Democracy in Crisis

Sunday, November 12, 2017
First Aired:
Sunday, March 22, 2015

What Is It

政府的民主制度应该反映普通公民的利益,而不是某些神秘的政治精英的利益。但是,我们越来越多地看到,在所谓的民主政治中,大财团和特殊利益集团的影响,而收入不平等和选民被压制的现象越来越严重。数以百万计的人相信政客不会为他们说话,美国是否存在“代表危机”?这些问题是我们体制中的政治腐朽的结果,还是民主在各地都遇到了麻烦?我们如何才能实现一个有效和繁荣的民主,让普通公民真正得到代表?我们是否应该考虑一个完全不同的政府体制?John and Ken keep calm with renowned political scientist Francis Fukuyama, author ofPolitical Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy.本节目在斯坦福大学校园现场录制。

Listening Notes

John opens on a rather pessimistic note wondering whether if there even is an American democracy to be in crisis in the first place. Ken responds that of course there is. There might be problems with it, but certainly there’s certainly no need to be so pessimistic.

John and Ken invite guest Francis Fukuyama, author ofPolitical Order and Political Decay. Francis opens by discussing how his views have changed sinceThe End of History. John asks Francis whether there are democracies doing well outside of the U.S. Francis notes that Scandinavian and German democracies are doing well, and the number of democracies have risen considerably throughout the world. With this trend of rising middle classes and democracies, there seems to be reason for optimism regarding democracy in the long run.

Ken asks what a healthy democracy would look like. Francis responds that there is a need for citizens to participate politically on a daily basis, not just when elections come around. However, there are limits to the degree to which people are participating, so we’ve settled for a compromise where citizens can participate if they want to. Ken asks Francis to diagnose how dire the situation is in the US. Francis responds that it isn’t nearly as bad as it was right before the Civil War, but it is clear that we are not receiving as good of governance as we deserve. The rise of special interest groups and the power of money currently blocks collective desires.

方济各在回答听众提问时指出,非自由民主不是真正的民主,并讨论了最高法院在美国民主中所发挥的独特作用。肯和弗朗西斯讨论了美国如何比其他民主国家拥有更多的制衡,这增加了效率低下。约翰接着问,像雅典人处理法律的方式一样,在立法中加入彩票制度是否明智。方济各回答了听众的另一个问题,然后讨论了在美国,第三个政党要赢得选举有多么困难。另一个听众的问题是,这场危机是否更多地是由文化原因而非制度原因造成的?也就是说,现在的美国公民似乎更关心商业而不是政治。

约翰开玩笑地问弗朗西斯,如果他是美国的沙皇一周,他会颁布什么法令来解决美国的政治问题。方济各回应说,他将转向议会制,但更现实的是,他将取消拖延战术,简化预算程序,使游说者和利益集团变得更有限,并迫使资金通过政党机制输送,这意味着私人捐款不受捐款人的控制。在回答最后一个问题时,方济各认为,技术的崛起提高了人们的期望,这导致了权威危机,给世界各地的民主国家带来了问题。

  • Roving Philosophical Report(Seek to 7:15): Shuka Kalantari looks at the Citizens United decision and how money has made United States less democratic, and how little the voice of citizens matters anymore. Furthermore, it seems like it is only getting worse. But all is not lost: there needs to be campaign finance reform. Until then, our government will respond only to the powerful few.
  • 60-Second Philosopher(Seek to 46:05): Ian Shoales discusses the Koch Brothers, the role they’ve played in politics, and the reach and limits of money in politics.

Transcript