Stanford University

Black Politics and American Democracy

-
5.18.26 Event Graphic

We meet at a moment of democratic upheaval in the United States, one in which questions of race and identity are at the heart of what many understand to be a crisis for American democracy. Against this backdrop, three scholars of Black politics gather to reflect on the politics of an ever diversifying Black public and what it tells us about the possibilities and limits of democratic life in the United States.

This conversation, presented by the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law's Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice, brings together Katherine Tate, Corey Fields, and Hakeem Jefferson to consider how Black politics is understood in the present moment. Rather than treating Black politics as singular or static, the discussion will take seriously the diversity of views, experiences, and political commitments that exist within Black communities, and the ways those differences matter for how people understand political life.

The event will begin with brief opening reflections from Tate and Fields, followed by a conversation with Jefferson, and will conclude with a moderated Q&A with attendees.

About the Speakers

KatherineTate

Katherine Tate

Professor of Political Science, Brown University
Link to bio

Katherine Tate is one of the foremost scholars of Black politics in the United States and a Professor of Political Science at Brown University. She received her Ph.D. in political science from the University of Michigan.

Tate is the author of seven books, including the award-winning Black Faces in the Mirror and From Protest to Politics. Her most recent book, Gendered Pluralism (University of Michigan Press, 2023), is coauthored with Belinda Robnett. She is currently at work on a new manuscript focused on Black voters and the 2024 election. Her research and teaching focus on public opinion, government, and Black and women’s politics.

Corey Fields

Corey Fields

Visiting Fellow, Stanford Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS); Idol Family Chair & Associate Professor of Sociology at Georgetown University
Link to bio

Corey D. Fields is a sociologist whose work examines how identity shapes social life at both the individual and collective level. He received his Ph.D. in sociology from Northwestern University.

Fields is the author of Black Elephants in the Room: The Unexpected Politics of African-American Republicans (University of California Press, 2016). His research draws on a cultural perspective to explore the relationship between identity, experience, and meaning across a range of domains, including politics, work, and relationships. This year, he is a fellow at Stanford's Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. He is currently at work on projects examining how social and professional identities are constructed and expressed, including a study of African Americans in the advertising industry.

Hakeem2023Headshot

Hakeem Jefferson

Assistant Professor of Political Science & Director, Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice, Stanford University
Link to bio

Hakeem Jefferson is an assistant professor of political science at Stanford University and faculty director of the Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. He received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Michigan.

His research centers on questions of race, identity, and political behavior in the United States, with a particular interest in the political and social lives of Black Americans. He is the author of Respectability Politics, forthcoming with the University of Chicago Press. The book examines disagreement among Black Americans about how members of their own group should behave, especially around issues of discipline and punishment, and develops a theory of ingroup social control that shows how stigma and status influence those judgments.

Hakeem Jefferson
Hakeem Jefferson

Philippines Conference Room — Encina Hall Central, 3rd Floor
616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford

This event is in-person and open to the public. Live stream available via Zoom. Registration is required.

Katherine Tate Professor of Political Science Panelist Brown University
Corey Fields Panelist Visiting Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University; Idol Family Chair in the Department of Sociology, Georgetown University
Panel Discussions
News Feed Image
5.18 IDJ Event_0.png
Date Label

In Advanced Democracies, Politics May Be Moving Beyond Policy

Authors
Khushmita Dhabhai
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On April 2, FSI Center Fellow Didi Kuo opened CDDRL’s Spring Research Seminar Series with a presentation titled “Beyond Policy: The Rise of Non-Programmatic Party Competition in Advanced Democracies.” The seminar examined whether policy continues to serve as the primary basis of political competition and voter-party linkage in advanced democratic systems.

Kuo began by outlining the traditional “programmatic” model of party competition, which assumes that political parties compete by offering distinct policy platforms and that voters make choices based on these policy differences. In this framework, democratic responsiveness emerges from the alignment between public preferences and party positions. Historically, such programmatic competition has been closely associated with democratic consolidation, strong institutions, and effective governance.

However, Kuo challenged this assumption by asking whether policy still plays a central role in contemporary politics. She presented evidence suggesting that political discourse, particularly in the United States, has shifted away from policy-focused communication. For example, recent political speeches were shown to contain fewer policy references and more grievance-based and retrospective language. This shift raised concerns that parties may increasingly rely on alternative strategies to mobilize voters.

The seminar then explored several non-programmatic forms of political competition. These included identity-based appeals, grievance politics, populism, and affective polarization. Kuo explained that these strategies emphasize emotional resonance, group identity, and symbolic representation rather than concrete policy proposals. In such contexts, voters may be motivated less by policy preferences and more by partisan identity or perceived cultural alignment. Importantly, these dynamics do not fully replace programmatic competition but instead reduce its relative importance.

Kuo also discussed theoretical and empirical research showing that many voters possess limited policy knowledge and often hold unstable or weakly structured policy preferences. As a result, factors such as party identification, emotion, and social identity can play a more significant role in shaping political behavior. This complicates the traditional view that democratic accountability operates primarily through policy evaluation.

To assess whether programmatic competition is declining, Kuo introduced new measurement strategies. These included expert surveys evaluating party cohesion and policy salience, as well as analyses of voter responses over time to determine whether individuals reference policy when expressing political preferences. The findings suggested a gradual decline in policy-based reasoning among voters, even in countries like the United States that have historically been highly programmatic.

Kuo concluded by considering the broader implications of this shift. A decline in programmatic competition may weaken democratic accountability, as voters become less likely to evaluate governments based on policy performance. It may also contribute to increased polarization and reduced willingness to compromise, as identity-driven politics tends to be more zero-sum. Ultimately, the seminar suggested that if policy is no longer the dominant mode of political competition, scholars may need to rethink core assumptions about how democracy functions.

In sum, Kuo’s presentation highlighted a significant transformation in advanced democracies: the growing importance of non-programmatic strategies in party competition and the potential consequences this shift holds for democratic governance.

Read More

Hannah Chapman presented her research in a CDDRL and TEC sponsored REDS Seminar on March 12, 2026.
News

The Information Paradox: Citizen Appeals and Authoritarian Governance in Russia

Associate Professor Hannah Chapman explores how the rise of crises affects authoritarian regimes’ ability to gather information from their citizens in the context of Russia.
The Information Paradox: Citizen Appeals and Authoritarian Governance in Russia
Oliver Kaplan presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on February 19, 2026.
News

Assessing Labor Market Discrimination Against Ex-combatants

CDDRL Visiting Scholar Oliver Kaplan explores how stigma shapes hiring decisions for ex-combatants in Colombia and identifies ways education, reconciliation efforts, and employer incentives can reduce discrimination.
Assessing Labor Market Discrimination Against Ex-combatants
Laia Balcells presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on March 5, 2026.
News

Do Transitional Justice Museums Change Minds?

Georgetown scholar Laia Balcells's research finds that museums commemorating past atrocities can shift political attitudes — but the extent of that shift depends on context.
Do Transitional Justice Museums Change Minds?
Hero Image
Didi Kuo presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 2, 2026.
Didi Kuo presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 2, 2026.
Stacey Clifton
All News button
1
Subtitle

Didi Kuo explores how non-programmatic competition is changing the relationship between voters, parties, and democratic institutions.

Date Label
In Brief
  • In an April 2 research seminar at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Didi Kuo examined whether policy still drives party competition in advanced democracies.
  • Kuo’s seminar showed parties increasingly rely on identity, grievance, and polarization alongside traditional policy-based appeals.
  • The research suggests declining policy-based competition could weaken democratic accountability and reshape how scholars understand democratic governance.
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No

A Blueprint for Healthier Political Parties

Paragraphs

The crisis in American democracy is inseparable from the failings of our political parties. Parties are essential to organizing citizens’ engagement in democracy, managing debate and compromise, nurturing candidates, and setting out competing national and local agendas. But our major parties have largely failed to fulfill these responsibilities, albeit in different ways.

In October 2025, New America’s Political Reform program brought together 42 political scientists and sociologists, political practitioners, and organizational leaders for a first-of-its-kind convening to consider two questions: What would a healthier system of political parties look like, and how can we build it?

Key Findings
 

  • Rebuild party organizations at the state and local level. Across much of the country, state and local parties no longer function as reliable civic institutions. They appear during election cycles and vanish afterward, leaving little ongoing connection between citizens and the political organizations that claim to represent them.
     
  • Reconstruct the talent pipeline, both for party leaders and candidates. Parties once developed local activists into national leaders. Today, those pathways are unclear or inaccessible. Weak organizations, consultant-driven candidate recruitment, and financial barriers have narrowed opportunities for new candidates and internal leadership.
     
  • Break the cycle of short-term incentives. Modern parties operate in an environment that rewards fundraising and the next election cycle over long-term organizing and institutional development. Predatory small-dollar fundraising tactics weaken trust and reinforce parties’ transactional relationships with voters.
     
  • Strengthen parties as core democratic institutions. Parties are essential to organizing citizens’ engagement, managing debate, nurturing candidates, and translating electoral victories into policy wins. Election reforms and civic engagement matter, but without parties capable of channeling political energy into governing coalitions, democratic renewal will remain incomplete.
     

Acknowledgments


We would like to thank the participants of the “Blueprint for a Healthier Party System” convening hosted by New America’s Political Reform program in October 2025. The convening and resulting report were made possible by the generous support of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Thanks also to Maresa Strano and Sarah Jacob of the Political Reform program, as well as our New America events and communications colleagues, for their organizational and editorial support throughout the project.

Editorial disclosure: The views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the views of New America, its staff, fellows, funders, or board of directors.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Reports
Publication Date
Subtitle

A convening organized by New America's Political Reform program reveals pathways to rebuild America’s political parties.

Authors
Didi Kuo

Hayden Thompson

0
CDDRL Honors Student, 2026-27
hayden_thompson_-_hayden_thompson.png

Major: Economics
Hometown: Oakland, California
Thesis Advisor: Jonathan Gienapp and Lukas Althoff

Tentative Thesis Title: Rights Balancing on the U.S. Supreme Court

Future aspirations post-Stanford: Work and graduate school.

A fun fact about yourself: I have bowled at the White House!

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label

George Porteous

0
CDDRL Honors Student, 2026-27
porteous-headshot2_copy_-_george_dockery_porteous.jpg

George Porteous is a CDDRL Honors Student pursuing a B.A. in History. Originally from New York, NY, his academic interests include American political and intellectual history, democratic legitimacy, and historical memory. He currently serves as the Editor-in-Chief and President of The Stanford Daily, where he began as a news reporter in his first quarter at Stanford. In his free time, he enjoys acting and creative writing.

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label

What Trump Gets Wrong About the Cultural Logic Driving Iran

Paragraphs

US President Donald Trump’s Iran strategy rests on the premise that economic and military force will eventually compel the regime to back down. But such approaches tend to backfire in societies where preservation of honor and reputation dictates defiance.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Commentary
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Project Syndicate
Authors
Michele Gelfand

Meet Our Researchers: James Goldgeier

Authors
Nensi Hayotsyan
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The "Meet Our Researchers" series showcases the incredible scholars at Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). Through engaging interviews conducted by our undergraduate research assistants, we explore the journeys, passions, and insights of CDDRL’s faculty and researchers.

Professor James Goldgeier is a Research Affiliate at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). He is also a Professor at the School of International Service at American University, where he served as Dean from 2011 to 2017. His research focuses primarily on U.S.-NATO-Russia relations since the end of the Cold War, examining how key foreign policy decisions were made and how they continue to influence relations between the United States, Europe, and Russia today.

What inspired you to pursue research in your current field? And how did your journey lead you to see your role? 


I got into this field because of my undergraduate thesis advisor, Joseph Nye, who inspired me to become a professor of international relations. When I was in college, I thought I wanted to work on political campaigns, and after graduating, my first job was managing a city council campaign in Boston. We lost by a very small margin, and afterward, I received offers to work on other campaigns. But that experience made me realize I wasn’t sure that was what I wanted to do long-term. 

I started thinking about people whose careers I admired, and Joseph Nye stood out. Before college, I had never traveled outside the United States, but he traveled extensively, wrote books, and clearly enjoyed teaching. That combination of research, writing, and teaching really appealed to me. I went to him and asked what I would need to do to pursue a similar path. He told me I would need to get a PhD. That conversation ultimately shaped my career. I went on to earn a PhD and become a professor, and I’ve always felt deeply indebted to him for helping me see that this was the path I wanted to pursue.

How did you get into the specific area of study that you ended up focusing on?


I went to U.C. Berkeley to do my PhD in international relations, and during my first year, Mikhail Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet Union. I was taking a class on Soviet foreign policy at the time, and that really drew me in. Since the Cold War was central to U.S. foreign policy, it became clear to me that if I wanted to understand international relations, I needed to understand the Soviet Union.

I started studying Russian, taking history courses, and focusing more closely on Soviet and European security issues. Although the Soviet Union collapsed while I was finishing my dissertation, my broader interest in U.S. foreign policy remained constant. My undergraduate thesis had been on NATO nuclear policy, so over time I returned to NATO and became increasingly interested in its role in shaping the post–Cold War order. By the mid-1990s, that had become a central focus of my research.

Since the Cold War was central to U.S. foreign policy, it became clear to me that if I wanted to understand international relations, I needed to understand the Soviet Union.
James Goldgeier

What’s the most exciting finding from your research, and why does it matter for democracy and development?


In the mid-1990s, I worked in the U.S. government at the State Department and the National Security Council, focusing on Russia and European security. One of the major issues at the time was whether NATO should expand to include countries in Central and Eastern Europe. I later wrote a book on that decision, which was published in 1999.

One of the most important things I found was that NATO enlargement didn’t come from a single formal decision by the president and his cabinet. Instead, it developed gradually, driven by individuals who believed strongly in the policy and worked to move it forward over time. It was a much more incremental and contested process than people often assumed.

What was especially significant was that policymakers saw NATO enlargement as a way to promote democracy and strengthen the rule of law in Central and Eastern Europe. By offering countries the prospect of membership, they hoped to encourage democratic reforms and political stability. I think NATO enlargement had a profound impact on democratic development in the region, and my research helped explain how and why that policy came about.

What have been some of the most challenging aspects of conducting research in this field, and how did you overcome them?


Much of my work sits at the intersection of political science and history, and one of the biggest challenges is studying relatively recent events, where records are often incomplete. When you study earlier historical periods, you have access to archives and official records, but when you study more recent foreign policy decisions, much of that material is still classified.

Because of that, I’ve relied heavily on interviews with policymakers and officials. Interviews are incredibly valuable, but they also have limitations. People remember events differently, and often present events in a light that best reflects their own role or perspective, which is why it’s important to interview multiple people and compare their accounts to develop a more accurate understanding of what happened.

I’ve also used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain declassified documents, although that process can take many years. Some requests I filed for my 1999 book didn’t produce results until I was working on later books in 2003 and even 2008. But over time, those documents helped confirm and strengthen my understanding of how key decisions were made. Doing this kind of research requires patience, but it’s essential if you want to understand how foreign policy actually develops.

Research requires patience, but it’s essential if you want to understand how foreign policy actually develops.
James Goldgeier

How has the field changed since you started, and what gives you hope?


The field has changed quite a bit since I finished my PhD in 1990. One major shift was that after the Cold War ended, there was less emphasis on area studies and regional expertise. When I was trained, people were expected to combine theoretical work with deep knowledge of particular regions, which is now less common. 

What gives me hope is the current generation of students. Many students today are highly capable of integrating knowledge of politics and history with technological expertise. Especially at places like Stanford, students have the opportunity to combine social science knowledge with new technologies. I think that combination will shape the future of the field.

What gaps still exist in your research, and what projects are you currently working on?


I’m currently working on a project with Michael McFaul and Elizabeth Economy on great power competition, focusing on how major powers try to influence the foreign policy orientation of smaller states. It’s an important issue, especially given the current international environment.

I’ve also continued working on NATO enlargement and its long-term consequences. When I published my book on NATO expansion in 1999, I didn’t expect that these issues would still be so central decades later. But NATO enlargement continues to shape relations between Russia, Europe, and the United States, particularly in light of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Hence, understanding how those earlier decisions connect to current events remains a major focus of my work.

What advice would you give to students interested in this field?


Students should focus on topics that genuinely interest them. You can’t predict what will be important five or ten years from now. Choosing a topic solely because you think it will be important in the future isn’t a good strategy if you’re not truly interested in it. Instead, study subjects that motivate you and that you feel compelled to understand. Unexpected events can suddenly make your area of interest highly relevant. Passion and curiosity are essential for meaningful research.

Study subjects that motivate you and that you feel compelled to understand. Unexpected events can suddenly make your area of interest highly relevant. Passion and curiosity are essential for meaningful research.
James Goldgeier

What book would you recommend to students interested in international relations?


I recommend Robert Jervis’s Perception and Misperception in International Politics, published in 1976. Jervis was one of the most brilliant scholars in international relations and had a major influence on the field.

His book explores how leaders interpret and misinterpret the world, and how those perceptions shape international relations. It combines insights from politics, psychology, and history, and helps explain why cooperation between states is often difficult. It’s an excellent starting point for anyone who wants to understand the role of leadership and perception in international politics.

Read More

Cover of The Washington Quarterly
Journal Articles

NATO Did Not Cause Putin's Imperial War

Were the United States and NATO enlargement to blame for Russia’s invasions of Ukraine?
NATO Did Not Cause Putin's Imperial War
Jim Goldgeier
News

Jim Goldgeier elected President of the International Studies Association

Goldgeier will serve as ISA President for the 2027–2028 term.
Jim Goldgeier elected President of the International Studies Association
Hero Image
Meet Our Researchers: James Goldgeier
All News button
1
Subtitle

Exploring U.S. foreign policy and the path to studying how major international decisions are made with Professor James Goldgeier.

Date Label
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
Yes

War and the Arab World: Regional Responses and Consequences

-
War and the Arab World: Regional Responses and Consequences

What does the U.S.–Israel war with Iran mean for the Arab world? How are Arab states responding, and what political, economic, and humanitarian consequences might emerge from a prolonged conflict?

The Program on Arab Reform and Development convenes a panel of scholars — Sean Yom, Lisa Blaydes, and Hesham Sallam — to examine the regional implications of the war, situating current developments within broader historical and geopolitical transformations shaping the region today.

SPEAKERS

Sean Yom

Sean Yom

Associate Professor of Political Science at Temple University and Senior Fellow at Democracy in the Arab World Now (DAWN)

Sean Yom is Associate Professor of Political Science at Temple University and Senior Fellow at Democracy in the Arab World Now (DAWN). His research explores the dynamics of authoritarian institutions, economic development, and US foreign policy in the Middle East, with a particular focus on Jordan, Morocco, and the Gulf. His most recent books include Jordan: Politics in an Accidental Crucible (Oxford University Press, 2025) and The Political Science of the Middle East: Theory and Research since the Arab Uprisings (co-edited with Marc Lynch and Jillian Schwedler; Oxford University Press, 2022).; Oxford University Press, 2022). He sits on the editorial board of the International Journal of Middle East Studies and the editorial committee of Middle East Report. He is also a former Stanford CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow (2009-10). AB, Brown University (2003); PhD, Harvard University (2009).

Lisa Blaydes

Lisa Blaydes

Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Professor of Political Science, Stanford University
Lisa's full bio

Lisa Blaydes is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. She is the author of State of Repression: Iraq under Saddam Hussein (Princeton University Press, 2018) and Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt (Cambridge University Press, 2011). Professor Blaydes received the 2009 Gabriel Almond Award for best dissertation in the field of comparative politics from the American Political Science Association for this project.  Her articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, International Studies Quarterly, International Organization, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Middle East Journal, and World Politics. During the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 academic years, Professor Blaydes was an Academy Scholar at the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies. She holds degrees in Political Science (PhD) from the University of California, Los Angeles, and International Relations (BA, MA) from Johns Hopkins University.

Portrait of Hesham Sallam

Hesham Sallam

Senior Research Scholar and Associate Director for Research, Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Associate Director of the Program on Arab Reform and Development
Hesham's full bio

Hesham Sallam is a Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL, where he serves as Associate Director for Research. He is also Associate Director of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. Sallam is co-editor of Jadaliyya ezine and a former program specialist at the U.S. Institute of Peace. His research focuses on political and social development in the Arab World. Sallam’s research has previously received the support of the Social Science Research Council and the U.S. Institute of Peace. He is author of Classless Politics: Islamist Movements, the Left, and Authoritarian Legacies in Egypt (Columbia University Press, 2022), co-editor of Struggles for Political Change in the Arab World (University of Michigan Press, 2022), and editor of Egypt's Parliamentary Elections 2011-2012: A Critical Guide to a Changing Political Arena (Tadween Publishing, 2013). Sallam received a Ph.D. in Government (2015) and an M.A. in Arab Studies (2006) from Georgetown University, and a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Pittsburgh (2003).

Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to the William J. Perry Conference Room in Encina Hall may attend in person.

Sean Yom

N/A

0
CDDRL Hewlett Fellow 2009-2010
YOM_webphoto.jpg PhD

Sean Yom finished his Ph.D. at the Department of Government at Harvard University in June 2009, with a dissertation entitled "Iron Fists in Silk Gloves: Building Political Regimes in the Middle East." His primary research explores the origins and durability of authoritarian regimes in this region. His work contends that initial social conflicts driven by strategic Western interventions shaped the social coalitions constructed by autocratic incumbents to consolidate power in the mid-twentieth century--early choices that ultimately shaped the institutional carapaces and political fates of these governments. While at CDDRL, he will revise the dissertation in preparation for book publication, with a focus on expanding the theory to cover other post-colonial regions and states. His other research interests encompass contemporary political reforms in the Arab world, the historical architecture of Persian Gulf security, and US democracy promotion in the Middle East. Recent publications include articles in the Journal of Democracy, Middle East Report, Arab Studies Quarterly, and Arab Studies Journal.

Sean Yom

Lisa Blaydes

Encina Hall West, Room 408
Stanford, CA 94305-6044

(650) 723-0649
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Professor of Political Science
lisa_blaydes_108_vert_final.jpg

Lisa Blaydes is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. She is the author of State of Repression: Iraq under Saddam Hussein (Princeton University Press, 2018) and Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt (Cambridge University Press, 2011). Professor Blaydes received the 2009 Gabriel Almond Award for best dissertation in the field of comparative politics from the American Political Science Association for this project.  Her articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, International Studies Quarterly, International Organization, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Middle East Journal, and World Politics. During the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 academic years, Professor Blaydes was an Academy Scholar at the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies. She holds degrees in Political Science (PhD) from the University of California, Los Angeles, and International Relations (BA, MA) from Johns Hopkins University.

 

Affiliated faculty at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law
Affiliated faculty at the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Lisa Blaydes

Hesham Sallam

Encina Hall, E105
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Senior Research Scholar
hesham_sallam_thumbnail_image_for_cddrl_1-2_copy.jpg

Hesham Sallam is a Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL, where he serves as Associate Director for Research. He is also Associate Director of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. Sallam is co-editor of Jadaliyya ezine and a former program specialist at the U.S. Institute of Peace. His research focuses on political and social development in the Arab World. Sallam’s research has previously received the support of the Social Science Research Council and the U.S. Institute of Peace. He is author of Classless Politics: Islamist Movements, the Left, and Authoritarian Legacies in Egypt (Columbia University Press, 2022), co-editor of Struggles for Political Change in the Arab World (University of Michigan Press, 2022), and editor of Egypt's Parliamentary Elections 2011-2012: A Critical Guide to a Changing Political Arena (Tadween Publishing, 2013). Sallam received a Ph.D. in Government (2015) and an M.A. in Arab Studies (2006) from Georgetown University, and a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Pittsburgh (2003).

 

Associate Director for Research, Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law
Associate Director, Program on Arab Reform and Development
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Hesham Sallam
Date Label

How Pro-Democracy Foreign Policy Can Survive Trump — And Emerge Stronger Than Ever

Paragraphs

Contrary to prevailing assumptions (and authoritarian aspirations), Larry Diamond argues that promoting democracy is not a dying or hopeless mission for the U.S. Here is why it remains an imperative, and how we can build it back better in the years to come.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Commentary
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
NOTUS Perspectives
Authors
Larry Diamond

People Shaping AI: Groundbreaking Industry-Wide Forum Invites Public Input for the Future of AI Agents Through Public Deliberation

Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

In an unprecedented collaboration, Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab has spearheaded the first-ever Industry-Wide Forum, a cross-industry effort putting everyday people at the center of decisions about AI agents. This unique initiative involving industry leaders Cohere, Meta, Oracle, PayPal, DoorDash, and Microsoft marks a significant shift in how AI technologies could be developed.

AI agents, advanced artificial intelligence systems designed to reason, plan, and act on behalf of users, are poised to revolutionize how we interact with technology. This Industry-Wide Forum provided an opportunity for the public in the United States and India to deliberate and share their attitudes on how AI agents should be deployed and developed.

The Forum employed a method known as Deliberative Polling, an innovative approach that goes beyond traditional surveys and focus groups. In November 2025, 503 participants from the United States and India engaged in an in-depth process on the AI-assisted Stanford Online Deliberation Platform, developed by Stanford's Crowdsourced Democracy Team. This method involves providing balanced information to participants, facilitated expert Q&A sessions, and small-group discussions. The goal is to capture informed public opinion that can provide durable steers in this rapidly evolving space.

As part of the process, academics, civil society, and non-profit organizations, including the Collective Intelligence Project, Center for Democracy and Technology, and academics from Ashoka University and Institute of Technology-Jodhpur, vetted the briefing materials for balance and accuracy, and some served as expert panelists for live sessions with the nationally representative samples of the United States and India.  

"This groundbreaking Forum represents a pivotal moment in AI development," said James Fishkin, Director of Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab. "By actively involving the public in shaping AI agent behavior, we're not just building better technology — we're building trust and ensuring these powerful tools align with societal values."

"This groundbreaking Forum represents a pivotal moment in AI development. By actively involving the public in shaping AI agent behavior, we're not just building better technology — we're building trust and ensuring these powerful tools align with societal values.
James Fishkin
Director, Deliberative Democracy Lab

The deliberations yielded clear priorities for building trust through safeguards during this early phase of agentic development and adoption. Currently, participants favor AI agents for low-risk tasks, while expressing caution about high-stakes applications in medical or financial domains. In deliberation, participants indicated an openness to these higher-risk applications if provided safeguards around privacy or user control, such as requiring approval before finalizing an action.

The Forum also revealed support for culturally adaptive agents, with a preference for asking users about norms rather than making assumptions. Lastly, the discussions underscored the need for better public understanding of AI agents and their capabilities, pointing to the importance of transparency and education in fostering trust in these emerging technologies.

"The perspectives coming out of these initial deliberations underscore the importance of our key focus areas at Cohere: security, privacy, and safeguards,” said Joelle Pineau, Chief AI Officer at Cohere. “We look forward to continuing our work alongside other leaders to strengthen industry standards for this technology, particularly for enterprise agentic AI that works with sensitive data."

The perspectives coming out of these initial deliberations underscore the importance of our key focus areas at Cohere: security, privacy, and safeguards. We look forward to continuing our work alongside other leaders to strengthen industry standards for this technology.
Joelle Pineau
Chief AI Officer, Cohere

This pioneering forum sets a new standard for public participation in AI development. By seeking feedback directly from the public, combining expert knowledge, meaningful public dialogue, and cross-industry commitment, the Industry Wide Forum provides a key mechanism for ensuring that AI innovation is aligned with public values and expectations.

“Technology better serves people when it's grounded in their feedback and expectations,” said Rob Sherman, Meta’s Vice President, AI Policy & Deputy Chief Privacy Officer.  “This Forum reinforces how companies and researchers can collaborate to make sure AI agents are built to be responsive to the diverse needs of people who use them – not just at one company, but across the industry.”

Technology better serves people when it's grounded in their feedback and expectations. This Forum reinforces how companies and researchers can collaborate to make sure AI agents are built to be responsive to the diverse needs of people who use them.
Rob Sherman
Vice President, AI Policy & Deputy Chief Privacy Officer, Meta

Through Stanford’s established methodology and their facilitation of industry partners, the Industry-Wide Forum provides the public with the opportunity to engage deeply with complex technological issues and for AI companies to benefit from considered public perspectives in developing products that are responsive to public opinion. We hope this is the first step towards more collaboration among industry, academia, and the public to shape the future of AI in ways that benefit everyone.

“We have more industry partners joining our next forum later this year”, says Alice Siu, Associate Director of Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab. “The 2026 Industry-Wide Forum expands our discussion scope and further deepens our understanding of public attitudes towards AI agents. These deliberations will help ensure AI development remains aligned with societal values and expectations.”

The 2026 Industry-Wide Forum expands our discussion scope and further deepens our understanding of public attitudes towards AI agents. These deliberations will help ensure AI development remains aligned with societal values and expectations.
Alice Siu
Associate Director, Deliberative Democracy Lab

For a full briefing on the Industry-Wide Forum, please contact Alice Siu.

Read More

Close-up of a computer chip labeled ‘AI Artificial Intelligence,’ embedded in a circuit board with gold connectors and electronic components.
News

DoorDash and Microsoft join Industry-Wide Deliberative Forum on Future of AI Agents

The inclusion of these companies in the Industry-Wide Deliberative Forum, convened by Stanford University’s Deliberative Democracy Lab, speaks to its importance and the need to engage the public on the future of AI agents.
DoorDash and Microsoft join Industry-Wide Deliberative Forum on Future of AI Agents
Futuristic 3D Render
News

Industry-Wide Deliberative Forum Invites Public to Weigh In on the Future of AI Agents

There is a significant gap between what technology, especially AI technology, is being developed and the public's understanding of such technologies. We must ask: what if the public were not just passive recipients of these technologies, but active participants in guiding their evolution?
Industry-Wide Deliberative Forum Invites Public to Weigh In on the Future of AI Agents
Hero Image
Human finger touching a screen with AI agent tadamichi via iStock
All News button
1
Subtitle

In an unprecedented collaboration, Stanford's Deliberative Democracy Lab has spearheaded the first-ever Industry-Wide Forum, a cross-industry effort putting everyday people at the center of decisions about AI agents.

Date Label
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No
Subscribe to United States