Democracy
-

 

 

Senator Olympia Jean Snowe is a senior fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) and served an 18-year career in the Senate, which ended on January 2, 2013. Before her election to the Senate, Snowe represented Maine’s 2nd Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives for 16 years. She was the first woman in U.S. history to serve in both houses of a state legislature and both houses of Congress. When first elected to Congress in 1978, at the age of 31, Snowe was the youngest Republican woman, and the first Greek-American woman, ever elected to Congress. She has won more federal elections in Maine than any other person since World War II, and is the third-longest serving woman in the history of the Congress. Snowe is a former chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, became the first Republican woman ever to secure a full-term seat on the Senate Finance Committee, and was also the first woman senator to chair the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Seapower, which oversees the Navy and Marine Corps. In 2005, Snowe was named the 54th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes magazine. In 2006, Time magazine named her one of the top ten U.S. senators.


Jason Grumet is the founder and president of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC). In 2007, Grumet founded BPC with former U.S. Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole and George Mitchell to develop and promote bipartisan solutions to America’s most difficult public policy challenges. Under Grumet’s leadership, BPC is developing and advocating bipartisan solutions on immigration reform, health care, housing and economic policy, energy security and national security. In 2001, Grumet founded and directed the National Commission on Energy Policy, which produced a comprehensive set of policy recommendations many of which were adopted into law in 2005 and 2007. These policies included specific legislative approaches to promote domestic energy production as well as the first updates of U.S. automotive fuel economy standards in 30 years. Previously, Grumet led the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, a nonprofit association of air quality agencies in the Northeast. During his eight-year tenure, Grumet expanded the organization’s technical and advocacy capabilities increasing its presence in the national policy debate.

This event is free and open to the public.


 

Paul Brest Hall

555 Salvatierra Way

Stanford, CA 94305

Senator Olympia Snowe Senator and Representative from Maine US Congress
Jason Grumet Founder and president of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC)

Jerry Yang & Akiko Yamazaki
Environment & Energy Building
473 Via Ortega, First Floor
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4225

0
Charles Louis Ducommun Professor, Humanities and Sciences
Director, Bill Lane Center for the American West
Professor, Political Science
CDDRL Affiliated Faculty
bruce_cain.jpg

Bruce E. Cain is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and Director of the Bill Lane Center for the American West. He received a BA from Bowdoin College (1970), a B Phil. from Oxford University (1972) as a Rhodes Scholar, and a Ph D from Harvard University (1976). He taught at Caltech (1976-89) and UC Berkeley (1989-2012) before coming to Stanford. Professor Cain was Director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley from 1990-2007 and Executive Director of the UC Washington Center from 2005-2012. He was elected the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2000 and has won awards for his research (Richard F. Fenno Prize, 1988), teaching (Caltech 1988 and UC Berkeley 2003) and public service (Zale Award for Outstanding Achievement in Policy Research and Public Service, 2000). His areas of expertise include political regulation, applied democratic theory, representation and state politics. Some of Professor Cain’s most recent publications include “Malleable Constitutions: Reflections on State Constitutional Design,” coauthored with Roger Noll in University of Texas Law Review, volume 2, 2009; “More or Less: Searching for Regulatory Balance,” in Race, Reform and the Political Process, edited by Heather Gerken, Guy Charles and Michael Kang, CUP, 2011; and “Redistricting Commissions: A Better Political Buffer?” in The Yale Law Journal, volume 121, 2012. He is currently working on a book about political reform in the US.

CV
Professor of Political Science at Stanford
Panel Discussions
Authors
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

Massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong reflect a direct challenge to the Chinese government, according to Stanford professor Larry Diamond. The younger Hong Kong generation has greater expectations of democratic freedoms, and Communist Party rule in China may be in its final decade, he said.

The street demonstrators in Hong Kong could have serious implications for political stability in China and the future of its Communist Party, a Stanford scholar says.

In an interview with Stanford News Service, Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute, discussed the Hong Kong situation.

In 2007, China promised that Hong Kong residents could vote for the chief executive of Hong Kong in a 2017 popular vote. However, on Aug. 31, China's legislature proposed changes that in effect closed the voting process – igniting widespread protests in the streets of Hong Kong. A former British colony of 7.2 million people, Hong Kong was handed over to China in 1997.


What rights do Hong Kong citizens have that are different from people on mainland China?

Under the principle of "one country, two systems" – known as the Basic Law – Hong Kong was promised the right to keep its capitalist way of life and its political autonomy, with civil freedoms and a rule of law, at least through 2047, 50 years after the handover of power in 1997.

But under pressure from Beijing, there has been gradual subtle erosion of academic freedom and press freedom, and increasing political control from Beijing. Still, as of today, Hong Kong has a level of civil freedom – freedom of speech, press and association – that people in mainland China can only dream of, and it has democratic elections for about half of its legislative seats.


How do you describe the Chinese government's reaction to the protests?

I think the Beijing authorities have been stunned by the intensity and scope of the protests, and quite unprepared. They are in a dilemma. They do not want to perpetrate another bloodbath like the crackdown on Tiananmen Square in 1989. Yet neither do they want to allow the protests to just continue to occupy large parts of central Hong Kong and press democratic demands.

Finally, they do not want to do what they should have done months ago – negotiate on some compromise formula to at least allow "gradual and orderly progress," as envisioned in the Basic Law, toward democracy in Hong Kong. They are in a bind, which could have serious implications ultimately for political stability in China itself.


Are the Chinese authorities surprised at the magnitude of the protests, and if so, why?

Yes, they thought that the people of Hong Kong would just swallow hard and surrender their dreams of democratic self-governance, just as they have accepted previous impositions by Beijing essentially blocking or deferring democratic progress. But Hong Kongers are fed up by now; they have been waiting for 17 years for China to deliver on the implicit promise in the Basic Law for democratic elections through universal suffrage to choose their chief executive.

And this is a new, more tech-savvy and democratically self-conscious generation of young Hong Kongers who have higher expectations, worse job prospects and more social media tools at their disposal. This emerging generation in Hong Kong is mad as hell, and they are not going to take it anymore.


Will this challenge Beijing's typical strategy for dealing with dissent and protests?

I think the Beijing authorities are really in a serious bind. Their frequent strategy in dealing with local-level protests is to try to grant some specific demands to mollify protestors and then isolate and arrest some of the harder-line protest elements. But the Hong Kong protests are so big and so visible, and the demands of the protestors – essentially, for democratic elections in Hong Kong – so risk the democratic "virus" spreading to the rest of China that the Beijing authorities do not feel they can make significant concessions.

If they crack down with brutal force, it will be Tiananmen all over again, and their international reputation will be badly damaged, along with any prospect of closer integration with Taiwan. If they negotiate under pressure, they fear setting a dangerous and highly visible precedent. If they do nothing, they may hope it just blows over as demonstrators get tired. I think that will be their initial strategy. If it does not work, they may dump Hong Kong Chief Executive C.Y. Leung to serve up a sacrificial lamb. Then, if that does not work, they are really in trouble.


What do you envision as the likely outcome of the protests?

I really do not know. They could gradually subside from exhaustion, but I think this is a new generation of Hong Kongers that is not going to simply melt away into passivity again. They could recur periodically, or just keep growing, while paralyzing normal business and governance in Hong Kong. If the latter happens, Beijing may decide it has to use force. I hope they don't do that. If the Beijing leadership was smart, they would negotiate a compromise agreement to allow gradual progress toward democratic self-governance. But I think they are too gripped with political fear of the future to risk that.

This could well mutate into a larger if more incremental challenge to the overall legitimacy of Communist Party rule. And if the increasingly vulnerable Chinese economy should slip into crisis before stability is returned to Hong Kong, then all bets are off. I think the profundity of this crisis in Hong Kong and the blunt and clumsy intransigence of China's leadership in responding to it are two more signs that Communist Party rule in China may be in its final decade.

The system is too politically rigid and the leadership is too conservative to respond creatively to a fundamental political crisis. I hope I am wrong about that, because it would be much better for China and the world if political change were to happen there through incremental reform rather than another massive societal upheaval.

To paraphrase John F. Kennedy, those who make peaceful reform impossible make sudden revolutionary change inevitable.


Media Mentions

Larry Diamond writes in Time, "Xi Jinping Could Be China's Last Communist Ruler" -Time (Oct. 1, 2014)

Larry Diamond in an interview with Fox Business News, "Why Xi Jinping won't repeat the Tiananmen Square incident in Hong Kong" (Oct. 1, 2014)

Larry Diamond mentioned in The New York Times for China, "Limited Tools to Quell Unrest in Hong Kong" -The New York Times (China) (Sept. 30, 2014)

 

 

Hero Image
rtr48f93
Paul Zimmerman, a district councillor, raises a yellow umbrella as Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying (5th R) and other officials make a toast to guests at a reception following a flag raising ceremony in Hong Kong October 1, 2014.
REUTERS/Bobby Yip
All News button
1
-

Abstract:

Students of liberal democracy have long highlighted its many paradoxes. Most notably, individual rights, although a necessary (albeit insufficient) condition for the existence of liberal democracy, often stands in tension with the dictates of electoral majorities. Nowhere is the tension between individual rights and democratic principle of popular sovereignty more apparent than in the contemporary Turkish context. Exemplifying that trend, the Justice and Development Party (JDP) came to power in 2002 after winning 34% of the vote, and maintained its rule through successive electoral victories in 2007 (with 47%) and 2011 (with almost 50%). Despite professing a commitment to democratic governance and contributing to democratization process early on, the JDP has taken an illiberal turn since 2007. As its popular support increased progressively, the ruling party began steering away from democratic practices, placing restrictions on the freedom of the press, and undermining judicial independence. It is within that context that Turkey offers broader lessons on how executive institutions can employ popular support and the legitimacy it affords them to undermine the effective workings of democracy.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
yesim arat

Yeşim Arat is 2014-15 FSI-SHC International Visiting Scholar and 2014-15 Aron Rodrigue International Visitor at Stanford University, and Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Boğaziçi University, Turkey. She is the author of The Patriarchal Paradox: Women Politicians in Turkey (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1989), Rethinking Islam and Liberal Democracy: Islamist Women in Turkish Politics (SUNY Press, 2005), Violence Against Women in Turkey (with Ayse Gul Altinay-Punto, 2009-Turkish version, 2008 Pen Duygu Asena Award) and numerous articles on women as well as Turkish politics. Arat was the Provost of her university between 2008-2012 and is a member of the Science Academy, Turkey. She is currently working on a book on post-1980 politics of Turkey. She will be in residence at Stanford from October 6, 2014 through November 6, 2014.

 

The event is co-sponsored by the Sohaib and Sara Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, Mediterranean Studies Forum and Stanford Humanities Center.

 

[[{"fid":"216180","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"Yesim Arat Flyer","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":"","field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"Yesim Arat Flyer","field_related_image_aspect[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto","pp_lightbox":true,"pp_description":true},"type":"media","attributes":{"height":667,"width":870,"class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto"}}]]

CISAC Central Conference Room

Second Floor, Encina Hall

Yeşim Arat 2014-15 FSI-SHC International Visiting Scholar at Stanford University and Professor of Political Science and International Relations Boğaziçi University, Turkey
Seminars
-

[[{"fid":"209960","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"Arlene Hsu","field_caption[und][0][value]":"Taipei at night with Taipei 101. 28 February 2009.","field_related_image_aspect[und][0][value]":"0","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"},"type":"media","field_deltas":{"1":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"Arlene Hsu","field_caption[und][0][value]":"Taipei at night with Taipei 101. 28 February 2009.","field_related_image_aspect[und][0][value]":"0","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"}},"link_text":null,"attributes":{"width":"870","class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto","data-delta":"1"}}]]


Over the past year and more, Taiwan’s political elite has been deadlocked over the question of deepening economic relations with the People’s Republic of China. This controversial issue has led to a standoff between the executive and legislative branches, sparked a frenzy of social activism and a student occupation of the legislature, and contributed to President Ma Ying-jeou’s deep unpopularity.

On October 17-18, the Taiwan Democracy Project at CDDRL, with the generous support of the Taipei Economic and Culture Office, will host its annual conference at Stanford University to examine the politics of polarization in Taiwan.

This conference will bring together specialists from Taiwan, the U.S., and elsewhere in Asia to examine the sources and implications of this political polarization in comparative perspective. It will include a special case study of the Trade in Services Agreement with China that triggered this past year’s protests, as well as a more general overview of the politics of trade liberalization in Taiwan, prospects for Taiwan’s integration into the Trans-Pacific Partnership and other regional trade agreements, and a consideration of the implications for Taiwan’s long-term democratic future.

Conference speakers will include: Chung-shu Wu, the president of the Chung-hwa Institute of Economic Research (CIER) in Taipei; Steve Chan of the University of Colorado; Roselyn Hsueh of Temple University; Yun-han Chu, the president of the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation; and Thitinan Pongsudhirak of Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok.


Panels will examine the following questions:

1. What are the sources and implications of political polarization in Taiwan, and how have these changed in recent years?

2. How does Taiwan’s recent experience compare to political polarization in other countries in Asia (e.g. South Korea, Thailand) and elsewhere (the US)?

3. To what extent does the latest political deadlock in Taiwan reflect concern over the specific issue of trade with the People’s Republic of China, versus a deeper, systemic set of problems with Taiwan’s democracy?

4. How are globalization and trade liberalization reshaping Taiwan’s domestic political economy, and what are the prospects for forging a stronger pro-trade coalition in Taiwan that transcends the current partisan divide?


The conference will take place October 17-18 in the Bechtel Conference Room in Encina Hall at Stanford University. It is free and open to the public. 

 

Conference Resources

 

Agenda

Speaker Bios

Presentations

Conference Report

Conference Flyer

 

Conference Papers

 

How Cross-Strait Trade and Investment Is Affecting Income and Wealth Inequality in Taiwan by Chien-Fu Lin, National Taiwan University

 

Generational Differences in Attitudes towards Cross-Straits Trade by Ping-Yin Kuan, Department of Sociology & International Program in Asia-Pacific Studies, National Chengchi University

 

Change and the Unchanged of Polarized Politics in Taiwan by Min-Hua Huang, National Taiwan University; Center for East Asia Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution

 

Social Media, Social Movements and the Challenge of Democratic Governability by Boyu Chen, National Sun Yat-sen University, Institute of Political Science 

 

Coping with the Challenge of Democratic Governance under Ma Ying-jeou by Yun-han Chu, National Taiwan University

 

Taiwan’s Bid for TPP Membership and the Potential Impact on Taiwan-U.S. Relations by Kwei-Bo Huang, National Chengchi University, Department of Diplomacy

 

In the Wake of the Sunflower Movement: Exploring the Political Consequences of Cross-Strait Integration by Pei-shan Lee, National Chung Cheng University, Political Science Department 

 

The Roots of Thailand’s Political Polarization in Comparative Perspective by Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Chulalongkorn University; The Institute of Security and International Studies

 

The Role of the United States in Cross-Strait Economic Integration by Chen-Dong Tso, National Taiwan University

 

The China Factor and the Generational Shift over National Identity by Mark Weatherall, Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

 

Taiwan’s Strategy for Regional Economic Integration by Chung-Shu Wu, Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research

 

Polarized Electorates in South Korea and Taiwan: The Role of Political Trust under Conservative Governments by Hyunji Lee, Institute of Asian Research, University of British Columbia

 

Polarization in Taiwan Politics by Steve Chan, University of Colorado, Boulder

 

Agenda
Conference Biographies
Taiwan Polarization Conference Flyer
Politics of Polarization in Taiwan: Conference Report
Conferences
0
brett_carter_2025.jpg

Brett Carter is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Southern California, a Hoover Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and a Faculty Affiliate at Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. He received a Ph.D. from Harvard University, where he was a fellow at the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies.

Carter studies politics in the world's autocracies. His first book, Propaganda in Autocracies: Institutions, Information, and the Politics of Belief (Cambridge University Press), draws on the largest archive of state propaganda ever assembled — encompassing over eight million newspaper articles in six languages from nearly 60 countries around the world — to show how political institutions shape the propaganda strategies of repressive governments. It received the William Riker Prize for the Best Book in Political Economy, the International Journal of Press/Politics Hazel Gaudet-Erskine Best Book Award, Honorable Mention for the Gregory Luebbert Award for the Best Book in Comparative Politics, and Honorable Mention for the APSA Democracy & Autocracy Section's Best Book Award.

His second book, in progress, shows how politics in Africa’s autocracies changed after the fall of the Berlin Wall and how a new era of geopolitical competition — marked by the rise of China and the resurgence of Russia — is changing them again.

Carter’s other work has appeared in the Journal of Politics, British Journal of Political Science, Perspectives on Politics, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Security Studies, China Quarterly, Journal of Democracy, and Foreign Affairs, among others. His work has been featured by The New York Times, The Economist, The National Interest, and NPR’s Radiolab.

Hoover Fellow
CDDRL Affiliated Scholar
CDDRL Visiting Scholar, 2020-2021
Date Label
-

Abstract

Taiwan’s indigenous social movement, active since the 1980s, has successfully lobbied to get indigenous rights included in the Republic of China Constitution, to create a cabinet level Council of Indigenous Peoples, and to pass the 2005 Basic Law on Indigenous Peoples. Taiwan’s indigenous social activists have also become regular participants in United Nations indigenous events. Especially during the Chen Shui-bian presidency, foreign observers often suspected that the state instrumentalized “indigeneity” to claim a distinct identity from China. Events since 2008, however, demonstrate that the indigenous rights movement has maintained its own momentum and that the indigenous peoples have interests that cannot be reduced to issues of national identity or party politics. In fact, the indigenous people overwhelmingly support the KMT, and indigenous movements are involved in both “pro-unification” and “pro-independence” political networks.  Most indigenous social movement leaders, as well as ordinary indigenous people, hope that their movement can make progress in indigenous rights in ways that transcend the “blue” and “green” division between Han Taiwanese. This talk will explore the diversity of the indigenous movements, their mobilization strategies, and values since Ma Ying-jeou was elected President of the ROC in 2008.



Speaker Bio

Scott Simon holds a Ph.D. in Anthropology from McGill University, and began his career working in the anthropology of development. Two separate research projects led to his books Tanners of Taiwan: Life Strategies and National Cultures (2005), as well as Sweet and Sour: Life-Worlds of Taipei Women Entrepreneurs (2003). He has worked extensively on ethnographic research with Truku and Sediq groups in both Hualien and Nantou counties of Taiwan since 2004. His third book - entitled Sadyaq Balae! L’autochtonie formosane dans tous ses états – was published in French by the Laval University Press. This book is an exploration of state-indigenous relations, including the social movements that often contest state projects on indigenous territory. He has in recent years, in annual trips to Taiwan, been working more closely with Truku-speaking trappers and hunters, who have been teaching him about ethno-biology and human-animal relations in addition to sharing their discontent about Taiwan’s legal regime that criminalizes most hunting activities. 

 

 

Scott Simon Professor School of Sociological and Anthropological Studies, Research Chair in Taiwan Studies, University of Ottawa
Seminars
0
erin_baggot_carter_2025.jpg

Erin Baggott Carter (赵雅芬) is an Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Southern California and a Hoover Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. She is also a non-resident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center. She has previously held fellowships at Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation. She received a Ph.D. in Political Science from Harvard University.

Dr. Carter's research focuses on Chinese politics and propaganda. Her first book, Propaganda in Autocracies (Cambridge University Press), explores how political institutions determine propaganda strategies with an original dataset of eight million articles in six languages drawn from state-run newspapers in nearly 70 countries. She is currently working on a book on how domestic politics influence US-China relations. Her other work has appeared in the British Journal of Political ScienceJournal of Conflict ResolutionSecurity Studies, and International Interactions. Her work has been featured by a number of media platforms, including the New York Times and the Little Red Podcast.

Her research has been supported by the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Center for International Studies at the University of Southern California, the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University, the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University, and the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University.

Dr. Carter regularly tweets about Chinese politics and propaganda at @baggottcarter. She can be reached via email at baggott [at] usc.edu or ebaggott [at] stanford.edu.

Hoover Fellow
CDDRL Affiliated Scholar
CDDRL Visiting Scholar, 2020-2021
CISAC Affiliate
Date Label
Paragraphs

Keynote address by Rt. Hon. Aminu Waziri Tambuwal CFR, Speaker, House of Representatives, National Assembly of Nigeria on the occasion of the Omidyar Network African Democracy and Leadership Forum organized by the Stanford University Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) on the 26th of June, 2014, at the Sheraton Hotel, Abuja.

This address was delivered as part of the conference on 'The Future of Human Rights and Good Governance in Africa' held from June 26 - 28, 2014, in Abuja, Nigeria, which convened many members of the Omidyar Network's Africa Leadership Forum.

All Publications button
1
Publication Date
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On June 30, CDDRL Director Larry Diamond delivered a lecture in Lagos, Nigeria on poverty, terrorism and democracy. Presented as part of the Freedom House Lecture Series, Diamond emphasized that the country’s core problem is not terrorism or poverty but bad governance and suggested six reforms to address the country’s democratic landscape.

Hero Image
8718989461 6e0501e331 b
Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan on a state visit to South Africa, 7 May 2013
GovernmentZA
All News button
1
Subscribe to Democracy