Liberal Democracy Research Articles

German Security and Defence Policy in the Early 2020s and the Influence of US Interests

The nature and content of the U.S. - German dialogue have been significant for shaping the distribution of influence and responsibility in Euro-Atlantic community. This article examines the extent to which the Federal Republic of Germany's (FRG) security and defense policy in the early 2020s aligns with U.S. interests. Under J. Biden`s administration the USA effectively rejected the FRG`s initiative to create a format for intergovernmental consultations. This initiative could have served as institutional “insurance” against the degradation of interstate dialogue experienced during D. Trump's administration. The signing of an agreement with the Taliban (recognized as a terrorist organization and banned in the Russian Federation) by D. Trump, and its implementation under J. Biden, forced Germany to end its strategic presence in Afghanistan. In an attempt to compensate for these losses, Germany has sought strategic engagement in the Indo-Pacific region and significantly increased its military activity under NATO in Europe to “contain” Russia. The article explores the role of Germany in the distributing responsibility between Western democracies in their concurrent confrontations with Russia and China. Among the large NATO member states in Europe, including the U.K., Germany has held special military-practical importance for the USA. The White House was interested in the Bundeswehr as the framework nation in different forms in NATO Forward Presence Force, NATO Response Force, and New NATO Force Model. Germany in agreement with the USA, has supported the use of the EU and palliative structures (first of all, the Rammstein format) for the «discharge» of NATO on the most provocative for Russia tracks of the military assistance to Kiev.

Transatlantic Relations in the Perception of the American Ruling Elite: the Economic Aspect

The article is dedicated to the analysis of the perception in the United States of the J. Biden administration transatlantic policy in economic sphere and role of the European countries in forming the new system of international relations. Considering this policy in the context of the process of fragmentation of the global economy, the authors analysed the views of the most active political and ideological groups within the American ruling elite. Although the overwhelming majority of politicians and experts agree with the administration's strategic line on the formation of integrated transatlantic economy as the core of a new system of international relations, nevertheless, they see different ways to achieve this goal. Thus, centrist Democrats believe that the United States should use its leadership to organise rapid and tough integration; conservative Democrats emphasise gradual transition and a soft policy towards the EU; progressive Democrats insist on climate priorities; moderate Republicans are for strategic control without European access to the US market; conservative Republicans see the basis of the unification only in center-right unity. At the same time, most groups agree with the administration on key issues related to the need for EU countries to withdraw from the Chinese market, the use of protectionist tools, countering the antitrust policy of Europeans, etc. It is concluded that in its transatlantic economic policy the administration receives confident support from the main groups of the American elite.

Towards Progressive Multilateralism: Decoding the Trilemma of State, Democracy, and Globalisation

Institutions have long been influenced by their idiographic milieu. Western liberal institutions, grounded in liberal internationalism, often negate the institutional epistemology that advocates for diversity in the structural reform of Multilateral Institutions. Neo-liberal institutions, however, promote ontological tendencies in multilateral institutions. Decoding the functioning of the state, democracy and globalisation offers insights into restructuring the multilateral institutions (MIs). The study uses regression analysis to know the functioning of the state, democracy and globalisation in the countries of the global South and global North. Social determinism helps recognise and deconstruct ontological MIs. G-20, a conglomeration of developing and developed countries, is better positioned to make consensus through consultative, collaborative and decisive processes amid competing interests and ideologies. The study finds the variables of political trilemma vary contrary to neo-liberal prescriptions of reducing government size to encourage trade openness & liberal democracy. Moreover, the study refuted the notion that democracy leads to trade openness and the concurrent relationship between government size and democracy. These findings present a strong case to rethink and restructure multilateralism and MIs.

The concept of the strategic state: An assessment after 30 years

AbstractThe strategic state was conceptualised 30 years ago in response to neoliberal reforms of government and the rise of New Public Management that began in Western democracies in the 1980s. The concept was widely used by the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development in assessing the performance of governments through the 2000s. This research note describes how the concept has evolved, lessons learned from the application of the concept over the last 20 years, and some new developments that affirm the continuing relevance of the concept but also make its practical application more challenging.Points for practitioners The strategic state is a well‐established concept of long‐term, outcomes‐based government. It is pertinent to contemporary debates around mission‐driven government and wellbeing approaches to government. The strategic state requires long‐term and sustained investment in strategic capabilities, in part to mitigate against electoral pressures. Secondly, it requires a connection from strategy to action through clear accountability processes for both individuals and organisations including appropriate budgeting and evaluation mechanisms. Thirdly, a successful strategic state requires effective collaboration between different levels of government. This can be supported through a relational approach to public service design and delivery. Challenges to the strategic state include increased turbulence from political events, economic crises, the climate emergency, and the rise of artificial intelligence; the erosion of public trust in government and social cohesion combined with the rise of populist movements; and a decay in the media environment with increasing public alienation and polarisation in political debate.

How do masses react to party polarization? Limited effect of party polarization on mass polarization

AbstractElite ideological polarization is rising in Western democracies. Is this elite ideological polarization associated with mass ideological polarization? I argue that when a party adopts a more extreme position, the masses polarize via two mechanisms. In‐partisans should follow the party and adopt a more extreme ideological stance while out‐partisans should backlash and move in the opposite direction. To test these expectations, I exploit a real‐world sudden party polarization when the Labour Party of the United Kingdom suddenly shifted to the left under new leadership. Using British Election Study Internet Panel data, I find limited evidence that elite polarization leads to mass polarization. Overall, neither in‐partisans followed the party, nor out‐partisans backlashed to it. Only ideologically out‐of‐touch in‐partisans adjusted their ideological stance to match their party, indicating the effectiveness of partisan cues, nonetheless. These findings provide insight into how the masses react to increasing party polarization, alleviating pundits' concerns that the masses are blind followers and bound to polarize if political parties polarize.

The Metamorphosis of Democracy: The Buffer Zone Between Fascist Russia and Liberal Democracies

The Metamorphosis of Democracy: The Buffer Zone Between Fascist Russia and Liberal Democracies

A plea for democratic resistance: Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s demosprudence through public address

ABSTRACT In response to the radical agenda of the Roberts Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor circulated a rhetoric of demosprudence during the 2021 Supreme Court term to raise alarm about the direction of the Court and to plea for democratic resistance. Demosprudence is an approach to the law that emphasizes the role of democratic participation and urges everyday people to claim agency in shaping the meaning of the law. As she appeared on late night talk shows, spoke at universities, visited legal societies, and gave interviews, Justice Sotomayor’s public address encouraged a wide public audience to resist the conservative supermajority and seize their role as lawmakers, too. This essay expands the genre of demosprudence as judicial practice and demonstrates how a rhetoric of demosprudence can circulate beyond the form of the dissenting opinion through public address. I argue that Justice Sotomayor’s demosprudence challenged an entrenched tradition of off-the-bench judicial rhetoric by confronting the anti-democratic myth of judicial supremacy and clearing inroads for the public to claim more agency in their Constitutional democracy. This essay also lends insight into Justice Sotomayor’s rhetorical legacy and points to demosprudence as a cornerstone of her judicial voice.

Pluralising pluralism in the study of populism

Despite the widespread claim that populism and pluralism are incompatible, the latter is rarely defined clearly in the existing literature. This is significant as such purported incompatibility is used to argue that populist politics cannot sit comfortably within liberal democracy. I begin this article by examining the theoretical foundations of research on populism and pluralism, particularly from scholars who adopt the ideational approach. I highlight how this conception of pluralism is limited to protecting minority rights through liberal-democratic institutions, without considering how such institutions are often exclusionary. I then turn to the contributions of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe on populism, pluralism, and hegemony. I suggest that while Mouffe sacrifices the counter-hegemonic potential of populism in pursuit of pluralism, Laclau sacrifices pluralism for counter-hegemony through his insistence that the universal can only be articulated through the particular. Moving beyond Laclau’s part-as-whole formulation, I develop an understanding of pluralism rooted in non-belonging, which grounds plurality in shared constitutive lack. This allows for the advancement of an indeterminate concept of ‘the people’ without the imposition of a universalised particular. Thinking of pluralism in these terms provides critical scholars of populism with a conceptualisation which does not depend solely on a liberal vocabulary.

Calling out the Troops to Manage Environmental and Health Crises in Australia: Public Understandings of Domestic Armed Forces Operations

Domestic deployment of armed forces as part of state-led responses to environmental and health hazards is a common occurrence across liberal democracies. Yet we know little about how these domestic operations influence public attitudes. Using six focus groups, we examine Australians’ views on the performance and appropriate roles of the Australian Defense Force (ADF) in the context of two domestic operations: Bushfire Assist (2019–2020) and COVID-19 Assist (2020–2022). We find high trust in the ADF and the capabilities of its personnel in assisting the civil community in crisis response—but a trust often based in “blind faith.” Likewise, we find broad support for domestic deployments, but with a clear caveat: military personnel should not undertake any roles of coercion or enforcement. The findings suggest democratic governments must carefully balance the benefits of leveraging military resources against potentially weakening the public support sustaining military legitimacy and “social license” to operate.

(In)stability in American public attitudes toward Jews: a panel analysis

Abstract Polls for the past several decades indicate high regard for Jews in democracies in Western Europe and North American. We however have a limited understanding of the properties underlying those poll responses, for instance whether response bias or nonattitudes account for those results. The nonattitudes perspective suggests that respondents’ survey answers to questions about Jews are not true attitudes. Nonattitudes are weakly held responses to survey questions, and tend to be unstable over time, reflecting random as opposed to systematic change. This paper uses panel data from Voter Study Group surveys to test for individual-level stability in attitudes toward Jews by non-Jews in the United States in the 2010s to assess whether such attitudes are true or nonattitudes. Results suggest considerable instability especially when compared to attitudes toward Muslims, Democrats, and Republicans, suggesting a high degree of nonattitudes in non-Jews attitudes toward Jews. The conclusion offers reasons that might account for this instability in attitudes toward Jews and implications for the continuation of positive regard for Jews in western democracies.

The Implementation of Referendum as a Limitation to Autocratic Legalism in the Formation of the Nusantara Capital City Law

The phenomenon of autocratic legalism in democratic countries is one of the interesting global issues to discuss. This condition appears simultaneously in weak democratic countries, namely countries that cannot present substantial democracy, where authoritarian rulers only use democracy as legitimacy to gain power. This condition can be seen in moving the National Capital City, which went through a haphazard procedure and contradicted several other laws and regulations. This condition is undoubtedly worrying for Indonesia's constitutional democracy. The formation of a Law that only involves the Government and the The House Of Representatives needs to be reviewed as a preventive effort to prevent the collapse of Indonesian democracy. The idea of ​​reviving the referendum is one solution. The Constitutional Court of South Korea once canceled the relocation of the South Korean capital because the President issued a Law without going through a referendum. However, it needs to be proven whether a referendum's implementation can limit the development of autocratic legalism. This article seeks to answer the question of whether the implementation of a referendum can limit autocratic legalism. The research method used in this article is normative juridical. This study hypothesizes that the formation of the Nusantara Capital City Law meets the requirements as a product of autocratic legalism, and the implementation of a referendum will be able to limit its development further.

Double Standards and Dissonance: Women’s Rights and Freedom of Religion in the Global North

In this article, I explore the complex intersection between women's rights and religious freedom in liberal democracies, particularly focusing on the Global North. I demonstrate how both religious freedom and women’s rights have been instrumentalized by Western powers, often as tools of foreign policy. I highlight the dissonance between Western nations’ rhetoric, which promotes these rights globally, and their domestic practices, which sometimes impose restrictions, especially on Muslim women. Through case studies, including countries in the Middle East, France, and the United States, the article underscores the hypocrisy of Western democracies that criticize religious restrictions in authoritarian regimes while enforcing their own limitations on women’s religious expression. In the conclusion, I emphasize the importance of consistent application of human rights to avoid reinforcing cynicism and authoritarian practices.

Freedom of Religion and Freedom from Religion in the Context of Contemporary Anti-Gender Politics

In the contemporary world, the topic of women’s rights has often been employed and manipulated in debates on religious freedom. In her article Rola El-Husseini shows that whereas Western politicians have promoted liberal values, including religious freedom, internationally, they have rarely uphold these principles domestically. Often, these values have been applied selectively, leaving Muslim communities—especially Muslim women—without the protections usually afforded by liberal democracy. This contribution discusses how opposition to women’s rights unfolds in contemporary Poland, where the Catholic Church has been instrumental in opposing women’s and minority rights. In the conclusion, it poses the question of whether we truly need more freedom of religion, or whether maybe what we should strive for is more freedom from religion and a firmer division between the state and the church, indiscriminately of what type of church or religious belief this may be. Such a perspective is rooted in the recognition that so far every religion has contributed to infringing women’s rights, and establishing and reinforcing social hierarchies.

Censoring Speech in Democracies: South Korea

In South Korea, both conservatives and progressives restrict allegedly harmful speech, claiming to protect democracy and individual rights. Conservatives restrict "pro-communist" and pro-LGBT speech, while progressives target racist slurs and especially "far-right" speech supporting Japanese colonial (1910–1945) or anti-communist (1948–1987) regimes. These controversial restrictions contribute to a global debate among proponents of liberal-democratic values ("liberals" or "democrats") about the relationship between procedural and substantive rights and norms (PRN, SRN). Procedural refers to formal-legal rights (e. g., free speech) and non-legal norms (impartial reporting) associated with fair procedures. Substantive refers to rights and norms associated with fair substantive outcomes, such as nondiscrimination and equal dignity. Proponents of a zero-sum perspective, including victim-rights and militant- democracy advocates, believe illiberal actors exploit PRN to harm vulnerable groups and/or democratic institutions. Therefore, liberal procedural rights (e. g., free speech) and norms (objectivity) should not be equally applied to harmful speakers. Conversely, positive-sum advocates argue that uniformly respecting procedural rights and norms for all persons (including allegedly illiberal ones) better protects everyone's overall rights (procedural and substantive). Despite South Korea's transition to civilian-led democracy, self-identified democrats, both conservative and progressive, continue to restrict PRN for certain speakers. Other democrats oppose such selective, and often arbitrary, restrictions. The ongoing contestation among zero- and positive-sum liberals shapes the meaning and direction of liberal democracy in South Korea.

The Neo-Weberian State in Italy: Understanding the Influence of Populist Government, EU Administrative Reform Support Policy, and Digitalization

This article argues that administrative reforms in Italy over the period 2001–2024 provide a case of special significance for investigating key profiles of the Neo-Weberian State (NWS) in relation to three important domains. The first pertains to the relationship of the NWS to politics/party ideology: Italy is a case of populist parties, both right-wing and left-wing, governing either separately or jointly, thereby providing an apt case for studying the impact of populist government on the functioning of a Neo-Weberian administration. Second, the case of Italy allows for the investigation of the implications of the embeddedness of a NWS administrative system into a broader, supranational governance system (the European Union). Third, the NWS characteristics shape and are shaped by digital government. Key findings point to, first, the bureaucracy in NWS very limitedly acting as guardian of liberal democracy and the rule of law, at least in the factual case of Italy, while leaving open the possibility that a pure, ideal-typical NWS might perform such guardianship role. Second, the European Union, itself a Neo-Weberian administration, plays a role in the diffusion and strengthening of the NWS in its Member States. Third, the NWS interplays with digitalization processes, shaping and being shaped by them.

Political Reform as Regime Survival Strategy in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan After the Arab Uprisings

Jordan has recently celebrated its centennial in a volatile region. The Jordanian regime has an experience in dealing with mass protests; however, the recent decade with a surmounting socio-economic challenge aggravated by the mass influx of Syrian refugees has pushed the Kingdom towards a “boiling point.” The narrative of political reform has been dominated the daily political life of the monarchy; however, citizens have disillusioned with the pace of political liberalization in the Kingdom. Constitutional amendments mainly empowered the King authority with new rights, and the new election law adopted in 2016 failed to meet with the demands of the protesters. Jordan is not a country in political transition as the regime has remained intact from a genuine structural reform aimed at reaching a constitutional democracy. The introduction of economic liberalization process as well as the austerity measures dictated by the International Monetary Fund has led to an eroding social base of the monarchy. The rise of the new businessmen elite and the growing socio-economic problems in the tribal South made the society restructured in a way, which provoked more protest waves. Until now Jordan has managed to tackle with all difficulties; however, the pandemic and the shifting regional order have been aggravating the situation. The reforms mainly serve as a regime survival strategy; however, the ones launched in 2021 show that the monarch understands the situation. It has yet to be seen whether the new reforms will last and satisfy the citizens.

Can schools teach moral and civil courage?

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, it clarifies the different connotations of moral and civil courage and reviews education literature demonstrating the understanding and value of this construct; and, second, it argues that the best schools can do in liberal democracies is to stimulate critical reflection and discussion about acts of moral and civil courage, rather than ‘teach’ moral and civil courage as such. Unlike nursing and medical education that advocates the teaching of moral courage, the paper shows the limits of (neo)liberal visions of ‘cultivating’ students’ individual competences of moral and civil courage as a response to the serious challenges experienced by liberal democracies in recent years. It is argued that greater emphasis should be placed on moral and civil courage in education, not in moralizing ways, but in ways that empower teachers, students and school leaders to reinforce civic values.

A left-right divide? Alternative news use and political trust, populist attitudes, and populist vote intentions in the case of Denmark

Many western democracies have witnessed an upsurge of partisan alternative media that explicitly challenge the legitimacy of mainstream media and politics alike and promote populist discourses. Accordingly, alternative media are often discussed in relation to lower levels of political trust and support for populist parties. Yet, only a limited number of studies have investigated these relationships empirically. Drawing on survey data representative of the Danish adult population ( n = 1,518) collected in January/February 2023, this study investigates how using alternative media is related to political trust, populist attitudes, and populist vote intentions. Unlike previous studies, it distinguishes between left-wing and right-wing alternative media users and finds notable differences: Users of right-wing alternative media have lower political trust, hold more populist attitudes, and have greater predicted probability of intending to vote for a right-wing populist party than non-users, but similar results were not found for users of left-wing alternative media. The study discusses potential explanations for this and how (different) alternative media might impact democracy.

Democracy and Climate Change for Realists: An Integrated Empirical and Normative Assessment

Abstract When scholars consider the relation between domestic political regimes and global climate change, they typically rely on assumptions about liberal democracy's core competencies with respect to environmental protection in general. As a result, an ostensibly normative debate pitting democracy against “eco-authoritarianism” depends for its resolution on causal theory and empirical analysis. I offer an integrated assessment of both empirical (causal) and normative (ethical) theories on democracy, autocracy, and climate change, concluding that democracy's superiority is less compellingly supported than regime-neutrality. Theoretically, the causal logic of environmentally protective democracy cannot readily be extended to climate change as a distinctive political problem. Empirically, my review of global statistical analyses of regime type and climate change reveals that the evidence is more consistent with regime-neutrality than democratic advantage. Regime-neutrality, in turn, revitalizes difficult normative arguments about trade-offs between democratic freedom and climatic stability. Something resembling the “win-win” situation of climate-fixing democracy may still be salvaged, theoretically. But political science's search for this outcome should take a realist turn: abandoning the liberal-authoritarian dichotomy in favor of a new one, pitting post-liberal forms of democracy against climate-fixing hybrid regimes.

Russia’s Discourse on Democracy in International Law

This article explores Russia’s official discourse on democracy in international law, addressing the following questions: When Russia speaks of democracy in the context of international law, what precisely does it mean and what does it advocate for? What do these discussions truly signify regarding Russia’s understanding and interpretation of democracy in international law? What are the potential consequences of Russia’s interpretation for the discourse on democracy in international law? The central hypothesis of this study suggests that Russia strategically leverages the counter-Western democratic discourse within international law to secure its position as a great power rather than offer a meaningful alternative to the Western “hegemonic” ideas of democracy. This study is novel, as Russia’s discourses on democracy have received little attention in international legal scholarship. It is relevant in light of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which is often framed within the broader context of the struggle between autocracy and democracy. The main analysis is construed around the official discourse of Russia’s high-ranking officials. The research highlights that although Russia’s discourse is directed against the Western liberal “hegemonic” idea of democracy, it does not offer any substantive alternative to it and aligns with the paradigm of realpolitik. Instead, it inadvertently reinforces the fundamental principles of Western liberal democracy.