Democracy Paradox

We are badly mismeasuring whether and how much people care about democracy.
Milan Svolik
In this episode of the Democracy Paradox, host Justin Kempf speaks with political scientist Milan Svolik, the Elizabeth S. & A. Varick Stout Professor of Political Science at Yale University and author of The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. Their conversation explores one of the central puzzles in contemporary democracy: why citizens who say they strongly support democracy sometimes vote for politicians who undermine it. Drawing on Svolik’s experimental research, the discussion examines how traditional survey questions often overestimate democratic commitment and why understanding voters’ real trade-offs offers a more accurate picture.
The Democracy Paradox is made in partnership with the Kellogg Institute of the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. 
Read the full transcript here.
Key Highlights
Introduction - 0:20
Measuring What Voters Really Believe - 3:33
Militant Democracy and the Risks of Overcorrection - 16:51
The Left, the Right, and Who Defends Democracy - 37:18
The Voter as Democracy's Last Gatekeeper - 52:13
Links
Learn more about Milan Svolik.
Learn more about his book The Politics of Authoritarian Rule (Cambridge University Press)
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute.
Register for the 2026 Global Democracy Conference at the University of Notre Dame.
Apes of the State created all Music
Email questions or comments to [email protected]
Support the show

The paradox of dictatorship is that dictatorships do well when they do not have a genuine dictator.
Minxin Pei
In this episode of Democracy Paradox, Justin Kempf speaks with China scholar Minxin Pei about his book The Broken China Dream: How Reform Revived Totalitarianism and his argument that China under Xi Jinping has shifted from authoritarianism back toward totalitarianism. They explore the missed opportunities for political reform in the 1980s, the party’s post-Tiananmen survival strategy, and how Xi consolidated power through purges, ideological revival, and expanded social control. The conversation also reflects on what China’s trajectory reveals about the strengths – and fragility – of democracy itself.
The Democracy Paradox is made in partnership with the Kellogg Institute of the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. 
Read the full transcript here.
Key Highlights
Introduction - 0:20
China's Missed Opening - 4:22
The Return of Control - 21:03
The Making of a Strongman 38:16
Lessons for Democracy - 50:41
Links
Learn more about Minxin Pei.
Learn more about his new book The Broken China Dream: How Reform Revived Totalitarianism.
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute.
Register for the Global Democracy Conference
Apes of the State created all Music
Support the show

Traditional programmatic parties serve as a critical guardrail for democracy. 
Erica Frantz
In this episode, Justin Kempf speaks with Erica Frantz about her book The Origins of Elected Strongmen and the rise of personalist leaders in democracies. Frantz explains how leader-dominated political parties – more than populist rhetoric alone – can erode democratic institutions from within, drawing on cases from El Salvador to France. The conversation explores why voters support such leaders and what this trend means for the future of democracy worldwide.
The Democracy Paradox is made in partnership with the Kellogg Institute of the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. 
Read the full transcript here.
Key Highlights
Introduction - 0:20
Personalism Defined - 2:50
Personalism's Appeal - 14:19
Threat to Democracy - 19:38
Pushing the Boundaries of the Theory - 33:13
Links
Learn more about Erica Frantz.
Learn more about her coauthored book The Origins of Elected Strongmen: How Personalist Parties Destroy Democracy from Within.
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute.
Register for the Global Democracy Conference
Apes of the State created all Music

Support the show

By dismantling certain capacities today, you're making the democratic choices of tomorrow harder.
Javier Pérez Sandoval
In this episode, Javier Pérez Sandoval discusses his Journal of Democracy essay, coauthored with Andrés Mejía Acosta, on why populist leaders often “hollow out” the state. Moving beyond familiar debates about executive aggrandizement and democratic backsliding, Pérez Sandoval argues that democracy depends on the state’s capacity to deliver essential public goods – from health and education to security, justice, and credible elections. Drawing on examples from Mexico and Argentina, he explains how both left- and right-wing populists may weaken institutions through austerity, politicization, and institutional restructuring, often prioritizing short-term political gains over long-term democratic resilience. The conversation explores how state erosion can constrain future democratic choices, undermine public trust, and create a vicious cycle that leaves democracy structurally weakened from within.
The Democracy Paradox is made in partnership with the Kellogg Institute of the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. 
Read the full transcript here.
Key Highlights
Introduction - 0:20
Reducing State Capacity - 3:47
Core Functions of the State - 12:23
Is Reducing State Capacity Antidemocratic? 21:13
Does the Public Want to Hollow Out the State? 33:31
Links
Learn more about Javier Pérez Sandoval.
Read the Journal of Democracy essay “Why Populists Hollow Out Their States.”
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute.
Apes of the State created all Music
Support the show

The group of people who have an interest in defending liberal democracy might be broader than many academics, and maybe even liberals, would have shown.
Kate Baldwin
This episode features Yale political scientist Kate Baldwin in a conversation about her book Faith in Democracy, which challenges the assumption that religion is inherently hostile to democratic governance. Drawing on research from sub-Saharan Africa, Baldwin explains how Christian churches have often emerged as defenders of liberal democracy – not because of ideological commitments, but because democratic institutions protect church autonomy and social service work from state overreach. The conversation explores when and why churches mobilize against democratic backsliding, how institutional incentives shape political behavior, and what this reveals about the broader coalition of actors invested in sustaining democracy.
The Democracy Paradox is made in partnership with the Kellogg Institute of the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. 

Read the full transcript here.
Key Highlights
Introduction - 0:20
Why Churches Defend Democracy - 3:20
Role of Education - 14:09
Why Churches Choose Autocracy - 20:09
Leadership - 27:00
Links
Learn more about Kate Baldwin.
Learn more about her book Faith in Democracy: The Logic of Church Advocacy for Liberal Democratic Institutions in Africa.
Check out "Democracy's Devout Defenders" in the Journal of Democracy.
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute.
Apes of the State created all Music
Support the show