DETAILED SCHEDULE OF READINGS AND LECTURES

 

Week 1: Introduction (26 August)

 

Robert A. Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971), pp. 1-9, 14-16.

 

Philippe Schmitter and Terry Lynn Karl, “What Democracy is … and Is Not,” Journal of Democracy 2, No. 3 (Summer 1991): 75-88.

 

David Collier and Steven Levitsky, “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research,” World Politics 49, No. 3 (April 1997): 430-451.

 

Pamela Paxton, “Women’s Suffrage in the Measurement of Democracy: Problems of Operationalization,” Studies in Comparative International Development 35, No. 3 (Fall 2000): 92-111.

 

Optional movie

 

The Divine Order (2017 film about 1971 referendum on female suffrage in Switzerland)

 

Reading questions

 

• What is the difference between what Dahl calls “public contestation” and “participation”? How do these relate to democracy (or “polyarchy”)?

 

• What does Dahl mean by the terms “costs of toleration” vs. the “costs of repression”? What do these have to do with the possibility of democratisation?

 

• What do Karl and Schmitter mean when they write that “all good things do not necessarily go together”? What is the relevance for democracy?

 

• What do Collier and Levitsky mean when they talk about the “procedural minimum” definition of democracy. What is the “expanded procedural minimum”?

 

• Democracy presumes full adult suffrage, yet the conventional dates for countries’ democratisation in often predates the right to vote for women. How does taking into account female suffrage affect how we think about democratisation (Paxton)?

 

 

Week 2: Theoretical Approaches: Structure, Agency, or Institutions? (2 September)

Seymour Martin Lipset, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981), pp. 27-58. 

 

Samuel Huntington, “Democracy’s Third Wave,” in Larry Diamond and Marc Plattner, eds., The Global Resurgence of Democracy, 2nd edition (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), pp. 3-5, 11-21.

 

Seymour Martin Lipset, “George Washington and the Founding of Democracy,” Journal of Democracy 9, No. 4 (October 1998): 24-38.

 

Juan J. Linz, “The Perils of Presidentialism,” Journal of Democracy 1, No. 1 (Winter 1990): 51-69.

 

Reading questions

 

• In a famous line from the first reading, Lipset writes: “The more well-to-do a nation, the greater the chances that it will sustain democracy.” This is the central claim of what is known as modernisation theory. What are some of the potential links (or causal mechanisms) between the independent variable of economic development and the dependent variable of democracy?

 

• Democracy as we know it today was first born in Western Europe and some of its overseas settler colonies. Huntington considers whether there may be cultural obstacles to democracy in other parts of the world. What do you think?

 

• In the second reading by Lipset, he presents an argument about George Washington. Do you find it surprising that he could present such a voluntarist argument here, given his association with modernisation theory, a highly structuralist approach?

 

• The reading by Linz is a great example of an institutionalist argument. Why, according to Linz, might presidentialism be less conducive to democratic stability than parliamentarism? Do you agree?

 

 

Week 3: The Process of Democratic Breakdown (9 September)

 

Juan J. Linz, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Crisis, Breakdown, and Reequilibration (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), pp. 14-49.

 

Milan W. Svolik, “Polarization versus Democracy,” Journal of Democracy 30, No. 3 (July 2019): 20-32.

 

Nancy Bermeo, Ordinary People in Extraordinary Times (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003), pp. 3-20, 221, 234-238.

 

Adam Przeworski, Crises of Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019), Ch. 2 (29-38), Ch. 3 (39-64).

 

Optional movie

 

The Act of Killing (2012 documentary about 1965 massacre and military takeover in Indonesia)

 

Reading questions

 

• What does Linz mean by the terms “loyal opposition,” “semi-loyal opposition,” and “disloyal opposition”?

 

• The reading by Svolik asks a provocative question: “Why do voters who routinely profess a commitment to democracy simultaneously support leaders who subvert it?” What is the answer?

 

• Bermeo is somewhat sceptical of arguments that attribute democratic breakdown to polarisation. Why? Do you agree?

 

• What are some of the general patterns of democratic breakdown identified by Przeworski?

 

• Germany and Chile are two iconic cases of democratic breakdown. In what ways were the experiences of these two countries similar or different (Przeworski)?

 

 

Week 4: Democratic Transition and Consolidation (16 September)

 

Guillermo O’Donnell and Philippe C. Schmitter, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), pp. 15-36.

 

Terry Lynn Karl, “Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America,” Comparative Politics 23, No. 1 (October 1990): 1-21.

 

Stephen Haggard and Robert H. Kaufman, “The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions,” Comparative Politics 29, No. 3 (April 1997): 263-283.

 

Andreas Schedler, “What is Democratic Consolidation?” Journal of Democracy 9, No. 2 (April 1998): 91-107.

 

Reading questions

 

• What do O’Donnell and Schmitter mean by the terms “hard-liners” and “soft-liners”?

 

• In a famous line, O’Donnell and Schmitter assert that “there is no transition whose beginning is not the consequence—direct or indirect—of important divisions within the authoritarian regime itself, principally along the fluctuating cleavage between hard-liners and soft-liners.” What do they mean? What are some of the things that might cause such divisions?

 

• What are the differences between the various “modes of transition to democracy” discussed by Karl (e.g., pacts)? What does she mean when she warns of the risk of “birth defect[s]”?

 

• What does Karl mean by the term “structured contingency”? Isn’t that an oxymoron?

 

• What are the potential consequences of “crisis” vs. “non-crisis” transitions to democracy (Haggard and Kaufman)?

 

• What do political scientists mean by the term “democratic consolidation” (Schedler)? How do we know it when we see it?

 

Optional movie

 

No (2012 film about 1988 plebiscite and transition to democracy in Chile)

                              

 

Week 5: The Third Wave of Democratisation (23 September)

 

Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), pp. 31-108.

 

Michael McFaul, “The Fourth Wave of Democracy and Dictatorship: Noncooperative Transitions in the Postcommunist World,” World Politics 54, No. 2 (January 2002): 212-244.

 

Optional movie

 

The Lives of Others (2006 film about secret police in communist East Germany)

 

Reading questions

 

• What does Huntington mean when he talks about “the third wave” of democratisation? How was it different from the first and second waves?

 

• What were some of the causes of the third wave?

 

• McFaul argues that we should separate “the third wave” from what he calls “the fourth wave” in the postcommunist world. Do you agree?

 

•  Why does McFaul add the words “…and Dictatorship” to the title of his article?

 

 

Week 6: Blurred Lines (I): Hybrid Regimes and Subnational Authoritarianism (30 September)

 

Thomas Carothers, “The End of the Transition Paradigm,” Journal of Democracy 13, No. 1 (January 2002): 5-21.

 

Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 3-26.

 

Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, “The New Competitive Authoritarianism,” Journal of Democracy 31, No. 1 (January 2020): 51-65.

 

Edward L. Gibson, “Boundary Control: Subnational Authoritarianism in Democratic Countries,” World Politics 58, No. 1 (October 2005): 101-132.

 

Reading questions

 

• What does Carothers mean by the term “the transition paradigm”? Why does he think that it is no longer useful? Do you agree?

 

• What do Levitsky and Way mean by the term “competitive authoritarianism”? What do you think of this concept? Isn’t this an oxymoron?

 

• The second reading by Levitsky and Way is called “The New Competitive Authoritarianism.” Why have these new competitive authoritarian regimes emerged?

 

• What does Gibson mean by the term “subnational authoritarianism”? Is it really possible to have pockets of authoritarian in national-level democracies?

 

 

Mid-Semester Break (5-9 October)

 

 

Week 7: Blurred Lines (II): Authoritarian Vestiges in Democratic Regimes (14 October)

 

James Loxton, “Introduction: Authoritarian Successor Parties Worldwide,” in James Loxton and Scott Mainwaring, eds., Life after Dictatorship: Authoritarian Successor Parties Worldwide (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018), pp. 1-31.

 

Rachel Beatty Riedl, Dan Slater, Joseph Wong, and Daniel Ziblatt, “Authoritarian-Led Democratization,” Annual Review of Political Science 23 (2020): 315–332.

 

Michael Albertus and Victor Menaldo, Authoritarianism and the Elite Origins of Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018), Ch. 1 (1-10, 14-21), Ch. 3 (63-70, 90-98), and Ch. 9 (270-273).

 

Reading questions

 

• What does Loxton mean by the term “authoritarian successor parties”? How are these different from the ruling parties of existing authoritarian regimes?

 

• Why are authoritarian successor parties so common? What are their effects on democracy? (Loxton)

 

• Riedl et al. argue that authoritarian-led transitions to democracy are especially likely to succeed. Why do they believe this is the case? Do you agree?

 

• Albertus and Menaldo make the provocative claim that the existence of authoritarian-era constitutions means that many democracies are “flawed by design.” Do you agree with this assessment?

 

 

Week 8: The Puzzle of Authoritarian Durability (21 October)

 

Barbara Geddes, “What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?” Annual Review of Political Science 2 (1999): 115-144.

 

Michael L. Ross, “Does Oil Hinder Democracy?” World Politics 53, No. 3 (April 2001): 325-337, 356-357.

 

Jason Brownlee, “Hereditary Succession in Modern Autocracies,” World Politics 59, No. 4 (July 2007): 595-628.

 

Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, “The Durability of Revolutionary Regimes,” Journal of Democracy 24, No. 3 (July 2013): 5-17.

 

Roberto Stefan Foa, “Modernization and Authoritarianism,” Journal of Democracy 29, No. 3 (July 2018): 129-140.

 

Reading questions

 

• Geddes argues that single-party authoritarian regimes are more likely to endure than military or personalist regimes. Why might this be the case?

 

• In the article by Ross, he provides a great example of what is sometimes called “the resource curse.” Why might oil wealth make democracy less likely?

 

• Why do authoritarian regimes—even quite sophisticates ones (e.g., Singapore today, pre-2000 Taiwan)—often choose their leaders through hereditary succession (Brownlee)?

 

• Levitsky and Way argue that authoritarian regimes born of violent revolutions are unusually durable. What might such origins contribute to authoritarian durability?

 

• What are the implications of relatively good governance in some authoritarian regimes today for the likelihood of eventual democratisation?

 

 

Week 9: The World’s Biggest Democracy: India (28 October)

 

Steven I. Wilkinson, “India,” in David J. Samuels, ed., Case Studies in Comparative Politics (United States: Pearson, 2013), pp. 194-207.

 

Ashutosh Varshney, “India Defies the Odds: Why Democracy Survives,” Journal of Democracy 9, No. 3 (July 1998): 36-50.

 

Maya Tudor, “Explaining Democracy’s Origins: Lessons from South Asia,” Comparative Politics 45, No. 3 (April 2013): 253-272.

 

Christophe Jaffrelot, “India’s Democracy at 70: Toward a Hindu State?” Journal of Democracy 28, No. 3 (July 2017): 52-63.

 

Ashutosh Varshney, “Modi Consolidates Power: Electoral Vibrancy, Mounting Liberal Deficits,” Journal of Democracy 30, No. 4 (October 2019): 63-77.

 

Optional movie

 

Viceroy’s House (2017 film about 1947 independence and partition of India)

 

Reading questions

 

• The first reading by Varshney is called “India Defies the Odds.” What does he mean by this? What is so surprising about the existence of democracy in India, and what are some of the factors that account for it?

 

• India and Pakistan both came into existence as independent countries in 1947 as a result of decolonisation by Britain and Partition. Why did India go on to become the world’s biggest democracy, while Pakistan experienced repeated bouts of authoritarianism (Tudor)?

 

• How has the rise of the BJP, and Hindu nationalism more broadly, changed the character of India in recent years (Jaffrelot)?

 

• What does the recent reelection of Prime Minister Narendra Modi mean for democracy in India (second Varshney reading)? Should we be worried?

 

 

Week 10: The World’s Biggest Authoritarian Regime: China (4 November)

 

Andrew Mertha, “China,” in David J. Samuels, ed., Case Studies in Comparative Politics (United States: Pearson, 2013), pp. 365-379.

 

Susan L. Shirk, “China in Xi’s ‘New Era’: The Return to Personalistic Rule,” Journal of Democracy 29, No. 2 (April 2018): 22-36.

 

Xiao Qiang, “The Road to Digital Unfreedom: President Xi’s Surveillance State,” Journal of Democracy 30, No. 1 (January 2019): 53-67.

 

Yun-han Chu, “China and East Asian Democracy: The Taiwan Factor,” Journal of Democracy 23, No. 1 (January 2012): 42-56.

 

Stephan Ortmann and Mark R. Thompson, “China and the ‘Singapore Model,’” Journal of Democracy 27, No. 1 (January 2016): 39-48.

 

Optional movie

 

Tremble and Obey (2019 episode of ABC’s Four Corners about1989 Tiananmen Massacre)

 

Reading questions

 

• What effects has the rise of Xi Jinping had on China’s communist regime (Shirk)?

 

• What are some of the ways that the Chinese Communist Party uses digital technologies to maintain its rule (Qiang)?

 

• What does the existence of democracy in Taiwan mean for cultural arguments about “Asian values”? Do you think it conceivable that mainland China could ever follow the Taiwanese example, or is this wishful thinking (Chu)?

 

• Why is the Chinese Communist Party so interested in the “Singapore model” (Ortmann and Thompson)?

 

 

Week 11: Contemporary Issues (I): The Threat of Democratic Erosion (11 November)

 

Larry Diamond, “Facing Up to the Democratic Recession,” Journal of Democracy 26, No. 1 (January 2015): 141-155.

 

Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, “The Myth of the Democratic Recession,” Journal of Democracy 26, No. 1 (January 2015): 45-58.

 

Roberto Stefan Foa and Yascha Mounk, “The Danger of Deconsolidation: The Democratic Disconnect,” Journal of Democracy 27, No. 3 (July 2016): 5-17.

 

Yascha Mounk, The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018), pp. 23-52.

 

Reading questions

 

• In his article, Diamond calls for us to face up to what he calls the “democratic recession.” Levitsky and Way, however, argue that this is largely a “myth.” Who do you find most persuasive? Why?

 

• What is democratic “deconsolidation”? What evidence is there that democracy in some countries today is deconsolidating (Foa and Mounk)?

 

• Politicians today are often referred to as “populist.” What do you think of Mounk’s account of populism? Do you agree with him that it is fundamentally democratic?

 

 

Week 12: Contemporary Issues (II): What is the Future of Democracy? (18 November)

 

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future (Great Britain: Viking, 2018). Read whole book.

 

Reading questions

 

• Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that the way democracies die today is different from how they died in the past. How is democratic breakdown today different?

 

• Drawing on Juan Linz’s 1978 book, Levitsky and Ziblatt put together a “litmus test” for identifying antidemocratic politicians. How does Donald Trump do on this test?

 

• What are “mutual toleration” and “institutional forbearance”? Why do Levitsky and Ziblatt describe these as the “guardrails of democracy”?

 

• Levitsky and Ziblatt wrote this book because they were concerned that the United States under Trump could slide into authoritarianism. With the benefit of hindsight, do you think that their concerns were warranted or overblown?