RevDem Podcast

In this conversation with M. V. Ramana, we delve into one of the most pressing issues of our time: the climate crisis. In response to this crisis, various solutions have been proposed, with nuclear energy emerging as one of the most prominent. After more than a decade of caution following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, a global consensus has gradually formed around nuclear power as a viable and efficient solution to meet energy demands. Advocates argue that nuclear energy can not only complement fossil fuels but also fulfill the growing energy needs of the world.   However, these arguments often prioritize the energy requirements of developed countries, overlooking the high costs, significant risks, and the lengthy timeline needed to build the necessary infrastructure for nuclear energy optimization. Moreover, the current push for nuclear energy sidesteps democratic considerations, with decisions skewed by a technocratic and bureaucratic approach to energy regulation.   Professor M. V. Ramana critically examines the often-misleading optimism surrounding nuclear energy and highlights how this industry's resurgence signals a return to a techno-bureaucratic model of governance.

The Georgian Dream movement came to power over a decade ago. It initially claimed to want to uphold the European integration policies of its predecessor but has slowly moved towards a more sovereign discourse. Over time, Georgian Dream has increasingly fueled affective political polarization, and now accuses its pro-European critics of wanting to drag Georgia into a war with Russia. It has furthermore vehemently defended adopting controversial anti-democratic legislation such as the so called ‘foreign agents’ law.In this latest episode of the Review of Democracy podcast, Lia Tsuladze discusses how Georgian Dream’s discourse and actions have evolved over the years to hollow out Georgia’s fragile democracy, and how this is now impacting the current electoral environment. She talks about the role of CSOs and the media, as well as her hopes for the future.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Diana Dumitru – co-editor, with Dirk Moses, of the new collection The Russian Invasion of Ukraine. Victims, Perpetrators, Justice, and the Question of Genocide – discusses the motives of various Russian perpetrators in Ukraine and how those motives might have evolved over time; shows how useful the concept of genocide proves when studying the multifaceted violence unleashed during Russia’s war of aggression; reflects on whether the current debates around genocide in Ukraine might reshape or expanding our understanding of genocide and mass violence; and addresses the challenges in pursuing accountability for Russian crimes.

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has been ongoing for 10 years. It started with the occupation of Crimea and parts of the Donbas in 2014 and culminated in the full-scale invasion in 2022. Various domestic and international justice initiatives to ensure accountability for war crimes and other conflict related violations have been unfolding since 2014. However, 2022 marked the start of a new important debate. How can Russia be held accountable for the underlying crime of aggression? In this RevDem Rule of Law podcast Oliver Garner discusses the proposal for a special tribunal to address Russia's crime of aggression in Ukraine with Kateryna Busol.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Jo Guldi explores the relationship between data sciences and the humanities; shows how the struggle for occupancy rights can help us reconsider global history; explains how her new project approaches climate change; and discusses the type of scholarship she finds most inspiring.

In our new podcast, Roland Freudenstein, Director of the Free Russia Foundation Brussels, and Founder and Executive Officer of the Brussels Freedom Hub discusses Russia’s geopolitical ambitions, how the war in Ukraine may end, and the potentials for a regime change in Moscow; reflects on democratic backsliding in EU Member States; and shares his thoughts about autocrats and how societies can be more resilient against authoritarianism.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Benedek Jávor – Head of the Representation of Budapest to the European Union – discusses his current role and the evolving relationship between the European Union, the city of Budapest, and the Hungarian government; reflects on the green transition and critiques Hungary’s current energy policies; and pleads for talking responsibility locally.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Nathalie Tocci – Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali and part-time professor at the School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute – discusses the direction the EU has taken in recent years in the light of its global strategy and how far it has managed to become strategically autonomous; reflects on what principled pragmatism implies in the context of the rise of illiberalism; and considers what could change during the second European Commission headed by Ursula von der Leyen – and whether the EU’s centre of gravity might be shifting.

In our latest podcast, Mikuláš Dzurinda – President of the Wilfried Martens Centre and former Prime Minister of Slovakia – discusses the changes that EU membership has brought to Slovakia; reflects on the recent rightward shift in Europe and how this might influence the EPP's priorities; analyzes potential change in Slovak foreign policy and the relationship with Hungary; and argues for Ukraine’s NATO accession.   The conversation was recorded on September 19, at the Budapest Forum for Building Sustainable Democracies.

In this conversation, Bernadett Sebály discusses the inception and development of the online database of protest events in Hungary, 1989–2010, entitled Küzdelmeink története, or “The Story of Our Struggles”; its use in pedagogical settings for students, activists, teachers, and everyday citizens; and the importance of its place between activism and scholarly research in the Hungarian illiberal context.