Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

America needs a cross-national approach to counter authoritarianism

America needs a cross-national approach to counter authoritarianism
Oliver Helbig / Getty Images

Yordanos Eyoel is the Founder and CEO of Keseb, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization building an ecosystem for cross-national learning, collaboration and innovation to advance inclusive and resilient democracies.

In September 2022, American headlines blasted the results of a new poll: an equal proportion of Democrats and Republicans had indicated that U.S. democracy was “in danger of collapse.” It was touted as a rare moment of convergence in an otherwise highly polarized political climate. Yet, the poll did not explore what people meant by democracy, surfacing a much larger question about the country’s collective vision or lack thereof for its system of governance.


From its inception in Athens, dēmokratia was designed for a homogenous group of people with similar racial, social and economic privileges. Yet, with its inherent values of individual choice and collective voice, democracy offers the most compelling vision and a system of government for human flourishing. This is especially salient for multiethnic and pluralistic societies, the testbeds of “the great” experiments in diverse democracy, as the renowned democracy scholar, Yascha Monk, discusses in his recent book. While there have been varying degrees of success across diverse countries, achieving a truly inclusive model of democracy that equitably protects and honors the dignity and rights of all members of society has yet to be fully actualized.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Although difficult to sustain, democracy builds its foundations on diversity and on the contest of ideas in the political space. Today, this very idea of diversity within a democracy has become a ubiquitous wedge issue that has fueled authoritarian, ethnonationalist and xenophobic movements in the U.S. and across the globe. While all nations need a unified vision and narrative about who they are, the existential question of national identity is uniquely difficult yet momentous for diverse democracies.

Last year, 8 out of 10 people resided in a country that is not fully free. With democracy at a critical inflection point, it is imperative to open the aperture of analysis beyond a single country in order to uncover patterns and levers to reverse democratic erosion.

Four former colonies - Brazil, South Africa, India and the United States - which represent 25% of the world’s population collectively, offer critical insights that can deepen our understanding of the crisis facing diverse democracies. These countries surface immediate priorities for pro-democracy civil society intervention, particularly for practitioners and philanthropists.

The newly released report, Defending and Strengthening Diverse Democracies by Keseb, a nonpartisan, pro-democracy nonprofit organization highlights five drivers of recent deterioration of democratic ideals, culture, and systems across Brazil, India, South Africa and the United States. These drivers are: (1) economic change and persistent or deepening inequality, (2) rapid demographic changes, (3) dysfunctional and unregulated information ecosystems, (4) cooperation between opportunistic populist leaders and political elites, and (5) cross-border learning and solidarity by authoritarian movements and leaders.

Over the next several years, innovation will be vital to the success of pro-democracy civil society organizations in resisting democratic regression and enabling their countries to realize the full promise and potential of truly inclusive and diverse democracies. This requires civil society organizations to access a range of support, including robust financial and human capital, leadership development, national and transnational platforms to exchange knowledge and tactics, and peer learning and support networks.

While the number and nature of pro-democracy civil society organizations differs across the four countries due to factors including differing legal frameworks, degrees of political freedom, and funding environments, Keseb's analysis has surfaced four immediate opportunities for philanthropy and practitioners in Brazil, India, South Africa, and the United States:

1. Immediately bolstering multi-year investment in targeted efforts to:

a. Promote free, fair and trusted elections;

b. Build a leadership pipeline for representative government;

c. Combat mis- and disinformation; and

d. Cultivate informed, empowered, and engaged citizens and voters.

2. Embracing issue intersectionality and re-envisioning what it means to be a “democracy organization.” Many organizations, often grassroots ones, are employing issue-based, intersectional organizing strategies in areas such as climate justice, racial equity, and economic empowerment that are in reality moving the needle in strengthening democracy, but often are not considered “democracy” organizations. There is a unique opportunity for philanthropy to break down the siloing of issues and help civil society organizations reinforce their issue-based work where it intersects with democracy.

3. Shifting insufficient and reactive philanthropy that perpetuates fragmentation among practitioners: The impact of pro-democracy civil society organizations is hampered by two mutually reinforcing dynamics:

a. Election-anchored philanthropic capital flow that creates a “boom and bust” effect. For example, overall U.S. democracy funding to civil society organizations dropped by 50% from 2020 (US $2.5 billion) to 2021 (US $1.3 billion); and

b. Fragmented and narrowly specialized pro-democracy organizations, often creating a divide between national and local groups and grassroots and grasstops efforts.

4. Building an inspiring collective narrative for sustaining democracy to combat the appeal of authoritarianism, particularly among disillusioned citizens for whom democracy has failed to deliver its promise of economic security.

In today's reality, threatened by a transnational authoritarian movement, it is no longer sufficient to support national pro-democracy efforts in isolation. This is particularly important for Americans to recognize - we have as much to learn from the world as we have to contribute to it. We have to develop transnational pro-democracy ecosystems that can significantly accelerate learning, collaboration and innovation by civil society organizations and leaders.

The mega experiment of diverse democracy is under threat. This is the moment to galvanize and build solidarity across borders to give rise to an inspiring, inclusive, and resilient 21st century democracy in the U.S. and globally.

Read More

Moderate voices are vanishing. Here’s how to get them back.
Moderate voices are vanishing. Here’s how to get them back.

Moderate voices are vanishing. Here’s how to get them back.

Fifty years ago this month, the US Congress established the Harry S. Truman Scholarship, which brings together service-minded college juniors who span the ideological spectrum – from Neil Gorsuch, now a Supreme Court Justice, to Stacey Abrams, founder of Fair Fight, to Bill Gates, who served as the Chair of Maricopa County Board of Supervisors during the 2020 presidential election. The scholarship is intended to serve as a living memorial to our 33rd President’s commitment to public service by building a diverse community committed to upholding public institutions.

After receiving the scholarship in 1997, I spent two intense summers with my fellow Trumans, soaking in diverse viewpoints, debating policy, wrestling with ethical dilemmas, and dreaming about how we might serve our country. During the Clinton impeachment's seemingly unprecedented partisan tensions, we discussed running on cross-partisan slates – not promising to always agree, but committing to respectful engagement and understanding our differences. Twenty-five years later, watching my 17-year-old son write about losing his faith in politics, I wonder what happened to that vision.

Keep ReadingShow less
After 2024, Republicans Ought to Want to Abolish the Electoral College Too
a person is casting a vote into a box

After 2024, Republicans Ought to Want to Abolish the Electoral College Too

January 6th this year marked not just the anniversary of the violent assault on the U.S. Capitol four years ago, but the actual counting of the electoral votes in Congress (by the loser of the presidential race, Vice President Kamala Harris). Last month, three Senate Democrats presented a bill to abolish the Electoral College. It’s a pity they couldn’t secure a couple of Republican cosponsors. Because it’s quite conceivable this time around that Donald Trump might have decisively won the nationwide popular vote – but nevertheless lost in the Electoral College. The same thing that happened to Democrats in 2000 and 2016 might well have happened to the GOP in 2024.

Let’s take a look at the math. If candidate Harris had held the line in her three “Blue Wall” states, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, she would have captured the presidency. Instead, she lost all three. But by how much?

Keep ReadingShow less
Tim Shriver on the Braver Angels podcast
Podcast: The call the unite
Youtube

Meet the Change Leaders: Tim Shriver

Tim Shriver leads the International Board of Directors of the Special Olympics and serves together with 6 million Special Olympics athletes in 200 countries to promote health, education, and a more unified world through the joy of sports.

Shriver joined the Special Olympics in 1996. He is a leading educator who focuses on the social and emotional factors in learning. He co-founded and currently chairs the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), the leading school reform organization in the field of social and emotional learning.

Keep ReadingShow less
The ‘deep state’ and ‘the swamp’ are both favorite Trump targets. Here’s the difference.

Nine days before the United States Presidential Election, supporters of former President Donald Trump flood the streets of midtown for a sold out campaign rally in Madison Square Garden, October 27, 2024, in New York City, New York.

(Photo by Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images)

The ‘deep state’ and ‘the swamp’ are both favorite Trump targets. Here’s the difference.

Donald Trump has promised to do many things once he reoccupies the White House. Among the most famous, and most desired by his biggest fans, is his vow to “drain the swamp” and “demolish the deep state.”

The first and arguably most important challenge for such a project is definitional. What is the deep state? And what is the swamp? Are they different? How so?

Keep ReadingShow less