Stanford University

Democracy

Democratic Backsliding and Resilience: South Korea’s December 3 Martial Law Crisis

-
Seoul National Assembly

What does it actually take to push back against democratic backsliding — not in theory, but in real time? On December 3, 2024, President Yoon Suk Yeol declared emergency martial law in violation of the South Korean Constitution. Had key figures from democratic institutions and civil society been even a few minutes slower to respond, the National Assembly could have been sealed off, and martial law might have succeeded.

This discussion will take you inside that night through the voices of those who were there. Bringing together a journalist, legal scholar, human rights advocate, and civil society leader directly involved in the crisis, the panel will examine what made such immediate democratic resilience possible.

Drawing on their experience, speakers will explore: how the media resisted suppression leading up to and during the crisis; the constitutional and political dynamics behind the lifting of martial law and the impeachment process;  how human rights advocates monitored military deployment and conduct; and how civil society rapidly mobilized to build broad democratic solidarity over the impeachment process. This discussion will offer timely lessons for democracies navigating democratic backsliding.
 

Speakers:
 

  • Jeeyang Rhee Baum (Moderator), Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy and Faculty Affiliate, Harvard Kennedy School
  • Young-jong Jin, Co-Chair, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, South Korea
  • Jikyung Kim, MBC Journalist, Chair, Gender Equality Committee, National Union of Mediaworkers, South Korea
  • Sang-don Lee, Emeritus Professor of Law, Chung-Ang University, former Member of the National Assembly, South Korea
  • Tae-hoon Lim, Director, Center for Military Human Rights, South Korea
     

About the Series


Lessons from Global Democratic Resistance is a public panel series that brings together frontline activists, civic leaders, institutional actors, and field‑informed scholars to examine how democratic actors have resisted, responded to, and learned from democratic backsliding across countries. The series aims to identify practical lessons and comparative insights for those defending democracy today and is organized by the Ash Center for Democratic Governance at the Harvard Kennedy School in collaboration with the Cornell Center on Global Democracy; Perry World House at the University of Pennsylvania; the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame; the Democratic Futures Project at the University of Virginia; Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law; and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
 

Event Details


This event is online only, and registration is required. A recording will be made available after the event’s conclusion. The information collected in the registration form is for internal use only and will not be shared externally.

The Ash Center encourages individuals with disabilities to participate in its events. Should you wish to enquire about an accommodation, please contact our events team at info@ash.harvard.edu prior to the event.

Online via Zoom. Registration is required.

For questions, please contact info@ash.harvard.edu.

Panel Discussions

Join a discussion on South Korea’s December 3 Martial Law Crisis that will bring you into that night through the firsthand accounts of those who experienced it.

Date Label

Lessons from Venezuela: Electoral Resistance to Popular Autocrats (2007–2013)

-
Venezuela

You are invited to a webinar examining how opposition actors navigated electoral politics under conditions of increasing authoritarian consolidation in Venezuela between 2007 and 2013. Focusing on a period marked by both competitive elections and accelerating institutional erosion, the discussion explores how electoral arenas became sites of resistance, coordination, and strategic adaptation under a popular autocrat.

At the center of the discussion are five key milestones:

  • The 2007 Constitutional Referendum
  • The creation of the opposition coalition Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (MUD) in 2008
  • Subsequent participation and coordination across several local, regional, legislative, and presidential elections
  • The opposition primary elections of 2010–2011
  • The 2012–2013 presidential cycle


Together, these moments illustrate how electoral processes were used not only for contestation, but also for coordination, organizational strengthening and political signaling under increasingly uneven conditions.

The webinar advances three core analytical insights. First, opposition strategy during this period reflects a process of pro-democratic learning. The defeat of the constitutional reform in 2007, followed by the institutionalization of coordination through the MUD and the adoption of primary elections, reveals an evolution toward more unified and strategically coherent forms of engagement.

Second, elections in hybrid regimes can function as tools for containing authoritarian advances. These milestones demonstrate how opposition actors can use electoral arenas to build unity, mobilize constituencies, and impose constraints—however partial—on authoritarian consolidation.

Finally, the Venezuelan case highlights pro-authoritarian learning by the regime. As opposition actors improved coordination and electoral competitiveness, incumbents adapted in turn—deploying institutional, legal, and coercive mechanisms to manage and limit opposition gains. This dynamic underscores the iterative nature of strategic interaction between authoritarian regimes and their challengers.

Bringing together political leaders, practitioners and scholars with direct experience of these processes, the conversation will reflect on the strategic dilemmas of participation, coordination and resistance under authoritarian constraints. The discussion will also consider the broader implications of these lessons for contemporary cases of democratic backsliding.
 

More About the Speakers:
 

  • Isabella Picón (Moderator) is a Ph.D. student in political science at George Washington University, specializing in comparative politics and international relations. Her research examines democratization, civil resistance, and opposition strategies under authoritarian regimes. She is a co-founder of civic initiatives that promote nonviolent action and electoral participation as tools for democratic resistance, including Labo Ciudadano and Toma El Control. She has been a fellow at the Harvard Nonviolent Action Lab and at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. She has a bachelor’s degree from Northwestern University and an M.Sc. from the London School of Economics.
  • Paola Bautista de Alemán is a Venezuelan political scientist, journalist, and opposition leader. A national board member of the Primero Justicia party and director of the Institute of Political Studies FORMA, she has dedicated her career to analyzing authoritarianism and fostering political capacity-building in Venezuela. She is currently in exile, serving as a Visiting Fellow at the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame, where her research centers on political resilience and democracy under authoritarian pressure. She has a bachelor’s degree in social communication from Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Venezuela and a Ph.D. in political science from Rostock University in Germany.
  • Julio Borges is a Venezuelan lawyer, opposition leader, and former president of the National Assembly. He co-founded the opposition party Primero Justicia and served as president of the National Assembly in 2017. In exile since 2017, he has faced political persecution, arrest warrants, and physical attacks for his opposition to the Maduro regime, while continuing to advocate for constitutional order and a united political front to resist authoritarianism in Venezuela. He holds a law degree from Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, a master’s degree in philosophy from Boston College, a public policy degree from the University of Oxford, and a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Universidad Santo Tomás in Valencia, Spain.
  • Freddy Guevara is a Venezuelan politician and democracy advocate who served as the first vice president of the National Assembly. A co-founder of the Voluntad Popular party, he has endured years of political persecution, imprisonment, and exile for his leadership in nonviolent civil resistance against the Maduro regime. He is currently a Democracy Fellow at the Ash Center and a researcher with the Nonviolent Action Lab, focusing on pro-democracy movements worldwide. He holds a bachelor’s degree in social communications from Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Venezuela and a master’s in public administration from Harvard Kennedy School, where he was an Edward S. Mason Fellow.
  • José Gustavo Arocha is a national security expert, a senior Fellow at the Center for a Secure Free Society, and a retired Lieutenant Colonel of the Venezuelan Army. His work focuses on civil-military relations, democratic erosion, and authoritarian consolidation in Latin America. A first-hand witness to the closing of democratic space in Venezuela between 2007 and 2012, he holds a master’s in public administration from Harvard Kennedy School, where he was an Edward S. Mason Fellow.
  • Roberto Picón is a Venezuelan systems engineer and electoral expert who has played a significant role in efforts to improve election integrity. He served as a rector of the National Electoral Council (CNE) from 2021 to 2023, where he was known for publicly challenging irregularities and advocating for fairer processes. Previously, his work with the opposition coalition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) led to his detention as a prisoner of conscience in 2017. He has a bachelor’s degree in systems engineering from Universidad Metropolitana in Caracas.
     

About the Series


Lessons from Global Democratic Resistance is a public panel series that brings together frontline activists, civic leaders, institutional actors, and field‑informed scholars to examine how democratic actors have resisted, responded to, and learned from democratic backsliding across countries. The series aims to identify practical lessons and comparative insights for those defending democracy today and is organized by the Ash Center for Democratic Governance at the Harvard Kennedy School in collaboration with the Cornell Center on Global Democracy; Perry World House at the University of Pennsylvania; the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame; the Democratic Futures Project at the University of Virginia; Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law; and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
 

Event Details


This event is online only, and registration is required. A recording will be made available after the event’s conclusion. The information collected in the registration form is for internal use only and will not be shared externally.

The Ash Center encourages individuals with disabilities to participate in its events. Should you wish to enquire about an accommodation, please contact our events team at info@ash.harvard.edu prior to the event.

Online via Zoom. Registration is required.

For questions, please contact info@ash.harvard.edu.

You are invited to a webinar examining how opposition actors navigated electoral politics under conditions of increasing authoritarian consolidation in Venezuela between 2007 and 2013.

Date Label

Colombia at a Crossroads: Ballots, Bullets, and the Future of Democracy

-
DAL Webinar 6.1.26

Colombians will vote for a new president on May 31, 2026, with a runoff scheduled for June 21 if no candidate secures more than 50 percent of the vote. These elections take place at a critical juncture for the country’s security strategy, institutional trajectory, and democratic resilience. While concerns about violence and public security remain central to voter decision-making, the electoral debate also encompasses broader, equally critical issues, including economic development, poverty reduction, institutional strength, victims' rights, and the stability and effectiveness of the presidency.

Democracy at the Ballot Box: The 2026 Electoral Cycle in Latin America is a new series, hosted by The Democracy Action Lab (DAL) at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and DAL's Academic Consortium. This panel will examine the stakes of the 2026 election and the alternatives before voters. It will analyze the main dynamics shaping the electoral cycle, including the leading candidates, the coalitions and groups competing for power, and the broader political context in which the contest is unfolding. The discussion will also assess the likely implications of competing policy agendas, evaluate the principal risks facing the electoral process, identify the sources of democratic resilience that may help sustain it, and draw lessons for other Latin American countries confronting similar challenges.

SPEAKERS

 

MODERATOR

Alberto Díaz-Cayeros — Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Professor, by courtesy, of Political Science, and Co-Director of DAL

Alberto Díaz-Cayeros
Alberto Díaz-Cayeros

Webinar open to the public via Zoom, if prompted for a password, use: 123456

María Ignacia Curiel

Encina Hall, Suite 052
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Research Scholar
Research Manager, Democracy Action Lab
Poverty, Violence, and Governance Lab Research Affiliate, 2024-25
CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow, 2023-24
maria_curiel_2024.jpg

María Ignacia Curiel is a Research Scholar at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and Research Affiliate of the Poverty, Violence and Governance Lab at Stanford University. Curiel is an empirical political scientist using experimental, observational, and qualitative data to study questions of violence and democratic participation, peacebuilding, and representation.

Her research primarily explores political solutions to violent conflict and the electoral participation of parties with violent origins. This work includes an in-depth empirical study of Comunes, the Colombian political party formed by the former FARC guerrilla, as well as a broader analysis of rebel party behaviors across different contexts. More recently, her research has focused on democratic mobilization and the political representation of groups affected by violence in Colombia, Mexico, and Venezuela.

Curiel's work has been supported by the Folke Bernadotte Academy, the Institute for Humane Studies, and the APSA Centennial Center and is published in the Journal of Politics. She holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and dual B.A. degrees in Economics and Political Science from New York University.

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
María Ignacia Curiel Panelist

Oliver Kaplan

Encina Hall, C151
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Associate Professor, Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver
CDDRL Visiting Scholar, 2025-26
20250506-kaplano-487_-_oliver_kaplan.jpg

Oliver Kaplan is an Associate Professor at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver. He is the author of the book, Resisting War: How Communities Protect Themselves (Cambridge University Press, 2017), which examines how civilian communities organize to protect themselves from wartime violence. He is a co-editor and contributor to the book, Speaking Science to Power: Responsible Researchers and Policymaking (Oxford University Press, 2024). Kaplan has also published articles on the conflict-related effects of land reforms and ex-combatant reintegration and recidivism. As part of his research, Kaplan has conducted fieldwork in Colombia and the Philippines.

Kaplan was a Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace and previously a postdoctoral Research Associate at Princeton University and at Stanford University. His research has been funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Smith Richardson Foundation, and other grants. His work has been published in The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of Peace Research, Conflict Management and Peace Science, Stability, The New York Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, CNN, and National Interest.

At the University of Denver, Kaplan is Director of the Korbel Asylum Project (KAP). He has taught M.A.-level courses on Human Rights and Foreign Policy, Peacebuilding in Civil Wars, Civilian Protection, and Human Rights Research Methods, and PhD-level courses on Social Science Research Methods. Kaplan received his Ph.D. in political science from Stanford University and completed his B.A. at UC San Diego.

Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Oliver Kaplan Panelist
Javier Mejía Panelist
Michael Weintraub
Panel Discussions
News Feed Image
DAL Event - Columbia 6.4.26 (2).png
Image
DAL Webinar 6.1.26
Date Label

Research Explores How Voter Capacity Shapes Democratic Outcomes

Authors
Khushmita Dhabhai
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Miriam Golden’s presentation in CDDRL’s Research Seminar on April 23, 2026, addressed a central puzzle in democratic politics: why are incumbent reelection rates systematically higher in richer democracies? Drawing on cross-national data, she demonstrates a strong positive relationship between national income and reelection rates, a pattern that is both statistically robust and theoretically unexpected. This empirical finding motivates a reassessment of two dominant frameworks — accountability theory, associated with John Ferejohn, and selection theory, associated with James Fearon. Accountability models suggest that voters reward good performance and punish poor performance, but they do not explain cross-national variation in reelection rates. Selection models argue that elections filter out low-quality politicians, implying that poorer countries with lower reelection rates must have dishonest or incompetent politicians, yet empirical evidence does not align well with these inferences.

Golden proposes an alternative framework centered on “capacity gaps,” introducing the resources that politicians have available and voters' ability to discern political performance as key missing parameters. In poorer countries, both state capacity and voter interpretive capacity are constrained. Governments face fiscal and administrative limitations that restrict policy delivery, while voters struggle to distinguish whether poor outcomes result from incompetence, corruption, or structural constraints. As a result, the informational conditions necessary for effective accountability break down. Golden further argues that informational signals are asymmetric: markers of “bad” types, such as corruption scandals, criminal convictions, or dynastic ties, are visible and salient, whereas markers of “good” types, such as competence or honesty, are diffuse and easily mimicked. In these settings, even honest, competent, and well-intentioned politicians are likely to lose office because they are indistinguishable to voters from the malfeasant and incompetent. Even high-performing politicians may not be rewarded electorally, and good types gain no consistent advantage in reelection. 

To evaluate this framework, Golden presents multiple empirical investigations. First, she examines whether voters reward economic performance using within-country variation in GDP growth. The results show that higher growth increases reelection rates, but only in countries with high literacy levels. Since literacy roughly proxies voter discernment capacity, this suggests that performance matters electorally only when voters can interpret it. Second, she analyzes survey data from legislators in Italy and Pakistan to assess whether elections filter out low-quality politicians. She finds that politicians with “bad-type” markers, such as dynastic backgrounds or long tenure, exhibit higher tolerance for corruption yet continue to survive electorally, contradicting selection theory. Third, she tests whether poorer democracies have lower-quality politicians by examining education levels and relative salaries. She finds no meaningful differences in legislator quality across income levels and no relationship between salaries and reelection rates, further weakening selection-based explanations.

Overall, Golden’s approach reconciles several empirical anomalies: the income–reelection relationship, the conditional effect of economic performance, and the persistence of low-quality politicians. At the same time, important questions remain regarding causal identification and measurement, as proxies like literacy may capture broader development effects. Nonetheless, the framework offers a compelling shift in focus from politicians to voters, highlighting how limits in information processing can undermine both accountability and selection in democratic systems.

Read More

Peter Magyar, lead candidate of the Tisza party, speaks to supporters after the Tisza party won the parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026 in Budapest, Hungary.
News

Hungary’s 2026 Election Signals Democratic Shift

Scholars Daniel Keleman and Hanna Folsz examine the defeat of Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz Party and the implications for Hungary and Europe.
Hungary’s 2026 Election Signals Democratic Shift
Konstantin Sonin presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on April 9, 2026.
News

Why Authoritarian Governments Tell Obvious Lies

Professor Konstantin Sonin explores the power of misinformation in shaping public perception and political decision-making in a recent Rethinking European Development and Security (REDS) seminar.
Why Authoritarian Governments Tell Obvious Lies
Didi Kuo presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 2, 2026.
News

In Advanced Democracies, Politics May Be Moving Beyond Policy

Didi Kuo explores how non-programmatic competition is changing the relationship between voters, parties, and democratic institutions.
In Advanced Democracies, Politics May Be Moving Beyond Policy
Hero Image
Miriam Golden presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 23, 2026.
Miriam Golden presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 23, 2026. | Nora Sulots
All News button
1
Subtitle

Miriam Golden presents a new framework linking state capacity and fiscal capacity to reelection patterns across countries.

Date Label
In Brief
  • CDDRL Visiting Scholar Miriam Golden presented research examining why incumbent reelection rates are higher in wealthier democracies using cross-national data.
  • She introduced a “capacity gaps” framework, arguing that voter ability to interpret performance shapes accountability and electoral outcomes.
  • Findings show performance is rewarded only where voters can assess it, highlighting limits of accountability and selection in democracies.
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No

William J. Dobson

0
dobson_photo.jpg

Will Dobson is the coeditor of the Journal of Democracy. Previously, he was the Chief International Editor at NPR, where he led the network’s award-winning international coverage and oversaw a team of editors and correspondents in 17 overseas bureaus and Washington, D.C. He is the author of The Dictator’s Learning Curve: Inside the Global Battle for Democracy, which examines the struggle between authoritarian regimes and the people who challenge them. It was selected as one of the “best books of the year” by Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, The Telegraph, and Prospect, and it has been translated into many languages.

Prior to joining NPR, Dobson was Slate magazine’s Washington Bureau Chief, overseeing the magazine’s coverage of politics, jurisprudence, and international news. Previously, he served as the Managing Editor of Foreign Policy, leading the editorial planning of its award-winning magazine. Earlier in his career, Dobson served as Newsweek International’s Asia Editor, managing a team of correspondents in more than 15 countries. His articles and essays have appeared in the New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, and elsewhere. Dobson holds a law degree from Harvard Law School and a Master’s degree in East Asian Studies from Harvard University. He received his Bachelor’s degree, summa cum laude, from Middlebury College.

Co-editor, Journal of Democracy
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label

Hungary’s 2026 Election Signals Democratic Shift

Authors
Surina Naran
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On Thursday, April 16, Daniel Kelemen (UC Merced) and CDDRL predoctoral fellow Hanna Folsz discussed the consequential outcome of the April 2026 Hungarian election: the victory of Peter Magyar’s Tisza Party over Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz Party in a Rethinking European Development and Security (REDS) seminar co-hosted by the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and The Europe Center.

Daniel Kelemen opened the talk, first offering an overview of Viktor Orbán's rise to power. In 2010, Orbán won Hungary’s nationwide election with over two-thirds majority, a majority large enough to allow him to amend the constitution. Having suffered an electoral defeat in the past, Orbán worked to centralize his power. He captured referees — courts and independent bodies — seized control of the media, and demonized and undermined the opposition. Orbán effectively changed the rules of the game, tilting the electoral playing field. 

Kelemen states that there are cases in which smaller authoritarian groups within a larger system are tolerated or protected by national parties because they deliver votes. Orbán operated with the support of Angela Merkel, the former Chancellor of Germany, who largely stopped the EU from taking action against Orbán. Orbán’s party, the Fidesz Party, was a part of Merkel’s EU-wide party, the European People’s Party (EPP), a center-right, Christian party. This support, along with the emigration of dissatisfied voters and continued funding from the EU, helped Orbán stay in power. 

However, Orbán’s Fidesz Party was kicked out of the EPP in 2021. Merkel, who was a strong supporter of Orbán, left office in 2022. Orbán’s policy also became more extreme, raising more concern from European member states. In 2022, the EU Commission cut funding to Hungary, suspending 32 billion euros. Kelemen identifies this suspension of funds as an effective step against Hungary’s regime. 

Kelemen then outlined the implications of Orbán’s fall for Hungary, the EU, and international actors, including Russia and the United States. For Hungary, it means full regime change, as the Tisza Party will likely take efforts to undo Orbán’s autocratic policy changes. For the EU, it means that policy on Ukraine and Russia will be different, because Orbán was using his veto to prevent support for Ukraine and sanctions on Russia. For the US and Russia, Russia lost its supporter and ear in the EU, and the Trump administration lost its closest ally in Europe. On a global note, Orbán was a key figure in trying to bring together far-right populists. After he was kicked out of the EPP, he formed a more autocratic-focused party called MEGA (Make Europe Great Again). 

Daniel Keleman presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on April 16, 2026.
Daniel Keleman presented his research in a REDS seminar on April 16, 2026. | Emil Kamalov

Hanna Folsz then took a closer, domestic look at the Tisza Party and how they triumphed over Orbán. As Kelemen discussed, Orbán's new electoral rules strongly favored large parties with rural bases, the characteristics of the Fidesz party. The Fidesz Party also controlled the media and enjoyed advantages in party financing. However, the Tisza Party, led by Peter Magyar, dominated the 2026 election, despite the electoral system being stacked against opposition parties. 

Economic woes, corruption, and scandals surrounding Fidesz created broad voter discontent and set the stage for the Tisza Party’s victory. Tisza worked to create a broad coalition through extensive group-level campaigning, messaging that focused on competent economic governance and anti-corruption, and the idea of reclaiming patriotism. Magyar also extensively campaigned, holding rallies all over Hungary in localities of all sizes. The district candidates within the Tisza Party campaigned in a similar manner. 

The Tisza Party focused its policy proposals on extensive welfare, public services improvement, the elimination of corruption, strengthening relationships with the EU and neighbors, and largely avoided divisive topics. The Party also distanced itself from the discredited and divisive established opposition parties, and they did not coordinate with past opposition parties. 

Folsz outlined the lessons Hungary’s electoral outcome shows for democratic resistance against autocratization. The Hungarian case demonstrated the importance of connecting with voters and building credibility by campaigning a lot and across the country, including in rural constituencies. The Tisza Party also smartly presented a vision for a better future with concrete proposals, rooted in citizens’ core concerns– in this case, the economy and corruption, and distanced themselves from divisive opposition politicians and parties. The Tisza Party focused its messaging on unity and reclaiming patriotism from the far right.

Hanna Folsz presented her research in a REDS seminar on April 16, 2026.
Hanna Folsz presented her research in a REDS seminar on April 16, 2026. | Hesham Sallam

The 2026 Hungarian election offered a rare example of democratic recovery in a system widely considered entrenched, raising important lessons for opposition movements confronting democratic erosion.

Read More

Nate Persily presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on December 4, 2025.
News

Election Administration, 2024 to 2026: Lessons Learned and Causes for Concern

In a CDDRL research seminar, Nate Persily, the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, discussed revelations from the 2024 election and how the 2024 election can forecast the upcoming 2026 midterm election cycle.
Election Administration, 2024 to 2026: Lessons Learned and Causes for Concern
Clémence Tricaud presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 15, 2025.
News

Margins That Matter: Understanding the Changing Nature of U.S. Elections

In a CDDRL research seminar, Clémence Tricaud, Assistant Professor of Economics at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, shared her research on the evolving nature of electoral competition in the United States. She explored a question of growing political and public interest: Are U.S. elections truly getting closer—and if so, why does that matter?
Margins That Matter: Understanding the Changing Nature of U.S. Elections
Ali Çarkoğlu
News

Polarization, Cleavages, and Democratic Backsliding: Electoral Dynamics in Turkey (1990-2023)

Using data from the World Values Survey and Turkish Election Studies, CDDRL Visiting Scholar Ali Çarkoğlu explores the rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the enduring influence of cultural divides on Turkey’s political landscape.
Polarization, Cleavages, and Democratic Backsliding: Electoral Dynamics in Turkey (1990-2023)
Hero Image
Peter Magyar, lead candidate of the Tisza party, speaks to supporters after the Tisza party won the parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026 in Budapest, Hungary.
Peter Magyar, lead candidate of the Tisza party, speaks to supporters after the Tisza party won the parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026, in Budapest, Hungary. | Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Scholars Daniel Keleman and Hanna Folsz examine the defeat of Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz Party and the implications for Hungary and Europe.

Terms
Image
Peter Magyar, lead candidate of the Tisza party, speaks to supporters after the Tisza party won the parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026 in Budapest, Hungary.
Caption Peter Magyar, lead candidate of the Tisza party, speaks to supporters after the Tisza party won the parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026, in Budapest, Hungary. | Photo credit Getty Images
Title
Hungary’s 2026 Election Signals Democratic Shift
Date Label
In Brief
  • At a REDS Seminar hosted by the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and The Europe Center seminar on April 16, 2026, Daniel Kelemen and Hanna Folsz discussed Hungary’s 2026 election and Viktor Orbán’s defeat by Peter Magyar’s Tisza Party.
  • They analyzed how Tisza overcame media control, electoral rules, and institutional advantages favoring Fidesz through broad-based campaigning.
  • The case highlights how opposition movements can challenge entrenched regimes and offers lessons for democratic recovery amid backsliding.
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No

Rebuilding Democracy in Venezuela — Breaking the Paradox of Plenty: Can Venezuela Escape the Resource Trap?

-
4.28 DAL Event

"Rebuilding Democracy in Venezuela" is a four-part webinar series hosted by CDDRL's Democracy Action Lab that examines Venezuela’s uncertain transition to democracy through the political, economic, security, and justice-related challenges that will ultimately determine its success. Moving beyond abstract calls for change, the series will offer a practical, sequenced analysis of what a democratic opening in Venezuela would realistically require, drawing on comparative experiences from other post-authoritarian transitions.

Venezuela’s democratic future will be shaped not only by political transitions, but by how the country manages its most defining structural feature: vast natural resource wealth. Oil has historically been both a source of opportunity and a driver of institutional fragility, contributing to cycles of centralization, rent-seeking, and democratic erosion. As Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonzo — former oil minister of Venezuela and one of the architects of OPEC — famously warned, petroleum could become “the devil’s excrement,” bringing with it corruption, waste, and institutional decay.

As Venezuela looks ahead to a potential — yet elusive — democratic opening, a central question emerges: can the country escape the historical trap of resource dependence and build a model in which oil supports — not undermines — shared prosperity and democracy?

This session brings together leading thinkers on political economy, development, and global energy to explore how Venezuela can transform its resource wealth into a foundation for democratic stability, economic diversification, and shared prosperity.

SPEAKERS

  • Paul Collier, Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, Oxford University
    • Development Strategy
  • Francis Fukuyama, Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Director of the Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy
    • Challenges of State-Building and Institutional Development
  • Terry Lynn Karl, Gildred Professor of Latin American Studies, Professor of Political Science, William and Gretchen Kimball University Fellow & Senior Research Scholar (by courtesy) of FSI/CDDRL, Stanford
    • Political Constraint – Institutional Design
       

MODERATOR

 Héctor Fuentes, Visiting Scholar at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University

Héctor Fuentes
Héctor Fuentes

This is a hybrid event. In-person in Goldman Conference Room, Encina Hall East, 4th floor - E409; Livestream via Zoom. Registration required.

Paul Collier Panelist

Terry L. Karl

Department of Political Science
Encina Hall
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-6044

(650) 724-4166 (650) 724-2996
0
Professor of Political Science
Gildred Professor of Latin American Studies
William and Gretchen Kimball University Fellow
Senior Research Scholar (by courtesty) of FSI/CDDRL
terrykarl.png MA, PhD

Professor Karl has published widely on comparative politics and international relations, with special emphasis on the politics of oil-exporting countries, transitions to democracy, problems of inequality, the global politics of human rights, and the resolution of civil wars. Her works on oil, human rights and democracy include The Paradox of Plenty: Oil Booms and Petro-States (University of California Press, 1998), honored as one of the two best books on Latin America by the Latin American Studies Association, the Bottom of the Barrel: Africa's Oil Boom and the Poor (2004 with Ian Gary), the forthcoming New and Old Oil Wars (with Mary Kaldor and Yahia Said), and the forthcoming Overcoming the Resource Curse (with Joseph Stiglitz, Jeffrey Sachs et al). She has also co-authored Limits of Competition (MIT Press, 1996), winner of the Twelve Stars Environmental Prize from the European Community. Karl has published extensively on comparative democratization, ending civil wars in Central America, and political economy. She has conducted field research throughout Latin America, West Africa and Eastern Europe. Her work has been translated into 15 languages.

Karl has a strong interest in U.S. foreign policy and has prepared expert testimony for the U.S. Congress, the Supreme Court, and the United Nations. She served as an advisor to chief U.N. peace negotiators in El Salvador and Guatemala and monitored elections for the United Nations. She accompanied numerous congressional delegations to Central America, lectured frequently before officials of the Department of State, Defense, and the Agency for International Development, and served as an adviser to the Chairman of the House Sub-Committee on Western Hemisphere Affairs of the United States Congress. Karl appears frequently in national and local media. Her most recent opinion piece was published in 25 countries.

Karl has been an expert witness in major human rights and war crimes trials in the United States that have set important legal precedents, most notably the first jury verdict in U.S. history against military commanders for murder and torture under the doctrine of command responsibility and the first jury verdict in U.S. history finding commanders responsible for "crimes against humanity" under the doctrine of command responsibility. In January 2006, her testimony formed the basis for a landmark victory for human rights on the statute of limitations issue. Her testimonies regarding political asylum have been presented to the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Circuit courts. She has written over 250 affidavits for political asylum, and she has prepared testimony for the U.S. Attorney General on the extension of temporary protected status for Salvadorans in the United States and the conditions of unaccompanied minors in U.S. custody. As a result of her human rights work, she received the Doctor of Humane Letters, honoris causa from the University of San Francisco in 2005.

Professor Karl has been recognized for "exceptional teaching throughout her career," resulting in her appointment as the William R. and Gretchen Kimball University Fellowship. She has also won the Dean's Award for Excellence in Teaching (1989), the Allan V. Cox Medal for Faculty Excellence Fostering Undergraduate Research (1994), and the Walter J. Gores Award for Excellence in Graduate and Undergraduate Teaching (1997), the University's highest academic prize. Karl served as director of Stanford's Center for Latin American Studies from 1990-2001, was praised by the president of Stanford for elevating the Center for Latin American Studies to "unprecedented levels of intelligent, dynamic, cross-disciplinary activity and public service in literature, arts, social sciences, and professions." In 1997 she was awarded the Rio Branco Prize by the President of Brazil, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, in recognition for her service in fostering academic relations between the United States and Latin America.

CV
Terry Lynn Karl Panelist

Francis Fukuyama

Encina Hall, C148
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305

0
Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Director of the Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy
Research Affiliate at The Europe Center
Professor by Courtesy, Department of Political Science
yff-2021-14290_6500x4500_square.jpg

Francis Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a faculty member of FSI's Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). He is also Director of Stanford's Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy, and a professor (by courtesy) of Political Science.

Dr. Fukuyama has written widely on issues in development and international politics. His 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man, has appeared in over twenty foreign editions. His book In the Realm of the Last Man: A Memoir will be published in fall 2026.

Francis Fukuyama received his B.A. from Cornell University in classics, and his Ph.D. from Harvard in Political Science. He was a member of the Political Science Department of the RAND Corporation, and of the Policy Planning Staff of the US Department of State. From 1996-2000 he was Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University, and from 2001-2010 he was Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. He served as a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics from 2001-2004. He is editor-in-chief of American Purpose, an online journal.

Dr. Fukuyama holds honorary doctorates from Connecticut College, Doane College, Doshisha University (Japan), Kansai University (Japan), Aarhus University (Denmark), the Pardee Rand Graduate School, and Adam Mickiewicz University (Poland). He is a non-resident fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of the Rand Corporation, the Board of Trustees of Freedom House, and the Board of the Volcker Alliance. He is a fellow of the National Academy for Public Administration, a member of the American Political Science Association, and of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is married to Laura Holmgren and has three children.

(October 2025)

Global Populisms

A new project examining the global surge in populist movements and what it means for established democratic rules and institutions.
Read More
CV
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
Francis Fukuyama Panelist
Panel Discussions

Join us for the final event in a four-part webinar series hosted by the Democracy Action Lab — "Rebuilding Democracy in Venezuela." Tuesday, April 28, 10:00 - 11:15 am PT.

News Feed Image
4.28.26 Venezuela webinar (9)_0.png
Date Label

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
Subscribe to Democracy