Is nationalism detrimental to democracy? The popular narrative would argue so. In her thought-provoking work, Narratives of Civic Duty, Aram Hur of the University of Missouri, uncovers a surprising revelation: the bedrock of a democracy’s resilience lies in the very element once deemed harmful — national attachments.

The prevailing notion of nationalism as a disruptor of democratic processes is meticulously reconsidered by Hur. She contends that nationalism’s alleged illiberal and exclusionary tendencies do not inherently render it antagonistic to democracy.

Instead, the compatibility of nationalism with democracy is intricately linked to the historical rapport between a nation and its democratic governance. Nationalism can play a complex and multifaceted role in a democracy, offering both potential benefits and challenges.

When harnessed in a responsible and inclusive manner, nationalism can contribute positively to various aspects of a democratic society. Hur explains the national theory of civic duty where she posits that the foundation of civic duty, encompassing the intrinsic urge to be an engaged and responsible citizen even when it demands sacrifice, is rooted in “national attachments.”

Contrary to its conventional portrayal as a force marked by intolerance and exclusivity, Hur argues that the impact of nationalism on democracy’s health depends on the historical context of the interconnection between a nation’s people and its democratic establishment, which can catalyze a sense of civic duty, thus augmenting the robustness of democratic systems. However, the dynamic relationship of “national stories,” plays a pivotal role in the success of this notion.

The interpretation of this connection significantly influences whether nationalism contributes positively to democracy’s vigor or presents challenges. Specifically, if these narratives depict a relationship characterized by mutual dedication, nationalism can emerge as a force that empowers democracies by instilling a sense of civic responsibility in the citizenry.

Hur examines civic duty within democratic societies, unraveling the question of why certain individuals feel compelled to engage in acts like voting, paying taxes, or defending their nation. In the heart of every thriving democracy beats the concept of civic duty. It encompasses the responsibilities and obligations that citizens have towards their society and government, beyond their individual interests.

A

s most of the world collectively undergoes a time of economic crisis, pressure continues to build on the public as governments in the 21st century first look to make cuts from services provided to citizens to contain the negative effects on the economy and increase solvency. Throughout the years, public distress has translated to protests resulting from the decline of social and economic welfare in many countries. The key tool we see policymakers implementing is austerity from the decrease in wages to public benefits cuts.

In The Capital Order, Clara E. Mattei explores austerity as we know it by taking the reader back to its origins: interwar Europe, a time when a new order was emerging as capitalism was fighting its most crucial battle for consolidation. Mattei highlights that after intensive wartime mobilizations capitalism’s inevitability was shattered in the eyes of many workers, and therefore strikes and social unrest increased as more of the population demanded collective power. That is when the austerity counteroffensive was launched.

Mattei brings attention to the fact that despite austerity measures’ failure to deliver their economic promises (such as reducing debt or boosting economic growth) policymakers continue to opt for them. Why so? In this case, she evaluates austerity from a different lens: austerity as crisis management for capitalism rather than the economy.

Mattei argues that austerity functions to discipline society. It enforces the protection of capital and creates conformity in society when means of production and wage relations are contested by the public or when there are calls for alternative forms of social organization. Austerity protects what she refers to as the “capital order” – a sociopolitical order that presupposes economic growth.

Considering austerity’s role in a societal class dynamic, Mattei finds that it insulates capitalist hierarchies from harm during times of would-be social change by placing structural limitations to wages and spending, inevitably imposing it as the only path to a worker’s survival.

Through meticulously compiled archival material, Mattei explores austerity by studying economists in the 1920s from the birthplace of liberalism (Britain) and the birthplace of fascism (Italy) to draw a provocative conclusion about its nature: “an anti-democratic reaction to threats from bottom-up social change.”

Mattei elucidates the thin line between liberalism and fascism that could be derailed by capitalism’s tendencies. The remarkable comparison between the cases of Britain and Italy reveals similarities beyond the sacrifice of citizens. While Italy chose direct coercion, Britain utilized coercion indirectly through a repression concealed in rationality and a seemingly apolitical technocracy that manipulated consensus.

The Capital Order touches upon a period often overlooked by economists when examining austerity. It illuminates the reader on the topics of class relations, the rise of modern economics, and political choice, and leaves even the most skeptical of readers with the question, “Has capitalism lost its innocence to its classist tendencies?”

Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists Invented Austerity and Paved the Way to Fascism (The University of Chicago Press, 2022) ISBN: 9780226818405, 480 pages

Written by Dilara Özer

Robert H. Latiff’s Future Peace, a sequel to Future War, specifically brings to attention a subtle, yet potentially destructive effect of technologies such as autonomous systems, advanced weapons, and AI: the provocation to violence. Against the backdrop of the brewing power rivalry between the U.S. and its adversaries, technology aggregates tension and catalyzes violence.

Future Peace touches upon the ethical, security-related, behavioral, and technical aspects of technology and warfare. It consists of four chapters: “A Giant Armed Nervous System” (referring to the military), “Urge to Violence,” “Stumbling into War,” and “Avoiding War.”

Latiff’s book comes as a warning to practice caution when adopting new weapons technology, and aids in understanding human and technical behaviors to attenuate its harms and decrease the chances of war. Not only does technology make war easier and speedier, hence enabling the rush to war, but hinders human reasoning. Such technical changes make the process of sound judgement difficult; for example, thinking and acting in a diplomatic manner. Furthermore, these changes enhance the potential for human error to get out of hand.

Latiff argues that it is vitally important to avoid entering conflict in the first place. He highlights the importance of the cooperative efforts of many segments of society, from the public and technologists to militarists and decision-makers. He implies that it is criminal negligence to leave everything to automation processes or politicians. Therefore, Future Peace also lays out long to short term recommendations to maintain peace and reverse the rush to war.

A

utonomous features are not a matter of the future; they have been used in warfare for years. However, it is quite evident that with the advancement of technology and the weaponization of artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons systems are swiftly adapting and becoming accepted.

As these changes emerge, the question that is often raised by international organizations such as the UN, which set the norms of conduct in an effort to control and regulate the use of autonomous weapons, is “How will human beings maintain control of the use of autonomous weapons?” In their study, Ingvild Bode and Hendrik Huelss flip the script to reveal another perspective of this dynamic.

Bode and Huelss aim to explain how testing, developing, and using weapons systems with autonomous features shapes ethical and legal norms, and how standards manifest and change in practice. The authors also examine the consequences of autonomous weapons for international relations.

Bode and Huelss acknowledge the fear and risks that these developments bring but adopt the approach that autonomous weapon systems may push people away from taking immediate decisions on the use of force as norms adapt to the appropriate use of force.

In short, Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Norms analyses the normative repercussions of weaponizing artificial intelligence by examining them not as tools used by the military but as shaping forces. Chapters include “Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Relations,” “New Technologies of Warfare: Emergence and Regulation,” “International Law, Norms, and Order,” “Norms in International Relations,” and “How Autonomous Weapons Systems Make Norms,” and contain assisting tables and figures.

As the trend and debate of autonomizing weapons systems continues, Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Norms equips the reader with an understanding of the relation of human-machine interaction and the process of integrating new technologies into war.

I

n War Virtually, Roberto J. González takes the reader behind the scenes to expose how scientists, programmers, and engineers developed technologies that automate war, predict conflict, and regulate human thought and behavior. Does this sound utopian? Not so when you factor in the persistent drive to arm for virtual warfare. In this quest, data comes a valuable commodity.

González evaluates autonomous weapons, robotic systems, predictive modeling software, advanced surveillance programs, and psyops techniques. He examines the foundation of the latest version of warfare in order to explain how it has taken its current form through contemporary military operations and their high-tech and cultural underpinnings.

However, War Virtually transcends the design, innovative, and transformative aspects of technology and warfare, and touches upon human engineering. González reveals the relations between U.S. intelligence agencies and Big Tech, and its implications. It is no secret that algorithms construct behavioral models for anticipating or even predicting human behavior, and, therefore, all of us risk having our digital lives become part of the military-industrial economy.

Adopting a critical approach, González examines how the U.S. military is weaponizing technology and data for new kinds of warfare, and questions the notion that technological advancements will lead to more efficient and less destructive warfare. In fact, he implies that such an aspiration comes at a great cost, and argues that in this world, there is little room for hubris.

War Virtually covers a large array of topics including automated battlefield robotics, social scientists’ involvement in experimental defense research, the blurred line between political consulting and propaganda in the internet era, and the military’s use of big data to craft new counterinsurgency methods based on predicting conflict.

I

n Proto-Algorithmic War, Stefka Hristova offers a unique perspective on the Iraq War and the history of algorithmic and digital logic that came to be a crucial element of today’s warfare. She examines the military policy of the United States going into the Iraq War: the U.S. approached the war with the logic of digital and emerging algorithmic technology alongside the preceding numerical logics of the British Mandate in Iraq. In a sense, the Iraq War became an experiment in the early stages of development and utilization of such technology in warfare, and moreover war culture.

Hristova provides a case study of a comparative historical framework reaching back to the quantification techniques harnessed during the era of Mandatory Iraq (1918-1932) and analyzes the parallels and diversions between the numerical logics in both cases.

The author further evaluates the logic that moved beyond the British mandate for Iraq and reduced culture, society, and the physical body and environment into visual data-driven, sterilized, reproducible warfare, highlighting that it lacked cultural and historical context. Indeed, the actual experience of the Iraq War resulted in massive-scale death and destruction.

Proto-Algorithmic War offers an insight into the digitization and automation of war. Hristova aptly scrutinizes the ways in which the Iraq War attempted and often failed to see and incorporate population and territory as digital and further proto-algorithmic entities.

B

en Buchanan and Andrew Imbrie use fire as an analogy to showcase how AI has a dual nature: destructive and constructive. Just like our distant ancestors learning to operate their newly discovered, full of potential tool, our responsibility is to understand and use AI potential wisely. With AI revolutionizing the world, democracies have a responsibility to harness that power constructively and come out on top. Transformation is on its way—can humanity use AI to light the way? Or will the fire burn wildly and ignite a new type of war?

In The New Fire, Buchanan and Imbrie help us understand AI better by breaking it down into its “sparks,” which are data, algorithms, and computing power. They further explain the tangible and potentially destructive consequences of these sparks such as disinformation campaigns, new hacking tools, and military weapons.

On a larger scale, The New Fire shows the urgency of democracies to adapt to the powerful tool that is AI, as autocrats may use it for domestic centralized control and asymmetric advantages in combat. In that sense, they argue that harnessing the power of AI is crucial for holding democracy in balance in the world. The New Fire also acknowledges that democracies have a harder time adapting to the age of AI given ethical and civil concerns, but that new ways could be forged based on the advantages of democracy.

Drawing on examples from geopolitical competition and its analysis, Buchanan and Imbrie show how AI can work for democracy while respecting civil rights. In the age of AI, this crucial topic may determine the choice of course between war and peace.

Written by Dilara Özer

Following the end of colonialism which saw the enslavement and migration of hundreds of thousands of people who were brought to foreign lands to serve the interests and wishes of their colonizers, immigrants had to survive by doing manual jobs. In this context, political engagement was severely hindered, if not completely impossible.

The new generations and descendants of these slaves and the new immigrants, however, grew up in different circumstances. Unlike their ancestors, they felt grounded in these new lands, which they came to call their home.

The path to citizenship for people of color was not easy. In the United States, the Civil Rights Movement was able to achieve success, although not a full and a decisive one, in the 1960s, after long years of fighting for equal rights for black people. People of color had to overcome many challenges to be able to engage in politics and to achieve representation.

Growing up in post settler-colonial societies such as the United States and New Zealand and having received the necessary education and skills, the younger generation had a different view of their new home countries and treated the political establishments differently.

Usually, the first generation of immigrants struggle to find work in order to survive. They have to learn a skill that helps them find their way in a foreign place in addition to facing cultural, economic, political, and assimilation challenges.

Their children, however, tend to have fewer such problems; they learn the language and culture of the countries they are in and adapt to their lifestyles.

The second and third generations of immigrants feel that their home is where they were born, although they might not forget their cultural heritage. They find their way in society more easily despite facing problems related to racial discrimination and family pressure.

The second and third generations of immigrants tend to be more involved in politics. This includes family and informal political debates, being involved with political groups on campus, being part of political parties and movements, leading the masses to bring about change, and ultimately running for political posts.

This second generation of immigrants have access to education, and this allows them to play a more prominent role in society. The fact that the second generation usually receives an education, empowers them and makes them feel less foreign. An empowered generation is better prepared to act politically. This political involvement of immigrants appears more prominently in the second and third generations who are more willing to take political action.

The second and third generations of immigrants tend to be more involved in politics. This includes family and informal political debates, being involved with political groups on campus, being part of political parties and movements, leading the masses to bring about change, and ultimately running for political posts.

Recent years have seen a trend in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand, among others, of second- and third-generation immigrants who feel politically empowered and who want to be part of bringing about a political change.

In the United States, more and more people with migrant backgrounds started actively participating in politics and forming groups that seek to be part of the political scenes of their country. Recent years have seen the election to the U.S. Congress of more radical and younger voices that call for political, economic, and social change.

Palestinian-American Iman Jodeh is the first Muslim American to be elected to represent the 41^st district in the Colorado House of Representatives in the 2020 general election, becoming the first Muslim lawmaker in the state’s history.

Leaving behind a war-torn country, Ilhan Omar arrived in the United States as a refugee from Somalia and is a U.S. representative for Minnesota’s 5th congressional district. Rashida Tlaib is of Palestinian origin and is serving as the U.S. representative for Michigan’s 13th congressional district, which has a large presence of Arab and Palestinian voters.

Ayanna Pressley is an African American politician who made her way to politics through her early political engagement; she was the first African American woman to be elected to Boston City Council in 2010 and the first black women elected to the congress from Massachusetts.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also fought a hard battle to get to the U.S. Congress when she ran against Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley, a 10-term incumbent, defeating him and becoming a national sensation.

The Squad was doubled in 2020 with the addition of more members. The 2020 elections in the U.S. were remarkable in the sense that they saw the election of more Native American representatives to the US Congress such as Deb Haaland, who, if confirmed, will become the first Native American Secretary of State under President Biden.

Palestinian-American Iman Jodeh is the first Muslim American to be elected to represent the 41^st district in the Colorado House of Representatives in the 2020 general election, becoming the first Muslim lawmaker in the state’s history.

In a webinar organized by American Muslims for Palestine, Jodeh said, “We need immediate criminal justice reform; I will do it from the lens of a practicing Muslim Palestinian Arab woman of color.”

Derya Taskin, an American politician of Turkish origin, made history after being elected to the Electoral College, becoming the first U.S. politician of Turkish origin to be elected to such a post. Taskin served as the deputy mayor of Paterson in New Jersey.

“I read and learned more about the United States system, I wanted more involvement. I contacted my local party and started passing out fliers and going door to door during the local election. As time passed, I wanted to make more of a difference because I started to help my community who did not speak English to fill out forms and take advantage of certain benefits the state offered. This brought me to the idea that with politics I can do more, but I had to start from the bottom and this is what I did,” Taskin said.