Democracy in Southeast Asia has been explained using a number of factors including historical legacies, social structures, developmental levels, transitional processes, and institutional designs while other elements, such as elite-level relations and social coalitions, have been overlooked. This book offers a new explanation for democracy’s collapse or persistence in Southeast Asia today. Focusing on Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia — the three countries in the region with the most democratic experience — William Case shows that existing accounts based on contextual factors are by themselves incomplete. Hence, they lead us wrongly to anticipate democracy’s persistence in Thailand and its collapse in Indonesia. They more accurately, though only partially, correlate with democracy’s fluctuations in the Philippines. Advancing a new argument, Case shows that democracy’s fate is determined instead by the opportunities that contextual factors can provide for populist mobilization. His model enables us better to understand democracy’s breakdown in Thailand, its survival in Indonesia, and its slippage in the Philippines. Presenting research into vital questions over democratic durability and authoritarian backlash, this book will be of interest to scholars in the field of comparative politics, specifically comparative democratization and Southeast Asian politics.

The last thirty years have witnessed one of the most remarkable developments in history: the rapid rise of democracy around the world. In 1900, only ten countries were democracies and by 1975 there were only 30. Today, 119 of the world's 190 countries have adopted this form of government, and it is by far the most celebrated and prestigious one. How did democracy acquire its good name? Why did it spread so far and so fast? Why do important countries remain undemocratic? And why do efforts to export democracy so often fail and even make conditions worse? In Democracy's Good Name, Michael Mandelbaum, one of America's leading foreign policy thinkers, answers these questions. He surveys the methods and risks of promoting democracy, and analyzes the prospects for the establishment of democratic governments in Russia, China, and the Arab world. Written in Mandelbaum's clear and accessible style, Democracy's Good Name presents a lucid, comprehensive, and surprising account of the history and future of democracy from the American Revolution to the occupation of Iraq.

How do American intellectuals try to achieve their political and social goals? By what means do they articulate their hopes for change? John McGowan seeks to identify the goals and strategies of contemporary humanistic intellectuals who strive to shape the politics and culture of their time. In a lively mix of personal reflection and shrewd analysis, McGowan visits the sites of intellectual activity (scholarly publications, professional conferences, the classroom, and the university) and considers the hazards of working within such institutional contexts to effect change outside the academy. Democracy's Children considers the historical trajectory that produced current intellectual practices. McGowan links the growing prestige of "culture" since 1800 to the growth of democracy and the obsession with modernity and explores how intellectuals became both custodians and creators of culture. Caught between fears of culture's irrelevance and dreams of its omnipotence, intellectuals pursue a cultural politics that aims for wide-ranging social transformations. For better or worse, McGowan says, the humanities are now tied to culture and to the university. The opportunities and frustrations attendant on this partnership resonate with the larger successes and failures of contemporary democratic societies. His purpose in this collection of essays is to illuminate the conditions under which intellectuals in a democracy work and at the same time to promote intellectual activities that further democratic ideals.

Winner of the Goldsmith Book Prize, Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government Winner of the Tankard Book Award, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Winner of the Frank Luther Mott–Kappa Tau Alpha Journalism & Mass Communication Research Award In democratic societies, investigative journalism holds government and private institutions accountable to the public. From firings and resignations to changes in budgets and laws, the impact of this reporting can be significant—but so too are the costs. As newspapers confront shrinking subscriptions and advertising revenue, who is footing the bill for journalists to carry out their essential work? Democracy’s Detectives puts investigative journalism under a magnifying glass to clarify the challenges and opportunities facing news organizations today. “Hamilton’s book presents a thoughtful and detailed case for the indispensability of investigative journalism—and just at the time when we needed it. Now more than ever, reporters can play an essential role as society’s watchdogs, working to expose corruption, greed, and injustice of the years to come. For this reason, Democracy’s Detectives should be taken as both a call to arms and a bracing reminder, for readers and journalists alike, of the importance of the profession.” —Anya Schiffrin, The Nation “A highly original look at exactly what the subtitle promises...Has this topic ever been more important than this year?” —Tyler Cowen, Marginal Revolution

Most American citizens are quick to criticize federal bureaucracy for its size and inefficiency. They assume it has exceeded the intent of our nation's founders; yet men like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton knew that good public administrators were essential to good government. William Richardson here examines the origins, legitimacy, and limitations of public administration from the perspective of the Founders' thought. He shows that these men—especially the authors of The Federalist—advocated an energetic public administration as an essential component of government and even considered the emergence of a "natural aristocracy" of virtuous civil servants. The Founders would see the fault of today's federal bureaucracy, argues Richardson, not as much in its size as in the character of its members. Richardson relates the Founders' belief that the nation should strive to produce public servants committed to developing character traits, such as wisdom and moderation, that would exemplify the highest ideals of the republic and thus ensure its survival. They anticipated some self-interest on the part of administrators, but believed it would be held in check by public opinion and the political process. To test the success of the Founders' ideal, Richardson examines both the character of administrators and the role of ethics in forming that character. He explores the various plans for educating public leaders throughout American history and looks at how attitudes toward public administration have changed in this century, from Woodrow Wilson's scientific ideal to recent proposals to downsize government. Among other suggestions, Richardson advocates reforming existing institutions by emphasizing character. Democracy, Bureaucracy, and Character is an exercise in legitimizing public administration, offering important insights into the Founders' thoughts that can be applied to today's debate over government bureaucracy. Public administration may be problematic by nature, observes Richardson, but it is crucial to our form of government. Through his analysis we can see that, while bureaucracy and democracy have long had an uneasy relationship, neither can be effective unless we fully assess the place and purpose of character in the American regime.

An in-depth analysis of the struggle to consolidate new and fragile democracies—available in two paperback volumes for course use. The global trend that Samuel P. Huntington has dubbed the "third wave" of democratization has seen more than 60 countries experience democratic transitions since 1974. While these countries have succeeded in bringing down authoritarian regimes and replacing them with freely elected governments, few of them can as yet be considered stable democracies. Most remain engaged in the struggle to consolidate their new and fragile democratic institutions. Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies provides an in-depth analysis of the challenges that they face. Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies is available in two paperback volumes, each introduced by the editors and organized for convenient course use. The first paperback volume, Themes and Perspectives, addresses issues of institutional design, civil-military relations, civil society, and economic development. It brings together some of the world's foremost scholars of democratization, including Robert A. Dahl, Samuel P. Huntington, Juan J. Linz, Guillermo O'Donnell, Adam Przeworski, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Alfred Stepan. The second paperback volume, Regional Challenges, focuses on developments in Southern Europe, Latin America, Russia, and East Asia, particularly Taiwan and China. It contains essays by leading regional experts, including Yun-han Chu, P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, Thomas B. Gold, Michael McFaul, Andrew J. Nathan, and Hung-mao Tien.

Democracy is not naturally plausible. Why turn such important matters over to masses of people who have no expertise? Many theories of democracy answer by appealing to the intrinsic value of democratic procedure, leaving aside whether it makes good decisions. In Democratic Authority, David Estlund offers a groundbreaking alternative based on the idea that democratic authority and legitimacy must depend partly on democracy's tendency to make good decisions. Just as with verdicts in jury trials, Estlund argues, the authority and legitimacy of a political decision does not depend on the particular decision being good or correct. But the "epistemic value" of the procedure--the degree to which it can generally be accepted as tending toward a good decision--is nevertheless crucial. Yet if good decisions were all that mattered, one might wonder why those who know best shouldn't simply rule. Estlund's theory--which he calls "epistemic proceduralism"--avoids epistocracy, or the rule of those who know. He argues that while some few people probably do know best, this can be used in political justification only if their expertise is acceptable from all reasonable points of view. If we seek the best epistemic arrangement in this respect, it will be recognizably democratic--with laws and policies actually authorized by the people subject to them.

Annotation Bridges the gap between theoretical literature and the tools and practices needed to strengthen or rebuild democratic institutions and reform governance systems. Through case studies and examples of good practices of governance, Cheema assesses the conditions that make democracy work.

The only introduction to cover the full spectrum of political systems, from democracy to dictatorship and the growing number of systems that fall between, equipping readers to think critically about democracy's future trajectory.