Of all domains of inquiry, the science of democracy is hit particularly heavily in non-democratic regimes. Max Steuer argues that non-democratic practices in academia complicate the issue. Here, he calls for a debate on more intra-academic democracy
Democracy is in trouble, and so is democracy research. In response, the Science of Democracy 2.0 lays out an ambitious agenda. While applauding this endeavour, Jonas Wolff explores a fundamental tension: is a radically pluralist approach to democracy research a tool to defend democracy?
The Science of Democracy 2.0 offers a bold, innovative rethinking of democracy by embracing diversity and challenging Western-centric models. Hong Do acknowledges its ambition, but argues it risks romantic pluralism by celebrating traditions without fully addressing embedded inequalities and power hierarchies within them
To kickstart another round of essays, Jean-Paul Gagnon recaps four years’ worth of discussions in The Loop's Science of Democracy series. He explains where this ever-growing community of scholars has got to so far – and where it aims to go next
Democracy is a set of processes that create spaces for dissensus and radical equality. Greg Thompson and Kalervo N. Gulson argue that nowhere is the lack of democratic spaces more evident than in the field of technology and its impact on institutions and life
Feelings are relevant to the study of democracy. Yet they prove difficult to encapsulate. Delving into the worlds of Michel Houellebecq, Jürgen Habermas and Emmanuel Macron, Shivdeep Grewal suggests an ‘experiential’ approach
Simon Bein postulates a new perspective on the multiplicity of understandings of democracy and political identities in democratic societies. He argues that democracies which recognise and balance competing political identities are less polarised
'Democracy is in crisis'. We have heard this claim since the 1930s, and new terms regularly surface to describe democracy’s transformations through crisis. Of these terms, argues Dimitra Mareta, post-democracy and authoritarian neo/liberalism are the most challenging. While they describe either a strong or weak state, neither term captures the implications for the people living under such regimes
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
