event : "message" Lecture 1: Introduction to Power and Politics in Today’s World TL;DR: This lecture series explores how global power politics have dramatically shifted since the hopeful era of 1989, leading to current challenges for democratic stability and the rise of anti-establishment forces. The Gist: Topic: Power Politics and Democratic Stability Since 1989 Core Concept: The Yale DeVane Lectures analyze the profound changes in global power politics over the past 30 years, contrasting the post-1989 period of rapid change with the relative stability and prosperity of advanced capitalist democracies after World War II. The series examines why the initial optimism of widespread democratization has given way to significant challenges to democratic systems, including the rise of anti-establishment and far-right political parties. How it did it: Historical Context: The lecture begins by recalling the period of relative stability from WWII to 1989, highlighting Cold War dynamics and post-war recovery. The 1989 Turning Point: It revisits the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent wave of democratization in Eastern Europe, South Africa, and initial peace efforts in conflicts like Northern Ireland and Israel-Palestine, leading to an "end of history" optimism. Current Challenges: The lecture then highlights the dramatic shift since 2016, showcasing the rise of far-right and anti-establishment parties across Europe (e.g., Germany's AfD, Brexit, Trump, Austria, Belgium, Italy, Sweden) and beyond, drawing parallels to the instability of the 1920s and 30s. , Academic Approach: History & Political Science: Uses the events of 1989 as a "natural experiment" to test and refine conventional political science theories, such as modernization theory and the relationship between economies and political systems. Political Theory & "Paths Not Taken": Explores alternative decisions that could have led to different global outcomes (e.g., NATO expansion after the Cold War, responses to 9/11, or the 2008 financial crisis). Politics & Public Policy: Aims to bridge the gap between ideal public policy and the political feasibility of achieving or blocking such policies. Key Learnings/Insights: The period since 1989 has been one of unprecedented, rapid change, challenging the initial widespread optimism about the triumph of liberal democracy. The rise of anti-establishment and far-right parties globally indicates a significant shift from the post-Cold War democratic consensus. Historical events, especially significant breaks like 1989, offer valuable data to re-evaluate and strengthen political science theories. Understanding "paths not taken" can provide insights into the contingent nature of historical and political developments. Specific Sections: Course Structure: The course is divided into five sections: The collapse of communism and the rise of a unipolar world. The politics of economics, including the rise of neoliberalism and the Washington Consensus. Waves of democratization and the development of international institutions (e.g., ICC, R2P). Key Topics: 1989 / Fall of Berlin Wall Democratization Wave / End of History Rise of Anti-Establishment Parties / Far-Right , Academic Approach / Political Science Paths Not Taken / NATO Expansion Neoliberalism / Washington Consensus International Institutions / Responsibility to Protect Lecture 1: Introduction to Power and Politics in Today’s World Lecturer “For [the] last 40 years or 60 years after World War II, it's all history.” “The first thing we need to do [is] regular practice: take everybody back, make people understand, [and] remind people [of things they have] forgotten.” “It's impossible not to start thinking [of the] past, particularly [the] 1920s and '30s.” “Don't get too depressed; it's not all for depression.” “The first thing about our approach [is] studying history with [the] tools [of] political science [and] political theory, using history to keep political science theory honest.” “We are bringing tools of political science theories to bear on data thrown up by the last 30 years of history, using data to keep political scientists honest.” “We think about normative questions from the perspective of how goals, however desirable, can be achieved.” “We are focusing on paths not taken, what we might have done differently.” “Now [we are in a] unipolar world dominated by a single power after 1989. Restructure politics, possibilities for politics [are] part of our concern.” “On Tuesday, we'll talk about the collapse of the Soviet Union from Soviet Communism to Russian gangster capitalism.” Dan Rather “Good evening, sights [and] sounds [of] continuing celebration of Germans about [the] symbolic, not literal, tearing down [of the] Berlin Wall.” “[It's] impossible to describe [how] deeply Germans feel.” “East German communist government said [they] can come [and] go permanently [to] West Berlin, look, come back home again, no special documents required.” low regulation across the board.. it's not surprising that she couldn't do it because the Greens want green regulation. they want environmental regulation.. that's their raison d'etre And the Free Democrats want no regulation or certainly, less regulation. so they stumbled along in and out of negotiations, but they weren't able to form a coalition. however, over the course of that six months, all the opinion polls showed that the AFD, the alternative for Deutschland was actually rising in popularity. and so the German president was very against having another election in the face of the stalemate with the Social Democrats refusing to join in a grand coalition on the one hand and Merkel's inability to construct a different coalition on the other. they all knew that if they went for another election, the AFD would do even better. so finally, after much hand-wringing, the SPD was persuaded after extracting a very big set of concessions, including six ministries and the finance Ministry. they were persuaded to go back into a grand coalition even though a lot of their membership didn't want it. so terrified were they of the prospect of another election in which the far right would do even better. so we thought German politics was kind of settling down at this point but the following year, this is what you see happening. -[presnter] German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who's led Germany for 13 years has offered to step down as her party's leader and said she won't run for office again after her term ends in 2021. her announcement came a day after her party, the Christian Democratic Union, saw a disappointing performance in a key regional election in the state of Hesse. the far-right, alternative for Germany party claimed more than a dozen seats in Hesse's parliament for the first time. the entire migrant party now controls seats in all 16 of Germany's state parliament's plus the national BundesTag and European parliament. -so there it is. they had also done very poorly in the Bavarian regional elections. they had hemorrhaged about 10% of their vote to the AFD in these regional elections. And by the way, the SPD wasn't very happy either because they were hemorrhaging support to the Greens. and this is something we'll see playing out in many European countries. the establishment parties are shrinking and becoming weaker and the parties on the fringes are growing and becoming stronger. and it was impossible not to start thinking about the past and thinking particularly about the 1920s and 30s. (speaking in foreign language) -[presenter] as a result of the elections of July, 1932, the Nazis became the biggest party in Germany with 37% of the vote. -so if you wanna go back to the 1930s, you can see that that video was about the July 1932 election. And you can see what happened in the subsequent elections that it was a very unstable system. they were having multiple elections. and of course, 18 months later, Hitler came to power. and if you go to Germany, you hear very anxious people talking about is this back to the future? is 2017 and 2018 some kind of replay of the empowerment of extremist parties and of course, it wasn't just Germany. in 2016 we had massive shocks delivered to establishment parties with the brexit result in the UK and Donald Trump's populist stampede to the presidency in the US, both widely unanticipated outcomes by most of the establishment parties, pundits and politicians. and you could go around the world. in the Austrian elections of 2016, people are very relieved that in the runoff, the green candidate actually defeated the far-right quite handsomely by 54 to 46% But if you look at the legislature, again, you see the far-right gaining ground, the establishment parties coming in fourth and fifth in the 2017 legislative elections. these are the parties that would normally have come in first and second while the far-right party increased its vote, putting them a close third with 51 seats, while the Greens fell below the threshold and won nothing. Or if you look at Belgium, you see a center-right party retains its majority. But if you drill down a little bit, you can see that there was an increase of support for the far-right Flemish VLAams Belang which received almost 12% of the vote gaining seats. if you look at Italy, you can see the center-left party ceding power to the center-right but many of the votes for the center-right party are coming from the league, so--called, again, a far right-wing populist party which ends up with 125 seats and 17% of the popular vote, of 109 seats and I could put up another seven or eight or nine slides of different countries that basically tell the same stories in country after country across Europe both Eastern Europe and Western Europe, including countries that we thought of as bastions of civil social democratic stability like Sweden. you see these far--right parties doing well, Turkey, Latin America, elsewhere, where anti-establishment parties that sometimes also verge on being anti-system parties are gaining ground in many legislatures. so if you think about the contrast between the videos of 1989 and where the world has been since 2016, it couldn't be more dramatic and in some ways, it's a big downer but my first thing I wanna say is don't get too depressed. it's not all of course, for depression. the central questions of this course are three. how did we get from there to here? what are the challenges and prospects going forward? and most importantly, in the last part of the course, how could we get to a better place in many of the countries that we're talking about? we'll spend a lot of time on the US but not exclusively in the US. I should say a little bit about the distinctive approach that I'm gonna be taking in these lectures, not to say it's the best approach; there are many ways to look at this kind of material, but it is the approach that I'm going to be using.. and the first thing I would say about this approach is that I'm going to be studying history with the tools of political science and political theory on the one hand but also using history to keep political science and political theory honest. so what do I mean by that? well, one thing that is remarkable about the Lecture 1: Introduction to Power and Politics in Today’s World TL;DR: This lecture series explores how global power politics have dramatically shifted since the hopeful era of 1989, leading to current challenges for democratic stability and the rise of anti-establishment forces. The Gist: ** Topic:** Power Politics and Democratic Stability Since 1989 Core Concept: The Yale DeVane Lectures analyze the profound changes in global power politics over the past 30 years, contrasting the post-1989 period of rapid change with the relative stability and prosperity of advanced capitalist democracies after World War II. The series examines why the initial optimism of widespread democratization has given way to significant challenges to democratic systems, including the rise of anti-establishment and far-right political parties. How it did it: Historical Context: The lecture begins by recalling the period of relative stability from WWII to 1989, highlighting Cold War dynamics and post-war recovery. The 1989 Turning Point: It revisits the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent wave of democratization in Eastern Europe, South Africa, and initial peace efforts in conflicts like Northern Ireland and Israel-Palestine, leading to an "end of history" optimism. Current Challenges: The lecture then highlights the dramatic shift since 2016, showcasing the rise of far-right and anti-establishment parties across Europe (e.g., Germany's AfD, Brexit, Trump, Austria, Belgium, Italy, Sweden) and beyond, drawing parallels to the instability of the 1920s and 30s. , Academic Approach: History & Political Science: Uses the events of 1989 as a "natural experiment" to test and refine conventional political science theories, such as modernization theory and the relationship between economies and political systems. Political Theory & "Paths Not Taken": Explores alternative decisions that could have led to different global outcomes (e.g., NATO expansion after the Cold War, responses to 9/11, or the 2008 financial crisis). Politics & Public Policy: Aims to bridge the gap between ideal public policy and the political feasibility of achieving or blocking such policies. Key Learnings/Insights: The period since 1989 has been one of unprecedented, rapid change, challenging the initial widespread optimism about the triumph of liberal democracy. The rise of anti-establishment and far-right parties globally indicates a significant shift from the post-Cold War democratic consensus. Historical events, especially significant breaks like 1989, offer valuable data to re-evaluate and strengthen political science theories. Understanding "paths not taken" can provide insights into the contingent nature of historical and political developments. Specific Sections: Course Structure: The course is divided into five sections: The collapse of communism and the rise of a unipolar world. The politics of economics, including the rise of neoliberalism and the Washington Consensus. Waves of democratization and the development of international institutions (e.g., ICC, R2P). Key Topics: 1989 / Fall of Berlin Wall Democratization Wave / End of History Rise of Anti-Establishment Parties / Far-Right , Academic Approach / Political Science Paths Not Taken / NATO Expansion Neoliberalism / Washington Consensus **International Institutions / Responsibility to Protect ** feature_type, query, session-id {{start_time, end_time}} data: {} This response is partial. to get the next part of the response click here /follow_part event: "ending-response" data : {json.dumps({data: "",})} Immediate impact Streets around the Brandenburg Gate filled with jubilant crowds as East German border guards began physically dismantling sections of the wall to let people pass through, turning a once rigid barrier into an emerging relic of history. , East Germans were suddenly allowed to cross into West Berlin without special documents, and large numbers streamed through the gaps to visit, celebrate, and reunite with family and friends. , Symbolic significance The event was framed as the “symbolic tearing down” of the Cold War division — a visible end to an era in which East and West were sharply separated by ideology and fortified borders. , Broadly, the opening of the Wall became a potent sign that Soviet control in Eastern Europe was weakening and that democratization and political change were sweeping the region. , What it meant for East Germans Immediate practical freedom: the ability to travel to West Berlin without special papers and see relatives and Western life firsthand. , Emotional relief and hope: many East Germans saw the moment as the end of years of hardship and the start of reunifying families and communities that had been divided for decades. What it meant for West Germans A mix of celebration and anticipation: West Germans witnessed scenes of joy and hoped the “artificial division” of Germany was moving toward permanent closeness and eventual political reunification. , The moment also signaled new responsibilities and complex political, economic, and social challenges ahead as two very different systems and populations faced integration. Broader takeaway The fall of the Wall was both an immediate liberation for individuals and a global symbol that the Cold War order was unraveling — a beacon for democratization across Eastern Europe