Kevin Vaught’s Post

“No government is perfect. One of the chief virtues of a democracy, however, is that its defects are always visible and under democratic processes can be pointed out and corrected.” —President Harry Truman announcing what became known as the Truman Doctrine, 1947 Is America perfect? No, but that doesn't mean we stop striving for a “more perfect union.” I believe in America's potential and will continue to work toward the bright future we can achieve together. Wishing you a Happy 4th! https://lnkd.in/e-ZyXxDX

While the current trend of political rightward lurching in Europe reflects deep-rooted challenges within societies, it also threatens the principles of human rights and solidarity that the European Union purports to uphold. As Europe continues to navigate these turbulent political waters, it is critical for policymakers, civil society, and citizens to engage in proactive dialogues and actions that reaffirm commitment to human rights and democratic values. The evolution of Europe into a human rights-based union depends not only on institutional frameworks but also on the willingness of its populace to embrace diversity, inclusiveness, and collective well- y on a hill.” This image, cherished in American rhetoric, has always been more illusion than reality—now shattered by historical injustices, deepening racial divides, and a foreign policy marred by contradiction. How can a country that elects a leader with contempt for democratic norms and a taste for autocratic allies claim moral leadership on the global stage?   Trump’s second term should compel the liberal establishment to confront its own hypocrisy: a nation that professes democratic ideals yet discards them when they prove inconvenient, both at home and abroad. The rhetoric of freedom now rings hollow against the backdrop of stark inequities, deep-seated racial biases, and a bipartisan disregard for international law. The illusion of American moral superiority no longer withstands global scrutiny; instead, the U.S. must face an uncomfortable truth—it has repeatedly fallen short of its supposed principles, nurturing authoritarian impulses domestically. Source Mondoweiss

Recent efforts in the EU, like the Conference on the Future of Europe and Democratic Odyssey, are setting the stage for a more inclusive #democracy. Citizens, selected randomly, are being empowered to directly influence policies on issues such as energy efficiency and societal challenges. The next step? A permanent #citizensassembly to create a balanced, #collaborative approach to governance. What's even more symbolic? This new chapter in democracy is kicking off in Athens, the birthplace of *western* democracy . Europe is going back to its roots to refresh and rethink how we can do governance better. https://lnkd.in/e3-CsNJk

The world is facing a polycrisis, and that’s because our global governance institutions privilege state interests determined by political and economic elites. To fight the polycrisis, global governance institutions must be influenced not just by states, but by people, writes CIVICUS’ Mandeep Tiwana in this piece. Specific proposals he highlights are the creation of a World Citizens' Initiative, a UN Parliamentary Assembly, and a UN Civil Society Envoy. These are the demands of the "We The Peoples" campaign for inclusive global governance jointly convened by CIVICUS, Democracy International, and Democracy Without Borders. Read the article here: https://lnkd.in/es5qFkiz Subscribe to our newsletter: https://lnkd.in/ekPGH6bx

Good questions worth exploring, and well-framed. Das sind gute Diskussionspunkte. #democracy #peace #rulesbasedorder #worldorder #geopolitics #diplomacy #framing #politicalframing

The Populist Backlash Against Global Institutions May Be Good for Them “Yes, populism in the West sometimes calls into question or even directly attacks the legitimacy of multilateral bodies. But while populism is a hot topic, it simply isn’t the greatest objective threat to the future of principled, effective and cooperative problem-solving, standard-setting and dialogue-enabling institutions grounded in UN Charter values,” JOLYON FORD writes. “In fact, the greater risk, from an Australian and Pacific perspective, is being passive and naive in multilateral arenas while autocratic powers capture and re-shape the institutions and agendas of the post-1945 order. “If populist attacks help to break this Western sleepwalk and to catalyse much-needed engagement, reform and revitalisation of parts of that order, they might unintentionally offset some of the damage their own rhetoric may do the legitimacy of those bodies.”

https://lnkd.in/dNQp8S2A "Given the Conservatives’ support for national sovereignty and distaste for political utopias, we might imagine that they would be exclusively hostile to these kinds of radical ideas. That was not the case. While there were those who bemoaned these ‘brave new worlders’, others were more sympathetic and put forward bold ideas of the future. Alongside support for European political integration and a revived League of Nations, some even supported the most utopian idea of the era: world government."

Less than a week before the upcoming US Presidential election, our analysis of the contestation of international institutions by the (first) Trump Administration - and other dissatisfied powers - is out with The Review of International Organizations. In this article, Benjamin Daßler, Tim Heinkelmann-Wild and I argue that dissatisfied states’ negative institutional power endowments in international institutions are key to understanding their varying contestation modes: the more limited (extensive) the negative institutional power of dissatisfied states in an institution, the more radical (moderate) modes of institutional contestation they will choose. Our "Negative Institutional Power Theory" explains why the Trump Administration's (and other dissatisfied powers') contestation of international institutions was not uniform but varied substantially. It also has important policy implications for dealing with a potential (second) Trump win: Whether, in the future, international institutions will be increasingly challenged from within and outside, can be influenced by institutional reforms that grant (or deny) states negative institutional power. Many thanks to my fabulous co-authors and to the many great colleagues who have commented on previous vrsions of the paper. You can read the (open access) article here: https://lnkd.in/eNMpmpQ2

Challenges in Global Justice: Examining Power Dynamics in the International System In an increasingly interconnected world, questions of justice, fairness, and equity on a global scale have become more pressing than ever.Lets explore some of the challenges in achieving global justice and the complexities of power dynamics in the international system. The Concept of Global Justice Global justice encompasses a wide range of issues, including: - Human rights - Economic inequality - Environmental sustainability - Conflict resolution invasion, aggression and land grab - Access to resources and opportunities -Displacement of Ethenic people and illegal settlements. - Root cause of resistance movements and addressing them Power Dynamics in the International System The current international system is characterized by complex power dynamics that can influence how justice is pursued and achieved: 1. Economic power: Countries with stronger economies often have more influence in global decision-making. 2. Military power: Military capabilities can affect a nation's ability to assert its interests or resist pressure. 3. Diplomatic influence: Some countries have more sway in international institutions and negotiations. 4. Soft power: Cultural influence and reputation can shape global perceptions and policies. Challenges in Achieving Global Justice Several factors complicate the pursuit of global justice: 1. Sovereignty: The principle of national sovereignty can conflict with efforts to address injustices within countries. 2. Competing interests: Nations often prioritize their own interests, which may not align with global justice goals. 3. Institutional limitations: International institutions may lack the authority or resources to effectively address injustices. 4. Cultural differences: Varying cultural perspectives can lead to disagreements on what constitutes justice. 5. Historical legacies: Past injustices and power imbalances continue to shape current global dynamics. Efforts to Address Global Justice Despite these challenges, there are ongoing efforts to promote global justice: 1. International law and treaties: Agreements like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set standards for global justice. 2. International courts: Institutions like the International Criminal Court aim to address serious violations of international law. 3. Non-governmental organizations: Many NGOs work to advocate for justice and human rights globally. 4. Grassroots movements: Citizen-led initiatives increasingly use technology to raise awareness and push for change. 5. Sustainable Development Goals: The UN's SDGs provide a framework for addressing global inequalities and injustices. Role of Public Discourse Open, informed dialogue about global justice issues is crucial. It can: - Raise awareness of injustices - Challenge existing power structures - Promote empathy and understanding across cultures - Inspire innovative solutions to complex problems .

According at least to the UNSC meeting’s coverage, Russia did not actually elaborate on the ‘democratic’ element of its vision for a new world order. Arguably, even if states attempted to do so, it would be subjective, as it would be a combination of different factors (e.g. the domestic political situation, foreign policy priorities, the need to come to the assistance of ‘likely-minded countries’, the urge to appear having the moral high ground, to legitimize illegal situations, etc.). On the other hand, states would rush to profess the advantages of democracy and that everything in the international community must be democratic, even though democratic ideals are routinely negated in far too many countries. Notwithstanding this state of affairs, what is perhaps more worrisome is that states refer to ‘democracy/democratic’ in a disingenuous manner in an (deliberate?) attempt to annihilate their inherent values. Therefore, one should not remain indifferent to the exploitation of democracy, as arguably has happened in the three instances above. –    https://lnkd.in/eznC3Tct