Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe: Extended Essay on the Book

Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe takes us back to his seminal text on “Necropolitics” translated and published in the US in 2003. At this point, 40 years after Foucault’s Biopolitics, Mbembe was re-theorizing biopolitics through a necro (death) horizon, which turned out to be a robust conceptual shift from Western thought. Not much else is explicitly said about necropolitics in the titular book, which comes 17 years after the seminal text that had a significant impact on the theory and practice of philosophy, politics, anthropology, and esthetics. Mbembe presents the layers of forms, modes, and procedures of the necropolitical working through contemporary neoliberal global societies. It is therefore not surprising that Mbembe makes reference to theory in forms, form is the way to redefine or rephrase content, and “who should live and who must die” is currently the beginning. But how this is done in the 21st century, what are the methods and procedures to implement this central act in neoliberal global democracy —that is the task of this book.

An Overview of the State of Electoral Democracy in Africa

Most recent accounts paint a bleak and gloomy picture of the state of global democracy. This is particularly so in Africa where the optimism of a democratic revival in the 1990s is rapidly giving way to narratives of doom and gloom. Using survey data compiled by well-established regional and global international organisations, this paper assesses the state of electoral democracy in Africa, reviews the challenges that have been encountered, and considers the prospects for the future. The trend in the evolution of electoral democracy on the continent in the last three decades points to an authoritarian mobilisation and resurgence. Although elections have become the norm, these elections are increasingly being used to disguise all forms of undemocratic governance. The major lesson to be drawn from the study is that there is no African country where democracy and constitutionalism can be thought of as firmly consolidated and secure. The number of countries which are declining due to failed or flawed electoral processes, or which show signs of stagnation, far exceed those that have improved to one degree or another. Current developments are not random ad hoc efforts to undermine the credibility of elections and democracy but rather, rational and well-calculated responses by ruling African elites who seek to perpetuate their rule. What this points to is the need to rethink strategies for promoting genuinely competitive elections, democracy, and constitutionalism.

The Global State of Democracy Indices Technical Procedures Guides, Version 5 (2021)

The Global State of Democracy is a biennial report that aims to provide policymakers with an evidence-based analysis of the state of global democracy, supported by the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) Indices, in order to inform policy interventions and identify problem-solving approaches to trends affecting the quality of democracy around the world. The third edition of the report provides analyses of the current trends in democracy and human rights at the national, regional, and global levels, with special attention to the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. This document presents revised and updated information about all the variables included in the GSoD indices data set that enabled the construction of Version 5 of the GSoD Indices, which depicts democratic trends at the country, regional and global levels across a broad range of different attributes of democracy in the period 1975–2020. The data underlying the GSoD Indices is based on a total of 116 indicators developed by various scholars and organizations using different types of source, including expert surveys, standards-based coding by research groups and analysts, observational data and composite measures.

The Global State of Democracy Indices Methodology, Conceptualization and Measurement Framework, Version 5 (2021)

The Global State of Democracy is a biennial report that aims to provide policymakers with an evidence-based analysis of the state of global democracy, supported by the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) Indices, in order to inform policy interventions and identify problem-solving approaches to trends affecting the quality of democracy around the world. This document revises and updates the conceptual and measurement framework that guided the construction of Version 5 of the GSoD Indices, which depicts democratic trends at the country, regional and global levels across a broad range of different attributes of democracy in the period 1975–2020. The data underlying the GSoD Indices is based on a total of 116 indicators developed by various scholars and organizations using different types of source, including expert surveys, standards-based coding by research groups and analysts, observational data and composite measures.

The Global State of Democracy Indices Codebook, Version 5 (2021)

The Global State of Democracy is a biennial report that aims to provide policymakers with an evidence-based analysis of the state of global democracy, supported by the Global State of Democracy Indices (GSoD Indices), in order to inform policy interventions and identify problem-solving approaches to trends affecting the quality of democracy around the world. This document presents revised and updated information about all the variables included in the GSoD indices data set that enabled the construction of Version 5 of the GSoD Indices, which depicts democratic trends at the country, regional and global levels across a broad range of different attributes of democracy in the period 1975–2020. The data underlying the GSoD Indices is based on a total of 116 indicators developed by various scholars and organizations using different types of source, including expert surveys, standards-based coding by research groups and analysts, observational data and composite measures.

Swedish Media, Fundamental Values and the Opinion Corridor in the 2018 Election

Sweden is usually ranking very highly in terms of global democracy and transparency indexes. The 2018 elections in Sweden were very divisive and bitterly fought, where there was an open conflict between the mainstream political establishment parties and the anti-political establishment Swedish Democrats. Mainstream Swedish media were not neutral bystanders in the election coverage, in the months before and after the September 2018 elections. The election coverage framing featured an idealised national myth that uses the notion of various acceptable fundamental values to define it, and an idealised Swedish society. Those actors whose values and norms that do not fit these ideals were subjected to attack and derision within a concept of consensus enforcement known as the opinion corridor, which is akin to the spiral of silence.

National policy space: reframing the political economy of globalization and its implications for national sovereignty and democracy

ABSTRACT This paper critiques the trilemma framing of the political economy of globalization, and offers an alternative framing based on the construction of national policy space. The paper makes three main contributions. First, building on Stein (2016), it deconstructs the categories used by Rodrik (2011) and introduces distinctions between the “degree”, “type”, and “dimensions” of globalization; “effective” versus “formal” national sovereignty; “content” versus “process” of democracy; and “national” versus “global” democracy. The deconstruction shows countries face choices involving a series of margins, not a trilemma. Second, that suggests reframing the problematic in terms of national policy space, which is the “funnel” through which globalization impacts democracy and national sovereignty. Third, the paper shows a country can be impacted by globalization even if it does nothing because other countries’ actions change its possibility set. The reframing shows globalization is an intrinsically political project. To the extent it is now driving a nationalistic anti-democratic turn in politics, responsibility lies with political elites.

Can Multilevel Trade Governance Protect Global Public Goods without Constitutional Restraints?

Legal history confirms that general interests of citizens can be protected most effectively through ‘democratic’ and ‘republican constitutionalism’ protecting constitutional rights and remedies of citizens and of their democratic and judicial institutions to hold governments accountable for providing public goods (PGs). Yet, the United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO), and related multilevel governance institutions do not effectively protect general interests and corresponding rights of citizens. The inadequate legal, democratic, and judicial accountability of intergovernmental power politics entails that – outside Europe’s multilevel ‘common market constitutionalism’ and ‘human rights constitutionalism’ – many governance institutions fail to protect transnational PGs effectively. This contribution explains why – even if ‘global democracy’ remains a utopia – today’s universal recognition of ‘inalienable’ human rights and of related constitutional principles requires re-interpreting the power-oriented ‘international law of states’ as multilevel governance of transnational PGs for the benefit of citizens and their constitutional rights.