Claim Ownership

Author:

Subscribed: 0Played: 0
Share

Description

 Episodes
Reverse
It would be a lovely thing if before I die, I get to see a younger generation reclaim democracy and rebuild it in a new, more expansive way.Heather Cox RichardsonAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Heather Cox Richardson is a Professor of History at Boston College. Her daily newsletter Letters from an American is read by millions. She has a new book out as of today called Democracy Awakening: Notes on the State of America.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:46Patriotism and Conservatism - 3:15The Liberal Consensus - 14:42Awakening Democracy - 39:07Trump - 51:41Key LinksDemocracy Awakening: Notes on the State of America by Heather Cox RichardsonLetters from an American by Heather Cox RichardsonFollow Heather Cox Richardson on Twitter @HC_RichardsonDemocracy Paradox PodcastDaniel Ziblatt on American Democracy, the Republican Party, and the Tyranny of the MinorityJoseph Fishkin on the Constitution, American History, and Economic InequalityMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
I think one of the greatest barriers to reform is thinking that reform is impossible.Daniel ZiblattAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Daniel Ziblatt is the Eaton Professor of Government at Harvard University and director of the Transformations of Democracy group at Berlin's Social Science Center. He is the coauthor with Steven Levitsky of How Democracies Dieand a new book The Tyranny of the Minority and the author of Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:38American Democracy - 3:25A Multi-Racial Democracy - 16:36Conservatism and Democracy - 22:34The Republican Party and Authoritarianism - 35:37Key LinksTyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point by Steven Levitsky and Daniel ZiblattHow Democracies Die by Steven Levitsky and Daniel ZiblattConservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy by Daniel ZiblattDemocracy Paradox PodcastStephan Haggard and Robert Kaufman on Democratic BackslidingSteven Levitsky and Lucan Way on the Durable Authoritarianism of Revolutionary RegimesMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
North Korea is stable up until the day it's not... The day that it collapses, there'll be a lot of people out there who will say this was inevitable.Victor ChaAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Victor Cha is a professor of government at Georgetown University and holds the Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. He is a former director for Asian Affairs at the White House National Security Council. Ramon Pacheco Pardo is a professor of international relations at King’s College London and the KF-VUB Korea Chair at Free University of Brussels. They are the authors of Korea: A New History of South and North.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:45Korea as a People and a Place - 2:25Korean War and its Aftermath - 11:44Democracy - 23:23Is Reconciliation Possible? - 40:55Key LinksKorea: A New History of South and North by Victor Cha and Ramon Pacheco PardoVictor Cha at the Center for Strategic & International StudiesRamon Pacheco Pardo at King's College LondonDemocracy Paradox PodcastDeng Xiaoping is Not Who You Think He is. Joseph Torigian on Leadership Transitions in China and the Soviet UnionHal Brands Thinks China is a Declining Power… Here’s Why that’s a ProblemMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
People still think of Chinese history as this two-line struggle because that's the story the Chinese tell. But everything from Mao Zedong's relationship to Liu Shaoqi to anything that happened during the 1980s, it was not a problem of competing policy platforms. It was a problem of getting the politics of your relationship with the top leader right when it was hard to guess what they were thinking and they were changing their mind and they were suspicious of you.Joseph TorigianAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Joseph Torigian is a Research Fellow at the Harvard History Lab. Previously he was an assistant professor at the School of International Service at American University in Washington and a Global Fellow at the Wilson Center. He is the author of Prestige, Manipulation, and Coercion: Elite Power Struggles in the Soviet Union and China after Stalin and Mao.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:48Deng Xiaoping and Hua Guofeng - 2:33Khrushchev Consolidates Power - 16:16Will History Repeat? - 30:11Connections to Contemporary China - 38:31Key LinksPrestige, Manipulation, and Coercion: Elite Power Struggles in the Soviet Union and China after Stalin and Mao by Joseph TorigianHarvard History LabLearn more about Joseph TorigianDemocracy Paradox PodcastHal Brands Thinks China is a Declining Power… Here’s Why that’s a ProblemAnne Applebaum on Autocracy, IncMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
Great developments by nature are not linear. Things just don't always continue as they have been. That's why this idea that the Arab Spring came, it went, it happened, it didn't work, therefore the Middle East will always remain an autocracy - that's linear thinking. Great events are great precisely because they're not linear.Robert KaplanAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Robert reported on foreign policy for The Atlantic for three decades and is currently the Robert Strausz-Hupé Chair in Geopolitics at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. His most recent book is The Loom of Time: Between Empire and Anarchy, from the Mediterranean to China.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:43What is the Greater Middle East? - 3:13Developing Political Institutions - 14:55Turkey and Iran - 26:40Iraq - 38:15Key LinksThe Loom of Time: Between Empire and Anarchy, from the Mediterranean to China by Robert KaplanForeign Policy Research InstituteThe Writings of Robert Kaplan at The AtlanticDemocracy Paradox PodcastBerk Esen and Sebnem Gumuscu on the Disappointing Elections in Turkey… or How Democratic (or Autocratic) is Turkey Really?Steven Simon on American Foreign Policy in the Middle East including Iran and the Wars in IraqMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
India should be understood as a test case of democracy outside the Western world.Rahul VermaAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Rahul Verma is a fellow at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi. He is also Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science, Ashoka University. Recently, he wrote “The Exaggerated Death of Indian Democracy” in the recent Journal of Democracy.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:44India's Democracy Paradox - 2:24Reconciling Illiberalism - 15:54Sources of Indian Democratic Deficits - 20:02Overstating and Understating Indian Democracy - 30:50Key Links"The Exaggerated Death of Indian Democracy" in Journal of Democracy by Rahul VermaCentre for Policy Research Follow Rahul Verma on Twitter @rahul_tvermaDemocracy Paradox PodcastAshutosh Varshney on India. Democracy in Hard PlacesChristophe Jaffrelot on Narendra Modi and Hindu NationalismMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
It would be a miracle if the original understanding of the Constitution just landed time and time again with the views in 2023 of the right-wing of the Republican Party. That would be too amazing a coincidence. That's more than troublesome.Cass SunsteinAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Cass Sunstein is the Robert Walmsley University Professor at Harvard Law School. During Obama’s first term he was the Administrator for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He is the author of dozens of books including Nudge(with Richard Thaler) and The World According to Star Wars. His most recent book is How to Interpret the Constitution.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:38Thinking about the Constitution - 3:06Different Interpretations - 10:44Textualism - 24:07Amendment or Interpretation - 37:23Key LinksHow to Interpret the Constitution  by Cass SunsteinThe World According to Star Wars  by Cass SunsteinFollow Cass Sunstein on Twitter @CassSunsteinDemocracy Paradox PodcastJoseph Fishkin on the Constitution, American History, and Economic InequalityDonald Horowitz on the Formation of Democratic ConstitutionsMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
I think we have a more complex notion of what democracy is. - Marc PlattnerAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Marc Plattner is the founding coeditor of the Journal of Democracy and the founding codirector of the National Endowment for Democracy’s International Forum for Democratic Studies. Until 2016, he also served as NED’s vice president for research and studies, and from 1984 to 1989 he was NED’s director of program.  He is the author of Democracy Without Borders? Global Challenges to Liberal Democracy (2008) and of Rousseau’s State of Nature(1979). His essays and reviews on a wide range of international and public policy issues have appeared in numerous books and journals, and he has coedited with Larry Diamond more than two dozen books on contemporary issues relating to democracy in the Journal of Democracy book series.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:48Democratic Consensus - 2:32Liberalism and Democracy - 10:26Democratic Threats - 20:58Governance - 28:51Key Links"Why Ukraine Is Critical to Rebuilding Our Democratic Consensus" in the Journal of Democracy by Marc Plattner"Democracy Embattled" in the Journal of Democracy by Marc Plattner"Liberalism and Democracy: Can’t Have One Without the Other" in Foreign Affairs by Marc PlattnerDemocracy Paradox PodcastAnne Applebaum on Autocracy, IncLarry Diamond on Supporting Democracy in the World and at HomeMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
It's too simplistic to call it an evil company. There are certainly a lot of very good people that work there. It's just the system itself and the corporation itself and the system that it's embedded in is what causes the problems.Michael ForsytheAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Michael Forsythe is a reporter on the investigations team at The New York Times. Until February 2017 he was a correspondent in the Hong Kong office, focusing on the intersection of money and politics in China. He is the author (along with Walt Bogdanich) of When McKinsey Comes to Town: the Hidden Influence of the World's Most Powerful Consulting Firm.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:35Who is McKinsey & Company? - 3:14Is it Anti-Democratic? - 17:55Working with Autocrats - 34:17Can it Change? - 44:33Key LinksWhen McKinsey Comes to Town: The Hidden Influence of the World's Most Powerful Consulting Firm by Walt Bogdanich and Michael Forsythe"How McKinsey Lost Its Way in South Africa" in The New York Times by Walt Bogdanich and Michael ForsytheFollow Michael Forsythe on Twitter @PekingMikeDemocracy Paradox PodcastAnne Applebaum on Autocracy, IncSamuel Woolley on Bots, Artificial Intelligence, and Digital PropagandaMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
Spin dictators have fewer political prisoners, fewer political killings. This is good. This is really good. On the other hand, we want to tell everybody that they are still dictators.Sergei GurievAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Sergei Guriev is a professor of Economics at Sciences Po in Paris. He was a former chief economist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the former rector of the New Economic School in Moscow. He is the coauthor (along with Daniel Treisman) of Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:46Spin Dictatorships and Fear Dictatorships - 3:12Popular Support - 25:21Putin - 39:44Beyond Spin Dictatorship - 43:49Key LinksSpin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century by Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman"Informational Autocrats" in the Journal of Economic Perspectives by Sergei Guriev and Daniel TreismanFollow Sergei Guriev on Twitter @sgurievDemocracy Paradox PodcastAnne Applebaum on Autocracy, IncLarry Bartels Says Democracy Erodes from the TopMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
Elections are not free or fair, but they matter greatly because this is how Erdoğan comes to power and stays in power and in this case he was almost about to lose that power.Sebnem GumuscuSupport Democracy Paradox on Podurama. Listen here.Access Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Berk Esen is an assistant professor of political science at Sabancı University. Sebnem Gumuscu is an associate professor of political science at Middlebury College. Their recent paper in the Journal of Democracy is “How Erdoğan’s Populism Won Again.”Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:33Democracy in Turkey - 3:30The Opposition - 21:36The AKP - 27:40Is Democracy Lost? - 41:01Key Links"How Erdoğan’s Populism Won Again" in Journal of Democracy by Berk Esen and Sebnem GumuscuDemocratic Erosion: A Research, Teaching, & Policy CollaborationDemocracy or Authoritarianism: Islamist Governments in Turkey, Egypt, and Tunisia by Sebnem GumuscuDemocracy Paradox PodcastDan Slater on Thailand’s Revolutionary ElectionAnne Applebaum on Autocracy, IncMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
The most dangerous states in the international system aren't necessarily revisionist powers that think that their trajectory points continually upward. It's those countries that have been growing, rising for a long time, and then fear that they are peaking and are about to decline. Those are the countries that are inclined to take the biggest risks to try to improve their position in the the here and now before things get worse for them in the future.Hal BrandsAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Hal Brands is the Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. He is the coauthor (with Michael Beckley) of Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China and the author of The Twilight Struggle: What the Cold War Teaches Us About Great-Power Rivalry Today.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:43Peaking Power Theory - 3:12The Original Cold War - 22:28China as a Peaking Power - 31:14American Policy Toward China - 41:56Key LinksDanger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China by Hal Brands and Michael BeckleyThe Twilight Struggle: What the Cold War Teaches Us about Great-Power Rivalry Today by Hal Brands"China’s Threat to Global Democracy" in Journal of Democracy by Hal Brands and Michael BeckleyDemocracy Paradox PodcastJosh Chin on China’s Surveillance StateElizabeth Economy in a Wide Ranging Conversation About ChinaMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on Democracy Support the show
My book is in some ways trying to help us see not only the kind of deep intermingling of pre-modern and modern ideas of sovereignty, but how we repeat some of those more fantastical attributes of sovereignty that we might otherwise presume to be long gone remnants of a more superstitious or religious age.Natasha WheatleyAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Natasha Wheatley is an assistant professor of history at Princeton University. She is the author of The Life and Death of States: Central Europe and the Transformation of Modern Sovereignty.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:40The State as Modern and Pre-Modern - 2:52The Habsbug Empire - 9:21Collapse of an Empire - 24:09The State and International Law - 40:55Key LinksThe Life and Death of States: Central Europe and the Transformation of Modern Sovereignty by Natasha WheatleyLearn More About Natasha WheatleyFollow Natasha Wheatley on Twitter @natasha_wheatlDemocracy Paradox PodcastAnna Grzymala-Busse on the Sacred Foundations of Modern PoliticsTom Ginsburg Shares his Thoughts on Democracy and International LawMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
I think that the most important reform is openness. Once the country is open, really open to the rest of the world, the rest follows.Sebastian EdwardsAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Sebastian Edwards is the Henry Ford II Professor of International Economics at the University of California, Los Angeles. He was the former Chief Economist for Latin America at the World Bank where from 1993 until 1996. His most recent book is The Chile Project: The Story of the Chicago Boys and the Downfall of Neoliberalism.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:46Pinochet and the Origin of the Chicago Boys - 3:17Neoliberalism Under Democracy - 22:35Personal Background of Sebastian Edwards - 30:18Future of Chile - 38:35Key LinksThe Chile Project: The Story of the Chicago Boys and the Downfall of Neoliberalism by Sebastian EdwardsLearn More About Sebastian EdwardsWatch the film Chicago Boys by Carola Fuentes and Rafael ValdeavellanoDemocracy Paradox PodcastJennifer Piscopo on the Constitutional Chaos in ChileAldo Madariaga on Neoliberalism, Democratic Deficits, and ChileMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
Democracy is Eastern as well as Western.Dan SlaterAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Dan Slater is the James Orin Murfin Professor of Political Science, the Ronald and Eileen Weiser Professor of Emerging Democracies, and director of the Weiser Center for Emerging Democracies at the University of Michigan. His most recent book (coauthored with Joseph Wong) is From Development to Democracy: The Transformations of Modern Asia. More recently he wrote the article "Thailand's Revolutionary Election" at the Journal of Democracy.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:41An Inspiring Election - 2:38Parties and Politics - 5:09Forming a Government - 21:09Risks and Hope - 35:53Key Links"Thailand's Revolutionary Election" by Dan Slater at Journal of DemocracyFrom Development to Democracy: The Transformations of Modern Asia by Dan Slater and Joseph Wong"What Indonesian Democracy Can Teach the World" by Dan Slater in the Journal of DemocracyDemocracy Paradox PodcastDan Slater on IndonesiaRoger Lee Huang on MyanmarMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
If you have grown up in a household which had decent quality of life and now you are struggling, you cannot even match the degree of wellbeing that your parents achieved, this is very obvious and makes people feel completely dissatisfied with the system that we have now.Peter TurchinAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Peter is a complexity scientist who has established a new field of social science research called cliodynamics. He is the author of the book End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration,Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:45The Crisis - 3:05Elites - 11:54Popular Immiseration - 30:59Cliodynamics - 43:40Key LinksEnd Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration by Peter TurchinCliodynamics: The Journal of Quantitative History and Cultural EvolutionLearn more about Peter TurchinDemocracy Paradox PodcastMartin Wolf on the Crisis of Democratic CapitalismFrancis Fukuyama Responds to Liberalism’s DiscontentsMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
It's very hard to understand what's happening today without looking at the roots of all these divisions and at the interests of the different communities and their long-held resentments against the establishment of the country.Isabel KershnerAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Isabel Kershner is a reporter at The New York Times and the author of a new book called The Land of Hope and Fear: Israel's Battle for Its Inner Soul.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:37Mizrahi and Askenazi - 5:31Immigration - 18:08Ultra-Orthodox - 28:12Netanyahu's Judiciary Proposal - 39:27Key LinksThe Land of Hope and Fear: Israel's Battle for Its Inner Soul by Isabel KershnerRead more from Isabel Kershner at The New York TimesFollow Isabel Kershner on Twitter @IKershnerDemocracy Paradox PodcastSteven Simon on American Foreign Policy in the Middle East including Iran and the Wars in IraqYascha Mounk on the Great Experiment of Diverse DemocraciesMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
The Jihadis today root themselves theologically and ideologically in a particular movement that is exclusivist, that is militant, that is activist, and that is the movement known as Wahhābism.Cole BunzelAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Cole Bunzel is a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and the editor of the blog Jihadica. He is the author of the book Wahhābism: The History of a Militant Islamic Movement.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:33Relevance and Overview - 2:43Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab - 14:15Appeal to Adherents - 26:14Legacy - 36:16Key LinksWahhābism: The History of a Militant Islamic Movement by Cole BunzelRead the Jihadica BlogLearn more about Cole BunzelDemocracy Paradox PodcastMarsin Alshamary on Iraq’s Struggle for DemocracySteven Simon on American Foreign Policy in the Middle East including Iran and the Wars in IraqMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
If you have this model of AI, which is geniuses design machines and those machines or algorithms are going to scoop up all the data and they're going to make better decisions for you. That's fundamentally anti-democratic.Daron AcemogluAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Daron Acemoglu is the Elizabeth and James Killian Professor of Economics at MIT. He is coauthor (with James A. Robinson) of The Narrow Corridor, Why Nations Fail, and The Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. His latest book (with Simon Johnson) is Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle over Technology and Prosperity.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:33Technology and Progress - 2:06Productivity - 14:01Artificial Intelligence - 24:42Shared Prosperity - 34:31Key LinksPower and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle over Technology and Prosperity by Daron Acemoglu and Simon JohnsonWhy Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty by Daron Acemoglu and James A. RobinsonLearn more about Daron AcemogluDemocracy Paradox PodcastJamie Susskind Explains How to Use Republican Ideals to Govern TechnologySamuel Woolley on Bots, Artificial Intelligence, and Digital PropagandaMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
The fact that Ukraine can be a democracy.... presents a threat to the authoritarian regimes in Moscow and Minsk of the sort that NATO would never actually present.Serhii PlokhyAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Serhii Plokhy is a Professor of Ukrainian history at Harvard University and the Director of the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. He’s written many books including The Gates of Europe, Nuclear Folly, and Atoms to Ashes. His most recent book is The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:37Ukrainian Political Identity - 2:39Background on the War - 18:31Causes of the War - 26:22Nuclear Power in a War - 36:06Key LinksThe Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History by Serhii PlokhyAtoms and Ashes: A Global History of Nuclear Disasters by Serhii PlokhyLearn more about the Harvard Ukrainian Research InstituteDemocracy Paradox PodcastOlga Onuch and Henry Hale Describe the Zelensky EffectMichael McFaul and Robert Person on Putin, Russia, and the War in UkraineMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show
Comments (65)

Pablo Tercero

Bland take on democracy and world politics. If you like caressing youself and your leaders endlessly, this interview (and probably this whole show) is for you.

Aug 9th
Reply

Brandon Miles

Eesh. Not sure how this podcast got in my subs, that happens quite often where this app will just subscribe me to random BS but this is a bit too far. The irony of the author talking about Russian and Chinese misinformation while glorifying the number one purveyor of misinformation in the world, the US government and the media that prop up its crimes as some noble quest for "democracy" which it has never experienced a day in its war-torn life.

Dec 20th
Reply

ncooty

I really enjoyed this conversation. One criticism: @12:41: You referred to "decolonizing" the literature via inclusion of local people's perspectives. Obviously, those perspectives are relevant and truly need and deserve consideration--particularly in the rare instances when research informs governance--but "decolonization" is a terrible word choice with large amounts of unnecessary and inaccurate baggage. You seem to insinuate that a colonial perspective is necessarily inherent in a researcher's nationality or ethnicity rather than a mindset. Colonialism is a point of view, not a skin tone or home address. Similarly, it implies that local people are rarely or never complicit in colonialism. Both of those are simply wrong, though they do reflect the fashionable nonsense of identity politics and a celebration of victimhood (real or concocted) that provides a sort of race-based culpability or exoneration that alludes to the idea of "noble savages". It's a flippant ad hominem that d

May 14th
Reply (8)

ncooty

Great episode. Very glad you chose to give it a looser structure and let the conversation flow.

Apr 28th
Reply (1)

ncooty

This was a miss for me. The topic was interesting, but the guest offered exceedingly poor evidence and rationale for his opinions. I think it would have helped for him to define his terms first, because he seemed to have a rather loose and fluctuating notion of the definitional criteria of revolutions. E.g., need they aim for regime change or does policy change suffice? How does he differentiate between demonstrations, movements, coups, revolts, etc.? Moreover, he seemed to have little appreciation for epistemological progression or methodological rigor. Rather than starting with (i) a specific description of phenomena and building an evidentiary basis for (ii) prediction from which to assert (iii) explanatory theories, subject to clear means of falsification, he seemed instead to leap straight to explanations. For example, @10:17+, he described selecting on the dependent variable, and indeed you followed up by compounding that over-interpretation (re: the causal influence of prop

Apr 16th
Reply (3)

ncooty

Justin, I just listened to a podcast that brought you to mind and thought I'd pass it along. It was episode 486 of the 99% Invisible podcast (which focuses on design), in which they rebroadcast an episode from the Rumble Strip podcast followed by a discussion with the host/ creator of Rumble Strip. The rebroadcast portion is about town meetings in Vermont, and the follow-up interview is a bit about creating a podcast. The combination of governance and podcasting brought you to mind and I thought you might enjoy that episode.

Apr 15th
Reply (1)

ncooty

"Place-making" is not new. This is a real point of irritation for me with academics, and social "scientists" in particular: they love to pretend they have found or invented new concepts and to ignore vast amounts of research already done on those topics, both in their field and in others. It's a startling degree of willful ignorance, incuriosity, or arrogance (combined with condescension toward past researchers)... but it is handsomely rewarded and obsequiously accommodated in their fields.

Apr 9th
Reply (1)

ncooty

Based on your intro, I was really looking forward to a conversation on the value of the concept of polarization, akin to Popper's justifications of intolerance of intolerance. Instead, the conversation seemed to assume that polarization is a useful framing and, to my ears, stayed mired in aloof abstractions or disconnected observations that presuppose the value of polar framing. It would have been informative to hear them rebutt the view that the concept of polarization often provides cover for what should be intolerable ideas. It's a way of casting issues as (i) a simplistic competition between 2 views (i.e., a binary political horse race) and (ii) inherently relative, as if we're only able to discern a difference score rather than to assess positions against any other criteria. It's a way of "both-sidesing" an issue. However, in many cases, we are in fact in a position to adjudicate between competing views based on evidence, and when we aren't sure what evidence would suffice, *th

Apr 9th
Reply (3)

ncooty

Nice, informative discussion. Always helpful to hear thoughtful, well informed conversations about particular instantiations/ contexts.

Apr 9th
Reply (1)

ncooty

I greatly appreciate discussions that seek to integrate, synthesize, or at least juxtapose the views of seemingly disconnected fields regarding a given phenomenon or system. However, I didn't find much value in this discussion. I think it might have helped to ask some epistemological questions. E.g., the guest made numerous assertions and interpretations that she attributed to external objects or society, but offered no evidence that her attributions were correct. Many times, I wanted you to ask, "How do we know that?" or "Aren't there competing explanations for that phenomenon?" E.g., she made several assertions that particular aesthetic choices were made in order to achieve certain political or cultural aims, yet offered no evidence of how we know those were the intentions nor any evidence of the extent to which those imputed intentions have been successful. In her field, does intuition = knowledge? (It's a minor point, but I found it especially ironic that she dismissed the lon

Apr 9th
Reply (2)

ncooty

@26:58: Although I think it's relevant to ask about the role of institutions as part of the autopsy of the war in Afghanistan, doing so can cast them as whipping boys for the real culprit: the American public. After all, part of the criticism made here is that the harsh truths spoken within the institutions were discordant with public statements. So, the main rift to be explained is not likely within those institutions, but rather between institutional views and public statements. At that transition, we're faced with both supply and demand. It seems quite obvious that, as the guest stated, no U.S. president will go to the U.S. public and say things aren't going well. Why not? Because the real problem is on the demand side. If voters valued truth, we'd have honest politicians. Once a politician whips up war fever, they lose control to the mob's egotistical, chauvinistic expectations and hallucinations. This seems to be an odd theme amongst podcasts on democracy: focusing on top

Apr 6th
Reply (1)

ncooty

Great guest and a great conversation, Justin. I'd have been interested to hear more about any circumstances in which the guest thinks people shouldn't be allowed to vote (not just shouldn't be required). I realize that would likely be a more philosophical than practical question (one you nearly hit with the question about 16 year olds). In any case, great episode.

Mar 30th
Reply (1)

ncooty

I've yet to encounter an economic theory that predicts anything (other than self-fulfilling prophecies). In most fields, when observed human behavior differs from the predictions of a theory, the theory is wrong, but in economics, the people are wrong. I detect a bit of that hubris in this interview, wherein we hear that an enforced model for transactions within regulated financial markets can explain the subjective phenomenology of justice. As is too often the case with economists, he seems to think both deductively and reductively, and to think that the key to understanding any issue is to price it (using economic theories and jargon), as if prices capture all value and other denominations of worth are crude. If it's a theory worth implementing, then I wish this guest were as committed to clear communication as he likely is to this theory. Until then, he might have to settle for accolades within his field while his theory languishes in irrelevance among broader society. This is

Mar 16th
Reply (1)

ncooty

@8:56: An excellent, sharp, diplomatically phrased, and useful question. Exactly the sort of question that makes your interviews great.

Mar 15th
Reply (1)

ncooty

I wonder what Mr. Meister finds insufficient in "original", such that we need "originary".

Mar 2nd
Reply (2)

ncooty

Funny coincidence, just yesterday, I listened to your first interview with her and noted that I'd love to hear a series with her. This one was likewise great. I did hear a bit of naivete in some of her answers, but I know we have to inject optimism into our work... for ourselves and those with whom we work.

Mar 2nd
Reply (1)

ncooty

Great interview with a great guest. I'd love to hear a series of interviews with her or similar colleagues. This discussion hinted at many topics that could warrant at least a full episode--e.g., discerning freedom and democracy from their predictors, the dimensions of freedom and democracy, whether freedom and democracy imply one another, what freedom means and how it ought to be weighed against other values, competing interpretations of freedom, instances in which freedom and democracy do not align, alternative values to freedom (e.g., social harmony, well-being), cultural and structural enablers (or hindrances) to freedom and democracy, etc. It would be very interesting to hear the two of you discuss some of these topics.

Feb 28th
Reply (2)

Cate Adams

I just found this podcast, and I'm so glad that I did. The hosts are knowledgeable without being arrogant, open minded without being too idealistic, and really eloquent in the way they tackle heavy duty, every day concepts concerning democracy. I'm really enjoying my learning experience, and can't wait for more! thank you so much for this important work!

Feb 24th
Reply (1)

ncooty

Justin's questions were characteristically well informed and well targeted, but I struggled to find value in this conversation. The constructs (especially of respect, tolerance, and dignity) seemed both poorly defined and conveniently manipulated to a rather loose and naive story--roughly approximated as "respect = acceptance, whatever those words mean". There was a conflation between immigrant status and religion, insufficient regard for the limits of generalizability, no apparent appreciation for the distinction between reporting personal biases and estimating statistics (e.g., are accurate Bayesian priors for social phenomena inherently inappropriate biases?), what sounded like a sadly unsophisticated notion of empirical methods, etc. In fact, the guy even recounted a story of having failed to do a manipulation check in an "experiment" with ONE WHOLE manipulation. And that was after the lady beamed that her friend had discovered randomization in the '80s, though evidently had tol

Feb 23rd
Reply (1)

ncooty

Another well-facilitated conversation. I wish the author had highlighted what she thinks is new or insightful here. Justin's questions about social media's evolving influence on the balance between representation, delegation, and manipulation provided exactly that sort of opportunity, but the author's response came across to me as a bit mealy-mouthed. (The read excerpts also sounded a bit self-involved and academically performative--displacing clarity with allusions to French social rapporteurs... as one does.) I thought the conversation also tilted a bit toward a "supply-side" view of power, even when Justin explicitly focused on public sovereignty. That seemed like a missed opportunity for the guest to talk a bit about the blame that ought to rest with individuals--e.g., the "demand" side of a political culture of cartoonish spectacles, division, a spectator's mentality, and proud idiocy. E.g., our current tragic circus is not the outcome just of formal political institutions an

Feb 11th
Reply (1)
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store