Governance

FSI's research on the origins, character and consequences of government institutions spans continents and academic disciplines. The institute’s senior fellows and their colleagues across Stanford examine the principles of public administration and implementation. Their work focuses on how maternal health care is delivered in rural China, how public action can create wealth and eliminate poverty, and why U.S. immigration reform keeps stalling. 

FSI’s work includes comparative studies of how institutions help resolve policy and societal issues. Scholars aim to clearly define and make sense of the rule of law, examining how it is invoked and applied around the world. 

FSI researchers also investigate government services – trying to understand and measure how they work, whom they serve and how good they are. They assess energy services aimed at helping the poorest people around the world and explore public opinion on torture policies. The Children in Crisis project addresses how child health interventions interact with political reform. Specific research on governance, organizations and security capitalizes on FSI's longstanding interests and looks at how governance and organizational issues affect a nation’s ability to address security and international cooperation.

Authors
Melissa Morgan
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

A year ago, a crowd on the National Mall violently breached the halls of the U.S. Capitol with the intent of disrupting the formal ratification of the 2020 presidential election. Despite the chaos, Joe Biden was inaugurated as the president, the prosecution of individual perpetrators has begun, and the House of Representatives January 6 Commitee's investigation is ongoing. Yet there remains a sense that something fundamental to American democracy has changed. Where is America now, one year from the attack?

To mark the first anniversary of the January 6 Capitol riot, scholars from across the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies share their thoughts on what has happened in the year since, and what the ongoing effects of the violence signal about the future of democracy and the integrity of America’s image at home and abroad.


Intensifying Divisions

Larry Diamond, Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy

The January 6 insurrection was the gravest assault on American democracy since the Civil War, and it came much closer to disrupting the peaceful transfer of power (and possibly our democracy itself) than we realized at the time.

Rather than providing a sobering lesson of the dangers of political polarization, the insurrection seems only to have intensified our divisions, and the willingness to contemplate or condone the use of violence. According to a recent Washington Post survey, a third of Americans feel violence against the government could be justified in some circumstances —a sharp increase from 16 percent in 2010 and 23 percent in 2015.

Sadly, many politicians have not been the least bit chastened by the close brush with a constitutional catastrophe. The “Big Lie” that Biden did not legitimately win the 2020 election retains the support of most Republicans and a substantial proportion of independents. Around the country, Republican legislatures have been introducing, and in many states adopting, bills that would give Republican legislatures the ability to reverse or sabotage legitimate electoral outcomes, and other bills that make it more difficult for people (especially Democratic-leaning groups) to vote. All of this is doing deep damage to the global reputation and hence “soft power” of American democracy.

Although they are generally relieved that Trump is no longer president, our allies remain deeply worried about the stability and effectiveness of American democracy.

What gives me some hope is the expanding network of civil society organizations documenting the multiple threats to electoral integrity in the U.S. But we are going to need much more widespread and resourceful mobilization to counter the downward spiral of our democracy.

Professor Larry Diamond

Larry Diamond

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at FSI
Full Profile

Problems at Home, Issues Abroad

Francis Fukuyama, Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow

The Capitol uprising on January 6 marked a grave crisis in American institutions, when a sitting President refused to transfer power peacefully and sought to actively overturn an election.  The Republican Party, rather than repudiating the uprising and marginalizing its organizers, instead rallied in subsequent weeks to normalize the event.  These developments, while bad in themselves from the standpoint of US politics, also sent an unmistakable geopolitical signal that the Biden presidency would not represent an American return to “normal” internationalism.  The Administration would lead a deeply polarized country uncertain of its own global role.

This is the point at which geopolitics and domestic unrest come together. The single greatest weakness of the United States today does not lie in its economy or military power, but in the deep polarization that has affected American politics.  This is not just speculation, but something underlined by Kremlin-linked commentators, as Françoise Thom has detailed: in the words of one, "the decrepit empire of the Stars and Stripes, weakened by LGBT, BLM, etc." makes "it is clear that it will not survive a two-front war."  They see that a significant number of Republicans believe that the Democratic Party represents a bigger threat to the American way of life than does Russia.  A country that cannot rally around sensible public health measures during a pandemic will not rally around defense of freedom abroad.  This is the significance of January 6:  it has hardened partisan divisions rather than being the occasion for national soul-searching.

Read Francis Fukuyama's full commentary in American Purpose.

Francis Fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama

Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at FSI
Full Profile

Democracy vs. Partisanship

Didi Kuo, Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL

It has been a year since rioters stormed the United States Capitol in an effort—an organized, violent effort—to declare Donald Trump the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election. The riots signaled a dangerous turn in American politics, an attack on the basic, fundamental institutions of democracy. For democracy to work, all sides must agree on the rules of the game: the fairness of the balloting and counting process, the routine and peaceful transfer of power. We now see what happens when the institutions and procedures of elections are delegitimated.

Our political leaders can act now to restore confidence in elections. They can do so by protecting election administrators from threats of violence, by depoliticizing oversight of elections, and by passing democratic reforms. Although President Biden’s Freedom to Vote Act and John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act have been blocked by Republicans, narrower versions of these bills could create stricter federal election standards. And Americans can organize to protect democracy through civic groups that push for ballot access and election integrity, particularly at the state level. Politicians and activists alike must make clear that election administration is not a partisan issue. As the nation enters the third year of a global pandemic and an upcoming midterm election, our leaders must make strengthening democracy their utmost priority.

Watch Kuo's conversation with Hakeem Jefferson about the anniversary of the riots at the U.S. Capitol.

Didi Kuo

Didi Kuo

Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL
Full Profile

Epistemic Fractures and Exploitation

Herbert Lin, Senior Research Scholar at CISAC

The failure of the Jan. 6 insurrection provided an opportunity for the United States to collectively take a step back from the conspiracy theories and lies that pervaded American political discourse in the preceding couple of years. But alas, the nation failed to take advantage of that opportunity, with tens of millions of Americans maintaining their delusions as strongly as ever. Substantial numbers of Americans continue to believe that Donald Trump really won the 2020 election, and the number of QAnon adherents and believers was virtually unchanged.

Even more alarming has been the cynical exploitation of such trends by elected officials in their quest to gain or retain political power. Rather than standing up for the rule of law and defending the conclusions of an independent judiciary regarding various allegations of election fraud, they have pointed to such outcomes as yet more evidence of a system rigged against them. We now live in a environment in which no conceivable evidence can persuade true believers to change their minds, and the resulting epistemic fractures translate into a once-unified nation sharply divided against itself.  A worse national posture to meet the challenges of coming great-power competition could not be imagined.

Read more of Herbert Lin's analysis of contemporary security issues and power competition in his latest book, Cyber Threats and Nuclear Weapons (Stanford University Press, 2021).

Dr. Hebert Lin

Herbert Lin

Senior Research Scholar at CISAC
Full Profile

The Need to Protect and Invest In Elections

Matthew Masterson, Non-resident Fellow at the Stanford Internet Observatory

The insurrection on January 6th left a scar on American Democracy. For the first time in our history, America did not have a peaceful transition of power. The effects of that day continue to be felt every day in election offices across the United States. Election officials, the guardians of our Democracy, are targets of harassment and threats fueled by the ongoing lies regarding the integrity and accuracy of the election. Worse yet, there have been little no consequences for these threats against our democracy. While some who participated in January 6th are being investigated and prosecuted, those responsible for the threats against election officials have faced little to no accountability for their actions. Facing ongoing threats and little support from law enforcement election officials are leaving their jobs out of fear for their own safety and the safety of their families.

Healing the wound of January 6th won’t be easy; there must be accountability for the damage done to our democracy. American democracy is resilient and strong, but can not survive the unchecked attacks against it. Those who seek to profit from the lies about 2020 need to be held accountable for selling out democracy in pursuit of their own political and financial gain. They must be defeated at the ballot box or their businesses made to pay the price  by Americans unwilling to accept holding democracy for ransom. As we bring accountability, we need to invest in continuing to improve the security, accessibility and integrity of the process. We need to fund elections on an ongoing basis like the national security issue they are. The only response to this sustained attack on our democracy is a sustained investment in protecting it.  

Matt Masterson

Matthew Masterson

Non-resident Fellow at the Stanford Internet Observatory
Full Profile

Read More

storming of capital 2021
News

To Support Democracy Abroad, the U.S. Needs To Set Its Own House In Order, says FSI Director Michael McFaul

Former U.S. ambassador to Russia and Stanford political scientist Michael McFaul recommends that the incoming Biden administration “go big” in its efforts to reaffirm core democratic values – including passing comprehensive, structural reforms.
To Support Democracy Abroad, the U.S. Needs To Set Its Own House In Order, says FSI Director Michael McFaul
Capitol Building
News

Stanford Scholars React to Capitol Hill Takeover

FSI scholars reflect on the occupation of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday and suggest what needs to happen next to preserve democracy.
Stanford Scholars React to Capitol Hill Takeover
Hero Image
Protesters attack the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Protesters attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 in an attempt to disrupt the verification of the 2020 election results.
Getty
All News button
1
Subtitle

On the first anniversary of the riot at the U.S. Capitol, scholars from across FSI reflect on the ongoing ramifications the violence is having on America's domestic politics and international influence.

Date Label

Download Transcript of Talk

The rule in international law which prohibits forcible seizure of territory has lately come under pressure, for example when Russia seized and annexed Crimea in 2014. In the presentation, we will take a look back at the history of this rule, including the Western non-recognition of the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States in 1940-1991, of which Mälksoo has written a leading monograph. Current threats to the rule will be discussed such as the ideas that great powers are entitled to historic justice which may differ from what international law dictates or there is a regional international law dictated by the leading great power in the region. With President Putin's demands to the US and NATO, these international legal questions have again become utterly topical.

Image
Lauri Mälksoo


Lauri Mälksoo is Professor of International Law at the University of Tartu in Estonia, member of the Institut de Droit International and of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. He has published widely on Russian and Soviet approaches to international law and human rights, including the monograph "Russian Approaches to International Law" (OUP, 2015).

 

*If you need any disability-related accommodation, please contact Shannon Johnson at sj1874@stanford.edu. Requests should be made by January 13, 2022.

Co-sponsored by Stanford University Library.

Transcript of talk
Download pdf
Lauri Mälksoo Professor of International Law speaker University of Tartu in Estonia
0
Assistant Professor, Political Science
HakeemJefferson_Headshot2023.png

Hakeem Jefferson is an assistant professor of political science at Stanford University where he is also a faculty affiliate with the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity and the Stanford Center for American Democracy. During the 2021-22 academic year he was also the SAGE Sara Miller McCune Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.

Hakeem’s work focuses primarily on the role identity plays in structuring political attitudes and behaviors in the U.S. His in-progress book project builds on his award-winning dissertation to consider how Black Americans come to support punitive social policies that target members of their racial group.

In other projects, Hakeem examines the causes of the racial divide in Americans’ reactions to officer-involved shootings; works to evaluate the meaningfulness of key political concepts, like ideological identification among Black Americans; and considers how white Americans navigate an identity that many within the group perceive as increasingly stigmatized. In these and other projects, Hakeem sets out to showcase and clarify the important and complex ways that identity matters across all domains of American life.

A public-facing, justice-oriented scholar, Hakeem is an academic contributor at FiveThirtyEight and his writings and commentary have been featured in places like the New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR, and other major outlets. He is also active on Twitter, and you can follow him @hakeemjefferson.

CDDRL Affiliated Faculty
CV
-

For winter quarter 2021, CISAC will be hosting hybrid events. Many events will offer limited-capacity in-person attendance for Stanford faculty, staff, fellows, visiting scholars, and students in accordance with Stanford’s health and safety guidelines, and be open to the public online via Zoom. All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone. 

SEMINAR RECORDING

This event is virtual only. This event will not be held in person.

Michael Kofman
Seminars
-

For winter quarter 2021, CISAC will be hosting hybrid events. Many events will offer limited-capacity in-person attendance for Stanford faculty, staff, fellows, visiting scholars, and students in accordance with Stanford’s health and safety guidelines, and be open to the public online via Zoom. All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone. 

SEMINAR RECORDING

This event is virtual only. This event will not be held in person.

Rose Gottemoeller
James Goldgeier
Seminars
-

This is a virtual event. Please click here to register and generate a link to the talk. 
The link will be unique to you; please save it and do not share with others.

 

In China, market institutions are still being developed and private owned enterprises need help to overcome obstacles arising from the imperfection of market institutions. Such help can come from various levels of the government or state-owned enterprises. It is believed that such help is more likely if a major shareholder of the private enterprise has formed a joint venture with a state shareholder, either directly or indirectly. In this talk, Bai Chong-en will discuss ownership connections among state and private investors (ultimate shareholders) and their changes overtime. He will also examine the relationship between the degree of such connection and some important characteristics of the investors. His model suggests that such connections have played an important role in the growth of the private sector. 



Image
Portrait of Bai Chong-en
BAI Chong-En is the Mansfield Freeman Chair Professor and dean of the School of Economics and Management of Tsinghua University. He is also the director of both the National Institute for Fiscal Studies of Tsinghua University and the Institute for State-Owned Enterprises of Tsinghua University. He earned his PhD degree in economics from Harvard University. His research areas include institutional economics, economic growth and development, public economics, finance, corporate governance, and Chinese economy.

BAI is a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, the “14th Five-Year Plan” National Development Planning Expert Committee, the Chinese Economists 50 Forum, the China Finance 40 Forum, and Chinainfo 100. He was a member of the monetary policy committee of the People’s Bank of China from 2015 to 2018. He served as Adjunct Vice-President of Beijing State-Owned Assets Management Co., Ltd. from August 2011 to December 2012. He was a non-resident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution from 2006 to 2007.

 


Image
Chinese 100 yuan bills

This event is part of the 2022 Winter webinar series, The Future of China's Economy, sponsored by the APARC China Program.

 

Via Zoom Webinar. Register at: https://bit.ly/31peuDs

Bai Chong-en Professor and Dean of School of Economics and Management; Mansfield Freeman Chair Professor, Tsinghua University
Seminars
0
John Perrino

John Perrino received his undergraduate and MPA at the George Washington University, focusing on internet policy and political communication. At the Stanford Internet Observatory he works on expanding policy strategy and working to build SIO's presence in DC. 

He previously held positions with GW’s Columbian College of Arts and Sciences and Elliott School of International Affairs. Perrino got his start in Internet policy as a Communications Fellow at the Internet Education Foundation, helping organize and promote Capitol Hill briefings and the annual State of the Net conference. He was most recently a Director at Glen Echo Group.

 

Former Policy Analyst, Stanford Internet Observatory, Cyber Policy Center
Date Label
1
johannes_ludewig.jpg

Chairman of National (Germany) Regulatory Control Council 2006-2021; CEO of German Railways and afterward Community of European Railways, Brussels 1997-2010; State Secretary Federal Ministry of Economics (1995-1997); Economic and Financial Advisor to the German Federal Chancellor, also responsible for the economic reconstruction of East Germany after Reunification 1990; Dr.(PhD) 1975 (University of Hamburg); MS 1972 (Stanford University).

CDDRL Visiting Scholar, 2022
 

Image
Register
                 

 
How do we explain the divergence in the embrace of LGBTQ rights among right-wing European parties? In the 1990s and early 2000s, a few conservative parties started to embrace the gay rights cause, joining earlier adopters among left-wing and liberal Western European parties. Conservative parties in Scandinavia, the Netherlands, and Britain trumpeted their newly found enthusiasm for gay rights as a badge of modernity and political maturity. The embrace was driven by changing social values, the idiosyncratic agency of leadership, and declining religiosity. Today the right-wing lesbian, gay or bisexual parliamentarian is far from an exception. Since 1976, nearly 150 self-identifying LGB parliamentarians from right of center parties have taken office.
 
The position of the radical right is more complex. When it comes to gay and lesbian rights, radical right parties can be divided into two groups. Parties from the Netherlands, Belgium, and northern European countries have invoked the nationalism of gay rights as a club to beat back the Muslim immigrant. Homonationalism has become a successful electoral strategy, which blends support for gay rights with xenophobia and Islamophobia. In contrast, radical right parties in Eastern and Southern Europe have not embraced gay rights. In most of these countries, “homosexuality” is seen as a foreign threat, imposed by Western liberals or alien to Catholic culture and tradition. While the arc of the gay rights movement bends towards freedom, in most countries the T has been jettisoned from the LGB. When the left is slow to adopt, the right sees little gain in moving on the issue, nor is disposed to lead from the front.

 

Gabriele Magni
Gabriele Magni is Assistant Professor of Political Science and Director of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. His research examines the factors that shape political inclusion, solidarity and representation in advanced democracies. One stream of his work explores the link between economic inequality, immigration and welfare attitudes. A second stream examines LGBTQ rights and representation, focusing on LGBTQ candidates and politicians. His research has appeared in the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Politics, and the British Journal of Political Science, among other outlets. He has also written for The Washington Post, Politico and The New Republic, and provided commentary to The New York Times, The Washington Post, FiveThirtyEight, NBC News and Reuters. Previously, he was a Postdoctoral Fellow at Princeton University’s Niehaus Center for Globalization and Governance.


*If you need any disability-related accommodation, please contact Shannon Johnson (sj1874@stanford.edu) by February 10, 2022.

Co-sponsored by the Clayman Institute for Gender Research.

Gabriele Magni Loyola Marymount University
Lectures
-

For winter quarter 2021, CISAC will be hosting hybrid events. Many events will offer limited-capacity in-person attendance for Stanford faculty, staff, fellows, visiting scholars, and students in accordance with Stanford’s health and safety guidelines, and be open to the public online via Zoom. All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone. 

SEMINAR RECORDING

This event is virtual only. This event will not be held in person.

Shirin Sinnar Professor of Law & John A. Wilson Faculty Scholar Stanford Law School
Seminars
Subscribe to Governance