The events in the United States demonstrated that democracies are self-correcting and resilient because they vest power in institutions, not in rulers. Rather than yield to the political violence of a fringe minority, representative institutions upheld the will of a majority of American voters.
Read Here |Foreign Affairs
Even after four years, many Americans have yet to reckon fully with what Donald Trump’s presidency means for the country’s politics and long-term future. Even if Trump fails to win re-election, he and the party he now controls have led the United States into dangerous territory from which there is no clear exit.
Read Here | Project Syndicate
How did western countries, in one quarter of the 20th century, manage to increase both equality and economic efficiency? Why did this virtuous combination ultimately fall apart by the end of the century? The answer lies in the awkward relationship between democracy and capitalism, the former founded on equal political rights, the latter tending to accentuate differences between citizens based on talent, luck or inherited advantage.
Read Here | Aeon
For the past 50 years, the West has clung to the hope that modernization would automatically transform China into a capitalist liberal democracy. For decades, maintaining this illusion was good for the bottom line, but now the implications of China’s ascendancy have become disturbingly clear.
When democratic values come under attack and the press and civil society are neutralised, the institutional safeguards lose their power. Under such conditions, the transgressions of those in power go unpunished or become normalised. The gradual erosion of checks and balances thus gives way to sudden institutional collapse.
A bipartisan U.S. foreign policy consensus has elevated the rise of China to an organising principle of U.S. grand strategy. And realists on both sides of the political aisle argue that Washington’s and New Delhi’s interests align in seeking a balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region, with India’s heft and capabilities necessary for reaching that goal.
New technologies now afford rulers fresh methods for preserving power that in many ways rival, if not improve on, the Stasi’s tactics. Surveillance powered by artificial intelligence, for example, allows despots to automate the monitoring and tracking of their opposition in ways that are far less intrusive than traditional surveillance. Not only do these digital tools enable authoritarian regimes to cast a wider net than with human-dependent methods; they can do so using far fewer resources.