The withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) raises crucial questions about its future as the governing international organization for health. The executive order on withdrawal was one of President Donald Trump's first acts in his second term. Because the United States is WHO's biggest funder and most powerful state backer, withdrawal could indicate an existential threat. However, almost simultaneously member states passed a new international Pandemic Agreement expanding WHO's authority. How should these conflicting signals be understood? Analyzing WHO's decline in a context of broader US and geopolitical shifts, the authors find that withdrawal is the outcome of the end to broader political orders of neoliberal internationalism on which WHO depended for legitimacy rather than idiosyncratic Trump politics. WHO's reliance on certain international norms and power structures leave it compromised. US normative and institutional shifts are far more difficult for WHO to navigate than in past political eras. Therefore, international relations research suggests that avoiding catastrophic impacts depends on reform actions by WHO officials, other member states, and US actors. States and others in the United States will face harm from WHO decline, and the authors suggest that US actors have legal standing to challenge withdrawal. Complacency and inaction may be WHO's biggest risk.

ABSTRACT The article examines the public messaging around the 2018 (Russia), 2022 (Qatar), and 2026 (Canada, Mexico, USA) FIFA Football World Cups. In the first two cases, it finds the common projection of an image of modernity and dispelling stereotypes, although there are important differences. The initial comparison is set aside early discourses from Mexico and the US in order to look ahead to 2026, although the unpredictability of US politics and regional relations makes this task speculative. All three cases are presented against the background of recent developments in the application of the concept of Soft Power to the hosting of Sports Mega Events. The article finds that while the concept is somewhat wanting, it continues to inform government strategies and provides some insights into the aims of messaging.

We investigate the origins and implications of zero-sum thinking: the belief that gains for one individual or group tend to come at the cost of others. Using a new survey of 20,400 US residents, we measure zero-sum thinking, political preferences, policy views, and a rich array of ancestral information spanning four generations. We find that a more zero-sum mindset is strongly associated with more support for government redistribution, race- and gender-based affirmative action, and more restrictive immigration policies. Zero-sum thinking can be traced back to the experiences of both the individual and their ancestors, encompassing factors such as the degree of intergenerational upward mobility they experienced, whether they immigrated to the United States or lived in a location with more immigrants, and whether they were enslaved or lived in a location with more enslavement. (JEL C83, D72, D91, H23, J15, J16, Z13)

Book Review: Waves of Discontent: Electoral Volatility, Public Policymaking, and the Health of American Democracy SmithJacob F. H., Waves of Discontent: Electoral Volatility, Public Policymaking, and the Health of American Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2025. 180pp. ISBN 978-0-472-05780-1.

ABSTRACT Through an analysis of US military development and use of genetic technologies, I argue these efforts have been shaped by an emphasis on sacrifice to the Nation and the American People in the committing of sovereign violence. First, I analyze genetic testing in the identification and sacralization of US service personnel, including the controversial 1998 identification of the Vietnam War Unknown Soldier. Conversely, US war culture engages in the demonization of enemies as evil and without political legitimacy. This demonization shaped how family, ancestry, and visible appearance-related genetics have been used in targeting those deemed enemies after 9/11, including the US killing of Osama bin Laden, and counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Finally, I consider US military programs to genetically select and eventually genetically engineer US Special Forces members to maximize “force lethality” and other sovereign violence capacities.

Purpose This article examines the perspectives of Rainbow employees on workplace climate challenges across New Zealand organisations. It also reveals the impacts of contemporary conservative political discourses surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and gender on Rainbow employees’ workplace experiences. Design/methodology/approach This article draws on qualitative data from Rainbow employees across 18 organisations in diverse sectors in New Zealand. The data includes survey comments from an employee perspective survey conducted in 17 organisations, as well as interview data from a focus group held in one organisation. Findings This article explores three interconnected layers of challenge: organisational, interpersonal and political. At the organisational level, the study identifies manifestations of Rainbow tokenism, where superficial gestures and tick-box exercises create the appearance of inclusion. Interpersonally, cis-heteronormative microaggressions persist, disproportionately marginalising transgender and gender-diverse employees. Politically, a growing global and national backlash against DEI initiatives and Rainbow communities has left Rainbow employees feeling under attack and unsupported by their organisations. Social implications Highlighting that organisations serve as active arenas of political contestation – both shaped by and capable of reshaping broader sociopolitical forces – this article suggests that organisations must reaffirm their commitment to Rainbow inclusion amid intensifying backlash. Originality/value By situating Rainbow employees’ perspectives within both New Zealand and international political dynamics, this article offers a nuanced understanding of workplace climate in an underexamined national context and its entanglement with broader sociopolitical currents. Rainbow employees’ concerns about political backlash and waning support underscore the far-reaching influence of US politics across the Pacific, revealing how authoritarian forces can reinforce organisational cis-heteronormativity.

Abstract This article revisits my essay on the American Tributary System (ATS), published by the Chinese Journal of International Politics (CJIP) in 2013. In that essay, I argued that the United States (US) resembled Ming and Qing China in important and interesting ways in the conduct of its foreign relations. I portrayed the US as the hub of a Chinese-like tributary system, and identified two tributes that it sought, in return for its global exertions: first, to be recognized as the number one power in the world; and second, to have others adopt its political ideas and forms (i.e. liberal democracy). More than a decade has passed, America has changed; so, has China, not to mention the power distribution in Asia. Given these changes—especially the rise of Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) base—it is timely to revisit my thesis for this special issue of the CJIP. This article argues that the ATS is waning; it is deeply contested from within and without. From without, China’s rise and its closing in on the US in comprehensive power terms have ended the era of unipolarity. Together with countries such as North Korea, Russia, Brazil, and South Africa, China is challenging American hegemony and leadership in Asia and beyond. Recognition of, and assent to, US hegemony—the first tribute demanded by the US—are thus harder to come by. Even more damaging to the ATS is what is happening within: a deeply divided US, characterized by internecine warfare between Republicans and Democrats and democratic backsliding verging on autocratic rule under Trump 2.0, have severely dented the “City on the Hill” image of America. Given the state of American democracy and the political dysfunction associated with it, even if Trump had wanted to promote democracy abroad, it will be a difficult sell.

The Dissipation of American Democracy in 2016: On the Emptiness of Elitism and the Poverty of Populism in the Trump Zone

The administration of D. Trump, which came to power in 2025, undertook a series of unconventional moves on the international stage. In particular, Trump referred to the events in Ukraine and Europe as «Biden’s war,» which he would not have allowed and which should be brought to an end. The ar­ ticle examines the problem of peacemaking in the context of US foreign pol­ icy, which has long-standing traditions and practices. However, Washington’s attempts to achieve peace in various parts of the world have often resulted in failure, as priority was given to securing primarily American interests.

Levitsky, Steven, Daniel Ziblatt (2023): Tyranny of the Minority. Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point

A geometric critique of democracy is Turkish democracy or American democracy more geometrically balanced?

Abstract The 2024 election of Donald Trump has been followed by executive decisions never before experienced in the history of American democracy. This new approach is grounded on a radical right (RR) program that had already been put in place in the Hungary of Viktor Orbán, who is presented as a model by Trump. Both leaders have defined a performative communication style, attracting a large segment of their respective citizenry. This style is based on the strategic use of common sense. However, we barely know how commonsensical executive RR leaders are during one of the most sacred events in a liberal democracy: the annual State of the Union or State of the Nation address. Based on a critical discourse analysis of the multiple speeches produced by Trump and Orbán in the frame of these events, the current research investigates the routinized and multifaceted usefulness of common sense to contest liberal democracy. The findings indicate that these leaders use the state address as a ritual of liberal democracy to impose a new RR order grounded in commonsensical policies, polities, and authorities.

Abstract In the United States in 2020 and early 2021, two historic crises relating to public health and election administration placed significant stresses on democratic institutions and civil servants, and contributed to the erosion of democratic accountability standards and the promulgation of democratic backsliding. Employing critical events analysis, a set of seven democratic accountability standards serve as benchmarks against which detailed timelines for each event are assessed. The study concludes that both critical events contributed to the erosion of democratic accountability standards, particularly seen in the failures of public leaders to demonstrate forbearance toward democratic institutions; to respect and defer to the professional discretion of career civil servants; and to draw on truth claims and evidence to guide decisions and actions. Implications for the present state of American democracy and public administration are considered.

In chapter 6 of Read My Desire, Joan Copjec argues that the constitutive limits of American democracy reveal themselves symptomatically in the electoral choice of a conspicuously incompetent sovereign figure. In a leader for whom governing is exposed as an “impossible profession” (Freud), the Other’s castration appears as a universalsign, which provokes an hysterical form of love even among would-be critics. This essay examines a crucial supplementation to this leader-group dynamic in the “neighborly” structure of voting. When a subject votes, she registers a signifier of her difference as a mark that both estranges her (by turning her difference into a data point) and also situates her in an equivalent alignment with other voters who are either “with” or “against” her position, enabling an imaginary mirror play. From this position of non-interactionand reflective doubling, the subject is invited to participate in a peculiar calculation with respect to what are known as “swing voters,” a demographically constructed set of individuals whose presumptive action is thought to decide the nation’s fate. This hypothetical “subject supposed to vote” is then considered such that the voter, as well as the candidate, adjust their actions based on the anticipated certainty of the fateful mark. In the election cycles that have come to dominate virtually every aspect of civic life, the imputed calculations of this little semblable (granted informational density through interminable polling and fantasized in racist caricature) exert a temporal pressure on democratic subjects that often forces hasty decisions. Through a comparative reading of Copjec’s chapter with Lacan’s essay “Logical Time,” this essay concludes by interpreting the intersubjective logic behind this temporal forcing.

Text messaging has emerged as a defining medium of interaction for millions of Americans. This simple form of communication has transformed the way Americans advocate for change, share information, conduct business, and cultivate relationships. In response to growing security and privacy concerns, leading messaging platforms have begun encrypting text messages by default, igniting a debate over the scope of First Amendment coverage.<br><br> This Article challenges the notion that encrypted speech is a modern phenomenon requiring novel constitutional analysis. Drawing from extensive archival research into the private correspondence of America’s foremost Founders, as well as doctors, lawyers, and businessmen of the era, this Article uncovers a forgotten yet vibrant tradition of encrypted communication. In response to an insecure postal system, eighteenth-century Americans routinely encrypted their politically, financially, and romantically sensitive letters using methods that proved impenetrable to surveillance efforts.<br><br> Encryption, it turns out, played an indispensable—and, fittingly, often overlooked—role in early American democracy. James Madison relied on encrypted correspondence to shield constitutional deliberations from public view, while Thomas Jefferson turned to anonymized and encrypted letters to organize the nation’s first opposition party. This history demonstrates that encryption was not merely present but instrumental in forming the very constitutional protections now invoked by messaging platforms. As courts grapple with modern encryption technologies, this Article argues that they should recognize encrypted speech not as a novel challenge, but as the digital successor to a cherished Founding-era practice.

The rapid development of social media, especially Instagram, has given rise to new forms of Qur'anic interpretation that utilize visual power, popular narratives, and digital delivery models. This article critically analyzes how the @Quranreview account frames Qur'anic verses as a discourse of resistance against injustice through the representation of Qur'anic figures such as Qarun, Pharaoh, and Moses. Based on three posts that explicitly address issues of corruption, abuse of power, and structural injustice, this study examines the construction of this discourse using a qualitative approach with Norman Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis. The results of the study show that, at the textual level, these accounts utilize persuasive language, moral metaphors, and strong visual designs to emphasize the opposition between the perpetrators of injustice and the victims of oppression. At the level of discourse practice, content production is closely related to the dynamics of digital media that encourage visual creativity, responsiveness to current political issues, and audience consumption patterns oriented towards moral narratives. Meanwhile, at the level of social practice, the discourse constructed reflects Indonesia's socio-political conditions, which are characterized by weakening public trust, polarization, and high sensitivity to open criticism. Overall, this study finds that @Quranreview functions as a form of symbolic resistance that uses the authority of sacred texts to challenge the narrative of power and strengthen the ethical awareness of society in the digital space.

The article highlights the verbal packaging of attitude to visibility of older people in politics and fashion – the two professional fields marked by unrivaled visibility and exceptional interest of the public. Statistics, gerontolinguisitcs, multiple reports reveal the greying of the world, the skyrocketing propotion of people 65+, with the soaring share of octogenarians. Nevertheless, elderly individuals remain invisible in public places, workplaces, being excluded from decision-making process. In the 21st century visibility of the elderly becomes a component of inclusive societies and sustainable development. Age limitations keep people of retirement age out of employment in many fields but outstanding professionals in their eighties break age stereotypes and remain active, stealing the limelight due to their extraordinary talent and exceptionalism. Gerontocracy in the US politics in the 2010-2020s is being severely criticised in mass media and gets lots of negative comments on social media. Gerontocracy has crept into the White House, Congress, The Supreme Court where octogenarians are obsessed with workism, nonagenarians cling to power. The articles on US political gerontocracy are marked by obvious negative sentiment, usage of age-related idioms, words with the negative evaluative meaning. Vice versa, senior models catwalking at prestigious fashion shows and invited to luxury brands advertising campaigns are perceived positively as the embodiment of taste, elegance and a healthy way of life. Laudatory articles about clothes-wise mature female models – successful actresses, singers, writers – have positive sentiment. Age-related words (wrinkle, grey) are used in the articles about fashion in a positive context. Brilliant careers of octogenarian and nonagenarian politicians are neglected in the articles while the past achievements of senior models are presented in the advantageous way.

Objectives This study aims to analyze the objectives of Project 2025, an initiative led by the Heritage Foundation and over 100 conservative organizations, proposing transformative policies for a potential second Trump administration. It focuses on the project’s goals, the historical and current role of the Heritage Foundation, and its implications for American democracy. A qualitative analysis was employed, involving a review of literature, project documents, and public statements by key stakeholders to understand the initiative’s intentions and consequences. Material and methods Project 2025 seeks to strengthen executive authority, replace career civil servants with ideological loyalists, deregulate key sectors, and implement conservative reforms in education, immigration, social policy, and national security. It also advocates for reduced U.S. involvement in global institutions and a more assertive stance toward adversaries like China. Findings reveal significant controversy: supporters view it as a means to curb bureaucratic overreach and align governance with voter priorities, while critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, warn of threats to democratic checks and balances, civil liberties, and marginalized communities. Results The study highlights the growing influence of think tanks in polarized policymaking and the evolving role of the Heritage Foundation. If implemented, Project 2025 could fundamentally reshape U.S. governance, raising critical questions about democratic resilience and ideological polarization. Conclusions These findings underscore the project's potential impact on the stability of democratic institutions and the need for further debate on balancing reform with the protection of democratic principles.

This paper examines the impact of political and geographic polarisation on high-speed rail (HSR) projects in the United States. Drawing from opinion polls, newspaper articles and election results, this paper demonstrates that sub-urbanisation and the construction of the interstate highways have fostered a geographically polarised political climate that serves as a barrier to the implementation of HSR in the United States. In examining these factors, this paper contributes a more comprehensive look at how the American built environment has impacted its political discourse and attitudes towards intercity rail. This analysis is particularly necessary as prior research on HSR in the United States has primarily focused on economic or technical impediments, and discussions of its politics have been focused on projects in specific states.

Abstract Redistricting plays a critical role in structuring the competitive terrain of American elections and shaping the quality of democratic representation. While often viewed as a routine administrative task, the redrawing of electoral boundaries is a deeply political process that can significantly influence who runs for office, who wins, and how voters are represented. This article examines the relationship between redistricting and electoral competition, with a particular focus on how partisan gerrymandering, legal rulings, and institutional reforms have influenced the fairness and integrity of the redistricting process. Tracing its historical roots and evolution, the analysis explores how legislatures, courts, and independent commissions construct district maps and the downstream effects these configurations have on incumbent entrenchment, voter behavior, and partisan polarization. By investigating the trade-offs between fair representation and competitive elections, this article illuminates how institutional design choices shape electoral outcomes and democratic legitimacy. In doing so, it underscores the enduring significance of redistricting as a source of political contestation and reform in the ongoing struggle to strengthen American democracy.