Our guest: Ivanka Popović

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

GLOSSARY

Milošević regime (p. 5 in the transcript, 17:28)

Slobodan Milošević was a central figure in the breakup of Yugoslavia and a key instigator of the ethnic conflicts that plagued the Balkans in the 1990s. Rising through the ranks of the Communist Party, he became Serbia’s president in 1989 and quickly moved to consolidate power by revoking the autonomy of Kosovo and Vojvodina. His leadership fueled a wave of Serbian nationalism and played a major role in the wars in Croatia, Bosnia, and later Kosovo, supporting Serbian forces involved in ethnic violence and atrocities.

Milošević’s regime was marked by authoritarian control, suppression of opposition, and state-controlled media. Though he maintained popular support in the early years by presenting himself as a defender of Serbs, his policies led to international isolation, UN sanctions, and ultimately NATO intervention. In 1999, following a brutal crackdown on ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, NATO launched a bombing campaign against Serbia.

Domestically, economic hardship and political repression led to growing dissatisfaction. After a disputed election in 2000, massive protests forced Milošević to resign. He was arrested in 2001 and extradited to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague, where he faced charges of war crimes, including genocide. He died in 2006 during the trial.source

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social

• Our guest: Soli Özel

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

GLOSSARY

Green New Deal (p. 6 in the transcript, 27:24)

The Green New Deal is a proposed framework of policies designed to combat climate change while simultaneously addressing economic inequality through large-scale public investment in clean energy, sustainable infrastructure, and job creation. The term draws inspiration from President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, which aimed to revive the U.S. economy during the Great Depression through government-led economic programs. The Green New Deal, however, focuses specifically on transitioning to a carbon-neutral economy while ensuring economic opportunities for all, particularly marginalized communities. The most well-known iteration of the Green New Deal in the U.S. was introduced as a non-binding congressional resolution in 2019 by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Edward J. Markey. It outlined broad goals such as achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by investing in renewable energy, modernizing transportation and infrastructure, and ensuring a just transition for workers in fossil fuel industries. It also emphasized social policies, including universal healthcare, affordable housing, and access to clean water and air. Supporters argue that the Green New Deal is essential for preventing catastrophic climate change and fostering economic justice, while critics claim it is financially impractical and would require massive government spending. Despite controversy, the Green New Deal has influenced climate policy discussions worldwide. source

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social

• Our guest: Nacim Pak-Shiraz

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

GLOSSARY

Woman, Life, Freedom (p. 2 in the transcript, 08:00)

Woman, Life, Freedom is a protest slogan that affirms that the rights of women are at the center of life and liberty. The slogan is best known in English-language media for its use within the context of Iran. In September 2022 protesters in Iran and abroad adopted the slogan after Jina Mahsa Amini an Iranian woman in her early 20s, died unexpectedly on September 16, 2022, while in custody of Iran’s Gasht-e Ershad (Guidance Patrol; also called “morality police”) for “improper” clothing. The death of Amini, a 22-year-old Sunni woman from Iran’s minority Kurdish community, was a reflection of the escalating and unrelenting authoritarianism of the Iranian regime at a time of deepening economic instability. While the circumstances surrounding Amini’s death made the slogan resonate throughout Iran and the world, it already had been in wide use among Kurdish activists. The incident sparked outrage in Iran, where anger toward the government had already been flaring, and ignited a sustained and widespread protest movement. The protests over Amini’s death, which reflected a broad and far-reaching set of grievances caused by persistent government negligence, found expression in the slogan. source

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social

• Our guest: @steffenmau.bsky.social

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

GLOSSARY

Traffic light coalition (p. 2 in the transcript, 08:14)

In German politics, a "traffic light coalition" (Ampelkoalition) refers to a governing alliance comprising the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Free Democratic Party (FDP), and Alliance 90/The Greens. The term derives from the parties' traditional colors—red for the SPD, yellow for the FDP, and green for The Greens—which correspond to the sequence of a traffic light. This coalition model was implemented at the federal level following the 2021 German parliamentary elections. The SPD, Greens, and FDP agreed on a coalition contract titled "Daring to make more progress—an alliance for freedom, justice, and sustainability," leading to the formation of the government under Chancellor Olaf Scholz. However, in November 2024, the coalition faced significant challenges. Disagreements over budget policies culminated in Chancellor Scholz dismissing Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the FDP. This decision led to the resignation of all FDP ministers, effectively collapsing the coalition and leaving an SPD-Greens minority government. The "traffic light coalition" concept has also been applied in other political contexts, such as in Austria, to describe similar alliances. source 1 source 2

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @CEU

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @GVAGrad_AHDC

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:

• Central European University: CEU

• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD

• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio

Follow us on social media!

• Central European University: @CEU

• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @GVAGrad_AHDC

Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!

Glossary

Dobbs v. Jackson

(24:03 or p.7 in the transcript)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, legal decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2022 overturned two historic Supreme Court rulings, Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), which had respectively established and affirmed a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Specifically, Roe v. Wade had recognized a constitutional right to obtain an abortion before approximately the end of the second trimester of pregnancy (which the Court understood as the usual point of fetal viability). Caseyhad affirmed the “essential holding” of Roe, which it had described in part as “a recognition of the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State.” As Caseyexplained, a state unduly interferes in the right to pre-viability abortion if its restrictions “impose…an undue burden on a woman’s ability to make this decision” or present “a substantial obstacle to the woman’s effective right to elect the procedure.” Notwithstanding Roe and Casey and other Supreme Court rulings reaffirming a constitutional right to pre-viability abortion, Mississippi, the state appellant in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, claimed that laws banning pre-viability abortion are not necessarily unconstitutional. States may “prohibit elective abortions before viability,” the state argued, “because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion.” Dobbs drew national attention because it overturned nearly 50 years of judicial precedent and effectively enabled states to impose drastic restrictions on the availability of abortion and even to ban it completely. source