One need only open your newspaper or news app to read about countries – societies in formerly strong democratic nations – where the rule of law and democracy itself appear to be faltering.[1] Today, “the most common way for authoritarian regimes to emerge” in Western society “is by eating out democracy from within”.[2]  Advanced democratic countries “no longer end with a bang, but with a whimper”, through “the slow, steady weakening of critical institutions and the gradual erosion of long-standing political norms”.[3]

The threat is not from military coups but unprincipled political parties and leaders in power, who – given enough time – erode democratic norms, values and customs, and hollow out our institutions. The danger is that even if an advanced democracy is not experiencing sharp assaults on their democracy and rule of law, if the underlying economic inequality and socio-economic issues are not addressed, one can expect to witness a continued decline in these values over time – as we have seen in India, Hungary and Poland, and most dramatically in the U.S. over the last four years – leaving democracy and the rule of law less vigorous, and society less stable.[4] 

History shows that public opinion may be easily swayed given the right (or wrong) circumstances, and values and principles that are valued highly today may become objects of attack by hyper-partisan and authoritarian leaning political leaders and their allies[5] – and we are seeing these issues in many countries across Western society,[6] including the U.S.,[7] the UK,[8] certain member countries of the EU (i.e. Poland, Hungary),[9] India,[10] and even to a lesser extent Australia[11] and Canada.[12]

To reverse this decline in our democratic institutions and values, to strengthen democracy and the rule of law, it will be important to identify and address the underlying factors driving this state of affairs.[13]

We are always quick to say: Democracy and values, they are part of our DNA. And that is true. But we must nurture our democracy every day, and defend our institutions. 

– Ursula von der Leyen, President, European Commission[14]

Overview

Authoritarian and nationalist populists like former U.S. president Trump, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán came to power as a response to the perceived failings of traditional democratic governments.[15]  In particular, four key factors: (1) rising economic insecurity and economic (income and wealth) inequality; (2) cultural backlash to perceived threats to national and cultural identity and status (i.e. blaming “Them” for stripping prosperity, job opportunities, and public services from “Us”); (3) an unresponsive government (captured by “big money” influence); and (4) an “epidemic of misinformation”, social instability, and consequential widespread mistrust[16] in societal institutions and leaders around the world.[17]

Today’s populism in Western society is increasingly nationalistic, authoritarian, and anti-democratic, with the flare of xenophobia propelling a narrowing definition of who “the people” are in an “us vs them” paradigm, with “the Other” targeted as an “enemy and existential threat” for a range of economic and social grievances. Preaching hostility toward “outsiders” and “elites”, authoritarian populism is rising because a significant segment of the population – driven by economic and social inequality, cultural backlash (against long-term, ongoing social change), and dispossession – feel threatened, disregarded and left behind by traditional political parties and government.[18] 

Although studies may disagree about the relative importance of populism’s drivers, there is broad consensus that rising inequality, declining bonds to established traditional parties, increasing salience of identity politics, and economic grievance have played a role in fueling populism’s rise.

– Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche[19]

This is particularly exacerbated by the influence of ‘big money’ in politics – sometimes referred to “regulatory capture”, “state capture”, “political capture”, or “policy capture”[20]  – whereby corporations and the financial elite and special interests disrupt the fundamental relationship between a nation’s citizens and their elected officials[21] by shaping government policy in their favour to the detriment of the public interest (i.e. the economy, tax policy, regulatory oversight, appointment of the judiciary, etc).  If in this environment there is policy failure – if traditional political leaders are not able or willing to do what is right,[22] if they are unresponsive or otherwise do not represent the middle- and working-classes[23] (i.e. those economically disadvantaged/‘left-behind’ by technological change, globalization, ‘big money’ influenced policy, etc.) – there is a loss of faith and trust in society’s traditional political and economic institutions and its leaders (unable or unwilling to address the economic conditions).[24]

Stepping into this leadership vacuum (created by an abdication of principled democratic leadership and representative government), authoritarian populist leaders are able to tap into popular resentments and a struggling population’s economic, social and cultural insecurities to “shake things up’ – pointing to scapegoats (the “Other”), misinformation and ‘beliefs of convenience’[25] to pursue their narrow interests.[26] 

Many citizens, their confidence in the future shaken, long instead for an imagined past that insurgent politicians have promised to restore. As popular demand for strong leaders grows, rising political actors are beginning to question key liberal-democratic principles such as the rule of law, freedom of the press, and minority rights. 

– William Galston, Brookings[27]

And democracies and the rule of law will become more fragile if government policy – influenced by “big money” special interests that may be described as a form of plutocracy[28] [29] – continue to beget yet further economic inequality and economic and social insecurity by redistributing money upward.[30] These underlying issues – marinated in an ocean of ‘big money’ – are the fertile ground for the deeply polarized and reactionary form of politics, significant societal unrest and violence,^[31] and the slide we are seeing in formerly strong democratic countries toward “metaphorical winter”:[32]

“All of these developments point to a growing danger that the international order of the past quarter-century – rooted in the principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law – will give way to a world in which individual leaders and nations pursue their own narrow interests without meaningful constraints, and without regard for the shared benefits of global peace, freedom, and prosperity.”

We need to ask ourselves why this is happening and what we can do to stop it. And yes, while authoritarian populism is a concern for democracy and the rule of law, it also important to understand that this phenomenon highlights and brings to the forefront important issues – economic and social inequality, “big money” policy capture, cultural backlash, corruption – that large parts of the population care about, and that are not being democratically addressed by many traditional political parties and their leaders. In many cases traditional political parties have “worked hand in glove” with corporate and economic special interests that have contributed to this state of affairs, however unintended, that must now be addressed.[33]

Scandals involving money in politics have affected countries in every region of the world …. These events fuel distrust in democratic institutions and actors, and undermine the integrity of the political system by making the policy process vulnerable to capture. … [B]ig money provides a disproportionate advantage to a selected few … leaving politics at the mercy of economic interests, such as corporations … wealthy donors … [who] can and do shape the economic and political processes to work for themselves.

– ‘Money, influence, corruption and capture: can democracy be protected?’, The Global State of Democracy[34]

The factors that have led to the decline of our democratic values and rule of law in other parts of the world are at play in much of Western society,[35] particularly in the U.S. and the EU, certainly in the UK, and yes, on a smaller scale even in Australia, Canada and New Zealand.[36]  

Democracy “is like a living, breathing organism. It requires attention and growth to meet the needs of its population. And just as it can be strengthened, it can be corrupted, weakened, and destroyed”. Our society is destined “to repeat this cycle of instability and backsliding if we do not make a bold effort to reimagine our democracy” – we need “to end the dominance of unchecked corporate money in our politics” and government policy, and to address “the structural inequities” in our economy underlying these threats to our society and our democratic institutions.[37]

The questions of populism would have little urgency were it not for the widespread agreement about the shortcomings of the political status quo: about the abyss between the shining ideals of equality and responsive government implied by our talk about democracy and the tarnished reality of life on the ground. The notion that ‘the people’ are being poorly served by politics has vast resonance across the political spectrum, and for good reason.

– The Guardian[38]

Introduction

A robust and resilient democracy depends on a strong, thriving middle- and working-class able to hold government accountable. The “link between income and stable democracies is, at a certain level, intuitive. After all, at the heart of democracy is an economic contract between citizens who consent to pay taxes and a government that, in exchange, safeguards the security and welfare of the nation by providing public goods such as education, health care, infrastructure and national security. In essence, any economic challenge that threatens the middle” and working “class places this contract – and ultimately, democracy – in peril”.[39]

Empirical studies have found that the drivers of authoritarian populism in Western society have interrelated root causes, and economic factors play an important role in increasing the support for authoritarian populists.[40] Not surprisingly, its economic roots are stagnating incomes, precarious employment and unemployment, and rising economic inequality. These economic shocks play a significant role in setting the conditions for a change in people’s attitudes and opinions. Economic inequality[41] and economic and social insecurity leads to fear, a growing trust gap in traditional political leaders, and uncertainty about the future and their role in it. This, not surprisingly, exacerbates social and economic instability in society, with the power to dramatically reshape our democracies[42] and rule of law as the middle- and working-class are left behind to look for answers – for shared but distinct beliefs that can furnish a sense of purpose and continuity – as they struggle with socio-economic distress.[43] 

Economic precarity is matched by social division in Brexit Britain. 

– Nick Pearce, Wired[44]

As trust declines worldwide in the pre-existing political and economic systems – and the consequent economic and social inequality that appears to be “more corrosive with each passing year”[45] – we have seen the rise of populists and authoritarians who champion illiberal democracy. This appeal of authoritarian populism has grown with mounting public discontent with the status quo and lack of voice in the political and economic system, exposing existing fissures within society based on this economic strain and cultural backlash.[46] The just ended “Trump presidency” – who still received an intimidating 74 million votes in his loss to President Biden, the second most presidential votes in history[47] – “the Brexit vote in the UK, and the expansion of right-wing movements around the world (but especially in Europe) have created” what appears to be “a globally permissive environment for authoritarian politics and intolerant, extremist ideologies which pose dilemmas for those supporting the democratic project”,[48] and for years ‘big money’ political influence has been a significant driver of the democratic decline:[49]

“For years, big corporations have been assaulting democracy with big money, drowning out the voices and needs of ordinary [citizens] and fueling much of the anger and cynicism that opened the door to Trump [and Brexit, India’s PM Modi, etc.] in the first place.

Their assault hasn’t been as dramatic as the Trump thugs who stormed the Capitol, and it’s entirely legal – although more damaging over the long term.

A study published a few years ago by two of America’s most respected political scientists, Princeton professor Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page of Northwestern, concluded that the preferences of the average American ‘have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically nonsignificant impact upon public policy’. Instead, lawmakers respond almost exclusively to the moneyed interests – those with the most lobbying prowess and deepest pockets to bankroll campaigns.

The capture of government by big business has infuriated average [citizens] whose paychecks have gone nowhere even as the stock market has soared.”

Are businesses undermining democracy? A Stanford conference explores the many ways that corporate leaders wield power over government.

– Bill Snyder, Stanford Graduate School of Business[50]

The growth of income and wealth inequality – which has contributed to our political and social polarization – has been further exacerbated by the pandemic. Losing jobs, cutting hours and the fear of being fired negatively effects  the economy, and when hundreds of millions of people around the world are struggling while billionaire and the financial elite wealth has increased exponentially – a sign that today’s ‘big money’ influenced capitalism is not working – it lays the conditions for” economic and social upheaval and civil unrest.[51] Too often ‘big money’ appears to call the shots, with politicians across the spectrum frequently guilty of unduly favouring the demands of their ‘big money’ corporate and financially elite donors and supporters – who may also have an impact on future employment after a career in politics – over the needs of their constituents and society.  In fact, the evidence[52] appears overwhelming that politicians generally vote the interests of their donors, not necessarily of society at large[53]:[54]

“Do you begin to see how popular fury might build? … Big business trampling over all who might challenge it. It’s not a recipe for social peace. … If you need a one-line explanation for populism, this is the best there is. … Yet again, vast amounts of public money are being committed, but instead of stagnation we face catastrophe. Nervous commentators reference how the Great Depression of the 1930s fuelled nazism and communism, as [the Global Financial Crisis of] 2008 fuelled populism, and dread what awaits us [from the 2020 Global Pandemic]. … Our future depends not only on the work of scientists but on the efforts of governments to stop democracy turning into a swindle. … If, as seems likely, the government moves from subsidising wages to direct loans to big business, the first question must be what do taxpayers, employees and wider society gain in return.”

The economic argument is straightforward: poor economic performance feeds dissatisfaction with the status quo. It fosters support for populist alternatives when that poor performance occurs on the watch of mainstream parties.  Rising inequality augments the ranks of the left behind, fanning dissatisfaction with economic management.  Declining social mobility and a dearth of alternatives reinforce the sense of hopelessness and exclusion.

– VoxEU[55]

Over the last four decades economic and social inequality increased dramatically as a result of globalization, technological change, and ‘big money’ influenced government policy, as the benefits of growth flowed primarily to the wealthy and well-educated. The middle- and working-class did not do well during this time period, and the threat to their economic status – reflected not just in stagnant or declining incomes and job losses and economic corruption, but in social breakdown as well – contributed to the rise of populist nationalism and authoritarianism in Europe, the United States and elsewhere.

Economic anxiety and distributional struggles generated the base for populism in Western market-based democracies. But it is the messaging and narratives and “blame” fomented by authoritarian populist leaders (and their right-wing media that amplifies fears and grievances and misinformation and extremism on a nonstop loop[56]) that promotes political polarization and provides the inappropriate direction and content to the underlying legitimate grievances. “Overlooking this distinction can obscure the respective roles of economic and cultural factors in driving populist politics”.[57]

These then may be seen as the main drivers of the new nationalism that sent Trump to the White House (and drove the UK to vote to leave the EU) – of being left behind, of invisibility, and something more, namely identity politics. The economic distress and fear for the future of their families may be seen as caused by the economic and traditional political elite (who may appear to act in their own interest), but with political polarization and simplistic narratives may also include minorities, women, the marginalized, and others identified as “less deserving” who populist leaders point to as being not only a threat, but unfairly favoured.[58] And when groups feel threatened, they retreat into tribalism. When groups feel mistreated and disrespected, they close ranks and become more insular, more defensive, more punitive, and more us-versus-them.[59] From this perspective, identity politics may be seen as a zero-sum game, one in which there is a fear of losing out as minority groups are perceived to make gains.[60]

And it is difficult to turn around, because identity politics and political polarization results in many cases to closed minds that are not open to facts and independent thinking.

[B]oth Brexit and Trump were driven by voters who felt uncomfortable with, or even disempowered by, the last 50 years of social and economic change, and who were consequently energized by populist, nationalist campaigns.

– CBC News[61]

A major reason for the resurgence of identity politics is the inequitable effects of globalization and structural inequities (and related economic and social inequality), which for many people in Western society created economic insecurity owing to new technologies and competition from lower-cost workers elsewhere.[62] And identity politics and misinformation that amplifies fears and grievances – boosted on a non-stop loop by social media and partisan television and radio[63] – has created real problems for democracies and the rule of law as the corrosive power of hate speech, disinformation, fake news and incitement to violence has shown it is “a short step from crude conspiracy theories” to the “storming of the” U.S. “Capitol Hill” by former President Trump’ supporters.[64] That is because a politics that reinforces immutable identities leads away from the tolerance and forbearance and compromise that a democracy needs to solve social conflicts and move forward. In arguments about who gets what, people can split the difference and feel content. In arguments about who they are – over religion, race and anti-elitism, for example – compromise can seem like betrayal. When ways of life appear to be at stake the “other side” are not just seen as mistaken, they are represented and seen as dangerous, leading to animosity and gridlock and away from political effort towards real economic and social outcomes and solutions. In some countries majoritarian leaders have exploited this tribal loyalty to undermine the institutions – including the rule of law – supposed to check them[65]:[66]

“Once the other party becomes an enemy rather than an opponent, winning becomes more important than the common good and compromise becomes an anathema. Such situations also promote emotional rather than rational evaluations of policies and evidence. Making matters worse, social scientists consistently find that the most committed partisans, those who are the angriest and have the most negative feelings towards out-groups, are the most politically engaged.

What does all this mean[?] … This will require avoiding the type of “identity politics” that stresses differences and creates a sense of “zero-sum” competition between groups and instead emphasizing common values and interests. … Nothing inspires greater tolerance from the intolerant than an abundance of common and unifying beliefs, practices, rituals, institutions and processes. …

Over the long term of course the goal is repairing democracy and diminishing intolerance and for this promoting cross-cutting cleavages within civil society and political organizations is absolutely necessary. … Scholars have long recognized the necessity of cross-cutting cleavages to healthy democracy. In his classic study, the Social Requisites of Democracy, Seymour Martin Lipset, for example, noted that ‘the available evidence suggests that the chances for stable democracy are enhanced to the extent that groups and individuals have a number of cross-cutting, politically relevant affiliations’. … Promoting cross-cutting cleavages and diminishing social divisions might therefore help productive policymaking actually occur.”

Today’s Republicans … doubling down on a truly radical, elite-benefiting economic agenda while at the same time making increasingly incendiary racial and cultural appeals to their almost entirely white base. Telling a forty-year story, Hacker and Pierson demonstrate that since the early 1980s, when inequality started spiking, extreme tax cutting, union busting, and deregulation have gone hand in hand with extreme race-baiting, outrage stoking, and disinformation. Instead of responding to the real challenges facing voters, the Republican Party offers division and distraction – most prominently, in the racist, nativist bile of the president’s Twitter feed.

– Professors Jacob Hacker (Yale University) and Paul Pierson (University of California, Berkeley), ‘How the Right Rules in an Age of Extreme Inequality’[67] 

Policy choices matter, and the “political economy” is about how “politics affects the economy and the economy affects politics”. [68]  Government policy does not happen in a vacuum.  A country’s economic and political institutions are deeply entwined.[69]  Markets, profits and capital are societal constructs that depend on choices, in particular government policy choices. The economy and our markets are shaped by rules and regulations, which can be designed to favour one group over another. For the last four decades the rules of the economic game have been rewritten by “big money politics”, both globally and nationally, in ways that advantage corporations and the economic elite and disadvantage the middle- and working-class. From this perspective, increasing economic and social inequality can be seen as a matter of choice: a consequence of government policies, laws and regulations heavily influenced by the corporate and economic elite.[70]

There is an opportunity to develop a vision and policy solutions for where a nation or region wants to be in the next ten years (for example), to create a narrative that unites, and to rebuild our institutions and our economy so that it promotes inclusive, equitable growth and financial security for all members of society. But we are at a moment of profound risk: “Increasing divisiveness and inequality, declining belief in capitalism, and accelerating climate emergency — all exacerbated by a global pandemic and its disparate economic impacts — threaten business, democracy, society”, the rule of law, and our” democratic nations. “To address these profound challenges, we have to look at root causes, not symptoms. And we have to look at them holistically, not one by one. If we look closely we can see clearly a deeper, more fundamental problem: an economic system that serves the few, not the many”. Leaders and policymakers need to address solutions that “lead to a more just economy designed to work for everyone and for the long-term”,[71] not just the economic elite:[72]

“Over the past four decades, work has failed to secure stable and adequate incomes for growing numbers of people. This shows up in stagnant wages, erratic incomes, non-existent financial buffers for emergencies, low job security and brutalised working conditions.

But lifting people out of economic precariousness is also greatly in the self-interest of the better off. Groups left behind by economic change are increasingly concluding that those in charge do not care about their predicament — or worse, have rigged the economy for their own benefit against those on the margins. Slowly but surely, that is putting capitalism and democracy in tension with one another.

Since the global financial crisis, this sense of betrayal has fuelled a political backlash against globalisation and the institutions of liberal democracy. Rightwing populism may thrive on this backlash.

The winds are changing. Politicians from Joe Biden to Boris Johnson have mandates to “build back better”; the guardians of economic orthodoxy have jettisoned the view that inequality is the price of growth. Capitalism can be made to secure dignity to all; the alternatives are worse for everyone.”

The … economy increasingly serves only a narrow part of society, and … national politics has failed to put [Western countries] back on track through honest, open, and transparent problem solving. Too many of … elites-among the super-rich, the CEOs, and many of my colleagues in academia-have abandoned a commitment to social responsibility. They chase wealth and power, the rest of society be damned.

– Jeffrey Sachs, ‘The Price of Civilization: Reawakening American Virtue and Prosperity’^[73]

One of democracy’s strengths is that it can bend without breaking, that it can be renewed, that with leadership there are opportunities to start again. So long as elections take place and the results respected, there is always the possibility of kicking the rascals (or rogues) out even in places where governments undermine – or even stack – the vote.[74]

And within this democratic framework society must take this opportunity to rewrite the social contract with capitalism and the political system so it is not undermined by ‘big money’, but rather reflective of its original premise of inclusivity of more people beyond the corporate and financial elite.[75] This is not a ‘nice to have’ but rather an operational and strategic imperative, at the heart of any nation’s – and their citizens – ability to compete and succeed in the long term. Unless systemic skillfully engineered repairs are made to provide greater opportunity for more citizens to achieve growth and financial security, the consequences will be painful both domestically and internationally:[76]

“Change must come from the top, … You will not effect change unless you affect the people who have their hands on the levers of power so that they move them to change things the way you want them to change.  So there need to be powerful forces from the top of the country that proclaim the income/wealth/opportunity gap to be a national emergency and take on the responsibility for re-engineering the system so that it works better.

[N]ational leaders [must] make policies that improve people’s lives.” 

Our country today, and indeed much of the world, is run by and for billionaires [and corporations] actively manipulating the political process. They have the means, power, influence and muscle to get their way.

– Jeffrey Sachs, Professor and Economist, Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs[77]

Unfortunately in these polarized times of “big money politics”, what should happen and what will happen are usually distinct questions. One involves questions of problem-solving and doing what is right for society. The other is an equation in which the variables are the self-interest of the political actors involved. Political spending and lobbying of corporations and financial elite do not just stand in the way of a fair representative political system, it also stands in the way of an economy that works for the middle- and working-class, and the trust required for a functioning democracy and rule of law.

Good policy, good governance, and good decision making, is the cornerstone of democracy, good government and leadership. And it is the job of leaders in government, business and academia to address government policy to fix it. But “we should not sleep comfortably until the underlying” socio-economic “problems are addressed”.[78] For now, “democratic publics want policy changes that give them hope for a better future”.[79] However, if continued to be left unmet, these demands for economic and political reform to address the underlying problems will likely evolve into significant civil unrest and “pressure for regime change”.[80]

What is needed is leadership, to put public purpose first and to solve the economic and social problems that matter to a nation’s people.

In modern history, only the Great Depression was more economically devastating than Covid-19. The aftermath of the Great Depression — relief, recovery, and most of all, reform — may once again be necessary to create a better economy for the future.

– Professor Larry Glickman, Cornell University[81]

A Big Picture Primer

Public leadership is about much more than political power. Effective, equitable public institutions are the product of respect for the rule of law and our democratic institutions, norms and values. The survival of good government and peace (at home and in the world at large[82]), our democratic institutions, and the rule of law depends on the trust[83] of our citizens, and the ethics and professionalism and leadership of those in government and the judiciary – including the upholding of norms by civil servants and the military:[84]

“We have grown too jaded about things like professionalism and institutions, and the idea of men and women who take their duties seriously. But as every major moral tradition teaches, no external constraint can fully substitute for the personal compulsion to do what is right.

It may sound naïve in our untrusting age to hope that people will care about ethics and professional duties. But … It is called civic virtue, and at the end of the day, there is no real alternative.”

Our way of life is fragile, and many of the long-term threats to democracy – socio-economic inequality, disinformation and truth decay and the trust gap, polarized and reactionary forms of politics, political interference by third-party countries, authoritarianism, climate change and inequities in the global economy, and fears about interdependence and globalization – can only be effectively addressed by governments acting not only collaboratively at home, but collectively internationally.[85]

In a world divided by differences of nationality, race, colour, religion, and wealth, it [the rule of law] is one of the greatest unifying factors, perhaps the greatest, the nearest we are likely to approach to a universal secular religion.

– Tom Bingham, ‘The Rule of Law’[86]

(a) State of Democracy

A 2020 Freedom House report found that, for the 14th year in a row, civil liberties and political freedoms had declined across the globe. This decline was reflected in the brutality of autocratic regimes like China, a rollback of democratic freedoms in countries like Hungary, Poland and Turkey where autocracy is on the rise, and eroding guardrails in two of the world’s largest democracies, India[87] and the United States (both ranked as “flawed democracies” by the Economist Intelligence Unit’s annual Democracy Index).[88]

According to the measure of democracy by the Economist Intelligence Unit, 48.4% of the world’s population live in a democracy of some sort. Only 5.7% reside in a full democracy, a decline of 8.9% since 2015 as a result of the U.S. being demoted in the Economist’s ranking from a full democracy to a flawed democracy in 2016. Democratic norms and standards in the U.S. continue to be undermined.

– The Street, January 2020[89]

Democracy and the rule of law is more at risk today in historically democratic countries – read U.S.,[90] India,[91] the UK,[92] and Europe[93] – than is commonly supposed as we see the faltering of democratic values and institutions. And India and the U.S. have not been alone in their drift from the ideals of democracy towards autocracy as “more than half of the world’s established democracies” have deteriorated over the past decade, with functioning of government, freedom of expression, and the rule of law being “the most common areas of decline”[94]: [95]

“Few democracies these days are killed by coups. They die when aspiring autocrats get elected and subvert democracy from inside. The recipes they use are time-tested ones involving similar ingredients in varying combinations: sabotaging or rewriting constitutions in order to gut checks and balances on executive power; sidelining legislative bodies while claiming to be “the voice of the people”; packing courts and government agencies with loyalists while purging experts and civil servants; delegitimizing political opponents and electoral processes; attacking or censoring the free press; tolerating or encouraging violence on the part of supporters; threatening to take legal action against political rivals.

And it’s not just the manipulation of government levers that follows a pattern. … [A] variety of despotism … is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. Among its features are: the fueling of us-versus-them dynamics, playing upon a ‘fear of difference’; the invocation of a nostalgia for a mythic past; a sense of beleaguerment manifesting itself in paranoia; and emotional appeals to aggrieved members of a middle class.

Jason Stanley, a Yale philosophy professor and the author of ‘How Fascism Works’, contends this is why ‘fascism flourishes in moments of great anxiety’. The narrative is put forward ‘that a once-great society has been destroyed by liberalism or feminism or cultural Marxism or whatever, and you make the dominant group feel angry and resentful about the loss of their status and power’. …

Once in power, many would-be autocrats maintain the rituals of democracy — like multiparty elections — but these increasingly become a charade. Earlier this year, Russians voted (overwhelmingly, it was said) to approve constitutional amendments that would allow Vladimir Putin to stay in office until 2036, but the outcome was never in question. …

Since winning a majority in Poland in 2015, the right-wing, populist Law and Justice party has aggressively asserted control over the courts, undermining the checks and balances provided by an independent judiciary. This February … Poland’s President Andrzej Duda signed into law much-criticized legislation giving politicians the power to fine and fire judges whose decisions they consider harmful.

In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has amassed sweeping executive powers that vastly expanded his authority over parliament and the courts, and gave him the ability to appoint a host of top officials with little oversight.

Erdogan — who long complained about a ‘deep state’ — had more than 130,000 civil servants fired or suspended after a failed coup in 2016. More than 80,000 citizens were arrested or imprisoned, and tens of thousands were investigated for insulting the president, which can carry a prison term of up to four years. Meanwhile, Erdogan has run the Turkish economy like a patronage network, enriching allies and cronies.

In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has pushed through more than 1,000 laws hollowing out the independence of the judiciary. At the same time, he has accelerated the culture wars. …

In many countries sliding toward autocracy, governments have cracked down on the free press while encouraging friendly media outlets to spread propaganda and attacks on opponents. … Not only has social media amplified political divisions and polarization, it has been weaponized by [political leaders and parties] to sow division. Outrage gives way to outrage fatigue, which gives way to the sort of cynicism that makes people give up on the political process, which, in turn, helps a dictator retain power. …

Much depends, of course, on how polarized a country already is, how resilient its institutions are, and whether the would-be tyrant is able to co-opt enough high-ranking officials to cripple constitutional checks on executive power.

At the same time, autocratic leaders try to tilt the playing field to ensure their ability to stay in office, using tactics like voter suppression, voter intimidation, gerrymandering and the sowing of division among opponents. …

Attacks on democracy around the world have a snowballing effect, with one autocrat learning techniques from another. Under Trump, the United States no longer provides a model of democracy to emulate; rather, Trump has openly expressed admiration for strongmen like Erdogan, Orban and Kim Jong Un. Meanwhile, Putin’s Russia has worked to undermine liberal democracies in the West, and Xi Jinping’s China has used its growing economic clout to fill the vacuum left by America’s retreat from the world stage.

None of this is good news for democracy.”

The unchecked brutality of autocratic regimes and the ethical decay of democratic powers are combining to make the world increasingly hostile to fresh demands for better governance.

– Freedom House, 2020[96]

In this vein, within the U.S. there is a rising “consensus among comparative politics scholars that the” U.S. Republican Party is currently “one of the most anti-democratic political parties in the developed world. It is one of a handful of once-centrist parties that has, in recent years, taken a turn toward the extreme” (resembling more extreme right-wing parties like Viktor Orbán’s in Hungary and Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s in Turkey “that have actively worked to dismantle democracy in their own countries”).[97]  The U.S. “Republican Party is on a continuum toward the kind of ‘democratic erosion’ visible in” Turkey and Hungary, but also “the most extreme example, Russia under Vladimir Putin. In those nations”, as referenced above, “a party that wins office through a democratic election then seeks to use state power to tilt or completely undermine future elections”.[98] There is evidence to suggest that the moment American conservatives come to any power again – after the recent presidential election of President Biden – they will use it to subvert the workings of legitimate government as they appear to radicalize against democracy.[99]

In countries with weakened institutions like we are now seeing in the U.S., authoritarian leaning political leaders – tapping into social and economic insecurities, political polarization, identity politics, and popular resentments to offer simplistic divisive solutions – are able to pursue their narrow interests without meaningful constraints.[100]  Why? Because the underlying issues that have not been addressed by mainstream political parties in Western democracies are fertile ground for a deeply polarized and reactionary form of politics that can lead to significant societal unrest, and a cycle of violence.^[101] The greatest danger to democracy and the rule of law is a struggling population in search of answers, and authoritarian populists prepared to “shake things up” in the absence of feasible solutions,[102] promote simplistic “us vs them” answers, and discourage an openness to facts and independent thinking. 

The assault on the US Capitol by Donald Trump’s supporters, incited by the president himself, was the predictable outcome of his four-year-long assault on democratic institutions, aided and abetted by so many in the Republican party.

– The Guardian[103]

In this respect, there is broad agreement among experts that former U.S. president “Trump’s most severe abuse of power was his relentless effort to undermine the 2020 election and overturn the legitimate results”.  His “attempts to cling to power reached” authoritarian heights on January 6, 2021, “when he” appeared to incite “a large gathering of supporters in Washington to attack the U.S. Capitol”[104]  and the joint session of Congress then meeting to formally certify President-elect Biden’s 2020 presidential election result.[105]  World leaders across the political spectrum expressed shock that a sitting president[106] – amplified by conservative political allies, right-wing media, and white supremacist groups and militias – would provoke insurrectionist supporters (aiming to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election) to violently storm and breach the seat of American democracy: the U.S. Capitol.[107] However, this danger to democracy and the rule of law in the U.S. (the reactionary end result of economic and social inequality, political and cultural polarization, and identify politics) is also a warning to the rest of the democratic world. The root causes are also present in many other advanced economies across Western society:[108]

“Despite the substantial victory of President-Elect Joseph Biden in the 2020 election, democracy in the US and indeed in the entire democratic world may well be in dire trouble. …

The precedent that Trump is setting for undermining legitimate winners of properly run democratic elections could entice aspiring autocrats around the democratic world to do likewise with the goal of eventually toppling incumbents. The Trump precedent could incite aspiring autocrats worldwide to use and be used by media outlets that promote divisive lies and dangerous conspiracies, falsely asserting widespread fraud and attempting to use what they perceive as sympathetic judges to undermine elections while refusing to concede to the legitimate winner of the elections while encouraging partisan elected officials to ignore constitutional election laws to just declare the losing candidate the winner. Some observers assert this dangerous Trump precedent will eagerly be embraced in fragile democracies, especially in Africa. However, it could easily spread to democratic societies in the western democracies and emerging democracies in other parts of the world. We have already seen variants of the Trump precedent at the heart of the European Union in Hungary dominated by the autocratic government of Viktor Orban. No democratic country is immune from this form of ‘truth decay’. 

 The reality that a US president who still managed to get a third of the electorate to believe the election was stolen without any basis, in fact, may well inspire aspiring autocrats around the world to explore how they can build on and perhaps even improve the Trump ‘truth decay’ precedent.”

Despite the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously dismissing Trump’s challenges to the Presidential election, as noted by the Los Angeles Times, “the biggest danger of Trump’s effort is that he has convinced so many Republicans that the election was rigged, establishing a precedent for future candidates to refuse to accept the outcome of a democratic vote. For the moment” the U.S. itself may “be escaping a full-scale constitutional crisis thanks to” President-elect “Biden’s healthy vote margin, the weakness of Trump’s case”, the “incompetence of his legal team”, and the horror of “a joint session of Congress” being overrun “by a mob attack carried out by Mr. Trump’s supporters on the U.S. Capitol”.[109] However, the world may not be so lucky if the focus is only on a particular political leader’s shortcomings and do not address the main point, the actual cause for the flashpoint to have taken place: the actual underlying economic and social inequality crises that lifted these authoritarian populist leaders onto the global stage.[110]

In the past, the U.S. has demonstrated what Alexis de Tocqueville called an “ability to repair her faults” — and arguably could again under the leadership of political leaders who exemplify in words and actions the ideals of democracy and an inclusive representative government.[111] Democracy advocates “around the world have historically turned to the United States for inspiration and support”,[112] so it is not surprising that the world will continue to watch what happens within the U.S. with concern.

Republicans have set a course of being willing to oppose the results of elections simply because they don’t like them. That is by definition antidemocratic.

– ‘The GOP Abandons Democracy’, The Atlantic[113]

Ultimately, only public opinion as registered through elections can save democratic societies and the rule of law – because authoritarian political leaders and their parties entrench themselves in power over time and selectively narrow the electorate to keep them in power as opposed to acting in the public interest for the common good.

Sustaining the rule of law and our democratic institutions is, at the end of the day, a fundamental societal choice between creating a culture of integrity and lawfulness/justice and inclusive economic opportunity for all citizens, or allowing authoritarian rule and power politics to prevail. Strengthening free and fair elections, an inclusive economy, a representative government, an independent and free press, independent prosecutors and judges, and trust in our institutions and leaders[114] are all critical to supporting democracy, its institutions, and the rule of law.[115]

A Republican senator who voted to convict Donald Trump in his impeachment trial was not sent to Washington to “do the right thing”, the GOP chair of one county in his state has said.

– Independent[116]

We need to build upon old-fashioned notions that facts matter, that leaders must project stability and subscribe to the rule of law and norms of ethical behaviour, that elected politicians act in the public interest (and solve problems that matter to people), that government officials need experience and expertise, that fractured nations and societies must be brought together and governable, and that the world needs a leading nation or nations – such as what it once had with the U.S. – to lead:[117]

“Across the world, democracy is facing challenges and threats on a scale we have not seen for decades. According to the V-Dem Institute’s Democracy Report 2020, this is the first year since 2001 that the majority of the world’s countries are autocracies: 92 countries, home to 54% of the global population. In addition, challenges to democracy are present in a number of the relatively prosperous and stable countries that could lay some claim to having re-invented Athenian democracy for the modern world. When a US President refuses to concede an election and armed demonstrators supporting him have roamed the streets with his tacit blessing, we cannot ignore the alarm bells.

Within Europe too, anti-democratic political forces have gained a level of support that used to be unthinkable. EU Member States are today arguing about the meaning and scope of the application the rule of law. …

We need to act on these challenges urgently. Not only because democracy is a foundational principle of the Union and because democracy is embedded in the norms and standards of the rules-based multilateral order that we cherish. But also because, fundamentally, it is in our strategic interest to do so. The greater the number and strength of democracies in the world, the more allies we will find to strengthen the rules-based and accountable multilateral system that we foster.

In the competition of great powers, Europe’s support for democracy is an important source of our power of attraction. Global polling clearly demonstrates that majorities throughout the world, also in authoritarian countries, support democracy. Democracy is associated with reduced inequality and, consequently, reduced levels of grievance and conflict. It can act both to prevent the emergence of war and conflict and help to reduce the push factors for irregular migration. A system of checks and balances and a solid legal framework attracts external investors and thus future growth by reducing fears over abuses of power or the arbitrary application of the law.”

President Trump’s post-election antics are dangerous. … laying the groundwork for violence and disruption to unfold regularly over the next four years. … Under Trump, the U.S. has become a tinderbox. … Political polarization is dividing us … [and the] COVID-19 pandemic have made Americans anxious and angry. Looming economic uncertainty and widespread unemployment will only fuel existing grievances.

– Colin P. Clarke, senior research fellow, terrorism, insurgency and political violence[118]

The same trends that have destabilized major democracies and pulled them away from their founding principles have also pulled them apart from one another, creating a vacuum on the international stage. Where once democracies might have acted in unison to support positive outcomes to global crises, disparate authoritarian states now frequently step into the breach and attempt to impose their will.[119]

History has shown that the chaotic effects of authoritarian misrule abroad are not confined by national borders, and that authoritarian powers will seek to expand their control by subverting the democratic sovereignty of other states. The same is true in domestic affairs: attacks on the rights of specific groups or individuals in a given country ultimately imperil the liberty of the entire society.[120]

In this environment the world is becoming less stable and secure, and the freedoms and interests of all open societies are endangered. The tide can be reversed, but delay makes the task more difficult and costly. Rather than putting international concerns on hold while they address problems in their own countries, the citizens and genuine public servants of democracies must apply their core principles simultaneously in both domestic and foreign policy, and stand up for fundamental rights wherever they are threatened.[121] These issues have most recently come to a head in Myanmar (formerly Burma):[122]

“Western countries may have reacted in condemnation of the Myanmar military’s coup on Monday but they should have known this day might be coming.

Days after Donald Trump started making unsubstantiated claims of election fraud in early November, Myanmar’s military began doing the same.

The nation’s leader … soared to a thumping re-election, with her party the National League for Democracy winning 83 per cent of available seats in the November 8 election. Shortly afterwards, the military-aligned Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) began making its fraud claims, despite election observers saying the voting was without major irregularities. …

The development is a sad indictment of the world’s decline into authoritarianism and the West’s ineffectual policies to stop it.”

[T]he biggest problem Biden will face in office — and one that will inform or impede his ability to deal with the towering crises of the Covid-19 pandemic and our precarious economic situation: How can a U.S. president govern, let alone solve major problems, if one of our political parties is openly hostile to our entire political system?

– NBC News[123]

(b) Economic Inequality and Middle/Working Class

Unfortunately, looking across the world today can be alarming for democracy and the rule of law as economic inequality[124] – resulting in a two-tiered economy where the 1% have gotten trillions of dollars richer over the last forty years while the bottom 50% have gotten poorer[125] – has led to economic and social instability, and the unintended consequence of dramatically reshaping our democracies[126] as significant segments of society are left behind to struggle with the economic distress.[127] 

As economies struggled and unemployment and precarious employment persisted, the middle and working-class, groups and regions that have been left behind lost confidence in mainstream political parties and established institutions, fueling the populist upsurge that has upended U.S. politics and the rule of law, threatens the European Union, the UK, Australia and Canada, and endangers governance[128]:[129]

“Among middle- [and working-]class households, there is now a growing discontent with economic conditions. In this context, the stagnation of middle-class living standards in OECD countries has been accompanied in recent years by the emergence of new forms of nationalism, isolationism, populism and protectionism. Nationalistic and anti-globalization sentiments can arise because a shrinking middle class produces disillusionment and damages political engagement, or turns voters towards anti-establishment and protectionist policies. Political instability is an important channel through which a squeezed middle class may upset economic investment and growth.

A rising sense of vulnerability, uncertainty, and anxiety has translated into increasing distrust towards global integration and public institutions. … Societies with a strong middle class experience higher levels of social trust but also better educational outcomes, lower crime incidence, better health outcomes and higher life satisfaction.

The middle class champions political stability and good governance. It prevents political polarization and promotes greater compromise within government. Middle classes also provide a solid basis to build a democratic state, not only by financing it through taxes but also demanding regulations, enforcement of contracts and the rule of law. … Therefore, policy options should concentrate on them in priority.”

Inequality hollows out support for democratic institutions that depend, to varying degrees, on the promise of social and economic equality – or at least the genuine equality of opportunity.[130]  The “veracity and very survival of democracy depends on a strong, prosperous middle-class – one that is able to hold government accountable”.[131]

Mature democracies need to pay close attention to the architecture of their political systems. The combination of globalization, the global financial crisis of 2008, and the digital revolution has undermined the economic and cultural security of the middle and working class and made some of democracy’s most important institutions look vulnerable[132] as inequality and its consequent vulnerability fuels authoritarian populism and a deeply polarized and reactionary form of politics unsuited to the complex times in which we live.[133] 

Otherwise, the sharper the inequality experienced by the middle and working-class (the foundation of our societies), the more likely we are to see a particular country move away from democracy and the rule of law. In some Western countries we are clearly seeing an erosion in democracy in that elected representatives no longer represent all people equally. Rather there is greater responsiveness to those with resources (i.e. corporations and the financial elite), especially those contributing to political campaigns. Increasingly those without resources find themselves frozen out. As democracies and the rule of law become more fragile, and government policy – influenced by ‘big money’ special interests – begets further economic inequality (by redistributing money upward), the response is unrest and movement away from the historical political elite unable or unwilling to address the economic conditions.

As a result today, the question of economic and social inequality (i.e. static incomes, precarious jobs, sense of national decline) must be addressed in conjunction with populism and authoritarian leaning political leaders as their corrosive impact on democracy and the rule of law is not going away.

Sarah Chayes writes in her new book, that the United States is showing signs similar to some of the most corrupt countries in the world. Corruption, as Chayes sees it, is an operating system of sophisticated networks in which government officials, key private-sector interests, and out-and-out criminals interweave. Their main objective: not to serve the public but to maximize returns for network members. … Chayes shows how corrupt systems are organized, how they enforce the rules so their crimes are covered legally, how they are overlooked and downplayed … how they become an overt principle determining the shape of our government, affecting all levels of society.

– Sarah Chayes, On Corruption in America: And What Is at Stake[134]

(c) ‘Big Money’ Influence on Political and Economic Institutions & Rise of Authoritarian Populism

Neither democratic norms and values or the rule of law countenance corruption, the selection of winners and losers in the economic marketplace, retaliatory actions against economic or political foes, biased law enforcement or judiciary, undermining the legitimacy of elections, or the threat or actual use of ‘violence’ for political ends[135]:[136]

“[Many] balk at even using the word corruption to describe their own country.  Instead, corrupt practices in the U.S. are widely assumed to be isolated exceptions to a norm of integrity in government.

After a dramatic 2016 election in which corruption became a campaign slogan across the political spectrum, and four tumultuous years of broken ethics norms, is it possible to maintain this is still the case?  Is corruption in the US truly limited to the acts of isolated ‘bad apples’?  Or is it time to recognize that corruption has become the system shaping the American political economy?   

Sarah Chayes … [d]rawing on her years of work in a dozen developing countries and her recent book ‘On Corruption in America – And What is at Stake’ … argue[s] that America is now in the grip of systemic corruption, that networks of wealth-maximizers, weaving across public and private sectors, have rigged the system.”

Rigged economies are funneling wealth to a rich elite who are riding out the pandemic in luxury, while those on the front line of the pandemic … are struggling to pay the bills and put food on the table. …Oxfam’s report shows how the rigged economic system is enabling a super-rich elite to amass wealth in the middle of the worst recession since the Great Depression while billions of people are struggling to make ends meet.  

– Gabriela Bucher, Executive Director, Oxfam[137]

Big money politics stands in the way of an inclusive democratic political system and economy. Corporations and the financial elite invest in politicians and lobby for the purpose of leverage to reshape the rules of engagement in society, in particular reshaping the economy in their favour. Within this paradigm, a “vicious spiral has formed: economic inequality translates into political inequality, which leads to rules that favor the wealthy, which in turn reinforces economic inequality”.[138]  As economic inequality has intensified and the financial elite have pulled away from the rest of society in Western society, “the policies they want – extremely low tax rates on the wealthy at a time of record deficits, rampant underinvestment in our future, special treatment for corporations that are imposing major environmental costs and financial risks on our society – are increasingly at odds with the policies” that countries like the UK, U.S., Canada, Australia and the European Union “desperately need”: in particular, “economic policies that would further the interests of broad majorities of citizens”[139]:[140]

“Middle- [and working-]class [citizens across Western society] are losing their jobs and their economic security [in light of precarious employment], and they believe government isn’t looking out for them. Asked … whom government had helped “a great deal” during the downturn, 53 percent of Americans said banks and financial institutions. Forty-four percent pointed to large corporations. Just 2 percent thought federal policies had helped the middle class a great deal. Reformers need to explain how campaign donations and lobbying are undermining not only a healthy democracy that distributes political influence broadly, but also a healthy economy that distributes economic rewards broadly.”

With the rising support for populist parties, complicated truths are being distorted into simplistic narratives,[141] and across Western society there is uncertainty, anxiety, and division. There are no simple answers, but any solution(s) will require an understanding of populism generally and “authoritarian” populism specifically, as it is apparent that the consequences of the rise of “authoritarian” populism in Western society will continue to play out and they are likely to be profound and consequential.[142] 

The Economist[143] notes that the “Western [intellectuals and academics], snug in [their] echo-chamber, [have] done a dismal job of understanding what is going on, either dismissing populists as cranks or demonising them as racists”, observing that populism “comes in a wide variety of flavours, left-wing as well as right-wing and smiley-faced as well as snarling. But populists are united in pitting the people against the powerful”, generally united in suspicion of traditional institutions, on the grounds that the institutions have been corrupted by the elites and/or their members have been left behind economically by globalization and technological change. However, they differ in many ways that make a populist front across political or national boundaries difficult.[144] 

One cannot read international headlines today without touching on the ups and downs of a volatile global economy (globalization, technology, and trade), the justice system, immigration and demographic changes, domestic terrorism, corporate ‘policy capture’ and tax avoidance, appointment of ‘business friendly’ judges, unemployment and weakened labour unions, or the growing disparity in both income and opportunity.  Not surprisingly, many people have lost trust and confidence in institutions. The International Monetary Fund has noted that too many people in Western societies feel left behind by ‘big money’ political influence, globalization, deregulation, and technological change.[145] The broader perception that many people have been left behind in the era of ‘big money’ politics, automation and globalization is unquestionably rooted in fact: “big slices of society, in big chunks of the developed world, have seen real wages stagnate even as returns rapidly escalated in small pockets. Ultimately this creates both growing inequality in wealth and income and — perhaps more troubling — a sense that gaps in opportunity have widened”[146] and that without political change it is “unlikely prospect that those at the bottom can ever improve their lot”.[147] These issues and others have contributed to the rise of populism, as an increasingly anxious population feel they “don’t have control over their futures”.[148] 

What explains this phenomenon (i.e. strong leader/popular will, nationalism, traditional values, anti-establishment)?[149] There are two leading theories. Perhaps the most widely-held view of mass support for populism is the economic insecurity perspective. This theory emphasizes the consequences of profound changes transforming the workforce and society in post-industrial economies.[150] The cultural backlash perspective suggests that support can be explained as a retro reaction by once-predominant sectors of the population to progressive value change. Throughout advanced industrial society, massive cultural changes have been occurring that seem shocking to those with traditional values.[151]  The drivers likely have interrelated root causes in Western society, with economic factors playing a meaningful role in increasing the support for “authoritarian” populism.[152]

While supporters may hope that populist parties’ policies will bring about greater equality and growth for all, their rise fosters polarization and partisan gridlock, and creates major political, economic, social and business uncertainty.[153]  Geopolitical shifts have made today’s world multipolar. As new national and global players bring different ideas about how to shape national systems and the international order, including business, the existing democratic world order is increasingly perceived as becoming more fragile.^[154] And corporations and the economic elite – by moving work around, optimizing tax footprints, “myopic short-termism”,^[155] influencing government policy and shaping the economy to their benefit, etc. — are seen as a significant part of the problem.^[156]

(d) Political Economy – Key tool for policy lessons to be drawn and solutions to be advanced

Political economy is the integration of political and economic factors in the analysis of modern society.  As the name suggests, political economy is concerned with how political forces influence the economy and economic outcomes. Insofar that it is agreed that politics and economics are intricately and irretrievably interwoven – politics affects the economy and the economy affects politics – it is important to recognize that corporations and the financial elite “are the dominant political” and economic “actors of our time”.[157]

Political economy … has proved itself powerful in understanding governments and societies; it can also be a powerful tool for those interested in changing governments and societies.

– Professor Jeffry Frieden, professor of government, Harvard University[158]

‘Big money’ – including untraceable ‘dark money’ – permeates, polarizes, and undermines the world’s political and government systems,^[159] introducing influential private interests where only the public interest (the common good that benefits society as a whole^[160]) should be considered.^[161] 

Today, many companies are larger economic entities (with potentially greater influence) than the countries in which they operate.[162] Too often ‘big money’ appears to call the shots, with politicians across the spectrum frequently guilty of unduly favouring the demands of their ‘big money’ corporate and financially elite donors over the needs of their constituents, the citizens of their countries. Today the interests of the financial elite dominate the making of national macroeconomic policies, including the ‘capture’ of regulatory and supervisory policy in the financial sector. Some studies have found corporations and the economic elite have obtained as much as a 22,000 % return on their financial investment into politicians and the political system.[163]

In this environment of accelerating economic and social inequality and weak institutional safeguards, a major concern is the unjustifiable and disproportionate influence that these corporate business interests and the ultra-wealthy have on government policy making,^[164] particularly in the United States.^[165] A U.S. Senator has admitted that “career politicians’ ears and wallets are open to the highest bidder”,^[166] and a former Vice President of the United States has stated on the record that “American democracy has been hacked”, that the United States Congress “is now incapable of passing laws without permission from the corporate lobbies and other special interests that control their campaign finances”.^[167] 

Not least, unbridled corporate power has been a factor behind the rise of populism, especially rightwing populism. … There are many arguments to be had over how corporations should change. But the biggest issue by far is how to create good rules of the game on competition, labour, the environment, taxation and so forth. … The challenge is to create good rules of the game, via politics.

– Martin Wolf, ‘The doctrine that has guided economists and businesses for 50 years needs re-evaluation’, Financial Times[168]

Corporate special interest groups that are prepared to invest a lot of money in a particular political issue will often beat the broader national interest^[169]:^[170]

“A society that allows a situation like this to exist is … showing the advanced signs of democratic decay.

Such decay doesn’t just happen in a vacuum: this sort of growing inequality – and it is a worldwide phenomenon in developed countries, including Australia – happens because politicians make choices. And the choices they make are what they are because those making them are more influenced by the rich and powerful than they are by the rank and file.

This in turn happens because the institutions that allow all of us to have a say in policy – everything from political parties to sections of the media – are no longer representative of the broader public but have become captives of powerful special interests.

It is not just a case of direct economic policies lowering taxes on the wealthy and redistributing national wealth upwards – though that happens in spades.

Something more insidious is at work. The very tools we use to assert ourselves as citizens against these special interests are themselves attacked and undermined. In the US, not only does corporate money corrupt the legislative process, but there are concerted efforts to rig the game before anyone actually gets to Congress. This is done by gerrymandering congressional districts and by enforcing voter identification laws aimed at discouraging disadvantaged groups from voting at all.

And let’s not get too smug. Increasingly, Australian [and other] governments are looking to the United States as a source of inspiration. …

So we demonise government, we laud private enterprise unconditionally, we privatise everything in sight, we cut services because we have undermined our tax base with handouts and reduced rates to our richest citizens – corporate and otherwise – and we wonder why we are not happy with the outcomes, why inequality rises and why we increasingly feel powerless.

It isn’t rocket science … When the state retreats and its functions are replaced by private firms, political control shifts from elected officials responsible to the whole community to unelected managers responsible to their boards or shareholders.

Inequality – social, economic and democratic – is part of our more general disenfranchisement from the political process. It is about the exercise of power, who has it and who doesn’t.

It is always and everywhere predicated on a demonization of government, an unending process conducted by think tanks who take their funding from big business, or even media outlets who devote column after column to demonising government investment in everything from the ABC to the NBN. …

[W]e are currently getting the worst of both worlds: a private sector so powerful that it is essentially unaccountable, and a public sector drained of meaning and confidence.

More than a balanced budget, that is the scale we have to fix.”

If the belief takes hold that the political system is stacked, that it’s unfair, individuals will feel released from the obligation of civic virtue. When the social contract is abrogated, when trust between a government and its citizens fails, disillusionment, disengagement, or worse, follow. In the United States, and in many other democracies around the world, mistrust is ascendant.

– Professor Joseph Stiglitz, ‘The Price of Inequality’[171]

For not the first time in geopolitics, “among us today a concentration of private power without equal in history is growing”[172] – and while “low taxes, light-touch regulation, weak unions, and unlimited campaign donations are certainly in the best interest of the plutocrats”, multinational corporations and tech giants, that “doesn’t mean they are the right way to maintain the economic system that created today’s super elite”.[173]

It has been noted that the defining feature of this concentration of private wealth and power “is the effort on the part of holders of this ideology to” influence economic policy in their favour and “defund or de-provision public goods, in order to defang a state that they see as a threat to their prerogatives”. Practically speaking this “takes the form of efforts to lower taxes,[174] which necessitates the cutting of spending on public goods; to reduce regulations that restrict corporate action or that protect workers;[175] and to defund or privatize public institutions, such as schools, healthcare, infrastructure, and social spaces”.[176] The political strategy “is to use austerity in the face of economic shocks to rewrite social contracts on the basis of a much narrower set of mutual social obligations, with the ultimate effect of decollectivizing social risks”[177] – the tax cuts benefitting the wealthy and corporations undermining needed tax revenue and contributing to and providing the deficit based “excuse for across-the-board cuts in domestic programs”.[178] Inequality gets worse, public investments and social programs vital to a country’s future are starved, the financial elite and corporations continue to receive tax cuts, and the fabric of our democratic societies weaken[179] as the middle and working class fall further behind.[180]

Wealth concentration may help explain the lack of redistributive responses to the rise of inequality observed since the 1980s. The interplay between money and power, in other words, may be self-reinforcing: The wealthy use their money to buy political power, and they use some of that power to protect their money.

– Gabriel Zucman, University of California at Berkeley[181]

Even before the pandemic of 2020 a crisis in capitalism was plainly evident. “Crony capitalism” or “capitalist plutocracy” and ‘big money’ politics – influenced by corporations and the economic elite – had pushed income and wealth inequality (and its perception of unfairness) to extremely high levels in Western countries across the world and stunted financial opportunities for a generation[182]:[183]

“Political scientists have documented the ways in which money influences politics in certain political systems, converting higher economic inequality into greater political inequality. Political inequality, in its turn, gives rise to more economic inequality as the rich use their political power to shape the rules of the game in ways that favor them—for instance, by softening antitrust laws and weakening unions. …

An account of how the rules have been shaped must begin with antitrust laws, first enacted 128 years ago in the U.S. to prevent the agglomeration of market power. Their enforcement has weakened—at a time when, if anything, the laws themselves should have been strengthened. Technological changes have concentrated market power in the hands of a few global players ….

In short, entry is hard and risky, which gives established firms with deep war chests enormous power to crush competitors and ultimately raise prices. … The European Commission has imposed fines of billions of dollars on Microsoft and Google and ordered them to stop their anticompetitive practices …. In the U.S., we have done too little to control concentrations of market power, so it is not a surprise that it has increased in many sectors. …

A concerted attack on unions has almost halved the fraction of unionized workers in the [U.S.], to about 11 percent. (In Scandinavia, it is roughly 70 percent.) Weaker unions provide workers less protection against the efforts of firms to drive down wages or worsen working conditions. Moreover, U.S. investment treaties such as the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement—treaties that were sold as a way of preventing foreign countries from discriminating against American firms—also protect investors against a tightening of environmental and health regulations abroad. For instance, they enable corporations to sue nations in private international arbitration panels for passing laws that protect citizens and the environment but threaten the multinational company’s bottom line. …

Many other changes to our norms, laws, rules and regulations have contributed to inequality. Weak corporate governance laws have allowed chief executives in the U.S. to compensate themselves 361 times more than the average worker …. Financial liberalization—the stripping away of regulations designed to prevent the financial sector from imposing harms, such as the 2008 economic crisis, on the rest of society—has enabled the finance industry to grow in size and profitability and has increased its opportunities to exploit everyone else. Banks routinely indulge in practices that are legal but should not be, such as imposing usurious interest rates on borrowers or exorbitant fees on merchants for credit and debit cards and creating securities that are designed to fail. They also frequently do things that are illegal, including market manipulation and insider trading. In all of this, the financial sector has moved money away from ordinary [citizens] to rich bankers and the banks’ shareholders. This redistribution of wealth is an important contributor to … inequality.

Other means of so-called rent extraction—the withdrawal of income from the national pie that is incommensurate with societal contribution—abound. For example, a [U.S.] legal provision enacted in 2003 prohibited the government from negotiating drug prices for Medicare—a gift of some $50 billion a year or more to the pharmaceutical industry. Special favors, such as extractive industries’ obtaining public resources such as oil at below fair-market value or banks’ getting funds from the Federal Reserve at near-zero interest rates (which they relend at high interest rates), also amount to rent extraction. Further exacerbating inequality is favorable tax treatment for the rich. In the U.S., those at the top pay a smaller fraction of their income in taxes than those who are much poorer—a form of largesse that the Trump administration has just worsened with the 2017 tax bill. …

It is no surprise that, on average, people living in unequal societies have less equality of opportunity: those at the bottom never get the education that would enable them to live up to their potential. This fact, in turn, exacerbates inequality while wasting the country’s most valuable resource: [our citizens] themselves.

Morale is lower in unequal societies, especially when inequality is seen as unjust, and the feeling of being used or cheated leads to lower productivity. When … bankers suffering from moral turpitude make a zillion times more than the scientists and inventors who brought us lasers, transistors and an understanding of DNA, it is clear that something is wrong. Then again, the children of the rich come to think of themselves as a class apart, entitled to their good fortune, and accordingly more likely to break the rules necessary for making society function. All of this contributes to a breakdown of trust, with its attendant impact on social cohesion and economic performance. …

The basic perquisites of a middle-class life, including a secure old age, are no longer attainable for m[any citizens]. … It is not just our economy that is at stake; we are risking our democracy. As more of our citizens come to understand why the fruits of economic progress have been so unequally shared, there is a real danger that they will become open to a demagogue blaming the country’s problems on others and making false promises of rectifying ‘a rigged system’. We are already experiencing a foretaste of what might happen. It could get much worse.”

The period from 1945-1980 was the Golden Age of Capitalism, followed by the Age of Market Capitalism from 1980 [and the unhealthy relations between business and government] … the Golden Age delivered better economic performance – dramatically better in terms of its impact on a typical member of society.

– Mark Thomas, The UK stands at a Crossroads[184]

The decline of the middle- and working-class across Western society is as stark as is the point that today even “the children of affluent and working-class parents alike can no longer expect what could be described as middle-class life: home ownership, job security, a decent salary, a gold-standard pension”.[185] The market economy has been transformed over the last two decades to embrace a “gig economy” (whereby companies could wash their hands of people who serve like employees but paid like independent contractors without protection or security), creating a “flexiforce” that has destroyed a core of secure, well-paid occupations in favour of precarious jobs and professions[186] – and “like it or not, many older workers from all educational backgrounds” will “find themselves transitioning to contract and gig work in the years before they leave the labour force entirely”.[187] Many countries have seen their standard of living for middle-income households stagnate or decline, while higher income groups have continued to accumulate income and wealth and the world’s richest 1% own half of the world’s wealth:[188]

“A strong and prosperous middle class is crucial for any successful economy and cohesive society. The middle class sustains consumption, it drives much of the investment in education, health and housing and it plays a key role in supporting social protection systems through its tax contributions. Societies with a strong middle class have lower crime rates, they enjoy higher levels of trust and life satisfaction, as well as greater political stability and good governance.

 However, current findings reveal that the top 10% in the income distribution holds almost half of the total wealth, while the bottom 40% accounts for only 3%. The OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) has also documented that economic insecurity concerns a large group of the population: more than one in three people are economically vulnerable ….  [A] situation that has become economically and politically unsustainable as it undermines public trust in policy and institutions.”

Is the middle class under pressure? Middle incomes have indeed barely grown, in both relative and absolute terms in most OECD countries. … In parallel, the cost of essential parts of the middle-class lifestyle have increased faster than inflation. … This happened in the context of rising job insecurity in fast transforming labour markets. One-in-six current middle-income jobs face high risk of automation. … [T]today the middle class looks increasingly like a boat in rocky waters.

– Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[189]

This growing economic and social inequality – polarizing society into a small elite with highly paid secure jobs on one side, and an increasingly “squeezed” middle- and working-class in precarious lower paid work (economically marginalized without fair opportunities for social mobility) – is largely responsible for the erosion in social trust and faith in our democratic and economic institutions, and contributed to the election of authoritarian political leaders (i.e. Donald Trump, Hungary, Poland, India), the UK’s disastrous Brexit vote,[190] and broad rise of populism across Western society.[191]

Anxious citizens and voters are looking for safety, and this economic anxiety and insecurity not only feeds dissatisfaction with the status quo, it exacerbates identity (cultural) politics and negative attitudes towards cultural diversity, immigration and a cooperative rules-based multilateral order.[192] The empirical research shows that economic unfairness is associated with political discontent, lower support for capitalism and democracy, and support for populism.[193]

Views that our political system is rigged are even stronger than those that our economic system is unfair. The poor, especially, believe that their voice is not being heard… The belief (and the reality) that our political and economic system is unfair weakens both. While the most immediate symptom is disillusionment leading to a lack of participation in the political process, there is always a worry that voters will be attracted to populists and extremists who attack the establishment that has created this unfair system and who make unrealistic promises of change.

– Professor Joseph Stiglitz, ‘The Price of Inequality’[194] 

The problem in large part is the “two megatrends” of “polarization and monetization of politics”.[195]  From a big picture perspective, the answer certainly includes the fact that our 20th-century political and economic institutions are drowning in a 21st-century ocean of corporate ‘big money’[196] and that political polarization and partisan “zero-sum” ideology is disconnected from the wider society.[197] However, it would be unwise to reduce the answer to just this snapshot without also considering the broader perspective: the consequent economic inequality and cultural division, deregulated finance, globalization, autonomous technology,[198] and the changing employment landscape (i.e. job insecurity; underemployment, precarious and non-standard gig work; wage stagnation; polarization of labour market between high earners and everyone else).[199] These are profound changes that are impacting and transforming society in post-industrial economies.[200] Bringing it all together, within this broad canvas there is growing anxiety and uncertainty about the future, and amid the political, economic, and social change many see not only less economic and social opportunity for themselves, but also for their children going forward.[201] This represents real costs to real people.[202]

The economic displacement as a consequence of the economic and political system (that is not inclusive) and digital revolution (that benefits higher-skilled workers over others) have given populist leaders the eco-system to thrive and tread over democratic institutions and values – that appears to be failing many citizens across Western society –  to see their political agendas realized.  Over the last forty years, economic inequality as a result of deliberate business influence and political public policy choices has undermined the economic system and popular public acceptance of capitalism. Not least, unbridled corporate power and political influence has been a significant factor behind the rise of populism, especially right-wing authoritarian populism[203]:[204]

“As Rebecca Henderson notes in “Reimaging Capitalism in a World on Fire,” between 1980 and 2014 the income of the poorest half of the U.S. population grew by only 1 percent, while the income of the top 10 percent expanded by 121 percent, and the income of the top 1 percent more than tripled. Average CEO pay, which averaged 30 times worker compensation in 1978, skyrocketed to 312 times that amount in 2017. Steven Pearlstein, in his 2018 book “Can American Capitalism Survive? ” concludes that if the distribution of U.S. income had remained the same in the decades after 1980 as in prior years, rising wages virtually would have eliminated poverty.

As evaluated by systems analyst John Sherman, unconstrained markets redefine their boundary zones so that important factors are not counted. In a global economy valued through the short-term lens of price and decided through the perspective of shareholder value, resources for preventive public health surveillance, public education, modernized transportation infrastructure and environmental protection are not valued and go unallocated. …

When the Business Roundtable issued its August 2019 statement to redefine the purpose of a corporation, it did not represent a vanguard to promote a more equitable, sustainable society (a more improbable organization to create such a blueprint could not be found). Rather, it produced a de facto concession that defending their corporate perimeters based upon shareholder value was becoming less defensible. …

[A growing body of citizens within society are questioning, or] no longer willing to accept the glaring injustices created by an economic system in which a rising stock market and higher share prices don’t reflect the realities of daily life or provide sufficient opportunities for social mobility.”

The plutocrats have never been richer, and their economic power continues to grow, but the populists, the wilder the better, are taking over. … [I]n America, more money means a more effective political voice: Democratic and Republican politicians are more likely to agree with the views of their wealthier constituents and to listen to them than they are to those lower down the income scale. … People might not mind that if the political economy were delivering for society as a whole.

– Chrystia Freeland[205]

The economic and cultural tensions behind the rise of authoritarian populism and social unrest are key to the policy lessons to be drawn and solutions to be advanced.

And with the right leadership – yes, some things will go back the way they were – but many will not, and from a public policy perspective we should not want them to. There is a requirement for a return to a more equitable and inclusive market economy, with strong meritocratic foundations for our economic and social systems. We have a unique window of opportunity to get recovery right and create a sustainable society if we put good governance, transparency and accountability at the heart of our democratic institutions, and promote ‘stakeholder capitalism’ as the heart of “an economy that serves the interests of all”.[206]

Through a pragmatic rebalancing of power between government, markets, and civil society, we can move toward a freer, fairer, and more productive system. Progressive capitalism means forging a new social contract between voters and elected officials, workers and corporations, the wealthy and financial elite and the middle- and working-class:[207]

[W]ealth creation is often confused with wealth extraction. Individuals and corporations can become rich by relying on market power, price discrimination, and other forms of exploitation. But that does not mean they have made any contribution to the wealth of society.

On the contrary, such behavior often leaves everyone else worse off overall. Economists refer to these wealth snatchers, who seek to grab a larger share of the economic pie than they create, as rent-seekers. The term originated from land rents: those who received them did so not as a result of their own efforts, but simply as a consequence of ownership, often inherited.

Such harmful behavior is especially prevalent in the U.S. economy, where more and more sectors have come to be dominated by just a few firms These mega-corporations have used their market power to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. By charging higher prices, they have effectively lowered consumers’ living standards.

With the help of new technologies, they can — and do — engage in mass discrimination, such that prices are set not by the market (finding the single price that equates demand and supply), but by algorithmic determinations of the maximum each customer is willing to pay.

At the same time, U.S. corporations have used the threat of offshoring to drive down domestic wages. And when that hasn’t sufficed, they have lobbied pliant politicians to weaken workers’ bargaining power further.

These efforts have proved effective: the share of workers who belong to unions has fallen across most advanced economies, but especially in the U.S., and the share of income going to workers has declined precipitously.

While advances in technology and emerging-market growth have certainly played some role in the decline of the middle class, they are of secondary importance to economic policy.

We know this because the same factors have had different effects across countries. … Likewise, where financial deregulation has gone the furthest, so have financial-sector abuses such as market manipulation, predatory lending, and excessive credit-card fees.

Or consider Trump’s obsession with trade agreements. Insofar as U.S. workers have been ill-served by policy makers, it is not because trade negotiators from developing countries outsmarted U.S. negotiators. In fact, the U.S. usually gets almost everything it asks for. The problem is that what it asks for reflects the interests of U.S. corporations, not of ordinary citizens.

And as bad as things are now, they are about to get worse. Consider America’s income inequality. Already, artificial intelligence and robotization are being hailed as the engines of future growth. But under the prevailing policy and regulatory framework, many people will lose their jobs, with little help from government to find new ones. Autonomous vehicles alone will deprive millions of their livelihood.

At the same time, our tech giants are doing what they can to deprive government of the ability to respond, and not just by campaigning for lowering taxes: They are demonstrating the same genius in avoiding taxes and exploiting consumers that they previously showed in developing cutting-edge innovations. …

Still, there is hope in the fact that our economic dysfunction is the result of our own policies. Some countries facing these same global forces have adopted policies that have led to dynamic economies in which ordinary citizens have prospered.

Through progressive-capitalist reforms, we can start to restore economic dynamism and ensure equality and opportunity for all. The top priority should be to curb exploitation and encourage wealth creation, and this can best — or only — be done by people working together, especially through government.

Whatever form wealth-snatching takes — from the abuse of market power and information asymmetries to profiting from environmental degradation — there are specific policies and regulations that could both prevent the worst outcomes and yield far-reaching economic and social benefits. …

For more than four decades after the Great Depression, a strong regulatory framework prevented financial crises, until it came to be seen, in the 1980s, as “stifling” innovation. With the first wave of deregulation came the savings and loan crisis, followed by more deregulation and the dot-com bubble in the 1990s, and then the global financial crisis in 2008. …

So, too, the antitrust regulations implemented to ensure that markets work like they are supposed to — competitively — have been stripped back. By curbing rent-seeking, anticompetitive practices, and other abuses, we would improve efficiency, increase production, and spur more investment. …

Government has a central role to play not just in restraining the private sector from doing what it shouldn’t, but in encouraging it to do what it should. And through collective action — through government — we can do things that we couldn’t do alone and which the market on its own won’t.

Defense is the obvious example, but the large-scale innovations — such as the creation of the internet and the Human Genome Project — are examples of public expenditures that have transformed our lives. Nor will the private sector ever provide many of the universal services [i.e. healthcare, social security, etc.] that are the basis of any decent society.”

Left unaddressed, these crises – together with the pandemic – will deepen and leave democracy even more exposed, less equal, and more fragile. Incremental measures and ad hoc fixes will not suffice to prevent this scenario, and any solution must keep the focus on these long-standing challenges “and the search for greater trust and integrity in institutions across social, economic and political systems”.[208]

[T]he middle class is being hollowed out on both sides of the Atlantic. Reversing this malaise requires that we figure out what went wrong and chart a new course forward, by embracing progressive capitalism, which, while acknowledging the virtues of the market, also recognizes its limitations and ensures that the economy works for the benefit of everyone.

– MarketWatch[209]

Making change can be a slow, painful, process, but we must re-imagine economic systems that actually address national and global challenges, including but not limited to wealth and income inequality, precarious employment, and climate change. The current quagmire of “crony capitalism” and ‘big money’ influence by corporations and the economic elite for special government favors at the expense of society and its citizens – government grants/bailouts, tax breaks and avoidance, ‘race to the bottom’ tax/labour/environmental policies, regulatory and court capture, and other forms of government – is objectionable, corrupting a nation’s market economy and public-serving economic, political and social principles and standards. This has had serious long-term negative consequences for economic inclusion and growth, stakeholder capitalism, public debt, employment, economic inequality, and the wellbeing of middle- and working-class citizens.

The biggest issues for appropriate corporate conduct is the creation of good rules on competition, labour, the environment, taxation and so forth. Bad rules, for example, would include such matters as governments providing billions of dollars in COVID-19 emergency aid to large corporations “without requiring them to save jobs or limit payments to executives and shareholders”.[210]  Free-market capitalism is not working well under the pressures of ‘big money’ political influence, and the Covid-19 crisis has exposed the same fissures and lack of trust for big business and its executives (to steward the economy on its own) in Canada that have caused so much upheaval in Europe and the U.S. over the last decade. The most recent example of extreme “shareholder capitalism” – and the signal it sends at a time when systemic unfairness has become undeniable – played out across the pages of the Financial Post in Canada leading to the Canadian Finance Minister reminding executives and their Boards that “the wage subsidy must be used to pay workers”.[211] Thousands of companies that are part of large corporate groups with deep pockets have tapped into the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy program, including companies owned by some of Canada’s most wealthy families, in particular the Irving, Péladeau and Thomson families[212] (despite the fact that the Thomson family recently reported to have become $8.8 billion richer during the pandemic[213]):[214]

“At least 68 publicly traded Canadian companies have continued to pay out billions of dollars in dividends to their shareholders while receiving government assistance [for COVID-19] in the form of the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy [“CEWS”].

A Financial Post analysis found that the 68 companies received at least $1.03 billion in CEWS, a subsidy introduced by the federal government in April to help companies that had seen significant drops in their revenue cover payroll costs and avoid laying off workers. While they were receiving government assistance over the past two quarters, the very same companies paid out more than $5 billion in dividends [to its shareholders].”

In this respect, what is sometimes referred to as “socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest”, here we are “in the middle of a pandemic that has crushed jobs and small businesses” and “the stock market is soaring”.[215]

A generation of North American executives has been conditioned to adhere to Milton Friedman’s credo that a manager’s job is to ‘make as much money as possible’ for shareholders. … [T]he sight of large, relatively healthy corporations feasting on sustenance meant for weaker employers during a once-in-a-lifetime catastrophe [Covid-19’s Canadian Emergency Wage Subsidy] is emblematic of why Canada’s style of capitalism is in trouble. Change is coming.

– Kevin Carmichael, Financial Post[216]

Solutions

The rules of the game make a big difference,[217] and they are affected by the power of ‘big money’ political influence whereby mainstream political parties become overtaken by corporate capital such that deregulation and tax cuts become the default policy.  Three plus decades of these types of policies and rules have decimated the middle- and working-class (higher inequality, less upward mobility), destabilized a formerly inclusive economy (in most advanced countries failing large swaths of society), and undermined democracy.[218] 

There is no shortage of statistics that illustrate the reality that the benefits of economic growth have been unevenly shared over the last thirty years as a result of the inequitable effects of ‘big money’ political influence of government policy, globalization, technology/automation, structural inequities, and most recently the coronavirus pandemic. Government and political leaders — from all political parties and countries — have not done a good enough job addressing the issue and taking care of those who are being left behind.

The proper response is to rebuild power-sharing institutions, at all levels, so that people feel they have a stake in society. … We have to resist demagogic populism. But at the same time, we have to ask: ‘What is wrong?’

– Professor Michael Lind[219]

Today the big challenge facing political and business leaders and policy makers is to address structural inequalities and rebalance the market economy so that it is again reasonably open and inclusive. Markets by themselves are neither efficient nor stable (i.e. see 2008 global financial crisis).  This then is one of the responsibilities of a representative and democratic government, to ensure markets act like markets – and prevent ‘big money’ from rigging the rules in their favour (i.e. in respect to competition, corporate governance, taxes, conflicts of interest, regulation, appointment of ‘business friendly’ judges, etc.).[220]

And yes, rising economic inequality and precarious employment (an outcome of economic policy)^[221] can be addressed with appropriate public policy,^[222] standards, and progressive tax reform^[223] to ensure middle- and working-class citizens lead secure dignified lives. But, political leaders “have got to listen to the anger of the people. [They] don’t need a lecture, … we cannot act as we did yesterday”.^[224] Whether that anger persists will depend on how the issues are managed and addressed by government.^[225] There must be a direct discussion with citizens aimed at building trust and re-engaging them in their democracy, their country and its values, and the critical issues impacting their lives.[226]

Societies and economies pay a high price when citizens do not have trust in public-sector leaders. Distrust leads to continued political polarization, widespread anxiety about the future, and uncertainty in domestic affairs and international relations. And these symptoms then reinforce the loss of trust, creating a vicious circle:^[227]

“71% of respondents globally considered government officials not credible or only somewhat credible, and 63% of respondents had the same dismal view of CEOs. This should not come as a surprise. Across dozens of countries, people have been airing their grievances against the status quo through social media, protests, consumer choice, and the ballot box.”

Listening to and learning from a nation’s citizens will develop ‘buy-in’ as well as provide invaluable insights that will aid leaders and policymakers to craft appropriate policies to tackle complex and novel challenges. When leaders focus on creating opportunities for people from all walks of life, they can build more cohesive societies and equip more people to contribute productively to the economy. This type of public policy rethink is as much about a social benefit as it is an economic necessity.

‘Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest’ … happens … when government intervention does more to stimulate the financial markets than the real economy. So, America’s richest 10 percent, who own more than 80 percent of U.S. stocks, have seen their wealth more than triple in 30 years, while the bottom 50 percent, relying on their day jobs in real markets to survive, had zero gains. 

– New York Times[228]

There is no single answer or remedy to a problem as deep-rooted as economic inequality: “Its origins are largely political, so it is hard to imagine meaningful change without a concerted effort to take money out of politics—through, for instance, campaign finance reform. Blocking the revolving doors by which regulators and other government officials come from and return to the same industries they regulate and work with is also essential”.[229]

Over and above this, the answer must include appropriate monetary (macroeconomic policy objectives) and fiscal (tax and spending policies) policy, and the entire response necessarily varies from country to country in line with economic and political conditions. Additionally, the policy solutions will likely be “hotly contested” based on history and ‘big money’ self-interest.[230]

To this end, historical analysis suggests that with appropriate leadership – and buy-in from prosocial segments of the financial elite, backed by broad-based social movements – the right set of reforms can successfully turn things back to stable waters. One familiar example from U.S. history is President Franklin Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ (utilized to re-establish economic order after it broke down during the Great Depression of the 1930s).^[231] Economic justice or even-handedness is the idea that the economy will be more successful if it is fairer – that an inclusive economy and representative government go hand-in-hand with a stable democracy.^[232]

For part of the 20th century, the democratic state served as a counterweight to the concentrated power that flowed to concentrated wealth in a capitalist economy. Laws helped workers offset the power of employers, protected small investors from the schemes of bankers and brokers, gave some countervailing power to tenants against landlords, and added consumer safeguards to constrain abuses of manufacturers and retailers. All of this has been thrown into reverse … as private potentates have captured the state.

– Professor Robert Kuttner (Brandeis University’s Heller School) and Professor Katherine Stone (UCLA School of Law)[233]

The challenges are enormous, and the political economy of reform is difficult. But, fortunately, the policy options are not limited to a binary choice between productivity and equity. There are policies that can promote both, and policymakers should consider approaching them through an integrated agenda of reforms.[234]

Through government by design, public-sector leaders can move beyond partisan debates and politicized headlines, and make progress on society’s most pressing problems.^[235] Four basic principles are at its core: implementation of a national strategic plan and use of evidence for decision making; appropriate engagement and empowerment of citizens; thoughtful investments in expertise and skill building; and appropriate collaboration with the private and social sectors (particularly in light of the detriment that otherwise can take place if ‘big money’ influence remains unaddressed).[236] From a big picture perspective, the ideal would be a process of cooperative leadership that brings together national governments, multilateral public agencies, business, civil society and citizens to achieve commonly agreed upon goals:^[237]

“This means understanding competing perspectives, developing empathy and working towards solutions that satisfy as many different interests as possible.

Much of the time, it works. However, it is clear that today things are not going well for this open, pragmatic view of progress. … Interdependence is seen as weakness. Nationalism has been rekindled to forge newer, harder identities. Anti-globalisation rhetoric is threatening the collaborative economic and trading structures …

Even if they have not always responded as effectively as critics might hope, leaders have not ignored the challenges these phenomena pose. Since the 1980s, it has been difficult to ignore the faults in the global system that led to the current crisis. These include the winner-takes-all nature of the economics of globalisation, and the wide and widening inequality that has followed. Much of this is driven by lightning-fast shifts in the geographical and technological bases of prosperity,^[238] producing insecurity and anxiety for workers and managers alike.

All of this is happening beyond the reach of the nation state. Yet just when we need flexible and strong international institutions to manage these shifts, our existing systems for global collaboration are being undermined, partly because they were designed in different times to respond to different pressures.

So what now? Amid a sea of challenges … perhaps most importantly, leaders need to address the pervasive identity crisis that has eroded communities and ways of life over the past two decades, resulting in wave upon wave of legitimate anger.”

To rebuild trust and restore faith in the system, institutions must step outside of their traditional roles and work toward a new, more integrated operating model that puts people — and the addressing of their fears — at the center of everything they do.

– 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer, Global Annual Study^[239]

Boosting income growth and living standards for the middle- and working-class requires a public policy agenda that explicitly aims to halt or reverse the rise in economic inequality across Western society over the last three or so decades. To do this, policies such as cutting top tax rates for the financial elite (corporations and the wealthy) and deregulating industries must be addressed. Why? Because, first, such policies do not appreciably boost growth rates, and second, such policies will continue to send a disproportionate share of income gains to the top 1%: “Income redistribution over the last few decades has been a zero-sum process, with gains at the top essentially coming straight out of the pockets of the bottom 90 percent of” citizens. “This zero sum dynamic means that intelligent policies – including but going way beyond smarter and fairer taxing and spending – can convert these lost potential gains for the bottom and middle into actual income increases without harming overall economic growth”.[240]

And that will require a more effective government (open to facts and independent thinking), which can only happen through leadership and the ability to build trust[241] and a broad-based coalition that includes people who may not always agree on every issue, but willing to come together to build a more inclusive society. This would mean steering the economy towards fairer outcomes, ensuring investments advance shared goals and the public good, and promoting a more equitable and inclusive society and economy.[242]

Contrary to what many in the financial sector would like to think, the problem was not too much state involvement in the economy, but too little. … Now the middle class is being hollowed out on both sides of the Atlantic.

– Professor Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel laureate in economics, Columbia University)[243]

(a) Specific Proposal: Tax reform

In principle, the gains from the market economy and trade can be redistributed to compensate those excluded or marginalized to ensure no identifiable group – the middle and working class – within society is left behind.[244]  Unfortunately, although it is increasingly clear that reducing economic inequalities strengthens not only the social fabric but also the economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, this awareness has not yet been translated into the necessary normative changes. Instead, growing inequalities and overreliance on the capacity of markets to bring about social justice threaten the social contract in many countries,[245] and supports an environment for the rise of authoritarian populists:[246]

“A basic economic principle is that any policy that is good for society as a whole can be made to be good for everyone in society, even if the policy creates winners and losers. It requires only that the winners be taxed just a bit to compensate the losers—and everyone is better off. Economists use powerful tools to clarify which economic policies are best for society. So why should economic policy be controversial?

A basic political economy principle is that the winners don’t like being taxed to compensate losers. And the battle is joined, not over what is best for society but rather over who will be the winners and losers. What is best for the country may not be best for my region, or group, or industry, or class—and so I will fight it.

Even in democracies, plenty of citizens might agree that politics obeys the golden rule: those with the gold make the rules. [‘Big money’ political influence by] [s]pecial-interest groups do seem to play an outsize role around the world, democratic or not. These include wealthy individuals, powerful industries, big banks and corporations.”

[E]conomists, aware of the distributive implications of their models, have long called for such compensation. If successive [political parties and governments] had done a better job at redistributing the gains from trade, could the protectionist backlash have been avoided?

– Professor Dani Rodrik, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University[247]

Tax policies in many western societies over the last four decades have disproportionately benefitted the top one percent to the exclusion of working- and middle-class families.^[248] According to new research by the London School of Economics and King’s College London – which examined tax cuts in 18 OECD countries, including the U.S. and UK, over a 50 year period – major tax reforms reducing taxes for the wealthy have only lead to higher income inequality, with no significant effect or benefit on economic growth or unemployment (i.e. ‘trickle-down’ economics makes inequality worse).^[249]  Thus eroding the middle class and “consolidating power in the hands of the” ultra-wealthy (in particular billionaires) and corporations “who are increasingly using their” financial power “to purchase political influence”.^[250] In this respect: “the greatest danger is that the truly rich are increasingly separated from the lives” of the working- and middle-class “so that they become largely insensitive to the concerns of those who still earn by the hour”. As that has happened we have begun to see increased social and economic upheaval, dislocation, division and the erosion of our democratic institutions as the cost for this insensitivity.[251]

When corporations and wealthy individuals are perceived to “game the system” – and are increasingly seen as out of touch and unaccountable – it is hardly surprising that ordinary people who have been “playing by the rules become so angry that they will put their faith in anyone who promises to shake up the system”.^[252] At the end of the day, lack of trust and growing inequality is not just bad economics, it is bad public policy and governance – as such, many governments will likely step in and deliver public interest legislation, actually addressing the economic and societal problems that technological change and globalization have brought to their front door.[253]  And, as governments are unique actors sitting outside the marketplace, they can set (or reset) the rules when faced with destabilizing economic and social turmoil:[254]

“Individual governments will come from different starting points in facing the economic challenges of the coming decades. But as the custodians of market governance and social policy, many governments may reset their role in the marketplace when faced with economic and social turmoil. If history is a guide, governments will not only discern a need to intervene, their societies will demand it. …

The collision of demographics, automation and inequality will shape a new era. Populations suffering severe economic dislocation could view jarring levels of income and wealth inequality as a form of social failure—a failure to provide the vast majority of the population with the chance to earn a decent living despite the nation’s technological and economic wherewithal. Today’s level of inequality already has prompted growing public concern and debate. It seems reasonable to expect that at significantly higher levels, popular criticism would intensify and increase pressure for social policies to address it. …

History shows that states can move quickly in response to economic crises. … A more interventionist government would affect the business environment in multiple ways.[255] … If wealth and income inequality become increasingly acute, some nations may use wealth or asset taxation as a tool for redistribution. … Governments may also expand entitlement programs, particularly in healthcare and family benefit spending. … Some countries may expand unemployment safety nets designed for short-term transitional unemployment to address the long-term unemployment caused by automation or even provide universal basic income. …

Each country’s approach and philosophy to regulation varies. … Government involvement in the economy is likely to increase in response to rising inequality and market imbalances.” 

When these political action committees give money, they expect something in return other than good government. . . . Poor people don’t make political contributions.

– Former Republican Senate Leader and presidential candidate, Bob Dole[256]

A disaffected and divided society must be looked at closely and carefully – to the “deeper sources” of the issues and concerns and “how governments around the world are likely to respond to them”.[257] As noted by the eminent American jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes, “taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society”.[258] Taxes are an integral part of our society. They pay for the infrastructure we rely on, provide for public services such as health care and education in most western countries, and help to appropriately redistribute wealth to facilitate growth and a stable society. The challenge is to carefully choose not only the level of tax rates but also the tax base.[259] 

Across the range of policy issues facing governments today, tax finds itself playing a central role, whether it is about collecting sufficient resources to fund the infrastructure of a society or acting as a policy lever to reflect attitudes and choices about such diverse areas as competition and monopolies, meritocracy and opportunity, education, healthcare, the social safety net, deficit reduction, emergency services and national security, climate change, and our democracy.[260] 

Current national and international tax laws and their underlying principles are no longer grounded in the reality of today’s economics, digital business models and the global economy, undermining common sense and promoting concern about the social contract and our democratic institutions. The result? Countries across the world compromised in their ability to fund the public goods of modern societies, and their citizens (and future generations) saddled with problems not of their own making: from shaky finances to pinched infrastructure and social safety net to loss of trust in meritocracy, our leaders and our institutions.[261]

The way in which governments raise and spend revenue has a substantial impact on the economic and social development of nations.[262] So, what needs to be done to ensure a sound corporate tax system focused on growing investment and economic growth with a robust personal income tax that ensures everyone contributes to society what is fair?[263]

‘Trickle-down’ tax cuts make the rich richer but are of no value to overall economy, study finds. Data spanning 50 years and 18 countries shows lowering rates for the wealthy increases inequality.

– Washington Post[264]

How should advanced countries and their governments respond to growing income and wealth inequality, and their increasingly fragmented and polarized societies struggling to find consensus in cultivating economic growth and funding the public goods and services required today? For some the answer is obvious: appropriately tax corporations and top income earners who have enjoyed, for almost a generation due to favourable government policy, the lion’s share of all income and wealth gains, and redistribute the revenue.[265]

A progressive and fair tax system for corporations and individuals is central to the capacity of nations to fund their own growth[266] – and higher taxes, raised progressively, would encourage economic growth by helping to pay for long-neglected public investment in our nations’ public goods (including infrastructure, education and research), help put government finances on a stable path, and reduce rising income and wealth inequality that holds back economic growth:[267] 

“The big obstacle to comprehensive tax reform is the persistent … myth that spending cuts alone can achieve economic and budget goals. … Yet it still has adherents … which will make it that much harder for [governments] to grapple with the bigger and more complex issue at the heart of tax reform: how to pay for government in the 21st century.

The main problem is that the current tax code [in many countries, due to tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy,] is incapable of raising the revenue needed to pay for the goods and services of government.” 

The failure to tax corporations and the ultra-rich reasonably and fairly is not only a missed opportunity to reduce inequality and appropriately support society – it actually worsens it, as governments must resort to taxing the rest of society more, or cut spending on health, education, environmental care, infrastructure, and other public services and social protection that benefit society, stimulate growth, and reduce economic inequality.[268]

Since the 1990s, the redistributive effect of taxes and transfers has declined.[269] Until leaders are willing to make the tough decisions required to change the current policies that undermine appropriate tax policy, the ‘race to the bottom’ will continue. Citizens are looking to business and business leaders to act with purpose and to lead, to accept this responsibility and embrace this reality.[270]

In the richest society in human history, nearly half of the population [in the U.S.] lives in poverty or is struggling to make ends meet.

– The Atlantic[271] 

Looking at corporate taxation in particular, the most striking issue in tax policy across the globe has been the inexorable decline in corporate tax rates: “between 1985 and 2018, the global average has fallen by more than half, from 49% to 24%”.[272]  And, the international corporate tax system has not kept pace with the spread of the digital economy and the evolution of today’s multinational enterprises, their operational models, and the complex cross-border arrangements and practices their executive leadership teams and Boards have implemented to avoid taxes across the world. This is particularly true in respect to the giant internet based tech multinationals such as Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Google and their digital business models that now dominate the world economy.[273] 

The future points to “global tax chaos” if this is not addressed, as governments chase dwindling tax revenues as a result of multinational enterprises and tech giants employing and being rewarded for aggressive tax avoidance schemes, questionable international corporate tax practices, and an army of tax avoidance professionals.[274] These multinational enterprises know no borders and are taxed (if at all) at a significantly lower rate than the smaller domestic competitors they are looking to displace.[275] 

Appropriate taxation resulting from a reformed corporation tax system (international and domestic) would support government priorities, such as a level ‘taxation’ playing field for domestic businesses to compete against multinational enterprises/tech giants, finance better public services, balance budget deficits, or perhaps – in the right circumstances – even pay for a reduction in the overall corporation tax rate.[276] 

Setting aside corporate taxation, with respect to individuals the answer for appropriate taxation policy is clear: look to the progressivity of personal income taxes. Since personal taxes are keyed directly to how much income an individual makes, personal taxes are an ideal way to tackle tax fairness:[277]

“One important feature of tax systems is the statutory rate of taxation that applies to the highest bracket of incomes. This measure, usually known as the ‘top marginal rate of taxation’, corresponds to the tax rate that applies to the ‘last dollar’ of income earned by the rich. … A common mistake is to interpret the top marginal tax rate as the effective rate of taxation applied to the rich. This is incorrect, because the top marginal rate applies (as the ‘marginal’ name suggests) only to the last portion of income earned by the rich. …

[T]he … reduction of top marginal income tax rates has been one of the ingredients contributing to lower effective tax rates for the rich.”

Today we are now seeing discussion and debate as to whether the top marginal rate on high incomes for individuals should shift back to what it was thirty plus years ago.[278] Polling has long shown that a majority of citizens in advanced countries believe the wealthiest citizens – and corporations – do not pay enough in taxes:[279]

“Recent polls have found that nearly 60% of voters [in the U.S.] are in favor of [a] 70% marginal rate on the ultra-rich [incomes exceeding $10 million]. (Many have also pointed out that [this] idea is nothing new. The US had a similarly high top tax rate between the 1930s and 1980s, a period of strong economic growth).”

From a policy perspective, the question that merits serious discussion is at what marginal tax rate should the “sweet spot” be implemented for top earners? In Canada the top marginal tax rate for both federal and provincial levies combined is 53.4%.  The rate by itself is not outlandishly high, compared to other countries – it is slightly lower than the top rate in France and Japan, for instance – but it stands out for the extremely low income threshold at which it is applied:[280]

“France, for instance, applies its top tax rate only on incomes that are nearly 15 times the national average wage, which means it applies only to people that would be regarded as seriously wealthy.

In contrast, Ottawa levies its top rate on people who earn only slightly more than four times the average wage [Two-thirds of Canadian tax filers in 2016 fell into the lowest tax bracket, with taxable incomes below $45,282. The top 10 percent of Canadian income earners made more than $93,000 annually.].

This year, the top rate applies to income over $210,371, a threshold that can be reached by many doctors, dentists, small business owners and similar folks who fall short of qualifying as seriously rich. “The threshold is just too low,” Mr. Laurin [director of research at C.D. Howe Institute] says. He argues Ottawa should double the level at which the top rate bites, applying it only to income over $420,742. [note: The current top tax rate in the U.S. peaks at 37 percent on earnings above $510,300 for individuals and $612,350 for couples].[281]

Such an adjustment might ease some the current tensions, but it is unlikely to end the broader argument over how the rich should be taxed or at what rate. Lars Osberg, a professor of economics at Dalhousie University in Halifax, points out that Canada and the United States grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s, with top tax rates that are much higher than now apply. Many of the current pleas for lower taxes are just alarmism, he says. …

Nor do tax rates by themselves say a lot about a country’s overall competitiveness. Prof. Osberg points out that many of the top-ranked countries in the most recent Global Competitiveness Report, compiled by the World Economic Forum, are highly taxed by most measures. Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany all crack the top 10 in the rankings, ahead of Canada, which comes in at No. 12.”

What lessons can we take away from all this? Well, “that facts and details matter just as much as broad policy strokes”.[282]

Beyond that, a number of tax issues should be reviewed, including but not limited to the following:

• Effectively lowering the net tax burden on middle-income households while maintaining the sustainability of public finances. In many Western countries, the income tax system could be made more progressive, in particular for top income earners, and fairer for the middle class.
• Eliminating “bracket creep” – an inflation-induced increase in tax rates which affects middle-class tax payers in particular – could be considered.
• Shifting the tax burden from labour to broader bases, including income from capital and capital gains, property, and inheritance.^[283] More sensible inheritance laws are required that will reduce the intergenerational transmission of advantage and disadvantage.
• Increase efforts to address and penalize aggressive tax avoidance, including questionable tax practices and legal setups that defy economic logic. The tax avoidance industry is on a collision course with civil society if corporations – and the financial elite – are permitted to continue shrinking the tax base and eroding tax revenues (while redistributing the wealth to their shareholders and executive leadership teams).[284] Tax abuse in the form of aggressive tax avoidance deprives civil society of billions of dollars in lost revenues, undermining the social structure of numerous jurisdictions across the world.[285]
• Address and remove appropriate tax exemptions generally benefitting wealthy individuals and corporations.

A fair and appropriate tax system is at the heart of a strong society and the lifeblood of democratic government and the social contract.[286] A well-functioning tax system is the foundation stone of the citizen-state relationship, establishing powerful links based on accountability and responsibility. It is also critical for inclusive growth and for sustainable development, providing governments with the resources – the tax revenue – to invest in public goods such as infrastructure, education, health, emergency services and national security, social protection systems.[287]

The idea of hiking taxes on the richest Americans is having its moment. Leading Democrats in Congress, including some expected to run for president in 2020, are floating proposals. Respected experts on inequality are preaching the gospel of redistributing wealth. Even the country’s most prominent banker, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, endorses the concept. And the public? They’re game, too — and by a wide margin. 

–  CBS News[288]

(b) Big Picture Proposal: vision and policy – near-term policy and longer-run investments

More than two centuries ago, Rousseau’s social contract helped to seed the idea among political leaders that they must serve the public good, lest their own legitimacy be threatened. Indeed, governments and political parties – those with the will, the means, and the inclination – will address innovative ways to meet the needs of the public, by revisiting the social contract that binds citizens and the state. This could mean, for example, rethinking assumptions about the purpose, content, and cost of education – and how it’s provided. It could mean preparing people to compete in a fast-changing economy and providing for their basic needs when they cannot make the leap. It could mean changes in the way governments collect taxes. This type of vision requires that government work with, or clear space for, others to also play a role. It requires open-minded civil discussion and collaboration.^[289]

[T]he kind of change that really matters is going to require action from the federal government. That which creates monopoly power can also destroy it; that which allows money into politics can also take it out; that which has transferred power from labor to capital can transfer it back.

– Matthew Stewart, The Atlantic[290]

There is an opportunity to develop a vision and policy solutions for where a nation or region wants to be in the next ten years (for example), to create a narrative that unites, and to rebuild our institutions and our economy to promote inclusive, equitable growth and financial security for all members of society. It is important to recognize that it is important to have well defined objectives, and with respect to spending the key is the quality not necessarily the quantity.[291]  There needs to be a strategic plan for the long term for all stakeholders to move forward (i.e. an economy that is more innovative, more inclusive, more productive, more competitive, and greener), and a plan to manage the short term.

For this to take place – particularly in today’s fractured world^[292] – it is critical to address the issues of ‘big money’ political influence and polarized echo chambers (i.e. reassessing the role of social media and partisan or ‘captured’ media) to find common ground. Although we live in a complicated world, “human beings wrote the rules of this game, so we decide when and how to change them”.^[293]

We need more public funding for elections to remove some of the pressure on political parties to relentlessly chase the corporate dollar. If we believe in democracy, we need to believe in it enough to invest in it.

– Katharine Murphy, The Guardian[294]

Policy has an essential “role to play in promoting greater equality, both through redistribution, where taxes and benefits moderate the unequal distribution of market income into a more equitable distribution of disposable income” (i.e. universal basic income for example),^[295] and pre-distribution where market forces and rules are engineered to improve the distribution of market income itself”: ^[296]

“Given the alarming trends in inequality, and the tendency for political stalemate over changes in tax and benefits, attention is increasingly focused on policies that support pre-distribution. Some of the most creative ideas seek to reshape the forces of technology and globalization themselves. For instance, policies can be put in place to incentivize research and development on innovations that generate more jobs. Alternatively, governments can deploy public funds to acquire stakes in technological innovations and their commercialization so that the profits they generate can be shared with citizens rather than benefit only a narrow group of shareholders. With regard to globalization, multilateral efforts can eliminate tax inversions, whereby one corporation acquires another to re-domicile to a lower-tax jurisdiction.

More generally, there can be little doubt that focusing almost exclusively on average incomes and their growth has been a disservice to policymaking and to the economics profession. A growth strategy that doesn’t work for all members of an economy is incomplete and unsustainable, no matter how much redistribution there may be. The definition of economic success must therefore include the extent to which growth is inclusive. Inclusiveness cannot be an afterthought.”

Today’s level of inequality already has prompted growing public concerns and debate. It seems reasonable to expect that at significantly higher levels, popular criticism would intensify and increase pressure for social policies to address it.

– Bain Report: Labor 2030 – The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality^[297]

However, the potential solutions, large and small, can only be implemented in societies where government is willing and able to experiment and collaborate, institutions are capable of executing these plans, and citizens believe they share basic values with their fellow citizens (even if it’s limited at this point in time – due to polarization and partisan politics – to a basic respect and allegiance to one’s country and democratic ideals).^[298]

What is needed is government policy which is thoughtful and inclusive, not just assisting individuals to adapt to circumstances and opportunities but which actively shapes those circumstances and opportunities. Governments have an opportunity—perhaps even a mandate, in certain troubled sectors—to play the part of a “systems integrator” that takes a high-level view on an issue and figure out how all stakeholders should work together.[299] This means among other things effective regulation of labour markets, financial markets, housing markets, and reforming corporate governance and tax policy. Big picture, for the purpose of this discussion, there are a number of areas ripe for consideration in creating the right incentives and ensuring the overall system works for everyone:[300]

• The levers of macroeconomic policy (monetary, fiscal, and exchange-rate policy) can be utilized to target genuine full employment and design appropriate and targeted coronavirus pandemic economic relief programs.
• Making investments that markets are not making—in infrastructure, energy efficiency, affordable housing, public health care, early childhood and public education (including affordable access to universities for all), and the social safety net. An overarching commitment to job creation, economic inclusion and equality will only be broadly shared if there are active measures to ensure a large majority of people are positioned to experience rising incomes and better security.
• Strategic investing in infrastructure and renewable energy and industrial competitiveness^[301] will impact economic inequality.Improved roads, bridges, airports, and digital connections (broadband internet) to rural communities will improve productivity and inclusive prosperity for business, workers and citizens alike.^[302] Investment in a sustainable and inclusive clean energy economy and innovative technologies (i.e. science and technology) will create and support high-quality/high-wage green jobs and industries.^[303]  The macroeconomic and job-creation benefits of infrastructure and renewable energy spending and investment can be directed into a country’s transportation, communication, research and development and other facilities that support industrial competitiveness, preparing companies and workers for the hyper-competitive digitally oriented economy, and export-oriented enterprises.^[304]
• Affordable and accessible housing including home ownership is a key element of the middle-class status. Policies need to address shortages in the supply while helping households through demand-side support. Demand-side policy measures first and foremost concern housing allowances or benefits. Additional measures can support lower-middle income households to purchase a home, e.g. through grants, financial assistance for loans or tax relief for home buyers. These policies need to be sufficiently targeted, and avoid measures that benefit high-income home owners more than others. A number of European countries offer first-time buyers, specifically young people, support with the deposit needed to access a mortgage, for instance in the form of state guarantees, interest subsidies or grants and saving schemes. In countries with acute levels of housing-related debt, mortgage relief measures may be needed to help overburdened households get back on track.^[305] 
•  Safety net programs need to be maintained and strengthened. Policies that contain the costs of education, child care, and health care can have a strong impact on middle-income households.
  • (a) In countries with universal health coverage, an expansion or deepening of healthcare cost coverage could provide substantial relief for low- and middle-income households. In those where health coverage is not universal, extending means-tested insurance coverage would help lower middle-income groups better manage their health costs.^[306] All UN Member States have agreed to work on achieving universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030, as part of the Sustainable Development Goals.[307] In a recent poll the UK was asked what historical event in British history makes them feel proud – “believe it or not, the creation of the National Health Service in 1948 came out way ahead as the British people’s proudest moment in their history”.[308] Canadians have called universal health care an important source of collective pride, and there continues to be a widespread willingness to pay higher taxes to improve and expand it.[309]
  •  (b) Publicly subsidized child care provision for those in need and price regulation are the most effective tools to limit the costs of child care for households with small children. Another option is to reimburse parents through a direct refund via cash benefits, or to offer tax credits or deductions.
  • (c) Education and training systems should offer a wider range of learning opportunities at various ages to address unemployment, underemployment and precarious employment in the new economy. Left unaddressed, this issue threatens to create inequalities that will undermine efforts to create a more economic and socially inclusive society. Policies to support students from middle-income families for tertiary education include tuition fee loans but also means-tested assistance for non-tuition costs such as housing, transport or books which are crucial for many children from lower middle-income families. Comprehensive school-to-work transition programmes are needed to prevent negative long-term consequences of early-life unemployment or inactivity. In addition, “upskilling” and retraining workers to work in the new economy is essential, and will require modernizing vocational education and training (VET) systems, notably in the most dynamic and high-paying sectors of the economy (i.e. the International Monetary Fund reports that there will be a shortage of 85 million tech workers by 2030,^[310] and in Canada and the U.S. today there are significant numbers of high-skilled jobs available but unable to be filled[311]). Making VET attractive in the context of rising skill standards requires reforming training curricula, developing post-secondary pathways and engaging more with employers in order to appropriately equip middle-income workers with the skills needed to succeed.^[312] This is a “trillion-dollar opportunity”,[313] particularly as it becomes more apparent that millions of jobs are unlikely to come back after the pandemic ends.
• Policies can be aimed at tackling labour market vulnerability at the root. Financial markets and corporate governance requires better oversight and conditions for a ‘stakeholder economy’.^[314]  The reality is that globalization, automation, structural inequities, and ‘big money’ influenced policies have reduced the bargaining position of individual employees and workers, and corporations have taken advantage of it.^[315] The benefits of the market economy and globalization are distributed unevenly because the current model is built on a fundamental and corrosive asymmetry. One of the things that the Covid-19 pandemic has shown us, “is that companies that have been run under a multi-stakeholder and longer-term model, taking into account environmental, social and governance issues as well as their shareholder base, tend to have done better”.^[316]Over the last forty years the rise of “shareholder capitalism” has reduced the influence of workers in political and economic decision-making and enhanced the “big money” political influence of business and the financial elite to the detriment of society. Government, enlightened business leaders, and engaged citizens can re-balance and realign the social contract to its original intent by implementing long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes. This will entail systematic effort to rewire market and regulatory institutions to ensure that they serve the long-term interests of society and its citizens.^[317] This may include: 
  • Strengthening antitrust regulations and looking for other opportunities to introduce competition to private markets. We need modern competition laws to deal with the problems posed by 21st-century market power and stronger enforcement of the laws we do have. Anti-trust regulation is particularly important in today’s digital ‘winner-take-all’ economy (adversely impacting society and middle class, quashing competition, and exercising monopoly-like powers). Governments and regulators “should take a more holistic approach on how mergers and consolidation impact an array of social and economic factors like employment, wages, consumer privacy and control over their users, and the ability to enter a market as a competitor”.[318] For example, think Amazon and its impact on jobs, wages, working conditions, competition, and communities locally, nationally and across the Western world.[319] This will be a tough sell where global companies such as Amazon are larger economic entities than some of the countries in which they operate (with arguably greater influence on government than their own citizens).[320] The answer may be restoring traditional antitrust and competition policy principles and applying common carrier obligations and duties.[321]
  • Re-regulating many activities of the financial sector to squeeze out the activities that do not enhance productivity or create efficiency but simply enrich well-placed actors within finance. A financial transactions tax is the clearest example of a policy that can stop income skimming. Corporate governance laws that curb exorbitant salaries bestowed on chief executives should be reviewed, as well as stronger financial regulations to prevent financial institutions from engaging in exploitative practices.
  • Addressing labour market vulnerability by strengthening regulations and institutions that help shift an artificial bargaining leverage from capital-owners and corporate managers to middle- and working-class workers (balancing the scales where required). This means embracing a vibrant labour agenda that gives workers and employees some power in the job market, representation in the workplace, and support in the communities in which they reside. This would include labour laws that protect workers and their rights to unionize and bargain collectively, and the enforcement of labour standards such as an appropriate minimum wage (i.e. a “living wage”) and benefits (i.e. paid sick leave, family leave).^[322] In light of the changing world of work, temporary or precarious jobs – often characterised by lower wages and weaker job security – will likely become more widespread as traditional middle- and working-class jobs disappear. As such, policy efforts should be considered in respect to extending collective bargaining coverage and social insurance to non-standard workers to secure middle-income households. One approach for improving social protection coverage is to link entitlements to individuals rather than to jobs. This would make entitlements to, for instance training or employment protection, “portable” as workers move from one precarious job to another or combine different forms of employment.^[323] Better enforcement of antidiscrimination laws should also be reviewed: it is unconscionable that women and minorities are today still largely paid less than their white male counterparts.  High-quality and affordable childcare and universal pre-K (with subsidies that phase out as income rises) should be considered and implemented where lacking.^[324] Appropriate policy is required to strengthen and reform retirement programs, which have put an increasing burden of risk management on workers (who are expected to manage their portfolios to guard simultaneously against the risks of inflation and market collapse) and opened such workers to exploitation by certain segments of the financial sector (that sell them products designed to maximize bank fees rather than retirement security).
• Enacting climate-change mitigation measures should be reviewed and implemented as appropriate. Climate change is disrupting national economies, and the solution requires system-wide action accelerated by leadership and “much stronger policy, finance and exponential technologies”.[325] National leaders around the world will need to articulate a vision for how the global economy will make the transition to zero carbon. The transition to a low-carbon and climate-resilient economy is not only a pathway to manage climate impacts – “playing offence” to reduce emissions and “playing defence” to cope with an altered environment[326] –  but is also a pathway for an inclusive economic transition as it supports economic innovation and opportunity, growth and jobs, and increased competitiveness.[327]
• Rebalancing governance to steer the economy toward fairer outcomes. To this end, policymakers should consider fostering a business environment in which compensation/income, opportunity, wealth, etc. are earned fairly based on strong meritocratic foundations for our economic and social systems – targeting and eliminating economic unfairness such as political favouritism, corruption, or ‘too big to fail’.^[328] Economic remedies to socio-economic inequality and insecurity in this paradigm would be paramount, such that policies may focus on enhancing socio-economic mobility, reducing income disparities, and increasing economic security.^[329] Policymakers can advance this objective by improving coordination (for example, in tax, regulatory, and fiscal policy) and supporting the conditions for a ‘stakeholder economy’ (note: the U.S. Business Roundtable embraced ‘stakeholder capitalism’ that serves all citizens in 2019).^[330]
• Large parts of the media have become a highly balkanized ecosystem no longer tethered to the journalistic standards and code of ethics that underpinned the old models. And the resulting misinformation and hate speech have undermined trust in the critical infrastructure of society. The line between objective journalism and opinion-based “echo chamber” punditry has been blurred, and trust in the news media has dropped to record lows. The spread of disinformation on social media is one part of that story, but so is the rise of alternative and insulated right-wing ideological media outlets, the lack of investment in public media, the demise of local news outlets, and the replacement of shuttered local newspapers with hyper-partisan online outlets. Reassessing the role of media and social-media will be an important element in reducing disinformation and polarization. In addition to public policy supporting independent public media (in the manner of the BBC news in the UK, CBC news in Canada), consideration of a “fairness doctrine” policy should be considered for media and social media platforms in Western society whereby there is a standard to both present controversial issues of public importance but to do so in a manner that is honest, equitable and balanced such that end users are exposed to a diversity of viewpoints.^[331] The United Kingdom does not currently have its own version of the U.S. Fox News, because it has a government regulator that metes out hefty fines to broadcasters that violate minimal standards of impartiality and accuracy. The U.S. has not had such a standard since the Federal Communications Commission stopped enforcing the “fairness” doctrine in the 1980s (which required broadcasters to have balanced coverage).^[332] In addition, online hosts or publishers should not be immunized from risk of liability (of hosting defamatory, threatening, or otherwise unlawful content), but rather enjoy the same legal protections as the independent media, as well as the same legal responsibilities for what they publish or permit to be published on their sites.^[333] Unfortunately, the “combination of monopoly power and deregulation has given rise to monolithic social media empires that have become more powerful than” possibly “nation-states, corporations and societies”. Appropriate and balanced regulation is “essential to protect” freedom of expression, a nation’s “national political conversations as well as their citizen’s” safety and right to be free from expression or speech that takes the form of inciting violence and hatred.[334]
• An important policy step to consider and address is the reduction of ‘big money’ and ‘dark money’ influence in politics. A critical avenue to reduce the disproportionate influence of corporations and the financial elite on public policy is ‘campaign-finance reform’ – to create a system for financing election campaigns “that lives up to the idea of one-person, one-vote” – to level the playing field and ensure citizens are heard and represented.[335] Unfortunately, “where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard” – unless the money comes from the public itself.[336] Money and its potentially corrupting influence – politicians, political parties, and governments beholden to corporate and wealthy donors who spend millions of dollars or otherwise influence the vote through ‘captured’ media, think tanks, etc. –  is at the very heart of complaints about politics in democracies across the world, including such countries as the U.S., the UK, Germany, etc.[337] There are compelling reasons, if not a duty, to take measures designed to guard against the detrimental effects on democracy by corporate and economic elite spending in elections.[338]  The “Holy Grail for many campaign-finance reformers is publicly-funded elections”.[339]  Alternatively, to restore some balance, leading academics have suggested that policy that addresses an “unbundled union, in which political organization is liberated from collective bargaining, constitutes one promising component of a broader attempt to improve representational equality” in Western democracy. Unbundling a union’s political and economic activities – allowing them to serve as political organizing vehicles for low- and middle-income citizens, even those whom a union may not represent for collective bargaining purposes – may provide some balance to the political spending and influence of corporations and the wealthy.[340]
• But where do we start? Currently there may be nothing more important to society, public health, and the economy then a country’s citizens getting vaccinated, thereby setting the stage for a more durable public health and economic recovery.[341]

Apply too little fiscal relief, or delay it too long, and the economic damage from the pandemic will worsen. The recession will last longer and perhaps deepen. Those who live on the bottom branch of what’s being called the K-shaped recovery will sink further into misery.

– Professor Alan Blinder, Wall Street Journal[342] 

Faced with market imbalances and growth-stifling levels of inequality, markets cannot be seen as independently ‘efficient and self-regulating coordinators of value creation’.^[343] Societies must reset the government’s role in the marketplace^[344] to ensure that markets remain competitive and efficient, the rules of the game are inclusive in that economic growth is distributed fairly across society and creates opportunities for all.[345]

The aim has to be the reconciliation of the old and the new social risks; the achievement of an inclusive market economy. The prize is a big one, since although not every individual benefits equally, all benefit from living in a society where every individual enjoys the right to an inclusive economy and society, a basic security and opportunity to live a full life[346] in a representative democracy.

But what has held fast – informing public policymaking … – is the idea of a work-shy, underserving poor. It’s a myth, and one that ignores economic realities. In the past few decades … as wages stagnated for those in the lower end of the income spectrum, jobs have ceased to be a guaranteed route out of poverty.

– Laura Paddison, ‘The Radical Idea of Making Sure Everybody has Enough Money to Live On’[347]

Western governments need to “get our house in order”, we must promote a collaborative coalition of shared values and interests, better manage the market economy, corporate governance, and fiscal policy, and make better investments in the infrastructure, education and healthcare that together will allow our citizens to inclusively compete in the twenty-first century, improve our innovation base, fix our democratic institutions, and more. 

However, it must be recognized that policy reform that impacts entrenched special interests will not likely happen overnight. “Reversing ‘structural inequalities’ is a fundamentally different challenge from reversing economic downturns”, as they “are caused by a lopsided allocation of power. Wealth and power are inseparable – wealth flows from power and power from wealth. That means reversing structural inequalities requires altering the distribution of power”.[348]

[T]he failures of the gig economy — where companies could wash their hands of people who served like employees but were paid like independent contractors — was a lesson learned during the pandemic that we must begin to rectify in 2021. … But we’re a fair distance from a regulatory and tax response that will enable what’s good and prevent what’s bad both for individuals and for the social fabric.

– Shirley Tillotson, CBC News: ‘Economic issues that big thinkers say need the world’s attention in 2021’[349]

Conclusion

Across Western society economic and social inequality has widened, living standards have declined, and the American Dream has continued to free–fall. There was a time the “American (Canadian, UK, EU, Australian) dream” was built on the ideal that hard work leads to success. For many citizens this no longer appears to be the case.

There is a mounting sense that societies’ economic and political institutions serve only those select few with enough money to secure a controlling stake.[350] These issues are enormously destructive – setting the conditions for the rise of authoritarian parties and leaders – and cannot continue to be left unattended.

Societies with a strong middle class … experience higher levels of social trust, lower crime incidence, and higher life satisfaction. The evidence shows that the middle class champions political stability and good governance.

– Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[351]

Citizens of democratic countries have “genuine grievances, which populism has exploited, but too many of those opposed to populism have simply stood for better management of the status quo”. This is not the answer, and business leaders – the wealthy and economic elite across Western society – “must realize that they not only have” an obligation, “but also a commercial stake in advocating for a fairer, more equitable” and more inclusive political and economic “system. Unless and until the core problem of” economic and social “inequality is addressed, all other overarching objectives and desires will remain elusive”[352] in what today is becoming a more polarized, unstable and dangerous world.

Political and corporate leaders have a collective responsibility to do more. This requires thinking beyond narrow or traditional roles, putting aside self-interest and partisan differences, appropriately collaborating, and committing to the pragmatic work of making meaningful change. In many cases leaders know the direction they must take, they simply need the courage and political will to put the public interest first. As noted by the President of the European Commission, “we all know what to do; we just don’t know how to get re-elected after we’ve done it”.^[353]

90% of the citizens of this world are asking to build back better – to not go back to where we came from – but to use this opportunity to create a more inclusive, more sustainable, and more equitable environment for all.

– Paul Polman[354]

Democracy is not a spectator sport, and across the Western world we all have a responsibility as citizens (in our various capacities) to hand over our society, our country – whether that be Canada, the U.S., the UK, Australia, the EU, etc. – to the next generation in better condition than it was handed to us. And for lawyers and the legal profession – as we witness the breakdown in trust and confidence in the rule of law and our democratic institutions – we cannot be content to accept this state of affairs but rather promote the public good.[355]

Unfortunately, across the world we are in danger of falling far short of that goal by giving in to our worst instincts of hyper-partisan and polarized groupthink – closing our minds to facts and independent thinking – and the elevation of self-interest over any concept of common ground and the common good.[356] And in this environment authoritarian political leaders and their right-wing conservative parties across Western society “have grown more ambitious and unashamed. But” the extreme embrace of identity politics and authoritarianism “has also become too garish to miss. And that constitutes a silver lining of sorts” as it is has also been clarifying[357] as the rule of law and our democratic institutions have been threatened, undermined, and in some Western countries, destabilized.

There is now a recognition that we are at an historical moment of crisis.

There is a growing realization that we as a society must address the underlying economic inequality and the major socio-economic issues Western countries are facing, and in doing so build “trust” – the “glue of healthy societies and the grease of economic productivity”.[358]

This will require leaders – guided by facts and independent thinking (with the capacity to define and champion principled positions) – who can build trust, create coalitions, find acceptable compromises for the benefit of society, and actually govern. Leaders who have the ethics and courage to put an end to the capture of government policy by private vested interests that work against the public interest^[359] (and wish to continue to be the economic beneficiaries of such politically-inspired inequality).^[360]

It is a long agenda—but a doable one. When skeptics say it is nice but not affordable, I reply: We cannot afford to not do these things. We are already paying a high price for inequality, but it is just a down payment on what we will have to pay if we do not do something—and quickly. It is not just our economy that is at stake; we are risking our democracy.

– Professor Joseph Stiglitz, (Nobel laureate in economics, Columbia University), Chief Economist at Roosevelt Institute[361]

Governments do in fact have a large set of policy tools available to address these challenges. Targeted reforms are needed in respect to the regulation of labour markets, financial markets, education and training systems, health care, housing, as well as corporate governance and tax policy, etc. A successful strategy will require a whole-of-government approach and the buy-in of all stakeholders including business, civil society and, most importantly, a nation’s citizens.

Civil discourse on the challenges facing society is an important element of democracy, particularly when appropriate solutions require reforming, designing and/or protecting our public systems.  And public engagement across the political spectrum will be an important part of the process that governments must implement to build trust and obtain the social licence to proceed with reforms.

A robust and resilient democracy depends on a strong, thriving middle- and working-class able to hold government accountable. It is not just our economy that is at stake.[362]

Eric Sigurdson

Endnotes:

---

[1] Eric Sigurdson, The Decline of the Rule of Law: Experiencing the Unimaginable in Western Society – the impact of economic and social inequality in the 21^st century, Sigurdson Post, April 26, 2020.

[2] Martin Wolf, The rise of the populist authoritarians: Elites must consider their responsibility for the worldwide resurgence of strongmen, Financial Times, January 22, 2019.

[3] Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die, Penguin Random House, January 2018; Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Wobbly Is Our Democracy?, New York Times, January 27, 2018.

[4] The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017.

[5] See generally, Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, Tim Duggan Books, 2017; Hans Petter Graver, Judges Against Justice: On Judges When the Rule of Law is Under Attack, Springer, 2015.

[6] The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017; William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018; Yascha Mounk, After Trump, Is America Democracy Doomed by Populism?, Council on Foreign Relations, January 14, 2021; Brandon Van Dyck, Why Right Populists Beat Left Populists (in the West), Harvard University, Government and Law Department, 2021 (in progress; scholar.harvard.edu); Yasmeen Serhan, Populism Is Morphing in Insidious Ways, The Atlantic, January 6, 2020;

[7] William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018; Yascha Mounk, After Trump, Is America Democracy Doomed by Populism?, Council on Foreign Relations, January 14, 2021; Brandon Van Dyck, Why Right Populists Beat Left Populists (in the West), Harvard University, Government and Law Department, 2021 (in progress; scholar.harvard.edu); Yasmeen Serhan, Populism Is Morphing in Insidious Ways, The Atlantic, January 6, 2020; Mark Cohen, The All-Out Assault on the Rule of Law, Forbes, February 20, 2017;  Mark Cohen, 2020 Vision: Focus on Defending the Rule of Law, Forbes, January 7, 2020; Jak Allen, Kavanaugh ‘circus’ is a disaster for an independent judiciary, The Conversation, October 4, 2018; Liora Lazarus, Brexit in the Supreme Court: when populists attack the rule of law, everyone loses, The Conversation, September 26, 2019; Jeffrey Meyers, Trump and Johnson are leading the attack against the rule of law, The Conversation, November 12, 2019; Joel Mathis, The rule of law is dead, The Week, February 12, 2020; Ed Pilkington, Roger Stone furore shows ‘crisis of credibility’ in US justice system, experts warn, The Guardian, February 13, 2020; Jonathan Chait, The GOP’s Age of Authoritarianism Has Only Just Begun, New York Magazine, October 31, 2016.

[8] Joe Greenwood and Joe Twyman, Exploring Authoritarian Populism in Britain (chapter 3), In book: Ivor Crewe and David Sanders (editors), Authoritarian Populism and Liberal Democracy, Palgrave Macmillan, 2020; Steve Bloomfield, Is Britain ready for a populist prime minister?, Prospect, May 7, 2019; Jeffrey Meyers, Trump and Johnson are leading the attack against the rule of law, The Conversation, November 12, 2019; David Allen Green, Boris Johnson subverts the rule of law, Financial Times, September 11, 2019; Yascha Mounk, What Boris Johnson Did to the World’s Most Stable Democracy, The Atlantic, August 28, 2019; Boris Johnson takes on the judges: The government wants to restrict the power of the judiciary. It shouldn’t, Economist, February 20, 2020; Laura Hughes, Kate Beioley, and Jane Croft, Questions raised over attorney-general’s independence, Financial Times, February 17, 2020.

[9] Francesca Bignami, EU Law in Populist Times: Crises and Prospects, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020; Europe and right-wing nationalism: A country-by-country guide, BBC News, November 13, 2019; Professors Laurent Pech and Dimitry Kochenov, Strengthening the Rule of Law Within the European Union: Diagnoses, Recommendations, and What to Avoid, Reconnect (Reconciling Europe with its Citizens through Democracy and Rule of Law), June 2019; The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017; Brian Porter-Szucs, Poland’s judicial purge another step toward authoritarian democracy, The Conversation, July 6, 2018; Capturing the Courts: As Poland’s government punishes judges, corruption is rising, The Economist, March 22, 2020; Sharon Thiruchelvam, Protecting the rule of law from populist threats, Raconteur, February 7, 2018.

[10] Narendra Modi threatens to turn India into a one-party state, The Economist, November 28, 2020; Rule of Law under assault in India, say former civil servants, National Herald (nationalheraldindia.com), July 5, 2020; Indian Farmers Lead Historic Strike & Protests Against Narendra Modi, Neoliberalism & Inequality, Democracy Now, December 3, 2020; Brett Wilkins, Indian Farmers Continue Historic Protests After 250 Million People Rise Up Against Modi’s Neoliberal Policies, Common Dreams, December 3, 2020; Chethan Kumar, Democracy is the rule of law, not rule by law, The Times of India, December 23, 2019; Editorial, The Guardian view on Modi’s 100 days: trashing lives and the constitution, The Guardian, September 13, 2019; Esh Gupta, Rule of Law in India, International Journal of Legal Science and Innovation, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 2019; Harish Narasappa, Rule of Law in India: A Quest for Reason, Oxford University Press, 2018; Dexter Filkins, Blood and Soil in Narendra Modi’s India: The Prime Minister’s Hindu-nationalist government has cast two hundred million Muslims as internal enemies, The New Yorker, December 2, 2019;  Rana Ayyub, Narendra Modi Looks the Other Way as New Delhi Burns, Time, February 28, 2020; Shashi Tharoor, India’s Democratic Dictatorship, Project Syndicate, September 13, 2019; Pankaj Mishra, The west’s self-proclaimed custodians of democracy failed to notice it rotting away, The Guardian, September 20, 2019; Yasmeen Serhan, The Trump-Modi Playbook, The Atlantic, February 25, 2020; Trudy Rubin, Trump’s India trip: Leaders of world’s two most important democracies trash rule of law, Philadelphia Inquirer, February 26, 2020; Rana Ayyub, Narendra Modi Looks the Other Way as New Delhi Burns, Time, February 28, 2020.

[11] Bligh Grant, Tod Moore, and Tony Lynch (editors), The Rise of Right-Populism: Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and Australian Politics, Spinger, 2019; Carol Johnson, Is the Morrison government ‘authoritarian populist’ with a punitive bent?, The Conversation, November 3, 2019; Kathy Marks, The rise of populist politics in Australia, BBC News, March 1, 2017; Josh Bornstein, Our politicians show an alarming ignorance of the separation of powers, Guardian, June 16, 2017; Political attacks on the judiciary undermines the independence, integrity and impartiality of Australia’s legal system, Australian Bar Association (austbar.asn.au), January 13, 2018; Act now to bolster government accountability and rule of law, Law Council of Australia, medianet.com.au, January 12, 2019; Paul Gregoire and Ugur Nedim, Dutton Continues to Undermine the Rule of Law, Sydney Criminal Lawyers, January 26, 2018; Morgan Begg, Legal Rights Persistently Undermined by Parliament, Institute of Public Affairs, February 24, 2017; Christopher Knaus, Whistleblower hits out at PM’s department over ‘pervasive and toxic’ disregard for law, Guardian, June 25, 2019.

[12] Kyle Friesen, Reimagining Populism to Reveal Canada’s Right-Wing Populist Zeitgeist, Inquiries Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2021; David Moscrop, Canada’s Conservatives need to take a harder line on the far right, Washington Post, January 28, 2021; Bruce Livesay, The fall of Jason Kenney, National Observer, February 8, 2021 (“embraced a style that veers towards the aggressive, unapologetic and authoritarian, laced with disinformation and picking fights that make little sense”); Leyland Cecco, Justin Trudeau violated law by urging that case be dropped – watchdog, The Guardian, August 14, 2019; Canadian Press, Trudeau breached federal ethics rules in SNC-Lavalin affair: ethics commissioner, Maclean’s, August 14, 2019 (“Trudeau also improperly pushed Wilson-Raybould to consider partisan political interests in the matter, contrary to constitutional principles on prosecutorial independence and the rule of law”.); Mashoka Maimona, Quebec’s Ban on Religious Clothing is Chilling: To Be Like Us, You Must Dress Like Us, Los Angeles Times, June 24, 2019; Mark Cardwell, Quebec bill threatens careers of hijab-wearing lawyers, Canadian Lawyer, May 9, 2019; Canada: New Bill Prohibits Religious Symbols for Public-Sector Workers in Quebec, Global Legal Monitor, Library of Congress (loc.gov), August 6, 2019; Scott Reid, Doug Ford, Donald Trump and the humility crisis in politics, Globe and Mail, September 11, 2018; Enzo Dimatteo, Scandals reveal conflict, corruption and cult personality surrounding Doug Ford, Now, December 5, 2018; James McCarten, Contempt for courts? Critics denounce disdain for rule of law in Ontario, U.S., CTV News, November 23, 2018.

[13] Democracy contains the seeds of its own recovery: A global democratic recession need not go on forever, The Economist, November 26, 2020.

[14] Ursula von der Leyen, Ursuala von der Leyen’s message to Davos Agenda: Full Transcript, World Economic Forum, January 26, 2021.

[15] Democracy contains the seeds of its own recovery: A global democratic recession need not go on forever, The Economist, November 26, 2020.

[16] 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021. Also see, 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report, Edelman.com, 2019; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, 2019; Angel Burria (OECD Secretary-General), 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer, OECD.org, January 30, 2019; Marc Montgomery, International survey indicates trust  in key institutions declining, Radio Canada International, February 25, 2020; The Global State of Democracy: Exploring Democracy’s Resilience, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (idea.int), November 2017; Richard Edelman, A crisis of trust: A warning to both business and government, Economist (theworldin.com), 2016; Uri Friedman, Trust Is Collapsing in America, The Atlantic, January 21, 2018.

[17] Dalibor Rohac, Liz Kennedy and Vikram Singh, Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States, American Progress, May 10, 2018; Israel Butler, It’s Time for Some Answers on Populist Authoritarians, Liberties, December 6, 2018; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, Pelican, 2018; Konstantin Sonin, The Historical Perspective on the Trump Puzzle: A Review of Barry Eichengreen’s ‘The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era’, American Economic Association, 2020 (Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming); Marin Lessenski, Assya Kavrakova, Emily Long, Huw Longton, Lorene Weber, and Marrit Westerweel, Societies outside Metropolises: the role of civil society organisations in facing populism: Study, European Economic and Social Committee, 2019; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020; Tomasz Mickiewicz, What explains support for authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland?, The Conversation, December 18, 2020; Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018; Jasmine Aguilera, An Epidemic of Misinformation. New Report Finds Trust in Social Institutions Diminished Further in 2020, Time, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021.

[18] Thorsten Wojczewski, ‘Enemies of the people’: Populism and the politics of (in)security, European Journal of International Security, Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2020; Tanya Voss, Jo Daugherty Bailey, Jim Ife, and Michaela Kottig, The Threatening Troika of Populism, Nationalism, and Neoliberalism, Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, Vol. 3, 2018; Dalibor Rohac, Liz Kennedy and Vikram Singh, Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States, American Progress, May 10, 2018; Israel Butler, It’s Time for Some Answers on Populist Authoritarians, Liberties, December 6, 2018; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, Pelican, 2018; Konstantin Sonin, The Historical Perspective on the Trump Puzzle: A Review of Barry Eichengreen’s ‘The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era’, American Economic Association, 2020 (Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming); Marin Lessenski, Assya Kavrakova, Emily Long, Huw Longton, Lorene Weber, and Marrit Westerweel, Societies outside Metropolises: the role of civil society organisations in facing populism: Study, European Economic and Social Committee, 2019; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020; Tomasz Mickiewicz, What explains support for authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland?, The Conversation, December 18, 2020; Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018.

[19] Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020.

[20] Preventing Policy Capture: Integrity in Public Decision Making, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, 2017; Anne Mette Kjaer, State Capture, Britannica, 2007; Hernan Cortes Saenz and Deborah Itriago, The Capture Phenomenon: Unmasking Power – Guidelines for the analysis of Public Policy Capture and its effect on Inequality, Oxfam, 2018; Daniel Carpenter and David Moss (editors), Preventing Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit It, Cambridge University Press, 2014. Also see, Duncan Hames, British politics is in the pocket of big money. And the EU vote was no exception, The Guardian, October 7, 2018; Jeanette Rodrigues, Archana Chaudhary, and Hannah Dormido, A Murky Flood of Money Pours Into the World’s Largest Election, Bloomberg, March 16, 2019; Jacob Rowbottom, The U.S. and Britain see corruption very differently. Here’s why, The Washington Post, May 4, 2016; Ben Jacobs and David Smith, ‘Politics are corrupt’: fears about money and its influence on elections loom large, The Guardian, July 8, 2016; Editorial, Money and politics: How to end the corruption and conflict of interest, Globe and Mail, editorial, April 8, 2016 (updated March 24, 2017); Damien Cave, Are Australia’s Politics Too Easy to Corrupt?, New York Times, June 7, 2017; Cataline Perdomo and Catalina Uribe Burcher, The Global State of Democracy 2017: Exploring Democracy’s Resilience (Chapter 5: Money, influence, corruption and capture: can democracy be protected), International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), 2017. Benjamin Page, Jason Seawright, and Matthew Lacombe, What billionaires want: the secret influence of America’s 100 richest – new study reveals how the wealthy engage in ‘stealth politics’; quietly advancing unpopular, inequality-exacerbating, highly conservative policies, Guardian, October 31, 2018. Examples: U.S.: Jane Meyer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, Random House, 2016; Margaret Renkl, The Death of Compassionate Democracy – following the Koch playbook, Tennessee keeps finding new ways to undermine the welfare of its citizens, New York Times, March 18, 2019 (“According to Dr. MacLean, the Koch network’s goal — and the goal of all legislators in thrall to the Kochs’ PACs — is to weaken unions, suppress voter turnout, privatize public education, undercut climate science, roll back existing environmental protections, dismantle the social safety net and, of course, stack the courts with sympathetic judges.”); Nancy MacLean, Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for American, Penguin Books, 2017; Lee Drutman, How Corporate Lobbyists Conquered American Democracy, Atlantic, April 20, 2015; Jacob Hacker and Nathan Loewentheil, How Big Money Corrupts the Economy, Democracy Journal.org, 2013; , Janine Wedel, Dana Archer Dolan, and Nazia Hussain, Political Rigging: A Primer on political capture and influence in the 21^st century, Oxfam America, 2017.  Australia: George Rennie, Lobbying 101: how interest groups influence politicians and the public to get what they want, The Conversation, June 9, 2016; Kate Griffiths, Carmela Chivers, and Danielle Wood, Influence in Australian politics needs an urgent overhaul – here’s how to do it, The Conversation, September 23, 2018; John Warhurst, Australia’s unrestricted political lobbyists, Sydney Morning Herald, October 18, 2017; Christopher Knaus, One in four Australian ministers go on to work for lobbyists or special interests, study finds, The Guardian, September 23, 2018. Canada: Bruce Livesey, Is the Oil Industry Canada’s ‘Deep State’?: From influencing politicians to shaping public opinion, industry strives to control energy policy, The Tyee, May 17, 2018; Evan Annett and Tu Thanh Ha, Political Donations in Canada: a guide to the ‘wild west’ vs the rest, Globe and Mail, March 14, 2017; Robert Benzie, Tories accused of selling access to Doug Ford with $1,250 fundraiser tickets, Toronto Star, February 25, 2019; Chad Skelton, Lobbying: Oil, gas companies are the top B.C. lobbyists, Vancouver Sun, March 21, 2014; Laura Stone and Jill Mahoney, MPP Randy Hillier says he was expelled from PC caucus after raising concerns about unregistered lobbying, Globe and Mail, March 18, 2019. EU: David Thunder, Populism not going away any time soon: Neither populists nor their critics grasp the depth of crisis in western democracy, Irish Times, January 23, 2019; Harry Cooper, Ginger Hervey, Etienne Bauvir and Ioannis Antypas, Big East – West skew in record EU lobbying bonanza, Politico, December 13, 2017; Lobby Planet: The Corporate Europe Observatory guide to the murky world of corporate EU lobbying, Vol. 3, Corporate Europe Observatory, June 2017; Captured States: when EU governments are a channel for corporate interests, Corporate Europe Observatory, February 2019. UK: George Monbiot, Dark money is pushing democracy in the UK over the edge, Guardian, May 17, 2017; Carole Cadwalladr, The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked, Observer, May 7, 2017; Working for the Few: political capture and economic inequality, Oxfam.org, 2014. OECD: Lobbyists, Governments and Public Trust: Implementing the OECD principles for transparency and integrity in lobbying, OECD, 2014.

[21] Democracy contains the seeds of its own recovery: A global democratic recession need not go on forever, The Economist, November 26, 2020.

[22] Edelman Trust Barometer 2021, Edelman.com; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021.

[23] Sophie Hardach, Here are 3 facts you need to know about inequality and populism, World Economic Forum, April 30, 2018; Thomas Piketty, Brahmin Left vs Merchant Right: Rising Inequality & the Changing Structure of Political Conflict (evidence from France, Britain and the US, 1948-2017), World Inequality Database, Working Paper 2018/7, March 2018. Also see, Dipti Jain, ‘Brahmin Left’ vs ‘Merchant Right’ – the emergence of West’s new political conflict, Live Mint, September 12, 2018; Thomas Edsall, Why Is It So Hard for Democracy to Deal with Inequality?, New York Times, February 15, 2018.

[24] Karl Aiginger, Populism: Roots, consequences, and counter strategy, Vox EU, April 20, 2019; Karl Aiginger, Populism: Root Causes, Power Grabbing and Counter Strategy, Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Vol. 55, No. 1, 2020. Also see, Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, Pelican, 2018; Konstantin Sonin, The Historical Perspective on the Trump Puzzle: A Review of Barry Eichengreen’s ‘The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era’, American Economic Association, 2020 (Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming); Marin Lessenski, Assya Kavrakova, Emily Long, Huw Longton, Lorene Weber, and Marrit Westerweel, Societies outside Metropolises: the role of civil society organisations in facing populism: Study, European Economic and Social Committee, 2019; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020; Dalibor Rohac, Liz Kennedy and Vikram Singh, Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States, American Progress, May 10, 2018; Israel Butler, It’s Time for Some Answers on Populist Authoritarians, Liberties, December 6, 2018; Tomasz Mickiewicz, What explains support for authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland?, The Conversation, December 18, 2020; Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018.

[25] Linda Fisher Thornton, Unethical Leadership: Beliefs of Convenience, Leading in Context, January 20, 2021; Jennifer Kavanagh and Michael Rich, Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life, Rand Corporation, 2018; Judit Bayer, etal, Disinformation and propaganda – impact on the functioning of the rule of law in the EU and its Member States, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament, February 2019; Michiko Kakutani, The Death of Truth, William Collins, 2018; Jasmine Aguilera, An Epidemic of Misinformation. New Report Finds Trust in Social Institutions Diminished Further in 2020, Time, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021.

[26] Yascha Mounk, How populist uprisings could bring down liberal democracy, The Guardian, March 4, 2018; What History Teaches Us About Demagogues Like the Donald, Time, June 20, 2016; Ngaire Woods, Populism is spreading. This is what’s driving it, World Economic Forum, December 9, 2016; David Thunder, Populism not going away any time soon: Neither populists nor their critics grasp the depth of crisis in western democracy, Irish Times, January 23, 2019.  Also see Yascha Mounk, The People vs. Democracy: Why our freedom is in danger & how to save it, Harvard University Press, 2018; Oren Levin-Waldman, How Inequality Undermines Democracy, E-International Relations (e-ir.info), December 10, 2016; Branko Milanovic, The higher the inequality, the more likely we are to move away from democracy, The Guardian, May 2, 2017; Oscar Vilhena Vierira, Inequality and the subversion of the Rule of Law, International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 4, No. 6, 2007; Laurie Goering, Growing wealth inequality ‘dangerous’ threat to democracy: experts, Reuters, April 15, 2016; Jonathan Aldred, ‘Socialism for the rich’: the evils of bad economics, Guardian, June 6, 2019; Jesse Singal, How Wealthy People Use the Government to Enrich Themselves, New York Magazine, December 28, 2017; Brink Lindsey and Steven Teles, The Captured Economy: How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality, Oxford University Press, 2017; Nicola Lacey, Populism and the Rule of Law, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 15, 2019; Alan Brudner, Populist and Liberal Democracy, Faulty Blog: University of Toronto, Faculty of Law (law.utoronto.ca), July 16, 2018. Also see: Michael Hobbes, The Golden Age of White Collar Crime: Elite lawbreaking is out of control, Huffington Post, February 10, 2020. Also see, Jeff Reiman and Paul Leighton, The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Ideology, Class, and Criminal Justice (11^th Edition), Routledge, 2017; As inequality grows, so does the political influence of the rich – concentrated wealth leads to concentrated power, The Economist, July 21, 2018; Alicia Bannon, How Secretive Money Is Influencing the Judicial System, Brennan Center, December 14, 2017; Anthony Grasso, Punishment and Privilege: The Politics of Class, Crime, and Corporations in America, Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations, University of Pennsylvania, 2018; Matt Taibbi, The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap, Spiegel & Grau, 2014; Brandon Garrett, Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations, Harvard University Press, 2016; Glenn Greenwald, With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful, Metropolitan Books, 2011; Nick Cohen, In Britain now, the richer you are, the better your chance for justice, Guardian, April 21, 2018; Kirk Makin, Access to justice becoming a privilege of the rich, judge warns, Globe and Mail, February 10, 2011 (updated April 29, 2018); Even It Up: Time to end extreme inequality, Oxfam, 2014; Michael Tonry (editor), Prosecutors and Politics: A Comparative Perspective, Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 41, No. 1, University of Chicago Press, 2012.

[27] William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018.

[28] John Cassidy, Is America an Oligarchy? New Yorker, April 18, 2014; Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens, Perspectives on Politics, Volume 12, No. 3, September 2014; Martin Gilens, Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America, Princeton University Press, 2014; Zachary Davies Boren, Major Study Finds the US is an Oligarchy, Business Insider, April 16, 2014; Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy, BBC.com, April 17, 2014; Tom McKay, Princeton Study Discovers What Our Politicians Really Think About US – And It’s Shocking, Mic.com, May 9, 2015; Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, Critics argued with our analysis of U.S. political inequality. Here are 5 ways they’re wrong, Washington Post, May 23, 2016; Professor Robert Finbow (Dalhousie University), Rethinking State Theories for the ‘Deconsolidation of Democracy’: The Rise of Pluralist Plutocracies?, Canadian Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada, June 1, 2017; David Thunder, Populism not going away any time soon: Neither populists nor their critics grasp the depth of crisis in western democracy, Irish Times, January 23, 2019.

[29] Plutocracy: A form of society defined as being ruled or controlled by a function of wealth or higher income. Government by the wealthy. A country or society governed by the wealthy. As opposed to, Oligarchy: A form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people. A small group of people having control of a country. A country governed by an oligarchy. A government by oligarchy.

[30] Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press, 2014; Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality, Harvard University Press, 2015.

[31] Max Fisher and Amanda Taub, ‘Overrun’, ‘Outbred’, ‘Replaced’: Why Ethnic Majorities Lash Out Over False Fears, New York Times, April 30, 2019; Marie-Danielle Smith, Appetite for populism on the decline in Canada – except among politicians: report, National Post, May 7, 2019; Jennifer Lynn McCoy, Extreme political polarization weakens democracy – can the US avoid that fate?, The Conversation, October 31, 2018; Daniel C. Préfontaine and Joanne Lee, The Rule of Law and the Independence of the Judiciary, World Conference on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Montreal, Canada, December 7-9, 1998; Eric Sigurdson, Global Populism: Corporate Strategy, Engagement & Leadership in 2017 – ‘the year of living dangerously’, Sigurdson Post, January 18, 2017; Eric Sigurdson, A Toxic Brew: The Polarization of the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, The Decline of the Rule of Law: Experiencing the Unimaginable in Western Society – the impact of economic and social inequality in the 21^st century, Sigurdson Post, April 26, 2020. Also see, Grace Kay, A majority of Americans surveyed believe the US is in the midst of a ‘cold’ civil war, Business Insider, January 13, 2021.

[32] Arch Puddington and Tyler Roylance, Freedom in the World 2017: Populists and Autocrats: The Dual Threat to Global Democracy, Freedom House, 2018. Also see, The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017.

[33] Cas Mudde, The problem with populism, Guardian, February 17, 2015.

[34] Cataline Perdomo and Catalina Uribe Burcher, The Global State of Democracy 2017: Exploring Democracy’s Resilience (Chapter 5: Money, influence, corruption and capture: can democracy be protected), International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), 2017.

[35] The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017.

[36] See generally, William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018; Yascha Mounk, After Trump, Is America Democracy Doomed by Populism?, Council on Foreign Relations, January 14, 2021; Brandon Van Dyck, Why Right Populists Beat Left Populists (in the West), Harvard University, Government and Law Department, 2021 (in progress; scholar.harvard.edu); Francesca Bignami, EU Law in Populist Times: Crises and Prospects, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020; Europe and right-wing nationalism: A country-by-country guide, BBC News, November 13, 2019; Yasmeen Serhan, Populism Is Morphing in Insidious Ways, The Atlantic, January 6, 2020; Steve Bloomfield, Is Britain ready for a populist prime minister?, Prospect, May 7, 2019; Joe Greenwood and Joe Twyman, Exploring Authoritarian Populism in Britain (chapter 3), In book: Ivor Crewe and David Sanders (editors), Authoritarian Populism and Liberal Democracy, Palgrave Macmillan, 2020; Bligh Grant, Tod Moore, and Tony Lynch (editors), The Rise of Right-Populism: Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and Australian Politics, Spinger, 2019; Carol Johnson, Is the Morrison government ‘authoritarian populist’ with a punitive bent?, The Conversation, November 3, 2019; Kathy Marks, The rise of populist politics in Australia, BBC News, March 1, 2017; Kyle Friesen, Reimagining Populism to Reveal Canada’s Right-Wing Populist Zeitgeist, Inquiries Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2021; David Moscrop, Canada’s Conservatives need to take a harder line on the far right, Washington Post, January 28, 2021; Bruce Livesay, The fall of Jason Kenney, National Observer, February 8, 2021 (“embraced a style that veers towards the aggressive, unapologetic and authoritarian, laced with disinformation and picking fights that make little sense”); Grant Duncan, Trust, distrust, and the end of politics-as-we-knew-it: the mood of the nation prior to election 2017, Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 13, Issue 2, 2018; Jack Vowles and Jennifer Curtin (editors and authors), With the election looming and New Zealand First struggling in the polls, where have those populist votes gone?, The Conversation, October 1, 2020; Jack Vowles and Jennifer Curtin, A Populist Exception?, Australian National University Press, 2020.

[37] Ilhan Omar, We Can’t Stop Fighting for Our Democracy, The Atlantic, January 21, 2021.

[38] Peter Baker, ‘We the people’: the battle to define populism, The Guardian, January 10, 2019.

[39] Dambisa Moyo, Why the survival of democracy depends on a strong middle-class, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[40] Dalibor Rohac, Liz Kennedy and Vikram Singh, Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States, American Progress, May 10, 2018; Israel Butler, It’s Time for Some Answers on Populist Authoritarians, Liberties, December 6, 2018; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, Pelican, 2018; Konstantin Sonin, The Historical Perspective on the Trump Puzzle: A Review of Barry Eichengreen’s ‘The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era’, American Economic Association, 2020 (Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming); Marin Lessenski, Assya Kavrakova, Emily Long, Huw Longton, Lorene Weber, and Marrit Westerweel, Societies outside Metropolises: the role of civil society organisations in facing populism: Study, European Economic and Social Committee, 2019; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020; Tomasz Mickiewicz, What explains support for authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland?, The Conversation, December 18, 2020; Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018; Thorsten Wojczewski, ‘Enemies of the people’: Populism and the politics of (in)security, European Journal of International Security, Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2020; Tanya Voss, Jo Daugherty Bailey, Jim Ife, and Michaela Kottig, The Threatening Troika of Populism, Nationalism, and Neoliberalism, Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, Vol. 3, 2018; Dani Rodrik, What is driving modern authoritarian populism?, Mint, July 11, 2019; Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018; Italo Colantone and Piero Stanig, Heterogeneous drivers of heterogenous populism, VoxEU, December 10, 2019.

[41] Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press, 2014; Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality, Harvard University Press, 2015.

[42] Sophie Hardach, Here are 3 facts you need to know about inequality and populism, World Economic Forum, April 30, 2018.

[43] Hillary Hoffower, The typical US worker can no longer afford a family on a year’s salary, showing the dire state of America’s middle class, Business Insider, February 25, 2020; Hillary Hoffower, 6 findings that show the dire state of America’s middle class, Business Insider, May 23, 2019; Christopher Ingraham, This chart is the best explanation of middle-class finances you will ever see, Washington Post, February 24, 2020; Danielle Paquette, Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common: ‘I see no way out’, Washington Post, December 28, 2018; Thomas Piketty, Capital and Ideology, Harvard University Press, 2020; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press, 2014; Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality, Harvard University Press, 2015; Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017;

[44] Nick Pearce, The political forecast for 2017? Economic precarity and social division – strap yourself in; the UK post-Brexit will be a bleaker, more fragile place, Wired.co.uk, January 7, 2017.

[45] Yascha Mounk, The Undemocratic Dilemma, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 29, Issue 2, 2018. Also see, Danny Feingold, What’s behind the rise of Bernie Sanders? Voter concern over economic inequality, Los Angeles Times, February 27, 2020.

[46] Dagny Anderson, etal, Task Force: The Global Implications of Populism on Democracy, Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington, 2018; Kenneth Roth, World Report 2017: The Dangerous Rise of Populism, Human Rights Watch, 2017; Nicola Lacey, Populism and the Rule of Law, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 15, 2019; Alan Brudner, Populist and Liberal Democracy, Faulty Blog: University of Toronto, Faculty of Law (law.utoronto.ca), July 16, 2018.

[47] William Link, The forgotten figure who explains how Trump got almost 74 million votes: President used tactics pioneered by one of the most divisive politicians from your past, Washington Post, November 25, 2020; Matt Bai, Let’s take a closer look at Trump’s supposedly intimidating 74 million vote total, Washington Post, December 11, 2020; Peter Singer, Has America Lost Its Soul?, Project Syndicate, November 6, 2020; Timothy Pytell, Why Did 74 Million People Vote for Trump, Psychology Today, December 14, 2020.

[48] Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018.

[49] Robert Reich, Don’t believe the anti-Trump hype – corporate sedition still endangers America, Guardian, January 24, 2021.

[50] Bill Snyder, Are Businesses Undermining Democracy? A Stanford conference explores the many ways that corporate leaders wield power over government, Stanford Business (gsb.stanford.edu), February 2, 2021. Also see, Conference on Corporations and Democracy: A conference examining the complex interactions and balance of power among corporations, governments, and individuals in democracies today, Stanford Graduate School of Business (gsb.stanford.edu), December 7-9, 2020.

[51] Jack Kelly, Life and Career Advice You Don’t Want to Hear, But Need to Know, Forbes, October 14, 2020; Jonathan Burton, Billionaire investor Ray Dalio on capitalism’s crisis: The world is going to change ‘in shocking ways’ in the next five years, MarketWatch, September 18, 2020. Also see, Christopher Ingraham, World’s richest men added billions to their fortunes last year as others struggled: Billionaires have added about $1 trillion to their total net worth since the pandemic began, Washington Post, January 1, 2021; Rupert Neate, Billionaires’ wealth rises to $10.2 trillion amid Covid crisis: Super-rich increase fortunes by more than a quarter during market turmoil, Guardian, October 7, 2020; John Letzing, The super-wealthy won big as COVID-19 spread – here’s how they can help alleviate the economic peril faced by most, World Economic Forum, October 28, 2020; Jack Kelly, Billionaires Are Getting Richer During the COVID-19 Pandemic While Most Americans Suffer, Forbes, April 27, 2020; Rupert Neate, Ten billionaires reap $400bn boost to wealth during pandemic: Covid-19 pushed many into poverty but brought huge benefits for some of the wealthiest, renewing calls for fairer taxes, Guardian, December 19, 2020; Nomi Prins, What Kind of Country Prioritizes Billionaires During a Pandemic?, Nation, January 12, 2021.

[52] This has now been demonstrated rigorously by many researchers, most notably Princeton Professor Martin Gilens – see, Jeffrey Sachs, Understanding and Overcoming America’s Plutocracy, Huffington Post, November 6, 2014; Martin Gilens, Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America, Princeton University Press, 2014.

[53] Jeffrey Sachs, Understanding and Overcoming America’s Plutocracy, Huffington Post, November 6, 2014; Martin Gilens, Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America, Princeton University Press, 2014; Ian Bailey, Donations taint B.C.’s approval of Trans Mountain pipeline expansion: advocacy group, Globe and Mail, January 31, 2017; Nancy Macdonald, Welcome to British Columbia, where you ‘pay to play’, Maclean’s, February 11, 2017; Maxwell Cameron, How Big Money Undermined B.C.’s Climate Leadership – and its Democracy, Huffington Post, September 21, 2017; Amy Melissa McKay, Fundraising for Favors? Linking Lobbyist-Hosted Fundraisers to Legislative Benefits, Political Research Quarterly (journals.sagepub.com), April 24, 2018. Also see, Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, First Anchor Books Edition, 2016, 2017 (preface); Lawrence Lessig, Mick Mulvaney shows why we need to radically change our elections, Washington Post, April 29, 2018.

[54] Nick Cohen, Beware a new wave of populism, born out of coronavirus-induced economic inequity, The Guardian, April 18, 2020. Also see, for example: Marco Chown Oved, Trudeau refuses call to exclude tax haven companies from COVID-19 bailout, Toronto Star, April 22, 2020 [contra, see: Bill Bostock, Denmark and Poland are refusing to bail out companies registered in offshore tax havens, Business Insider, April 20, 2020; Bill Bostock, France is barring firms registered in offshore tax havens from its government coronavirus bailout, following similar bans in Denmark and Poland, Business Insider, April 23, 2020].

[55] Barry Eichengreen, The two faces of populism, VoxEU (voxeu.org), October 29, 2019. Also see, Lubos Pastor and Pietro Veronesi, Populism: Why in rich countries and in good times, VoxEU (voxeu.org), December 12, 2019.

[56] Hannah Allam, Right-Wing Embrace of Conspiracy Is ‘Mass Radicalization’, Experts Warn, NPR, December 15, 2020; Assessing the threat from America’s far right: The real worry may not be large-scale violence but the ‘mainstreaming of extremism’, The Economist, December 12, 2020.

[57] Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018.

[58] Francis Fukuyama, Against Identity Politics: The New Tribalism and the Crisis of Democracy, Foreign Affairs, September/October 2018; Colleen Scribner, Why Stongmen Attack Women’s Rights: Authoritarian rulers around the world are leading attacks on women’s rights, Freedom House, June 18, 2019. Also see, Eric Schmitt and Helene Cooper, Promotions for Female Generals Were Delayed Over Fears of Trump’s Reaction, New York Times, February 17, 2021.

[59] Amy Chua, How America’s identity politics went from inclusion to division, Guardian, March 1, 2018.

[60] German Lopez, The battle over identity politics, explained, Vox, August 17, 2017.

[61] Aaron Wherry, Where you live is who you are: Erin O’Toole and the new culture war, CBC, December 4, 2020.

[62] Kemal Dervis, The paradox of identity politics, Brookings, May 13, 2015;

[63] See generally, Alex Barker, James Murdoch blasts US media for unleashing ‘insidious forces’, Financial Times, January 15, 2021; Max Boot, Trump couldn’t have incited sedition without the help of Fox News, Washington Post, January 18, 2021. Also see, Hannah Allam, Right-Wing Embrace of Conspiracy is ‘Mass Radicalization’, Experts Warn, NPR, December 15, 2020.

[64] Ursula von der Leyen, Ursuala von der Leyen’s message to Davos Agenda: Full Transcript, World Economic Forum, January 26, 2021.

[65] Democracy contains the seeds of its own recovery: A global democratic recession need not go on forever, The Economist, November 26, 2020.

[66] Sheri Berman, Why identify politics benefits the right more than the left, Guardian, July 14, 2018.

[67] Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, Let them Eat Tweets: How the Right Rules in an Age of Extreme Inequality, Liveright, 2020. Also see, Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, The origins of the Republican Party’s plutocratic populism, Washington Post, July 7, 2020.

[68] Jeffry Frieden, The Political Economy of Economic Policy: We should pay closer attention to the interactions between politics, economics, and other realms, International Monetary Fund, Finance and Development, June 2020. Also see, Allan Drazen, Political Economy in Macroeconomics, chapter one: What Is Political Economy?, Princeton University Press, 2018; Will Kenton, Political Economy, Investopedia, updated November 18, 2020.

[69] Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, Crown Publishers, 2012.

[70] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018.

[71] Halla Tomasdottir and Jay Coen Gilbert, The big reset – how to reboot capitalism after COVID-19, Thomson Reuters, September 14, 2020.

[72] Editorial Board, A better form of capitalism is possible:  Everyone loses from the growth of a precariat in rich economies, Financial Times, December 30, 2020.

[73] Jeffrey Sachs, The Price of Civilization: Reawakening American Virtue and Prosperity, Random House, 2012. Also see, Nathan Lewis, The Crisis of Capitalism Is a Lack of Capitalism, Forbes, February 23, 2012.

[74] Democracy contains the seeds of its own recovery: A global democratic recession need not go on forever, The Economist, November 26, 2020; Adam Gopnik, What We Get Wrong About America’s Crisis of Democracy, The New Yorker, December 27, 2020.

[75] See generally, Jonathan Burton, Billionaire investor Ray Dalio on capitalism’s crisis: The world is going to change ‘in shocking ways’ in the next five years, MarketWatch, September 18, 2020; Ciara Linnane and Jonathan Burton, Hedge-fund billionaire Ray Dalio says capitalism needs urgent reform, MarketWatch, April 15, 2019;

[76] Ciara Linnane and Jonathan Burton, Hedge-fund billionaire Ray Dalio says capitalism needs urgent reform, MarketWatch, April 15, 2019. Also see, Ray Dalio, Why and How Capitalism Needs to Be Reformed (Parts 1 & 2), LinkedIn, April 15, 2019.

[77] Jeffrey Sachs, Scott Pruitt sums up America’s big challenge, CNN, April 10, 2018. Also see, Alexander Burns, Jasmine Lee, and Rachel Shorey, Billionaire vs. Billionaire: A Tug of War Between 2 Rogue Donors, New York Times, April 12, 2018:

“Matthew Rothschild, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which supports stricter campaign-finance regulation, said [billionaire] Mr. Uihlein’s political role showed how big donors had come to overshadow traditional political parties.

“The parties are increasingly irrelevant,” Mr. Rothschild said. “Billionaires can just set up their own organizations and just dominate a political campaign.”

Mr. Uihlein has done that to a great degree in Wisconsin this year, Mr. Rothschild said, by giving $3.5 million to a super PAC supporting Kevin Nicholson, a Republican running for the senate. Mr. Nicholson faces a contested primary against a fellow Republican who is backed by a different billionaire.

Mr. Rothschild said voters should not mistake the emergence of competing billionaires as a sign that the campaign finance system is basically stable and fair.

“Our democracy is not supposed to be a tug of war between a couple of billionaires on the left and a couple of billionaires on the right,” he said.”

Also see, Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, First Anchor Books Edition, 2016, 2017 (preface); Charles Kaiser, Dark Money review: Nazi oil, the Koch brothers and a rightwing revolution, The Guardian, January 17, 2016; Daniel Ben-Ami, Book Review: ‘Dark Money’, by Jane Mayer, Financial Times, March 11, 2016; Alan Ehrenhalt, ‘Dark Money’, by Jane Mayer, New York Times, January 19, 2016; Donald Gutstein, Harperism: How Stephen Harper and his think tank colleagues have transformed Canada, James Lorimer & Company Publishers, 2014; Bruce Livesey, How Canada made the Koch brothers rich, National Observer, May 5, 2015; Gerald Caplan, Harper is Right: Foreign radicals are after the oil sands, Globe and Mail, May 26, 2012; Daniel Tencer, Koch Brothers, Tea Party Billionaires, Donated To Right-Wing Fraser Institute, Reports Show, Huffington Post, April 26, 2012; Daphne Bramham, Lessons for Canada from how the Koch brothers hijacked democracy, Vancouver Sun, September 25, 2016; Elizabeth McSheffrey, Are the billionaire American Koch brothers playing climate politics in Alberta?, National Observer, January 13, 2017.

[78] Joseph Stiglitz, Is Donald Trump an aberration or a symptom of a deeper US malady?, Guardian, January 12, 202.

[79] William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018; Thomas Wright, The U.S. Must Now Repair Democracy at Home and Abroad: Our domestic troubles show that America has a real stake in the struggle for democracy worldwide, Atlantic, January 10, 2021.

[80] William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018; Thomas Wright, The U.S. Must Now Repair Democracy at Home and Abroad: Our domestic troubles show that America has a real stake in the struggle for democracy worldwide, Atlantic, January 10, 2021.

[81] Anneken Tappe, Capitalism isn’t working anymore. Here’s how the pandemic could change it forever, CNN Business, September 21, 2020.

[82] Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law, Penguin Books, 2010.

[83] For example, see: 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report, Edelman.com, 2019; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, 2019; Angel Burria (OECD Secretary-General), 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer, OECD.org, January 30, 2019; Marc Montgomery, International survey indicates trust  in key institutions declining, Radio Canada International, February 25, 2020; The Global State of Democracy: Exploring Democracy’s Resilience, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (idea.int), November 2017; Richard Edelman, A crisis of trust: A warning to both business and government, Economist (theworldin.com), 2016; Uri Friedman, Trust Is Collapsing in America, The Atlantic, January 21, 2018.

[84] Tim Wu, What Really Saved the Republic From Trump?: It wasn’t our constitutional system of checks and balances, New York Times, December 10, 2020.

[85] Thomas Wright, The U.S. Must Now Repair Democracy at Home and Abroad: Our domestic troubles show that America has a real stake in the struggle for democracy worldwide, Atlantic, January 10, 2021; Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Wobbly Is Our Democracy?, New York Times, January 27, 2018; Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, How Democracies Die, What History Tells Us About Our Future, Broadway Books, 2018; Jennifer Lynn McCoy, Extreme political polarization weakens democracy – can the US avoid that fate?, The Conversation, October 31, 2018; Jennifer McCoy, Tahmina Rahman and Murat Somer, Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics, and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 62, Number 1, 2018. Also see for example: Jonathan Montpetit, Quebec is divided, polarized as hearings set to begin on secularism bill, CBC, May 6, 2019.

[86] Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law, Penguin Random House, 2011.

[87] Narendra Modi threatens to turn India into a one-party state, The Economist, November 28, 2020. Also see, Global Democracy has another bad year, The Economist, January 22, 2020; The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index – 167 countries scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on 60 indicators, infographics.economist.com; India falls to 51^st position in EIU’s Democracy Index, The Economic Times, January 23, 2020:

“Based on their total score, the countries are classified as one of four types of regime: ‘full democracy’ (scores greater than 8); ‘flawed democracy’ — scores greater than 6 and less than or equal to 8; ‘hybrid regime’ — scores greater than 4 and less than or equal to 6; ‘authoritarian regime’ — scores less than or equal to 4″. India was included in the ‘flawed democracy’ category.”

[88] Michiko Kakutani, Democracies around the world are under threat. Ours is no exception, Los Angeles Times, October 31, 2020; Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020. Also see, Global Democracy has another bad year, The Economist, January 22, 2020; The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index – 167 countries scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on 60 indicators, infographics.economist.com.

[89] Samanda Dorger, The Most Democratic Countries: How Does the U.S. Rank?, The Street, October 20, 2020. Also see, Global Democracy has another bad year, The Economist, January 22, 2020; The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index – 167 countries scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on 60 indicators, infographics.economist.com; Nicole Karus, New report classifies US as a ‘flawed democracy’, Salon, January 31, 2018; Alexandra Ma, These are the best democracies in the world – and the US barely makes the list, Business Insider, January 31, 2018; Niall McCarthy, The Best and Worst Countries for Democracy, Forbes, February 1, 2018; Lianna Brinded, The US is not one of the only 19 ‘fully democratic’ countries in the world, Quartz (qz.com), January 30, 2018; Rebecca Joseph, Canada is a ‘full’ democracy, U.S. is not: report, Global News.ca, January 31, 2018.

[90] Rebecca Henderson, The Business Case for Saving Democracy: Why free markets need free politics, Harvard Business Review, March 2020.

[91] Narendra Modi threatens to turn India into a one-party state, The Economist, November 28, 2020; Rule of Law under assault in India, say former civil servants, National Herald (nationalheraldindia.com), July 5, 2020; Indian Farmers Lead Historic Strike & Protests Against Narendra Modi, Neoliberalism & Inequality, Democracy Now, December 3, 2020; Brett Wilkins, Indian Farmers Continue Historic Protests After 250 Million People Rise Up Against Modi’s Neoliberal Policies, Common Dreams, December 3, 2020.

[92] Sharon Thiruchelvam, Protecting the rule of law from populist threats: Threats to the rule of law are a major problem that should not be underestimated in risk areas, including UK, Raconteur, February 7, 2018;William Worley, UK must get ‘own house in order’ on democracy, says former top diplomat, Devex.com, October 28, 2020; Philip Stephens, Post-Brexit UK must respect the rule of law: Boris Johnson’s plan to rewrite EU withdrawal agreement destroys trust and undermines democracy, Financial Times, September 10, 2020; Steve Bloomfield, Is Britain ready for a populist prime minister?, Prospect, May 7, 2019; Joe Greenwood and Joe Twyman, Exploring Authoritarian Populism in Britain (chapter 3), In book: Ivor Crewe and David Sanders (editors), Authoritarian Populism and Liberal Democracy, Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.

[93] Brandon Van Dyck, Why Right Populists Beat Left Populists (in the West), Harvard University, Government and Law Department, 2021 (in progress; scholar.harvard.edu); Francesca Bignami, EU Law in Populist Times: Crises and Prospects, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020; Francesca Bignami, EU Law in Populist Times: Crises and Prospects, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020; Europe and right-wing nationalism: A country-by-country guide, BBC News, November 13, 2019; Yasmeen Serhan, Populism Is Morphing in Insidious Ways, The Atlantic, January 6, 2020.

[94] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[95] Michiko Kakutani, Democracies around the world are under threat. Ours is no exception, Los Angeles Times, October 31, 2020.

[96] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[97] Zach Beauchamp, The Republican Party is an authoritarian outlier: Comparted to center-right parties in developed democracies, the GOP is dangerously far from normal, Vox, September 22, 2020. Also see, Paul Rosenberg, Republicans, a history: How did the party of ‘law and order’ become the party of crooks and crime?: Fundamentalism and authoritarianism pushed the Republicans from low-grade mendacity into a threat to democracy, Salon, November 24, 2019; Robert Kagen, The Strongmen strike back, Washington Post, March 14, 2019; George Packer, Republicans Are Suddenly Afraid of Democracy, The Atlantic, October 9, 2020; Zacharay Wolf, A GOP senator has gone public against democracy, CNN, October 9, 2020; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021; Joseph Stiglitz, Is Donald Trump an aberration or a symptom of a deeper US malady?, Guardian, January 12, 2021:

“For at least a quarter century, the Republican party has understood that it could represent the interests of business elites only by embracing anti-democratic measures (including voter suppression and gerrymandering) and allies, including the religious fundamentalists, white supremacists and nationalist populists.

Of course, populism implied policies that were antithetical to business elites. But many business leaders spent decades mastering the ability to deceive the public. Big Tobacco spent lavishly on lawyers and bogus science to deny their products’ adverse health effects. Big Oil did likewise to deny fossil fuels’ contribution to the climate crisis. They recognised that Trump was one of their own.

Then, advances in technology provided a tool for rapid dissemination of dis/misinformation. …

This political system did one other thing: it generated a set of policies (sometimes referred to as neoliberalism) that delivered massive income and wealth gains to those at the top, but near-stagnation everywhere elsewhere. Soon, a country on the cutting edge of scientific progress was marked by declining life expectancy and increasing health disparities.

The neoliberal promise that wealth and income gains would trickle down to those at the bottom was fundamentally spurious. As massive structural changes deindustrialised large parts of the country, those left behind were left to fend largely for themselves. As I warned in my books ‘The Price of Inequality’ and ‘People, Power and Profits’, this toxic mix provided an inviting opportunity for a would-be demagogue.”

[98] Ronald Brownstein, Republicans Are Going Down a Dangerous Road: In elections going forward, not trying to steal the election will be seen as RINO behavior, The Atlantic, December 10, 2020; Edward Keenan, Donald Trump’s legacy: He shook Americans’ faith in their country to its very foundation, Toronto Star, December 19, 2020. Also see, Amy Gardner, ‘I just want to find 11.780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor, Washington Post, January 3, 2020; Jeff Amy, Darlene Superville, and Kate Brumback, President recorded on tape pressing Georgia official to ‘find’ Trump votes, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2020; John Cassidy, Trump’s Authoritarian Moment is Here: Far too many Republicans are complicit in Donald Trump’s continuing efforts to overthrow the election results, The New Yorker, January 4, 2021; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021; Editorial Board, A moment of grave danger for US democracy: Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election are ever more desperate, Financial Times, January 4, 2021; Peter Baker, An Insurgency From Inside the Oval Office, New York Times, January 4, 2021; Stephen Collinson, Trump’s bid to steal Georgia exposes GOP election ruse, CNN, January 4, 2020:

“Astonishing new evidence of a desperate President Donald Trump caught on tape trying to steal the election exposes the depth of his corruption and makes his Republican Capitol Hill allies complicit in his bid to thwart the will of voters.

In a fresh abuse of power, Trump tried to bully a top Georgia GOP official into finding votes to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s win in the state. The staggering telephone call, audio of which was obtained by CNN and first reported by The Washington Post, amounted to the most serious threat yet posed by his authoritarian instincts to American democracy. …

The tape recalled the kind of coercive, corrupt behavior that led to Trump’s impeachment over a call with Ukraine’s President, but that all Republican senators, with the exception of Mitt Romney, decided last year did not merit his ouster from office.

In the latest smoking gun call, Trump is heard trying to convince [Georgia’s GOP Secretary of State Brad] Raffensperger to announce that he had recalculated the vote totals and that the President won, and threatening criminal reprisals if his fellow Republican failed to act. …

Biden senior legal adviser Bob Bauer said in a statement that the tape offered ‘irrefutable proof of a president pressuring and threatening an official of his own party to get him to rescind a state’s lawful, certified vote count and fabricate another in its place’. ‘It captures the whole, disgraceful story about Donald Trump’s assault on American democracy’. …

The corruption revealed on Trump’s call to Georgia, meanwhile, removes any doubt that the President is trying to steal the election.”

[99] Stephen Marche, The insurrection has not yet happened. But it’s coming, Globe and Mail, January 15, 2021. Also see, Chris Hayes, The Republican Party is Radicalizing Against Democracy: The GOP is moderating on policy questions, even as it grows more dangerous on core questions of democracy and the rule of law, The Atlantic, February 8, 2021.

[100] Arch Puddington and Tyler Roylance, Freedom in the World 2017: Populists and Autocrats: The Dual Threat to Global Democracy, Freedom House, 2018; The Decline of Democracy and the Rule of Law: How to Preserve the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence?, Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, September 28, 2017.

[101] Max Fisher and Amanda Taub, ‘Overrun’, ‘Outbred’, ‘Replaced’: Why Ethnic Majorities Lash Out Over False Fears, New York Times, April 30, 2019; Marie-Danielle Smith, Appetite for populism on the decline in Canada – except among politicians: report, National Post, May 7, 2019; Eric Sigurdson, Global Populism: Corporate Strategy, Engagement & Leadership in 2017 – ‘the year of living dangerously’, Sigurdson Post, January 18, 2017; Eric Sigurdson, A Toxic Brew: The Polarization of the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, The Decline of the Rule of Law: Experiencing the Unimaginable in Western Society – the impact of economic and social inequality in the 21^st century, Sigurdson Post, April 26, 2020. Also see, Grace Kay, A majority of Americans surveyed believe the US is in the midst of a ‘cold’ civil war, Business Insider, January 13, 2021.

[102] What History Teaches Us About Demagogues Like the Donald, Time, June 20, 2016; Ngaire Woods, Populism is spreading. This is what’s driving it, World Economic Forum, December 9, 2016; David Thunder, Populism not going away any time soon: Neither populists nor their critics grasp the depth of crisis in western democracy, Irish Times, January 23, 2019.

[103] Joseph Stiglitz, Is Donald Trump an aberration or a symptom of a deeper US malady?, Guardian, January 12, 2021. Also see, Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick, McConnell says Trump ‘provoked’ U.S. Capitol siege, mob was ‘fed lies’, Globe and Mail, January 19, 2021; Andrew Desiderio, McConnell says Trump ‘provoked’ the Capitol attackers: ‘The mob was fed lies’, the majority leader says, Politico, January 19, 2021.

[104] Marshall Cohen, Chronicling Trump’s 10 worst abuses of power, CNN, January 24, 2021.

[105] Peter Wehner, Republicans Own This Insurrection: Responsibility for the storming of the Capitol extends well beyond Trump, The Atlantic, January 7, 2021; Kimberly Dozier and Vera Bergengruen, Incited by the President, Trump Supporters Violently Storm the Capital, Time, January 6, 2021; Julian Borger, MAGA mob’s Capitol invasion makes Trump’s assault on democracy literal, Guardian, January 6, 2021; Allan Smith, Ginger Gibson, Daniel Arkin, Pete Williams, and Dartunorro Clark, 4 dead, Congress evacuated, National Guard activated after pro-Trump rioters storm capital: A noose was erected outside and at least one improvised explosive device has been found on the grounds, law enforcement officials said, NBC News, January 6, 2021 (updated January 7, 2021); Jacqueline Thomsen, ‘Inciting a Riot’: Legal Community Erupts in Calls for Trump’s Removal as Mob Storms Capitol: The takeover of the building forced the evacuation of lawmakers, staffers and members of the press, The National Law Journal, January 6, 2021; Colby Itkowitz and Paulina Firozi, Democrats, Republicans blame Trump for inciting ‘coup’ as mob storms Capitol, Washington Post, January 6, 2021; Amanda Macias, Mattis blames Trump for violence at Capitol, says his actions ‘poison our respect for fellow citizens’, CNBC, January 6, 2021;  Dan Spinelli and Abigail Weinberg, Liveblog: Trump Incites Violent Insurrection on Capitol Hill – ‘This is what the president has caused today, this insurrection’, Mother Jones, January 6, 2021; Editorial Board, Trump caused the assault on the Capitol. He must be removed, Washington Post, January 6, 2021; Lisa Mascrao, Eric Tucker, and Mary Clare Jalonick, Pro-Trump mob storms U.S. Capitol in bid to overturn election, CTV News, January 6, 2021; Trump’s supporters storm the Capitol to block the transfer of power: The mayhem is unlike any in living memory, The Economist, January 6, 2021; Trump’s legacy – the shame and the opportunity, The Economist, January 7, 2021; Kevin Liptak, Trump’s presidency ends with American carnage, CNN, January 6, 2021; Matt Egan, Trump should be removed from office to preserve democracy, business leaders say, CNN Business, January 6, 2021; Eliza Relman, World leaders and top US allies condemn Trump and his supporters violent attempted coup, Business Insider, January 6, 2021; Mark Gollom, Lawmakers, world leaders condemn chaos at the U.S. Capitol while some call for Trump’s removal, CBC News, January 6, 2021; Daniel Kreps, ‘Deeply Disturbing and Alarming’: World Leaders Condemn MAGA Insurrection, Rolling Stone, January 6, 2021; Kathleen Harris, Trudeau says ‘shocking’ riot in Washington was incited by Trump, CBC News, January 8, 2021; Grace Panetta, Biden calls the pro-Trump riot at the Capitol an ‘insurrection’ and ‘domestic terrorism’, Business Insider, January 7, 2021; Stephen Losey, ‘We are in danger of losing our republic’ Air Force strategy chief says in wake of Capitol attack, Air Force Times, January 7, 2021; Oliver Darcy, Right-wing media gathered the tinder. Trump just lit it on fire, CNN, January 6, 2021; Kevin Baron, How Will Biden’s Pentagon Handle Extreme Right-Wing Media: The Capitol riot was just the latest tell for propaganda outlets masquerading as newsrooms, Defense One, January 1, 2021. Also see re military / law enforcement, Mitch Prothero, Some among America’s military allies believe Trump deliberately attempted a coup and may have had help from federal law-enforcement officials, Business Insider, January 7, 2021; Robert Burns, All 10 living former defence secretaries issue Trump extraordinary warning over election fraud claims, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2021; Ashton Carter, Dick Cheney, William Cohen, Mark Esper, Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel, James Mattis, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Donald Rumsfeld, All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory, Washington Post, January 3, 2021; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021; Peter Feaver, The Military Stayed Out of the Insurrection, but It Isn’t Over Yet, Foreign Policy, January 7, 2021; Geoff Colvin, Retired brigadier general says Trump loyalists in military need rooting out: ‘We’re probably talking about thousands across the Department of Defense’, Fortune, January 8, 2021; Debra Thompson, The insurrection in Washington shows police decide who to protect and serve, Globe and Mail, January 8, 2021; Peter Nickeas, Annie Grayer, and Ryan Nobles, 2 Capitol Police officers suspended and at least 10 more under investigation for alleged roles in riot, CNN, January 11, 2021; Ryan Pickrell, A veteran in Congress asked the military to make sure troops deploying to Biden’s inauguration are not sympathetic to domestic terrorists after Capitol siege, Business Insider, January 11, 2021; Jessica Pishko, Sheriffs Helped Lead This Insurrection: Sheriffs play a key role in right-wing white supremacist movements, Slate, January 15, 2021.

[106] Congress has impeached Donald Trump for his incitement of a mob attack on the Capitol, The Economist, January 16, 2021; Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick, McConnell says Trump ‘provoked’ U.S. Capitol siege, mob was ‘fed lies’, Globe and Mail, January 19, 2021; Andrew Desiderio, McConnell says Trump ‘provoked’ the Capitol attackers: ‘The mob was fed lies’, the majority leader says, Politico, January 19, 2021. Also see, Tim Naftali, The Worst President in History, The Atlantic, January 19, 2021 (“President Trump … held to account by voters for his failures, he refused to concede defeat and instead instigated an insurrection, stirring a mob that stormed the Capitol”.).

[107] Peter Wehner, Republicans Own This Insurrection: Responsibility for the storming of the Capitol extends well beyond Trump, The Atlantic, January 7, 2021; Kimberly Dozier and Vera Bergengruen, Incited by the President, Trump Supporters Violently Storm the Capital, Time, January 6, 2021; Julian Borger, MAGA mob’s Capitol invasion makes Trump’s assault on democracy literal, Guardian, January 6, 2021; Allan Smith, Ginger Gibson, Daniel Arkin, Pete Williams, and Dartunorro Clark, 4 dead, Congress evacuated, National Guard activated after pro-Trump rioters storm capital: A noose was erected outside and at least one improvised explosive device has been found on the grounds, law enforcement officials said, NBC News, January 6, 2021 (updated January 7, 2021); Jacqueline Thomsen, ‘Inciting a Riot’: Legal Community Erupts in Calls for Trump’s Removal as Mob Storms Capitol: The takeover of the building forced the evacuation of lawmakers, staffers and members of the press, The National Law Journal, January 6, 2021; Colby Itkowitz and Paulina Firozi, Democrats, Republicans blame Trump for inciting ‘coup’ as mob storms Capitol, Washington Post, January 6, 2021; Amanda Macias, Mattis blames Trump for violence at Capitol, says his actions ‘poison our respect for fellow citizens’, CNBC, January 6, 2021;  Dan Spinelli and Abigail Weinberg, Liveblog: Trump Incites Violent Insurrection on Capitol Hill – ‘This is what the president has caused today, this insurrection’, Mother Jones, January 6, 2021; Editorial Board, Trump caused the assault on the Capitol. He must be removed, Washington Post, January 6, 2021; Lisa Mascrao, Eric Tucker, and Mary Clare Jalonick, Pro-Trump mob storms U.S. Capitol in bid to overturn election, CTV News, January 6, 2021; Trump’s supporters storm the Capitol to block the transfer of power: The mayhem is unlike any in living memory, The Economist, January 6, 2021; Trump’s legacy – the shame and the opportunity, The Economist, January 7, 2021; Kevin Liptak, Trump’s presidency ends with American carnage, CNN, January 6, 2021; Matt Egan, Trump should be removed from office to preserve democracy, business leaders say, CNN Business, January 6, 2021; Eliza Relman, World leaders and top US allies condemn Trump and his supporters violent attempted coup, Business Insider, January 6, 2021; Mark Gollom, Lawmakers, world leaders condemn chaos at the U.S. Capitol while some call for Trump’s removal, CBC News, January 6, 2021; Daniel Kreps, ‘Deeply Disturbing and Alarming’: World Leaders Condemn MAGA Insurrection, Rolling Stone, January 6, 2021; Kathleen Harris, Trudeau says ‘shocking’ riot in Washington was incited by Trump, CBC News, January 8, 2021; Grace Panetta, Biden calls the pro-Trump riot at the Capitol an ‘insurrection’ and ‘domestic terrorism’, Business Insider, January 7, 2021; Stephen Losey, ‘We are in danger of losing our republic’ Air Force strategy chief says in wake of Capitol attack, Air Force Times, January 7, 2021; Oliver Darcy, Right-wing media gathered the tinder. Trump just lit it on fire, CNN, January 6, 2021; Kevin Baron, How Will Biden’s Pentagon Handle Extreme Right-Wing Media: The Capitol riot was just the latest tell for propaganda outlets masquerading as newsrooms, Defense One, January 1, 2021. Also see re military / law enforcement, Mitch Prothero, Some among America’s military allies believe Trump deliberately attempted a coup and may have had help from federal law-enforcement officials, Business Insider, January 7, 2021; Robert Burns, All 10 living former defence secretaries issue Trump extraordinary warning over election fraud claims, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2021; Ashton Carter, Dick Cheney, William Cohen, Mark Esper, Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel, James Mattis, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Donald Rumsfeld, All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory, Washington Post, January 3, 2021; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021; Peter Feaver, The Military Stayed Out of the Insurrection, but It Isn’t Over Yet, Foreign Policy, January 7, 2021; Geoff Colvin, Retired brigadier general says Trump loyalists in military need rooting out: ‘We’re probably talking about thousands across the Department of Defense’, Fortune, January 8, 2021; Debra Thompson, The insurrection in Washington shows police decide who to protect and serve, Globe and Mail, January 8, 2021; Peter Nickeas, Annie Grayer, and Ryan Nobles, 2 Capitol Police officers suspended and at least 10 more under investigation for alleged roles in riot, CNN, January 11, 2021; Ryan Pickrell, A veteran in Congress asked the military to make sure troops deploying to Biden’s inauguration are not sympathetic to domestic terrorists after Capitol siege, Business Insider, January 11, 2021; Jessica Pishko, Sheriffs Helped Lead This Insurrection: Sheriffs play a key role in right-wing white supremacist movements, Slate, January 15, 2021.

[108] Errol Mendes, The Trump ‘Truth Decay’ Precedent and the Threat to Democracy Worldwide, Centre for International Policy Studies, December 8, 2020. Also see, Mark Thomas, It Could Never happen Here!, 99 percent, January 9, 2021 (“the four root causes”); Edward Keenan, Donald Trump’s legacy: He shook Americans’ faith in their country to its very foundation, Toronto Star, December 19, 2020; Amy Gardner, ‘I just want to find 11.780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor, Washington Post, January 3, 2020; Jeff Amy, Darlene Superville, and Kate Brumback, President recorded on tape pressing Georgia official to ‘find’ Trump votes, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2020; Stephen Collinson, Trump’s bid to steal Georgia exposes GOP election ruse, CNN, January 4, 2020; Peter Donolo, What will become of Trump’s Canadian fan base?, Toronto Star, January 9, 2021; Bob Hepburn, Conrad Black is now Canada’s Rudy Giuliani, Toronto Star, January 13, 2021; David Smith, Inequality, racism and polarisation set stage for Trump’s ‘American Carnage’, Guardian, January 10, 2021; Diane Francis, American domestic terrorism presents a threat to Canada, Financial Post, January 11, 2021; Yasir Naqvi, Don’t be smug, Canada. The U.S. insurrection shows even the strongest democracies are fragile, Globe and Mail, January 11, 2021; Robert Shrimsley, America’s warning for British Democracy: A cavalier approach to truth and a readiness to break political norms have fomented a similar rot, Financial Times, January 13, 2021.

[109] Doyle McManus, Trump has changed tactics in his election fight. His new approach is more dangerous, Los Angeles Times, December 13, 2020; Lauren Fedor, James Politi, Courtney Weaver, and Aime Williams, Trump pledges ‘orderly transition’ after turmoil on Capitol Hill: Statement comes after lawmakers certify Biden win storming of Congress by protestors, Financial Times, January 7, 2021.

[110] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, Global Populism: Corporate Strategy, Engagement & Leadership in 2017 – ‘the year of living dangerously’, Sigurdson Post, January 18, 2017; Eric Sigurdson, A Toxic Brew: The Polarization of the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, The Decline of the Rule of Law: Experiencing the Unimaginable in Western Society – the impact of economic and social inequality in the 21^st century, Sigurdson Post, April 26, 2020.

[111] Michiko Kakutani, Democracies around the world are under threat. Ours is no exception, Los Angeles Times, October 31, 2020.

[112] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[113] David Graham, The GOP Abandons Democracy, The Atlantic, December 10, 2020. Also see, Amy Gardner, ‘I just want to find 11.780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor, Washington Post, January 3, 2020; Jeff Amy, Darlene Superville, and Kate Brumback, President recorded on tape pressing Georgia official to ‘find’ Trump votes, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2020; Stephen Collinson, Trump’s bid to steal Georgia exposes GOP election ruse, CNN, January 4, 2020; John Cassidy, Trump’s Authoritarian Moment is Here: Far too many Republicans are complicit in Donald Trump’s continuing efforts to overthrow the election results, The New Yorker, January 4, 2021; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021; Editorial Board, A moment of grave danger for US democracy: Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election are ever more desperate, Financial Times, January 4, 2021; Peter Baker, An Insurgency From Inside the Oval Office, New York Times, January 4, 2021.

[114] For example, see: 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 13, 2021; 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer, Edelman.com, January 19, 2020; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report, Edelman.com, 2019; 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive Summary, Edelman.com, 2019; Angel Burria (OECD Secretary-General), 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer, OECD.org, January 30, 2019; Marc Montgomery, International survey indicates trust  in key institutions declining, Radio Canada International, February 25, 2020; The Global State of Democracy: Exploring Democracy’s Resilience, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (idea.int), November 2017; Richard Edelman, A crisis of trust: A warning to both business and government, Economist (theworldin.com), 2016; Uri Friedman, Trust Is Collapsing in America, The Atlantic, January 21, 2018.

[115] Ted Piccone, The rule of law is under duress everywhere, Brookings, March 17, 2020. Also see, Robert Burns, All 10 living former defence secretaries issue Trump extraordinary warning over election fraud claims, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2021; Ashton Carter, Dick Cheney, William Cohen, Mark Esper, Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel, James Mattis, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Donald Rumsfeld, All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory, Washington Post, January 3, 2021; America’s former defence secretaries sound the alarm over Trump: The president’s desperate effort to overturn the election raises fears that he will try to suborn the armed forces, The Economist, January 4, 2021.

[116] Gustaf Kilander, Republican senator who voted to convict Trump was not sent to DC to ‘do the right thing’, his party complains, Independent, February 17, 2021. Also see, Travis Waldron, Republicans Have Emerged From the Capitol Insurrection United Against Democracy: Republicans who voted to impeach or convict Trump for his role in the Capitol riot are facing fury and official rebukes from party leaders back home, Huffington Post, February 16, 2021.

[117] Josep Borrell, We need straight-talk and determined action on democracy, European Union External Action Service (eeas.europa.eu), November 11, 2020. Also see, Michael Balsamo, Justice Department has found no evidence of voter fraud that would change U.S. election outcome: Barr, Globe and Mail, December 1, 2020.

[118] Colin P. Clarke, How Trump is laying the groundwork for violence and unrest during Biden’s presidency, Los Angeles Times, November 29, 2020. Also see, Michael Balsamo, Justice Department has found no evidence of voter fraud that would change U.S. election outcome: Barr, Globe and Mail, December 1, 2020; Edward Keenan, Donald Trump’s legacy: He shook Americans’ faith in their country to its very foundation, Toronto Star, December 19, 2020; Amy Gardner, ‘I just want to find 11.780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor, Washington Post, January 3, 2020; Jeff Amy, Darlene Superville, and Kate Brumback, President recorded on tape pressing Georgia official to ‘find’ Trump votes, Globe and Mail, January 3, 2020; Stephen Collinson, Trump’s bid to steal Georgia exposes GOP election ruse, CNN, January 4, 2020; John Cassidy, Trump’s Authoritarian Moment is Here: Far too many Republicans are complicit in Donald Trump’s continuing efforts to overthrow the election results, The New Yorker, January 4, 2021.

[119] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[120] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[121] Sarah Repucci, Freedom in the World 2020: A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy, Freedom House, 2020.

[122] Anthony Galloway, West has hard questions to answer about Myanmar coup, Sydney Morning Herald, February 1, 2021. Also see, Shoon Naing, Military-backed opposition rejects election result as Suu Kyi heads for victory, Sydney Morning Herald, November 12, 2020.

[123] Robert Schlesinger, The Texas lawsuit shows Republicans went from fighting Democrats to fighting democracy, NBC News, December 11, 2020.  Also see, Nomaan Merchant, Alanna Durkin Richer, and Mark Sherman, Supreme Court rejects Republican attack on Biden victory, AP News, December 11, 2020; Araine de Vogue and Maegan Vazquez, Supreme Court rejects Texas’ and Trump’s bid to overturn election, CNN, December 11, 2020.

[124] Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press, 2014; Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality, Harvard University Press, 2015.

[125] Eric Levitz, The One Percent Have Gotten $21 Trillion Richer Since 1989. The Bottom 50% Have Gotten Poorer, New York Magazine, June 16, 2019; Rec Nutting, The super rich elite have more money than they know what to do with, Market Watch, November 2, 2019; Jake Johnson, ‘Eye-Popping’: Analysis Shows Top 1% Gained $21 Trillion in Wealth Since 1989 While Bottom Half Lost $900 Billion, Common Dreams, June 14, 2019; David Harrison, Historic Asset Boom Passes by Half of Families, Wall Street Journal, August 30, 2019; Lola Fadulu, Study Shows Income Gap Between Rich and Poor Keeps Growing, With Deadly Effects, New York Times, September 10, 2019.

[126] Sophie Hardach, Here are 3 facts you need to know about inequality and populism, World Economic Forum, April 30, 2018.

[127] Hillary Hoffower, The typical US worker can no longer afford a family on a year’s salary, showing the dire state of America’s middle class, Business Insider, February 25, 2020; Hillary Hoffower, 6 findings that show the dire state of America’s middle class, Business Insider, May 23, 2019; Christopher Ingraham, This chart is the best explanation of middle-class finances you will ever see, Washington Post, February 24, 2020; Danielle Paquette, Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common: ‘I see no way out’, Washington Post, December 28, 2018; Thomas Piketty, Capital and Ideology, Harvard University Press, 2020; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press, 2014; Thomas Piketty, The Economics of Inequality, Harvard University Press, 2015; Daniel Tencer, Canadians Increasingly Stuck in the Economic Conditions They Were Born In: StatCan: More and more, what your parents make determines what you will make, Huffington Post, February 11, 2021;

[128] William Galston, The populist challenge to liberal democracy, Brookings, April 17, 2018.

[129] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019. Also see for example: Tess Kalinowski, ‘Everybody in the middle getting squeezed out and it’s painful’: Toronto’s lack of affordable housing hits those in higher income brackets, say experts, Toronto Star, December 28, 2020.

[130] Duncan Ivison (Deputy Vice Chancellor, University of Sydney), Learning to be Human: Universities in a world of rising inequality and technological change, OECD-forum.org, May 3, 2018.

[131] Dambisa Moyo, Why the survival of democracy depends on a strong middle-class, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018 (Canada).

[132] What’s Gone Wrong With Democracy, The Economist, March 1, 2014.

[133] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[134] Sarah Chayes, On Corruption in America: And What Is at Stake, Knopf, 2020. Also see, Corruption Perceptions Index 2020, Transparency International (transparency.org); CPI 2020: Trouble in the Top 25 Countries: The top 25 countries on the CPI have their share of corruption challenges, Transparency International, January 28, 2021; Roberto Martinez B. Kukutschka, Jorge Valladares, and Jon Vrushi, Building Political Integrity to Stamp Out Corruption: Three Steps to Cleaner Politics, Transparency International, January 23, 2020.

[135] See generally, Eric Sigurdson, The Decline of the Rule of Law: Experiencing the Unimaginable in Western Society – the impact of economic and social inequality in the 21^st century, Sigurdson Post, April 26, 2020; Eric Sigurdson, A Toxic Brew: The Politicization of the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, The Impunity Pandemic: Police ‘Use of Force’, the Justice System, and Systemic Racism – an examination of inequality, discrimination, and declining trust in societal institutions and the rule of law, Sigurdson Post, August 30, 2020. Also see generally, Michael Klarman, Trump, the Republican Party, and the Rule of Law, Harvard Law School, Rule of Law Society, April 23, 2020; Eric Levitz, Trump Is Growing the GOP’s ‘Anti-Rule of Law’ Wing, New York Magazine (Intelligencer), December 10, 2020; Editorial Board, The danger is growing that Trump’s lies about the election will lead to violence, Washington Post, December 9, 2020; Paul Waldman, The risk of right-wing terrorism is rising dramatically, Washington Post, December 9, 2020.  Also see, Corruption Perceptions Index 2020, Transparency International (transparency.org); CPI 2020: Trouble in the Top 25 Countries: The top 25 countries on the CPI have their share of corruption challenges, Transparency International, January 28, 2021; Roberto Martinez B. Kukutschka, Jorge Valladares, and Jon Vrushi, Building Political Integrity to Stamp Out Corruption: Three Steps to Cleaner Politics, Transparency International, January 23, 2020.

[136] Diana Chigas and Cheyanne Scharbatke-Church (moderators), A Bad Barrel – How America Embraced Corruption: A Conversation with Sarah Chayes, Henry J. Leir Institute, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, December 9, 2020. Also see, Sarah Chayes, On Corruption in America: And What Is at Stake, Knopf, 2020.

[137] Mega-Rich Recoup COVID-Losses in Record Time Yet Billions Will Live in Poverty for at Least a Decade, Oxfam, January 24, 2021. Also see, Tami Luhby, The megarich have already recovered from the pandemic. It may take the poor a decade to do so, CNN Business, January 24, 2021; Esmé Berkhout, Nick Galasso, Max Lawson, Pablo Andrés Rivero Morales, Anjela Taneja, and Diego Alejo Vázquez Pimentel, The Inequality Virus: Bringing together a world torn apart by coronavirus through a fair, just and sustainable economy, Oxfam International, 2021; Daniel Tencer, Canada’s Richest 44 People Add $53.6B in Wealth as 20% of Low-Income Jobs Vanish: Canada faces the spectre of ‘the greatest increase in inequality on record’ amid soaring investments and disappearing jobs, Oxfam says, Huffington Post, January 26, 2021.

[138] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018.

[139] Jacob Hacker, Nathan Loewentheil, How Big Money Corrupts the Economy, Democracy Journal, Winter 2013.

[140] Jacob Hacker, Nathan Loewentheil, How Big Money Corrupts the Economy, Democracy Journal, Winter 2013. Also see, Big Money in Politics: Meet the billionaire donors shaping the 2020 presidential election, Business Insider, August 9, 2020; Elin Falguera, Samuel Jones, and Magnus Ohman (editors), Funding of Political Parties and Election Campaigns: A Handbook on Political Finance, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2014; Peter Hagel, Billionaires in World Politics, Oxford University Press, 2020.

[141] Andrew Cumbers, Economically marginalized voters played a critical role in Trump’s rise, Brexit, and a shift to the far right in Europe, Business Insider, January 13, 2017. [Originally published in The Conversation.com: Andrew Cumbers, New index of economic marginalisation helps explain Trump, Brexit, and alt.right, The Conversation, January 12, 2017] – “populist ‘outsiders’ with simplistic yet ultimately flawed political and economic narratives”. Also see: Editorial Board, The Patriotic Response to Populism, Bloomberg, January 3, 2017; Christopher Alessi, Siemens warns wave of populism threatens business, Market Watch, November 10, 2016:“Populism is dangerous because it demands simplistic solutions to complicated problems — and when its solutions fail, the anger is apt to mount.” 

[142] Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; ‘The risk is very high, and we need to pay very close attention to what’s happening in Europe’, Business Insider, December 30, 2016. For example, also see: overviews of the literature in Hans-Georg Betz, Radical Rightwing Populism in Western Europe, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1994; Piero Ignazi, Extreme right parties in Western Europe, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003; Herbert Kitschelt with Anthony J. McGann, The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1995; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Cas Mudde, Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Ruth Wodak, Majid KhosraviNik and Brigitte Mral, Eds., Right-Wing Populism in Europe, London: Bloomsbury, 2013; Carlos de la Torre, Ed., The Promise and Perils of Populism: Global Perspectives, Lexington, KT: University of Kentucky Press, 2015; Matt Golder, ‘Far Right Parties in Europe’, Annual Review of Political Science 19:477-97, 2016; Thomas Piketty, Capital, Cambridge, MA: Bellnap Press, 2014; Jacob Hacker, The Great Risk Shift: The New Economic Insecurity and the Decline of the American Dream, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006; Ronald Inglehart, Modernization and Post modernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997; Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, Sacred and Secular, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris, Its not just Trump. Authoritarian populism is rising across the West. Here’s why, Washington Post, March 11, 2016; Classic works on the rise of populism, The Economist, December 3, 2016; Katharine Murphy, Australia in 2016: the year leaders flailed as populism sailed, The Guardian (Australia), December 27, 2016.

[143] A perfectly timed book on populism: John Judis has written a powerful account of the forces shaking Europe and America, The Economist, December 3, 2016. See, John Judis, The Populist Explosion, 2016.

[144] A perfectly timed book on populism: John Judis has written a powerful account of the forces shaking Europe and America, The Economist, December 3, 2016. See, John Judis, The Populist Explosion, 2016; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; A perfectly timed book on populism: John Judis has written a powerful account of the forces shaking Europe and America, The Economist, December 3, 2016. See, John Judis, The Populist Explosion, 2016.

[145] Christine Lagarde, The Role of Business in Supporting a more Inclusive Global Economy, Conference on Inclusive Capitalism, New York, International Monetary Fund, October 10, 2016; A perfectly timed book on populism: John Judis has written a powerful account of the forces shaking Europe and America, The Economist, December 3, 2016. See, John Judis, The Populist Explosion, 2016; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016.  Also see: Nouriel Roubini, The Political Left and Right Are Being Upended by Globalization Politics, Huffington Post, August 23, 2016:

“The backlash against globalization is real and mounting in advanced economies. But it can be managed through policies that ensure that the benefits of globalization continue, that mitigates collateral damage to those who lose out and that makes losers more likely to eventually join the ranks of the winners.”

[146] Tom Monahan, Populism Unleashed: 5 Steps for Business Leaders to Shape a Healthy Society and Boost Performance, CEB Global, November 9, 2016; Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017;  Also see, Annie Lowrey, 2016: A Year Defined by America’s Diverging Economies, The Atlantic, December 30, 2016; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016.

[147] Christina Pazzanese, Economic and political inequities are interlaced, analysts say, leaving many Americans poor and voiceless, The Harvard Gazette, February 8, 2016.

[148] Stephen Fussell, How Business Leaders Can Best Respond to the Rise of Populism: populism reflects worry about the economy and sagging faith in political institutions – insightful business leaders will respond by offering stability and purpose, Entrepreneur, September 19, 2016; Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017. Also see, Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Anand Giridharadas, When Technology Sets off a Populist Revolt, New York Times, August 29, 2016;  ‘The risk is very high, and we need to pay very close attention to what’s happening in Europe’, Business Insider, December 30, 2016; Peter Murphy, Populism Rising, Quadrant, May 25, 2016. For example, also see: overviews of the literature in Hans-Georg Betz, Radical Rightwing Populism in Western Europe, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1994; Piero Ignazi, Extreme right parties in Western Europe, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003; Herbert Kitschelt with Anthony J. McGann, The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1995; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Cas Mudde, Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Ruth Wodak, Majid KhosraviNik and Brigitte Mral, Eds., Right-Wing Populism in Europe, London: Bloomsbury, 2013; Carlos de la Torre, Ed., The Promise and Perils of Populism: Global Perspectives, Lexington, KT: University of Kentucky Press, 2015; Matt Golder, ‘Far Right Parties in Europe’, Annual Review of Political Science 19:477-97, 2016; Thomas Piketty, Capital, Cambridge, MA: Bellnap Press, 2014; Jacob Hacker, The Great Risk Shift: The New Economic Insecurity and the Decline of the American Dream, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006; Ronald Inglehart, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997; Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, Sacred and Secular, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris, Its not just Trump. Authoritarian populism is rising across the West. Here’s why, Washington Post, March 11, 2016; Classic works on the rise of populism, The Economist, December 3, 2016. Also see: – Pankaj Mishra, Welcome to the age of anger, The Guardian, December 8, 2016; Donna Twombly, Letter to the Editor: Those left behind by economy turn to populism, Portland Press Herald, November 20, 2016; Donna Twombly, Opinion: Want to understand Trump’s populist uprising? Just look at the rural Maine left behind, Bangor Daily News, November 16, 2016.

[149] Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016. For example, also see: overviews of the literature in Hans-Georg Betz, Radical Rightwing Populism in Western Europe, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1994; Piero Ignazi, Extreme right parties in Western Europe, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003; Herbert Kitschelt with Anthony J. McGann, The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1995; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Cas Mudde, Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Ruth Wodak, Majid KhosraviNik and Brigitte Mral, Eds., Right-Wing Populism in Europe, London: Bloomsbury, 2013; Carlos de la Torre, Ed., The Promise and Perils of Populism: Global Perspectives, Lexington, KT: University of Kentucky Press, 2015; Matt Golder, ‘Far Right Parties in Europe’, Annual Review of Political Science 19:477-97, 2016; Thomas Piketty, Capital, Cambridge, MA: Bellnap Press, 2014; Jacob Hacker, The Great Risk Shift: The New Economic Insecurity and the Decline of the American Dream, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006; Ronald Inglehart, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997; Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, Sacred and Secular, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011; Pippa Norris, Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Pippa Norris, Its not just Trump. Authoritarian populism is rising across the West. Here’s why, Washington Post, March 11, 2016; Classic works on the rise of populism, The Economist, December 3, 2016. Also see: Peter Murphy, Populism Rising, Quadrant, May 25, 2016:

“Populism’s electoral success is a function of voter anxiety. It appeals to stressed, dissatisfied and angry voters who have lost confidence in the political system. These alienated voters reach the conclusion that no conventional party or candidate is responsive to their problems. So they turn elsewhere.”

[150] The economic inequality perspective — emphasizes the consequences for electoral behavior arising from profound changes transforming the workforce and society in post-industrial economies. There is overwhelming evidence of powerful trends toward greater income and wealth inequality in the West, based on the rise of the knowledge economy, technological automation, and the collapse of manufacturing industry, global flows of labor, goods, peoples, and capital (especially the inflow of migrants and refugees), the erosion of organized labor, shrinking welfare safety-nets, and neo-liberal austerity policies.  According to this view, rising economic insecurity and social deprivation among the left-behinds has fueled popular resentment of the political classes. This situation is believed to have made the less secure strata of society – low-waged unskilled workers, the long-term unemployed, households dependent on shrinking social benefits, residents of public housing, single-parent families, and poorer white populations living in inner-city areas with concentrations of immigrants– susceptible to the anti-establishment, nativist, and xenophobic scare-mongering exploited of populist movements, parties, and leaders, blaming ‘Them’ for stripping prosperity, job opportunities, and public services from ‘Us’: Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016.

[151] The cultural backlash perspective — suggests that the surge in votes for populist parties can be explained not as a purely economic phenomenon but in large part as a reaction against progressive cultural change. This argument builds on the ‘silent revolution’ theory of value change, which holds that the unprecedentedly high levels of existential security experienced by the people of developed Western societies during the postwar decades brought an intergenerational shift toward post-materialist values, such as cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism, generating rising support for left-libertarian parties such as the Greens and other progressive movements advocating environmental protection, human rights, and gender equality.  A large body of empirical evidence documents these developments, which first became evident in affluent societies during the early-1970s, when the postwar generation first surfaced into political relevance, bringing an era of student protest.  This cultural shift has sometimes been depicted as an inexorable cultural escalator moving post-industrial societies steadily in a more progressive direction, as opportunities for college education have expanded to more and more sectors of the population and as younger cohorts have gradually replaced their parents and grandparents in the population. But it has been clear from the start that reactions to these developments triggered a counterrevolutionary retro backlash, especially among the older generation, white men, and less educated sectors, who sense decline and actively reject the rising tide of progressive values, resent the displacement of familiar traditional norms, and provide a pool of supporters potentially vulnerable to populist appeals.  Sectors once culturally predominant in Western Europe may react angrily to the erosion of their privileges and status: Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016.

[152] Dalibor Rohac, Liz Kennedy and Vikram Singh, Drivers of Authoritarian Populism in the United States, American Progress, May 10, 2018; Israel Butler, It’s Time for Some Answers on Populist Authoritarians, Liberties, December 6, 2018; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016; Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, Pelican, 2018; Konstantin Sonin, The Historical Perspective on the Trump Puzzle: A Review of Barry Eichengreen’s ‘The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era’, American Economic Association, 2020 (Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming); Marin Lessenski, Assya Kavrakova, Emily Long, Huw Longton, Lorene Weber, and Marrit Westerweel, Societies outside Metropolises: the role of civil society organisations in facing populism: Study, European Economic and Social Committee, 2019; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Carisa Nietsche, Combating Populism, CNAS (Center for a New American Security), March 2020; Tomasz Mickiewicz, What explains support for authoritarian populists in Hungary and Poland?, The Conversation, December 18, 2020; Kevin Clements, Authoritarian Populism and Atavistic Nationalism: 21^st-Century Challenges to Peacebuilding and Development, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, Vol. 13, Issue 3, 2018; Thorsten Wojczewski, ‘Enemies of the people’: Populism and the politics of (in)security, European Journal of International Security, Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2020; Tanya Voss, Jo Daugherty Bailey, Jim Ife, and Michaela Kottig, The Threatening Troika of Populism, Nationalism, and Neoliberalism, Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, Vol. 3, 2018; Dani Rodrik, What is driving modern authoritarian populism?, Mint, July 11, 2019; Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018; Italo Colantone and Piero Stanig, Heterogeneous drivers of heterogenous populism, VoxEU, December 10, 2019.

[153] Oscar Williams-Grut, Brexit and Trump are just the start – populism will strike Europe next, Business Insider, November 10, 2016.  But also see: Paul Krugman, Populism, Real and Phony, New York Times, December 23, 2016; Jennifer Rudin, Will Trump drop populism like a bad habit?, Washington Post, December 27, 2016:

“Trump risks blowing his populist image … Whatever the merits of these individual measures, collectively they look like stereotypical Republican reverse-Robin Hood policies (take from the poor and give to the rich). Allowing Wall Street to dominate the new administration (in the person of so many Cabinet officials and by zeroing out the consumer protection board) would make Trump into the quintessential Big Business president, not the defender of the little guy.

Democrats may not be able to stop the train, but they can begin to restore their image as the party of the little guy by highlighting the very un-populist polices that will be coming down the pike. If Trump insists on serving up 1980s-vintage economic policy, Trump may lose the affection of his white working-class base, whose members actually believed his populist rhetoric. For a president starting out with an approval rating below 45 percent, that could be a serious blow — and the beginning of a Democratic comeback.”

Also see: John Loyd, For left-behinders, populists paint a picture of a better future, Financial Times, August 16, 2016; Conor Lynch, False hope for sale: Trump, Brexit and the irrational response to the very real threat of neoliberal policies, Salon, June 28, 2016.

[154] Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017.

[155] Christine Lagarde, The Role of Business in Supporting a more Inclusive Global Economy, Conference on Inclusive Capitalism, New York, International Monetary Fund, October 10, 2016. Alana Semuels, How to Stop Short-Term Thinking at America’s Companies, The Atlantic, December 30, 2016. For discussion of short and long term strategy, and discussion re purpose of organization and duty to stakeholders (shareholders and public/society), also see: American Prosperity Project (an initiative spearheaded by the Aspen Institute – aspeninstitute.org – to encourage companies and the nation to engage in more long-term thinking):

“The American Prosperity Project is a nonpartisan framework for long-term investment to support our families and communities and reinvigorate the economy to create jobs and prosperity. There is no viable model under which either business or government can or should shoulder the responsibility for long-term investment alone; both are required.

The time is right for a national conversation about long-term investment in infrastructure, basic science, education and training for workers who feel the brunt of globalization and technology. We need to focus on the critical levers for economic growth along with sources of revenue to help pay for it, as well as ways to overcome the short-term thinking currently baked into government policy and business protocols.

The ideas offered here have been developed under the auspices of the Aspen Institute in consultation with a non-partisan working group of experts in public policy formation, tax and regulation, business, and corporate law and governance. …”

[156] Tom Monahan, Populism Unleashed: 5 Steps for Business Leaders to Shape a Healthy Society and Boost Performance, CEB Global, November 9, 2016; Klaus Schwab, Five Leadership priorities for 2017, World Economic Forum, January 2, 2017;  Also see, Annie Lowrey, 2016: A Year Defined by America’s Diverging Economies, The Atlantic, December 30, 2016; Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Culture, Leadership and Personal Liability – Ethics and Compliance Programs in the 21^st Century, Sigurdson Post, October 5, 2016.

[157] Jeffry Frieden, The Political Economy of Economic Policy: We should pay closer attention to the interactions between politics, economics, and other realms, International Monetary Fund, Finance and Development, June 2020; Stephen Kobrin, Multinational Corporations, the Protest Movement and the Future of Global Governance, Chapter 9 in A. Chandler and B. Mazlish (editors), Leviathans: Multinational Corporations and the New Global History, Cambridge University Press, 2005. Also see, Dana Milbank, This is what happens when corporations run the government, Washington Post, March 15, 2019; Allan Drazen, Political Economy in Macroeconomics, chapter one: What Is Political Economy?, Princeton University Press, 2018; Will Kenton, Political Economy, Investopedia, updated November 18, 2020.

[158] Jeffry Frieden, The Political Economy of Economic Policy: We should pay closer attention to the interactions between politics, economics, and other realms, International Monetary Fund, Finance and Development, June 2020. Also see, Allan Drazen, Political Economy in Macroeconomics, chapter one: What Is Political Economy?, Princeton University Press, 2018; Will Kenton, Political Economy, Investopedia, updated November 18, 2020.

[159] Jeffrey Sachs, Scott Pruitt sums up America’s big challenge, CNN, April 10, 2018.

[160] Simon Lee, Common Good, Encyclopaedia Britannica (Britannica.com). Also see, for example: Professor Michael Sandel, Towards a just society, The Guardian, February 20, 2010.

[161] U.S.: George Monbiot, How Corporate dark money is taking power on both sides of the Atlantic, The Guardian, February 2, 2017; Jacob Hacker and Nathan Loewentheil, How Big Money Corrupts the Economy, Democracy Journal.org, Winter 2013; Charles Wheelan, It’s Official: In America, Affluence Equals Influence, US News.com, April 22, 2014; Jeffrey Sachs, Scott Pruitt sums up America’s big challenge, CNN, April 10, 2018; Andrew Prokop, 40 charts that explain money in politics, Vox, July 30, 2014; Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Dark Money as a Political Sovereignty Problem, King’s Law Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2017; Alex Tausanovitch, NRA, Russia and Trump: How ‘dark money’ is poisoning American democracy, CNBC, February 15, 2018; Matt Kelly, It’s Harder to Pay Off Foreign Governments than the American One: Novartis would think twice before giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to Vladimir Putin’s lawyer. But in Washington, the rules are different, BuzzFeed News, May 9, 2018; Fredreka Schouten, Exclusive: Three-quarters of the secret money in recent elections came from 15 groups, USA Today, September 12, 2018; Michael Beckel, Dark Money Illuminated, Issue One (issueone.org), 2018.

UK: George Monbiot, How Corporate dark money is taking power on both sides of the Atlantic, The Guardian, February 2, 2017; Duncan Hames, British politics is in the pocket of big money. And the EU vote was no exception, The Guardian, October 7, 2016; Tamasin Cave and Andy Rowell, The truth about lobbying: 10 ways big business controls government, The Guardian, March 12, 2014; Carole Cadwalladr, ‘Dark money’ is threat to integrity of UK elections, say leading academics, The Guardian, April 1, 2017, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Dark Money as a Political Sovereignty Problem, King’s Law Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2017.

Australia: Mike Steketee, Donations and democracy: how money is compromising our political system, ABC News (abc.net.au), July 2, 2015; Gareth Hutchens, Labor senator Sam Dastyari claims 10 companies have taken control of Australian politics, Sydney Morning Herald, February 5, 2016; Warwick Smith, Political donations corrupt democracy in ways you might not realise, The Guardian, September 11, 2014; Professor Iain McMenamin, No bribes please, we’re corrupt Australians, The Conversation, May 30, 2016.

EU: Ian Traynor, 30,000 lobbyists and counting: is Brussels under corporate sway?, The Guardian, May 8, 2014; Money, Politics, Power: Corruptions Risks in Europe, Transparency International (transparency.eu), 2012.

Canada: Alan Yuhas, How Justin Trudeau Was Ensnared by Scandal: A Corruption Case and ‘Veiled Threats’, New York Times, March 4, 2019; Kristy Kirkup and Mia Rabson, Trudeau acknowledges ‘erosion of trust’ in SNC-Lavalin scandal, BNN Bloomberg, March 7, 2019; Nancy Macdonald, Welcome to British Columbia, where you ‘pay to play’, Maclean’s, February 11, 2017; Dan Levin, British Columbia: The ‘Wild West’ of Canadian Political Cash, New York Times, January 13, 2017; Ian Bailey, Donations taint B.C.’s approval of Trans Mountain pipeline expansion: advocacy group, Globe and Mail, January 31, 2017; Anver Emon, Foreign Dark Money Taints Canadian Parliamentary Proceeding, University of Toronto Faculty of Law (law.utoronto.ca), October 23, 2017; Linda McQuaig, Who owns Stephen Harper? Money in Politics. ‘Secret Donors’ Supported His Rise to Power, Global Research.ca, February 13, 2015 (and see, Now Toronto.com, February 4, 2015); Beth Hong, Charitable Fraser Institute received $4.3 million in foreign funding since 2000, Vancouver Observer, August 30, 2012; Anne Kingston, How Canada’s growing anti-abortion movement plans to swing the next federal election, Macleans.ca, September 12, 2018; Daniel Tencer, Koch Brothers, Tea Party Billionaires, Donated To Right-Wing Fraser Institute, Reports Show, Huffington Post, April 26, 2012; Warren Bell, Canada’s Republican prime minister, National Observer, October 18, 2015; The Far Right Dark Money Network Behind Conservative Politics: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, North 99.org, January 26, 2018; Olivia Ward, Billionaire Koch brothers are big oil players in Alberta, Toronto Star, July 6, 2014; Daphne Bramham, Lessons for Canada from how the Koch brothers hijacked democracy, Vancouver Sun, September 25, 2016; Mitchell Anderson, Canada’s Real Problem with Intrusive Foreign Interests, The Tyee, February 24, 2014; David Sassoon, Koch Brothers’ Activism Protects their 50 Years in Canadian Heavy Oils, Reuters, May 10, 2012; Ed Finn (editor), Canada After Harper: His ideology-fuelled attack on Canadian society and values, John Lorimer & Company, 2015; Tristin Hopper, Stephen Harper at Bohemian Grove? Hacked email says ex-leader visited shadowy GOP summer camp, National Post, September 16, 2016; Dermod Travis, B.C. Politics Has a ‘Dark Money’ Problem, Huffington Post, December 9, 2015; Graham Thomson, Lone Liberal MLA David Swann warns of ‘dark money’ dangers, Edmonton Journal, November 2, 2017; Chrystia Freeland, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else, Penguin Press, 2012.

[162] Rohitesh Dhawan and Sean West, The CEO as Chief Geopolitical Officer, KPMG.com, 2018. Also see, 10 biggest corporations make more money than most countries in the world combined, Global Justice Now, September 12, 2016. Also see, Robin Wigglesworth, Larry Fink identifies China as critical BlackRock priority, Financial Times, April 8, 2018; Nyshka Chandran, Hopes are high for China to announce market access reforms on Tuesday, CNBC, April 9, 2018. Also see for example only, Amazon corporation and its CEO Jeff Bezo: Flora Carr, Amazon Is Now More Valuable Than Microsoft and Only 2 Other Companies Are Worth More, Fortune, February 15, 2018; Kate Vinton, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is the Richest Person in the World, Forbes, October 27, 2017; Chris Isidore, Jeff Bezos is the richest person in history, CNN, January 9, 2018; Ben Schiller, Is Amazon Killing Jobs and Destroying Communities? At what cost does convenience come? A new report says it’s not just jobs, but the rest of the economy as well, Fast Company, December 2, 2016; Olivia LaVecchia and Stacy Mitchell, Amazon’s Stranglehold: How the Company’s Tightening Grip Is Stifling Competition, Eroding Jobs, and Threatening Communities, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, November 2016.

[163] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020; Andrew Prokop, 40 charts that explain money in politics, Vox, July 30, 2014; Paul Blumenthal, Return on Lobbying Investment: 22,000%, Sunlight Foundation.com, April 9, 2009, Also see, Ian Traynor, 30,000 lobbyists and counting: is Brussels under corporate sway?, The Guardian, May 8, 2014; George Monbiot, How Corporate dark money is taking power on both sides of the Atlantic, The Guardian, February 2, 2017; James Hohmann, The Daily 202: Mick Mulvaney’s confession highlights the corrosive influence of money in politics, Washington Post, April 25, 2018; David Graham, Mick Mulvaney Says the Quiet Part Out Loud – head of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau tells it like it is: if you want access to policymakers, it’s helpful to donate lots of money, The Atlantic, April 25, 2018; Renae Merle, Mulvaney discloses ‘hierarchy’ for meeting lobbyists, saying some would be seen only if they paid, Washington Post, April 25, 2018.

[164] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018. Also see, Business Among Friends: Why corporate tax dodgers are not yet losing sleep over global tax reform, Oxfam.org, May 2014; Mike Crawley, Ford Government’s top political staff hold ‘secretive’ meeting with business leaders: ‘refrain from mentioning this event on social media’, Ontario Chamber of Commerce tells invitees, CBC News, December 6, 2018; Martin Lukacs, Doug Ford isn’t ‘for the little guy’ – he’s a mercenary for the millionaire class, Guardian, May 25, 2018.

[165] Saskia Brechenmacher, Comparing Democratic Distress in the United States and Europe, Carnegie Endowment.org, June 21, 2018; Sinead Baker, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slams Harvard orientation for freshman lawmakers as ‘lobbyist project’ that hypes tax cuts for corporations, Business Insider, December 10, 2018.

[166] ICYMI: Sen. Cruz: It’s Time to Break the Washington Cartel – delivers speech exposing big government, bug business cronyism, U.S. Senator for Texas Ted Cruz (cruz.senate.gov), June 24, 2015. Also see, Jon Schwarz, ‘Yes, We’re Corrupt’: A List of Politicians Admitting That Money Controls Politics, The Intercept, July 30, 2015.

[167] Al Gore, The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change, Random House Publishing Group, 2013. Also see, Jon Schwarz, ‘Yes, We’re Corrupt’: A List of Politicians Admitting That Money Controls Politics, The Intercept, July 30, 2015.

[168] Martin Wolf, Milton Friedman was wrong on the corporation: The doctrine that has guided economists and businesses for 50 years needs re-evaluation, Financial Times, December 8, 2020.

[169] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020;  Anup Shah, Tax Avoidance and Tax Havens; Undermining Democracy, Global Issues.org, January 7, 2013; Is Sweeping Reform Necessary, Tax Me If You Can, Frontline, PBS, February 19, 2004.

[170] Tim Dunlop, Inequality is a political problem, not an economic one, ABC News (abc.net.au), November 27, 2013.  Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020.

[171] Joseph Stiglitz, The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future, W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. Also see,  Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018; Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[172] Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States (1933-1945), Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies, April 29, 1938, The American Presidency Project (presidency.ucsb.edu). Also see, Felix Salmon, Why the world elite won’t lift a finger to stop Trump, Splinter News.com, December 16, 2016.

[173] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020; Chrystia Freeland, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else, Penguin Press, 2012; Don Pittis, Plutocrats with the crony capitalism are taking over again in the U.S., CBC.ca, February 20, 2017; Nick Hanauer, To My Fellow Plutocrats: You Can Cure Trumpism – pay your workers a decent wage, Politico.com, July 18, 2017.

[174] Martin Wolf, A Republican tax plan built for plutocrats, Financial Times, November 21, 2017; John Wasik, How the GOP Tax Plan Scrooges Middle Class, Retired and Poor, Forbes, November 29, 2017; Peter Goodman and Patricia Cohen, It Started as a Tax Cut. Now It Could Change American Life, New York Times, November 29, 2017; Josh Hoxie, Trump’s Tax Cuts Are the Biggest Wealth Grab in Modern History, Fortune, November 3, 2017; Stan Collender, Paul Ryan’s Most Lasting Legacy: Permanent Trillion-Dollar Deficits, Forbes, April 11, 2018; Mark Warner, Congress and the $1 trillion deficit: time to be straight with the American People, CNBC, April 10, 2018; Stephen Gandel, Trump tax cut is the gift that keeps on giving, BNN Bloomberg.ca, May 25, 2018; Dylan Scott, House Republican: my donors told me to pass the tax bill ‘or don’t ever call me again’, Vox, November 7, 2017; Emily Stewart, Citigroup CEO explains why tax cuts outweigh Trump tweets – and Citibank reported a 24 percent profit jump. Here’s how they’re related, Vox, April 14, 2018; Bob Ryan, Top Republican senator says voting for the GOP tax law could be ‘one of the worst votes I’ve made’, Business Insider UK, April 11, 2018 (“This Congress and this administration likely will go down as one of the most fiscally irresponsible administrations and Congresses that we’ve had”); Tom Dickinson, How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich – the inside story of how the Republicans abandoned the poor and middle class to pursue their relentless agenda of tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent, Rolling Stone, November 9, 2011:

“To truly understand the depth of the GOP’s entrenched opposition to Obamacare [healthcare], it’s crucial to understand how the reform is financed: The single largest source of funds comes from increasing Medicare taxes on the wealthy – including new taxes on investment income. According to the Tax Policy Center, Americans who make more than $1 million a year will pay an extra $37,381 in annual taxes under the plan. The top 400 taxpayers [billionaires] would contribute even more: an average of $11 million each. Rarely in American history has a tax so effectively targeted the top one percent.” 

[175] Bloomberg, Trump signs executive orders cracking down on federal unions representing about 2.1 million employees, Los Angeles Times, May 25, 2018; Robert Barnes, Supreme Court rules that companies can require workers to accept individual arbitration, Washington Post, May 21, 2018; Adam Liptak, Supreme Court Upholds Workplace Arbitration Contracts Barring Class Actions, New York Times, May 21, 2018.

[176] Hilary Matfess and Michael Miklaucic (editors), Beyond Convergence: World Without Order, Center for Complex Operations at National Defense University, 2016 – see, Chapter 2, Nils Gilman, The Twin Insurgencies: Plutocrats and Criminals Challenge the Westphalian State; Lars Osberg, The Age of Increasing Inequality: The Astonishing Rise of Canada’s 1%, James Lorimer & Company Publishers, 2018; Daniel Tencer, Relentlessly Rising Wealth Disparity Threatens To Destabilize Canada: Author, September 11, 2018; Katrina vanden Heuvel, Trump’s budget is a bitter betrayal, Washington Post, March 19, 2019. Also see, Peter Goodman, Britain’s Big Squeeze: In Britain, Austerity is Changing Everything, New York Times, May 28, 2018; Matthew Snow, Against Charity, Jacobinmag.com, August 25, 2015; Peter Singer, Famine, Affluence, and Morality, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 1972; Peter Singer, The Life You can Save, Random House, 2009; Jacob Silverman, The Billionaire Philanthropist, LongReads.com, March 13, 2018; Anand Giridharadas, Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, Alfred A. Knopf publisher, 2018. Also see,

[177] Hilary Matfess and Michael Miklaucic (editors), Beyond Convergence: World Without Order, Center for Complex Operations at National Defense University, 2016 – see, Chapter 2, Nils Gilman, The Twin Insurgencies: Plutocrats and Criminals Challenge the Westphalian State; Lars Osberg, The Age of Increasing Inequality: The Astonishing Rise of Canada’s 1%, James Lorimer & Company Publishers, 2018; Daniel Tencer, Relentlessly Rising Wealth Disparity Threatens To Destabilize Canada: Author, September 11, 2018; Katrina vanden Heuvel, Trump’s budget is a bitter betrayal, Washington Post, March 19, 2019. Also see, Peter Goodman, Britain’s Big Squeeze: In Britain, Austerity is Changing Everything, New York Times, May 28, 2018; Matthew Snow, Against Charity, Jacobinmag.com, August 25, 2015; Peter Singer, Famine, Affluence, and Morality, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 1972; Peter Singer, The Life You can Save, Random House, 2009; Jacob Silverman, The Billionaire Philanthropist, LongReads.com, March 13, 2018; Anand Giridharadas, Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, Alfred A. Knopf publisher, 2018.

[178] Katrina vanden Heuvel, Trump’s budget is a bitter betrayal, Washington Post, March 19, 2019. Also see, Chuck Jones, Trump’s Additional Budget Deficit Was Largely Due To The Corporate Tax Cut, Forbes, October 31, 2018; Moody’s downgrades Ontario’s credit rating, citing deficit, revenue cuts under Doug Ford, Ottawa Citizen, December 14, 2018;

[179] Roberta Lexier and Avi Lewis, Corporate welfare bums: It’s payback time, The Conversation, December 5, 2018; Roberta Lexier and Avi Lewis, It’s Time ‘Corporate welfare bums’ Paid Canadians Back, Huffington Post, December 11, 2018.

[180] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020; Simon Tilford, As the rich get richer, why don’t British people care about inequality?, Guardian, September 18, 2018; Toby Sanger, A crisis of public revenue: progressive taxation can equalize and stabilize our economy while providing insurance against the next inevitable crash, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, September 1, 2018; Christina Pazzanese, The costs of inequality: Increasingly, it’s the rich and the rest – economic and political inequalities are interlaced, Harvard Gazette, February 8, 2016; Tim Dunlop, Inequality is a political problem, not an economic one, ABC News (abc.net.au), November 27, 2013.

[181] Christopher Ingraham, Wealth Concentration returning to ‘levels last seen during the Roaring Twenties’, according to new research, Washington Post, February 8, 2019 (citing Professor Gabriel Zucman); Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer – and Turned its Back on the Middle Class, Simon & Schuster, 2010.

[182] David Rotman, Capitalism is in crisis. To save it, we need to rethink economic growth, MIT Technology Review, December 14, 2020. Also see, Naomi Xu Elegant, How two of India’s richest men became the target of farmer boycotts: Farmers protesting agricultural reform laws claim that Indian billionaires will benefit while they suffer, Fortune, January 22, 2021 (“Complaints of “crony capitalism” stretch back to the beginning of Modi’s first term in 2014, when the prime minister flew to New Delhi to assume office in Gautam Adani’s private jet. Both Ambani and Adani are personally close with Modi, and both men’s fortunes—which are built on sprawling businesses, from energy to defense to port infrastructure—have soared since Modi became prime minister seven years ago.”).

[183] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018.

[184] Mark Thomas, The UK stands at a Crossroads, 99 Percent, July 27, 2019; Crony Capitalism: Unhealthy Relations Between Business and Government: A White Paper by the Committee for Economic Development of the Conference Board, Committee for Economic Development, 2015. Also see, Post-war reconstruction and development in the Golden Age of Capitalism, Chapter 2, in World Economics and Social Survey 2017, United Nations, 2017; Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018; Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019; Robert Reich, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, Knopf, 2020; Robert Reich, Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few, Vintage, 2016; Robert Reich, Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life, Knopf, 2007; Jeffrey Sachs, The Price of Civilization: Reawakening American Virtue and Prosperity, Random House, 2012.

[185] Owen Jones, The British middle class is in freefall, its young people pushed into precarity, The Guardian, December 12, 2020; Neal Gabler, The Secret Shame of Middle-Class Americans: Nearly half of Americans would have trouble finding $400 to pay for an emergency, The Atlantic, May 2016; Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[186] Owen Jones, The British middle class is in freefall, its young people pushed into precarity, The Guardian, December 12, 2020; Neal Gabler, The Secret Shame of Middle-Class Americans: Nearly half of Americans would have trouble finding $400 to pay for an emergency, The Atlantic, May 2016; Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[187] Linda Nazareth, The ‘K-shaped’ recovery won’t be kind to Canada’s older workers, Globe and Mail, December 13, 2020.

[188] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019. See, Rupert Neate, Richest 1% own half the world’s wealth, study finds, The Guardian, November 14, 2017; Christopher Ingraham, The richest 1 percent now owns more of the country’s wealth than at any time in the past 50 years, Washington Post, December 6, 2017; Michael Savage, Richest 1% have almost a quarter of UK wealth, study claims, Guardian, January 3, 2021; Tommy Beer, Top 1% of U.S. Households Hold 15 Times More Wealth Than Bottom 50% Combined, Forbes, October 8, 2020; Dan Healing, Canada’s wealthiest 1% hold 25.6% of riches, new PBO report says, Investment Executive, June 17, 2020.

[189] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[190] Diane Francis, The Disunited Kingdom: An untethered Great Britain without a trade bloc, prosperity or an empire is a ship of state steaming toward the shoals, Financial Post, December 14, 2020 (“Brexit will go down as one of the biggest mistakes in British history and recent polls show that 70 per cent of Britons agree.”).

[191] Brian Nola, Why we can’t just blame rising inequality for the growth of populism around the world, The Conversation, August 13, 2019; Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, OECD Publishing, 2019; Dani Rodik, What’s driving right-wing populism? It’s both economic insecurity and the culture wars, Market Watch, July 16, 2019; Javier Garcia Arenas, Inequality and populism: myths and truths, CaixaBank Research, January 17, 2017; Sarah Jay, Anatolia Batruch, Jolanda Jetten, Craig McGarty, and Orla Muldoon, Economic Inequality and the rise of far-right populism: A social psychological analysis, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 29, Issue 5, 2019; Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Will Wilkinson, The Density Divide: Urbanization, Polarization, and Populist Backlash, Niskanen Center, June 26, 2019; Nat O’Connor, Three Connections between Rising Economic Inequality and the Rise of Populism, Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 28, 2017; Austin Botelho, The Short End of the Stick: Income Inequality and Populist Sentiment in Europe, Issues in Political Economy, Vol. 28, Issue 1, 2019.

[192] Ruth Green, The rise and rise of national populism: A global resurgence of populism and nationalism has galvanised support for leaders with policies inimical to the rule of law, International Bar Association, October 14, 2019. Also see, Yasmeen Serhan, Populism is Morphing in Insidious Ways, The Atlantic, January 6, 2020; Brian Nola, Why we can’t just blame rising inequality for the growth of populism around the world, The Conversation, August 13, 2019; Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, OECD Publishing, 2019; Dani Rodik, What’s driving right-wing populism? It’s both economic insecurity and the culture wars, Market Watch, July 16, 2019; Javier Garcia Arenas, Inequality and populism: myths and truths, CaixaBank Research, January 17, 2017; Sarah Jay, Anatolia Batruch, Jolanda Jetten, Craig McGarty, and Orla Muldoon, Economic Inequality and the rise of far-right populism: A social psychological analysis, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 29, Issue 5, 2019; Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019; Will Wilkinson, The Density Divide: Urbanization, Polarization, and Populist Backlash, Niskanen Center, June 26, 2019; Nat O’Connor, Three Connections between Rising Economic Inequality and the Rise of Populism, Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 28, 2017; Austin Botelho, The Short End of the Stick: Income Inequality and Populist Sentiment in Europe, Issues in Political Economy, Vol. 28, Issue 1, 2019.

[193] Eric Protzer, Social Mobility Explains Populism, Not Inequality or Culture, CID Working Paper No. 118, Center for International Development at Harvard University, September 2019 (Revised September 2020). Also see, Lubos Pastor and Pietro Veronesi, Populism: Why in rich countries and in good times, VoxEU (voxeu.org), December 12, 2019.

[194] Joseph Stiglitz, The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future, W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. Also see, Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018; Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[195] Daniel P. Tokaji, A Toxic Brew: Judicial Elections in the Age of Big-Money Politics, in The Politicization of Judicial Elections and Its Effect on Judicial Independence, 60 Cleveland State Law Review 461, 2012.

[196] See Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018, endnotes #123 and #130 for specific references for the U.S., UK, Australia, EU, and Canada.  Also see, Jeffrey Sachs, Scott Pruitt sums up America’s big challenge, CNN, April 10, 2018; Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, First Anchor Books Edition, 2016, 2017 (preface); George Tyler, Billionaire Democracy: The Hijacking of the American Political System, BenBella Books, 2018; Fredreka Schouten, Exclusive: Three-quarters of the secret money in recent elections came from 15 groups, USA Today, September 12, 2018; Michael Beckel, Dark Money Illuminated, Issue One (issueone.org), 2018; Tim Dunlop, Three things must change for a healthier democracy, ABC.net.au, October 17, 2013. Also see, for example: Charles Kaiser, Dark Money review: Nazi oil, the Koch brothers and a rightwing revolution, The Guardian, January 17, 2016; Daniel Ben-Ami, Book Review: ‘Dark Money’, by Jane Mayer, Financial Times, March 11, 2016;Donald Gutstein, Harperism: How Stephen Harper and his think tank colleagues have transformed Canada, James Lorimer & Company Publishers, 2014; Daphne Bramham, Lessons for Canada from how the Koch brothers hijacked democracy, Vancouver Sun, September 25, 2016;Alan Ehrenhalt, ‘Dark Money’, by Jane Mayer, New York Times, January 19, 2016; Tim Roemer and Zach Wamp, John McCain’s warning about dark money is real. Stop campaign finance corruption, USA Today, May 8, 2018.

[197] Matthew Yglesias, American democracy is doomed, Vox, October 8, 2015; David Moss, Fixing What’s Wrong with U.S. Politics, Harvard Business Review, March 2012.

[198] As noted by the New York Times, “if you think globalization, immigration, trade and demographic change have contributed to displacement and political anger, wait until robots take away millions and millions of jobs, including those requiring the use of a well-trained brain” [Anand Giridharadas, When Technology Sets off a Populist Revolt, New York Times, August 29, 2016].  Until recently, technology has been an often overlooked—but significant—factor, and going forward you can expect technology to change the economy even more than globalization [Simon Veazey, The Impact of Technology’s Invisible Hand, Epoch Times, October 28, 2016; Hadi Partovi, A trillion-dollar opportunity for America, LinkedIn, January 9, 2017]. Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen has noted that globalization and technology has “reinforced the shift away from lower-skilled jobs that require less education, to higher-skilled jobs that require college and advanced degrees,” and that “the jobs that globalization creates” – serving a global economy of billions of people – “are more likely to be filled by those who have secured the advantage of higher education” [Akin Oyedele, Trump could be looking at the job market all wrong, Business Insider, January 8, 2017].

[199] Caitlin Zaloom, Does the U.S. Still Have a ‘Middle Class’?: White-collar work today is fundamentally insecure, The Atlantic, November 4, 2018; Stephen Harper, Populism’s rise points to real problems in our world. We ignore them at our peril, Globe and Mail, October 6, 2018; Overhaul tax for the 21^st century, The Economist, August 9, 2018; Daniel Tencer, OECD Report Warns of ‘Unprecedented Wage Stagnation’ in Developed Countries, Huffington Post, July 9, 2018; Pedro Nicolaci da Costa, There’s one simple explanation for the wage stagnation ‘puzzle’ confounding top Fed officials, Business Insider, August 29, 2018; Steve Johnson, Global unemployment hits lowest point for 4 decades: UBS survey highlights impact of labour flexibility, lower wages and interest rates, Financial Times, December 5, 2018; Leonid Bershidsky, Underemployment is the New Unemployment: Western countries are celebrating low joblessness, but much of the new work is precarious and part-time, Bloomberg, September 26, 2018; Suresh Naidu, Eric Posner, and Glen Weyl, More and more companies have monopoly power over workers’ wages. That’s killing the economy, Vox, April 6, 2018; Nick Hanauer, To My Fellow Plutocrats: You Can Cure Trumpism – pay your workers a decent wage, Politico.com, July 18, 2017; Aleksandra Sagen, Loblaw shareholders reject proposal to study feasibility of paying a living wage, Globe and Mail, May 3, 2018; Jesse M. Fried (Harvard Law School) and Charles C.Y. Wang (Harvard Business School), Short-Termism and Capital Flows, Working Paper 17-062, 2017; Amy Minsky, Average hourly wages in Canada have barely budged in 40 years, Global News, June 15, 2017; Drew DeSilver, For most U.S. workers, real wages have barely budged in decades, Pew Research Center, August 7, 2018.  Note: re wage stagnation also see – Stephen J. Rose, How Different Studies Measure Income Inequality in the US: Piketty and Company Are Not the Only Game in Town, Income and Benefits Policy Center, Urban Institute (urban.org), December 2018.

[200] The economic inequality perspective — emphasizes the consequences for electoral behavior arising from profound changes transforming the workforce and society in post-industrial economies. There is overwhelming evidence of powerful trends toward greater income and wealth inequality in the West, based on the rise of the knowledge economy, technological automation, and the collapse of manufacturing industry, global flows of labor, goods, peoples, and capital (especially the inflow of migrants and refugees), the erosion of organized labor, shrinking welfare safety-nets, and neo-liberal austerity policies.  According to this view, rising economic insecurity and social deprivation among the left-behinds has fueled popular resentment of the political classes. This situation is believed to have made the less secure strata of society – low-waged unskilled workers, the long-term unemployed, households dependent on shrinking social benefits, residents of public housing, single-parent families, and poorer white populations living in inner-city areas with concentrations of immigrants– susceptible to the anti-establishment, nativist, and xenophobic scare-mongering exploited of populist movements, parties, and leaders, blaming ‘Them’ for stripping prosperity, job opportunities, and public services from ‘Us’. [Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series, August 2016]. Also see, Suresh Naidu, Eric Posner, and Glen Weyl, More and more companies have monopoly power over workers’ wages. That’s killing the economy, Vox, April 6, 2018.

[201] Caitlin Zaloom, Does the U.S. Still Have a ‘Middle Class’?: White-collar work today is fundamentally insecure, The Atlantic, November 4, 2018; Stephen Harper, Populism’s rise points to real problems in our world. We ignore them at our peril, Globe and Mail, October 6, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[202] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2020; Rana Dasgupta, The demise of the nation state, The Guardian, April 5, 2018. Also see, Hilary Matfess and Michael Miklaucic (editors), Beyond Convergence: World Without Order, Center for Complex Operations at National Defense University, 2016 (see, Chapter 2, Nils Gilman, The Twin Insurgencies: Plutocrats and Criminals Challenge the Westphalian State, etc).

[203] Martin Wolf, Milton Friedman was wrong on the corporation: The doctrine that has guided economists and businesses for 50 years needs re-evaluation, Financial Times, December 8, 2020.

[204] Terry F. Yoise, Preparing for a capitalism reset, GreenBiz, August 3, 2020.

[205] Chrystia Freeland, Plutocrats vs. Populists, New York Times, November 1, 2013. Also see, Chrystia Freeland, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else, Penguin Press, 2012; Sanjay Reddy, Trumpism Has Dealt a Mortal Blow to Orthodox Economics and ‘Social Science’, Institute for New Economic Thinking, November 23, 2016; Nick Hanauer, The Pitchforks are Coming … For Us Plutocrats, Politico, July/August 2014; Milan Zafirovski, The dark side of capitalism – in orthodox economics?, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 26, Issue 5, 2019; Robert Finbow, Rethinking State Theories for the ‘Deconsolidation of Democracy’: The Rise of Pluralist Plutocracies?, Presented to the Canadian Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Ryerson University, Toronto, June 1, 2017; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Belknap Press, 2017; Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, The origins of the Republican Party’s plutocratic populism, Washington Post, July 7, 2020; Greg Sargent, The GOP whitewashing of the Trump stain has quietly begun, Washington Post, December 21, 2020.

[206] Borge Brende and Pedro Gabriel Gomez Pensado, 3 ways to fight corruption and restore trust in leadership, World Economic Forum, December 1, 2020.

[207] Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[208] Borge Brende and Pedro Gabriel Gomez Pensado, 3 ways to fight corruption and restore trust in leadership, World Economic Forum, December 1, 2020.

[209] Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[210] Jeff Stein and Peter Whoriskey, The U.S. plans to lend $500 billion to large companies. It won’t require them to preserve jobs or limit executive pay, Washington Post, April 18, 2020. Also see, Emily Flitter and Peter Eavis, Some Companies Seeking Bailouts Had Piles of Cash, Then Spent It: They poured the money into stock buybacks and dividends. Now, those hurting from the pandemic want government aid, New York Times, April 24, 2020. But see: Patricia Kowsmann, European Bank Dividend Ban Lifted, but Restrictions Remain: European banks can resume dividends next year, cautioned not to go overboard on staff bonuses, Wall Street Journal, December 15, 2020.

[211] Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, FP Investigation: As CEWS flowed in, dividends flowed out: At least 68 Canadian companies have continued to pay out billions in dividends to their shareholders while receiving government aid, Financial Post, December 7, 2020; Kevin Carmichael, Arguing over optics of collecting subsidies while paying dividends obscures deeper issues: The issue is more about the signal it sends at a time when systemic unfairness has become undeniable, Financial Post, December 14, 2020; Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, CEOs raked in hefty dividends as their companies accepted CEWS, Financial Post analysis finds, Financial Post, December 22, 2020.

[212] Patrick Brethour, Wage subsidies flow to companies with deep pockets, analysis shows, Globe and Mail, January 8, 2021.

[213] Pamela Heaven, Posthaste: Canadian billionaires add $53 billion to their wealth pile during pandemic, Financial Post, November 26, 2020; Alex Hemingway and Michal Rozworski, Canadian Billionaires’ Wealth Is Skyrocketing in the Pandemic, The Tyee, September 17, 2020; Abby Neufeld, Toronto’s Wealthiest Family Became $8 Billion Richer Since the Pandemic Started, Narcity, January 5, 2021; Daniel Tencer, Canada’s Richest 44 People Add $53.6B in Wealth as 20% of Low-Income Jobs Vanish: Canada faces the spectre of ‘the greatest increase in inequality on record’ amid soaring investments and disappearing jobs, Oxfam says, Huffington Post, January 26, 2021.

[214] Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, FP Investigation: As CEWS flowed in, dividends flowed out: At least 68 Canadian companies have continued to pay out billions in dividends to their shareholders while receiving government aid, Financial Post, December 7, 2020; Kevin Carmichael, Arguing over optics of collecting subsidies while paying dividends obscures deeper issues: The issue is more about the signal it sends at a time when systemic unfairness has become undeniable, Financial Post, December 14, 2020; Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, CEOs raked in hefty dividends as their companies accepted CEWS, Financial Post analysis finds, Financial Post, December 22, 2020.

[215] Thomas Friedman, Made in the U.S.A.: Socialism for the Rich. Capitalism for the Rest, New York Times, January 26, 2021.

[216] Kevin Carmichael, A subsidy that is hard to resist, and sometimes harder to justify, Financial Post, December 7, 2020. Also see, Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, FP Investigation: As CEWS flowed in, dividends flowed out: At least 68 Canadian companies have continued to pay out billions in dividends to their shareholders while receiving government aid, Financial Post, December 7, 2020; Victor Ferreira and Kevin Carmichael, CEOs raked in hefty dividends as their companies accepted CEWS, Financial Post analysis finds, Financial Post, December 22, 2020.

[217] Emily Stewart, The progressive vision for economic growth, explained, Vox, November 4, 2019 (citing Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate economist at Columbia University and author of ‘People, Power and Profits’, W.W. Norton & Company, 2019).

[218] Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[219] Tara Henley, In The New Class War, political scientist Michael Lind argues that the cure for Trump-era populism is democratic pluralism, Globe and Mail, January 21, 2021. Also see, Michael Lind, The New Class War: Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite, Portfolio, 2020.

[220] Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018.

[221] Precarity is an outcome of economic policy: Brhmie Balaram, Insecurity in modern work: policy overlooks the ‘chronically precarious’ workers, London School of Economics (blogs.lse.ac.uk), March 1, 2018; Michael Nau and Matthew Soener, Income precarity and the financial crisis, Socio-Economic Review, June 21, 2017 (United States); Nick Pearce, The political forecast for 2017? Economic precarity and social division – strap yourself in; the UK post-Brexit will be a bleaker, more fragile place, Wired.co.uk, January 7, 2017 (UK); Francis Fong, We don’t know the extent of precarious work, Policy Options.irpp.org, January 25, 2018 (Canada); Ubiye Shin (translated and introduced by Sachie Mizohata), Inequality and Precarity in Japan: The Sorry Achievements of Abenomics, The Asia-Pacific Journal, Volume 16, Issue 6, March 15, 2018 (Japan); More than half of Ontario’s postsecondary jobs show signs of precarity: precarious work is a serious and growing problem at Ontario’s colleges and universities, PressProgress.ca, February 12, 2018; Jim Edwards, UK ‘underemployment’ is worse now than during the financial crisis of 2008, Business Insider, April 24, 2018; Jim Edwards, New stats show underemployment in the UK is being replaced by chronic ‘underemployment’, Business Insider, September 19, 2017; Jackson Stiles, Australian underemployment is the highest in modern times, New Daily, June 15, 2017; Nick Purdon and Leonardo Palleja, The millennial side hustle, not stable job, is the new reality for university grads, CBC.ca, March 23, 2017; Canadian Press, Bill Morneau, Finance Minister, Says Canadians Should Get Used to Short-Term Employment, Huffington Post, October 23, 2016.

[222] Kemal Dervis and Laurence Chandy, Are technology and globalization destined to drive up inequality? Understanding inequality and what drives it, Brookings.edu, October 5, 2016; Peter Goodman, Davos Elite Fret About Inequality Over vintage wines and canapes, New York Times, January 18, 2017: “… the way we have managed globalization has contributed significantly to inequality. … changes in globalization [that] would address inequality … would include items that involve … more progressive taxation, increased bargaining rights for labor unions, and greater protections for labor in general.”

[223] Maya Oppenheim, Bill Gates says he and other rich people should pay ‘significantly higher taxes, Independent.co.uk, February 19, 2018; Carol Goar, Jack up tax rate for privileged elite, Toronto Star, January 11, 2015; Emmie Martin, Bill Gates has paid over $10 billion in taxes – here’s why he says he should pay more, CNBC.com, February 21, 2018. But see, Jonathan O’Connell, As Amazon pursues a second headquarters, it battles hometown Seattle over tax to stem homelessness, Washington Post, May 10, 2018; Jacob Silverman, The Billionaire Philanthropist, LongReads.com, March 13, 2018:

“Advancing Amazon’s interests has meant, since day one, having a skeptical attitude toward taxation. Simply put, the company has a long history of tax evasion; … Jeff Bezos has shown little interest in putting his billions toward the common good. (If he had, perhaps paying taxes would have been a good starting point.) He has repeatedly expressed an intention to help save the world but claims, with a tech mogul’s typical messianism, that he will do it through building great companies.” 

[224] Rebecca Perring, ‘This is European Civil War!’ France’s Macron savages EU states for ‘national selfishness’, Express.co.uk, April 17, 2018.

[225] Kemal Dervisand Laurence Chandy, Are technology and globalization destined to drive up inequality? Understanding inequality and what drives it, Brookings.edu, October 5, 2016.

[226] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[227] Douglas Elmendorf and Nitin Nohria, Restoring Trust in Leadership, Project Syndicate, January 29, 2018. Also see, Dambisa Moyo, Why the survival of democracy depends on a strong middle-class, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018:

“[A] 2015 Pew survey concluded that only 19 per cent of Americans trust their federal government to do what is right “just about always” (3 per cent) or “most of the time” (16 per cent). Throughout the 1960s, this level of trust was more than 60 per cent.”

[228] Thomas Friedman, Made in the U.S.A.: Socialism for the Rich. Capitalism for the Rest, New York Times, January 26, 2021.

[229] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018. Also see generally, Grace Dean, Top CEOs may cut off funding to Republicans who have supported Trump’s election challenge: ‘Money is the key way’, Business Insider, January 7, 2020.

[230] Jeffrey Frieden, The Political Economy of Economic Policy: We should pay closer attention to the interactions between politics, economics, and other realms, Finance and Development, International Monetary Fund, June 2020.

[231] Peter Turchin, I predicted 2020 would be a mess for the U.S. Could that help prevent a second civil war?, Globe and Mail, July 3, 2020; Meg Jacobs, Desperate Times, Desperate Measures: The Lessons of the New Deal, Foreign Policy, January-February 2021. Also see, Peter Turchin, Ages of Discord: A Structural-Demographic Analysis of American History, Beresta Books, 2016.

[232] Defining Economic Justice and Social Justice, Center for Economic and Social Justice (cesj.org); Economics and Economic Justice, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (plato.stanford.edu), May 28, 2004 and November 17, 2016; Sandro Galea, On Economic Justice, Boston University, School of Public Health, January 29, 2017;

[233] Robert Kuttner and Katherine Stone, The Rise of Neo-Feudalism: The private capture of entire legal systems by corporate America, The American Prospect, April 8, 2020.

[234] Zia Qureshi, Advanced Tech, But Growth Slow and Unequal: Paradoxes and Policies, in The Age of Perplexity: Rethinking the World We Knew, BBVA Foundation (bbvaopenmind.com), OpenMind, Penguin Random House Grupo Editorial, 2018.

[235] Diana Farrell and Andrew Goodman, Government by Design: Four Principles for a better public sector, McKinsey.com, December 2013.

[236] See generally, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018; Diana Farrell and Andrew Goodman, Government by Design: Four Principles for a better public sector, McKinsey.com, December 2013.

[237] Klaus Schwab, World leaders reckon with a global rebalancing: interdependence is seen as a weakness and nationalism is rekindled, Financial Times, January 12, 2017.

[238] Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, and Andrew Schwedel, Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality, Bain Report (bain.com), February 7, 2018; Ben Schiller, How Demographics, Automation and Inequality will shape the next decade: A new report says that by 2030, 25% of jobs will be automated – and without government intervention, income inequality will get even worse, Fast Company, February 21, 2018:

“Income inequality has increased rapidly in the last few decades, as the gains from globalization, technology, and political changes have flowed largely to top earners. At the same time, wages among earners in the lower and lower-middle of the income scale have stagnated.

And here’s the scary thing: These trends are likely to speed up in the next 10 years, according to consulting firm Bain & Company. By 2030, automation will eliminate up to 25% of all jobs in the U.S., hitting those at the bottom hardest. It forecasts that the benefits of automation will go mostly to the top 20% of earners as well as to investors funding artificially intelligent equipment.”

[239] 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer, Global Annual Study, Edelman.com.

[240] Josh Bivens, Progressive redistribution without guilt: Using policy to shift economic policy and make U.S. incomes grow fairer and faster, Economic Policy Institute, June 9, 2016; Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Statcheva, Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 2014; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Belknap Press, 2017.

[241] Tim Hanstad, Trust is the glue of a healthy society. Here’s how to bring it back, World Economic Forum, December 17, 2020. Also see, Trust in Government: Assessing the Evidence, Understanding the Policies, 47^th Session of the Public Governance Committee, OECD Conference Center, Paris, France, April 25-26, 2013; Investing in Trust: Leveraging Institutions for Inclusive Policy Making, OECD, 2013; The Framework for Policy Action on Inclusive Growth, Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level, OECD, 2018. See generally, Yuval Noah Harari, The world after coronavirus: This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come, Financial Times, March 20, 2020.

[242] See generally, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[243] Joseph E. Stiglitz, Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy, MarketWatch, May 13, 2019.

[244] Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018.

[245] World Social Report 2020: Inequality in a Rapidly Changing World, Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat, United Nations, 2020.

[246] Jeffrey Frieden, The Political Economy of Economic Policy: We should pay closer attention to the interactions between politics, economics, and other realms, Finance and Development, International Monetary Fund, June 2020.

[247] Dani Rodrik, Populism and the economics of globalization, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018.

[248] Christopher Ingraham, Wealth Concentration returning to ‘levels last seen during the Roaring Twenties’, according to new research, Washington Post, February 8, 2019. Also see, Gabriel Zucman, Global Wealth Inequality, NBER Working Paper No. 25462, National Bureau of Economic Research, January 2019.

[249] David Hope and Julian LImberg, The Economic Consequences of Major Tax Cuts for the Rich, London School of Economics and Political Science, Working Paper 55, December 2020. Also see, Keeping tax low for the rich does not boost economy, London School of Economics and Political Science (lse.ac.uk), December 16, 2020; Grace Dean, A huge study of 50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy suggests ‘trickle-down’ economics makes inequality worse, Business Insider, December 16, 2020; Kimberly Amadeo and Eric Estevez, Why Trickle-Down Economics Works in Theory But Not in Fact, The Balance, September 24, 2020; Greg Jericho, Tax cuts for the rich don’t help the rest. Don’t take my word for it, ask the IMF, The Guardian, September 9, 2017; Sandra Lizarazo Ruiz, Adrian Peralta-Alva and Damien Puy, Macroeconomic and Distributional Effects of Personal Income Tax Reforms: A Heterogenous Agent Model Approach for the U.S., Working Paper No. 17/192, Internal Monetary Fund, September 1, 2017; Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Statcheva, Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 2014.

[250] Christopher Ingraham, Wealth Concentration returning to ‘levels last seen during the Roaring Twenties’, according to new research, Washington Post, February 8, 2019. Also see, Gabriel Zucman, Global Wealth Inequality, NBER Working Paper No. 25462, National Bureau of Economic Research, January 2019.

[251] Eric Weinstein, Why capitalism won’t survive without socialism: Eric Weinstein on the crisis of late capitalism, Vox, July 4, 2018.

[252] Stephen M. Walt, America’s Corruption Is A National Security Threat, Foreign Policy, March 19, 2019; Stephen M. Walt, The US is a lot more corrupt than Americans realize, and the problem goes much deeper than Trump, Business Insider, March 20, 2019. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’?, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2019.

[253] For example, see: Tony Romm, Craig Timberg, and Michael Birnbaum, Europe, not the U.S., is now the most powerful regulator of Silicon Valley, Washington Post, May 25, 2018.

[254] Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, and Andrew Schwedel, Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality, Bain Report (bain.com), February 7, 2018.

[255] For example: Social protection systems: (a) untethering health and income protection from individual employers or jobs (i.e. similar to Canada, Europe), (b) revamping pension models in line with the new realities of work and ageing, (c) implementing policies to increase ‘flexicurity’ (employer given access to flexible labour force while providing individuals with security of safety net and active help in securing employment), (d) implementing alternative models of income distribution (i.e. negative income tax, wage supplements, universal basic income),(e) providing greater support for working into old age. [The Global Risks Report 2017 (12 edition), World Economic Forum, 2017].

[256] Mark Shields, Part-Time Legislators and Full-Time Fund-Raisers, Washington Post, May 1, 1987. Also see, Jon Schwarz, ‘Yes, We’re Corrupt’: A List of Politicians Admitting That Money Controls Politics, The Intercept, July 30, 2015.

[257] Dylan Schleicher, Excerpts: Us vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism, 800 CEO Read (inthebooks.800ceoread.com), May 3, 2018.

[258] Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr, United States Supreme Court Justice, in the case of CompanIia General deTabacos de Filipinas v. Collector of Internal Revenue, 275 U.S. 87, 1927.

[259] Paying Taxes: Why it Matters – Why Do Tax Rates and Tax Administration Matter?, Doing Business.org (World Bank), 2018.

[260] OECD Work on Taxation: 2018-2019, The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (oecd.org), 2018. Also see, Viola Tanto, The International Company and Tax Avoidance, European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, Vol. 1, No. 6, Sep-Dec 2016 (PHD Candidate in Tax Law, Business and Private Law Department, European University of Tirana). Also see, Peter Coy, Can we tame Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple?, Sydney Morning Herald, December 2, 2017; Competition in the digital age: How to tame the tech titans, The Economist, January 18, 2018; David Dayen, Big Tech: The New Predatory Capitalism – the tech giants are menacing democracy, privacy and competition, American Prospect, December 26, 2017. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Making the case for ‘digital taxation’: Into the Kingdom of Tech Giants – international tax avoidance and the modern digital economy, Sigurdson Post, January 21, 2019; Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’?, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2019.

[261] Eric Sigurdson, Making the case for ‘digital taxation’: Into the Kingdom of Tech Giants – international tax avoidance and the modern digital economy, Sigurdson Post, January 21, 2019.

[262] Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser, Taxation, Our World In Data.org, 2019.

[263] Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’?, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2019.

[264] Christopher Ingraham, ‘Trickle-down’ tax cuts make the rich richer but are of no value to overall economy, study finds. Data spanning 50 years and 18 countries shows lowering rates for the wealthy increases inequality, Washington Post, December 23, 2020. Also see, David Hope and Julian LImberg, The Economic Consequences of Major Tax Cuts for the Rich, London School of Economics and Political Science, Working Paper 55, December 2020. Also see, Keeping tax low for the rich does not boost economy, London School of Economics and Political Science (lse.ac.uk), December 16, 2020; Grace Dean, A huge study of 50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy suggests ‘trickle-down’ economics makes inequality worse, Business Insider, December 16, 2020.

[265] Taxing the Rich: Be it resolved, tax the rich (more) …, Munk Debates.com, May 30, 2013.

[266] Wayne Swan, Tax Avoidance impoverishes us all. Fighting it requires challenging the powerful, Guardian, January 11, 2016.

[267] Editorial, Why the Economy Needs Tax Reform, New York Times, December 29, 2012. Also see, Joseph Stiglitz, Inequality is Holding Back the Recovery, New York Times, January 19, 2013.

[268] Max Lawson, etal, Public Good or Private Wealth?, Oxfam.org, January 2019; Vinod Thomas, Will more infrastructure spending increase US growth?, Brookings, December 13, 2016; IMF Policy Paper: Fiscal Policy and Long-Term Growth, International Monetary Fund, June 2015; Fiscal Policy and Growth: Why, What, and How?, OECD.org, 2015; Jean-Marc Fournier, The Positive Effect of Public Investment on Potential Growth, OECD, Economics Department Working Papers No. 1347, November 22, 2016.

[269] Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level, Opportunities for All: A Framework for Policy Action on Inclusive Growth, OECD.org, May 30-31, 2018.

[270] Lisa Kimmel, Canada’s unprecedented trust gap: Who will build the bridge for a country divided?, Globe and Mail, February 14, 2019. Also see, 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report, Edelman.com.

[271] William J. Barber II, America’s Moral Malady, The Atlantic, March 30, 2018. Also see, Mark Rank, Poverty in America is Mainstream, New York Times, November 2, 2013; Associated Press, Census data: Half of U.S. poor or low income, CBS News, December 15, 2011; Annalisa Merelli, The US has a lot of money, but it does not look like a developed country, Quartz, March 10, 2017; Neal Gabler, The Secret Shame of Middle-Class Americans: Nearly half of Americans would have trouble finding $400 to pay for an emergency, The Atlantic, May 2016.

[272] Lana Payne, Say no to more corporate cuts, Canada, Telegram, August 4, 2018.

[273] Tax challenges arising from digitalisation – Interim Report 2018, Eurofound.europa.eu, September 5, 2018; Tax Challenges Arising from Digitalisation – Interim Report 2018: Inclusive Framework on BEPS, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, 2018; Brief on the Tax Challenges Arising from Digitalisation: Interim Report 2018, oecd.org; 3 ways digitalisation is shaping the future of taxation, International Chamber of Commerce (iccwbo.org), March 7, 2018; Ashley Greenback and Riannon Kinghall Were, Taxing clicks: the European Commission’s new digital tax, Practical Law (uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com), May 3, 2018; Maarten Floris de Wilde , Comparing Tax Policy Responses for the Digitalizing Economy: Fold or All-in, Croner-i.co.uk, Volume 46, Issue 6/7, 2018; Digital Taxation Opens the Pandora Box: The OECD Interim Report and the European Commission Proposals, Croner-i.co.uk, Volume 46, Issue 6/7, 2019. Also see, Alex Gray, These are the world’s 10 biggest corporate giants, World Economic Forum (weforum.org), January 16, 2017; Companies: The rise of the superstars, The Economist, September 17, 2016; Mark Sweney, Amazon paid just £15m in tax on European revenues of £19.5bn, Guardian, August 10, 2017; Francine McKenna, Amazon Minimizes Profits Because CEO Jeff Bezos Hates Paying Taxes, Medium.com, September 29, 2014.

[274] Patrick Wintour and Simon Bowers, G20 report warns of global tax chaos: international tax system cannot deal with mobile multinational firms that shift profits to low-tax countries, says OECD thinktank, The Guardian, July 19, 2015. For a different perspective on ‘global tax chaos’, see: Russell Guthrie, Avoiding “Tax Chaos” in the Globalized, Digital 21^st Century, International Federation of Accountants (ifac.org), September 22, 2015; Robert Kovacev, Age of international tax cooperation or global tax chaos? Views from the Pacific Rim Tax Conference, Multinational Tax & Transfer Pricing News (mnetax.com), March 12, 2018; George Turner, Protesting PwC: Professionals Without Conscience, Tax Justice Network, taxjustice.net, April 6, 2017; Francine McKenna, Amazon Minimizes Profits Because CEO Jeff Bezos Hates Paying Taxes, Medium.com, September 29, 2014.

[275] David Meyer, The Battle Over Big Tech’s Regulation is being Sucked into Trump’s Trade War, and that’s Dangerous, Fortune, July 23, 2018.

[276] David Pegg, The tech giants will never pay their fair share of taxes – unless we make them, The Guardian, December 11, 2017. Also see, Peter Coy, Can we tame Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple?, Sydney Morning Herald, December 2, 2017; Competition in the digital age: How to tame the tech titans, The Economist, January 18, 2018; David Dayen, Big Tech: The New Predatory Capitalism – the tech giants are menacing democracy, privacy and competition, American Prospect, December 26, 2017; Eric Sigurdson, Making the case for ‘digital taxation’: Into the Kingdom of Tech Giants – international tax avoidance and the modern digital economy, Sigurdson Post, January 21, 2019.

[277] Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser, Taxation, Our World In Data.org, 2019.

[278] Michael Hiltzik, American is falling out of love with billionaires, and it’s about time, Los Angeles Times, February 1, 2019.

[279] Eliza Relman, ‘2020 class warfare?’: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the left face off against billionaires in a fight to tax the rich, Business Insider, February 2, 2019; Taxes for the Common Good: A Public Justice Primer on Taxation, Citizens for Public Justice (cpj.ca), May 2015; Leigh Thomas, Tax the Rich? Poll of 21 Wealthy Countries Finds Broad Support for Higher Taxes on High Earners: Canadians are more likely than average to support a tax hike on the rich, Huffington Post, March 19, 2019; People Want Higher Taxes on Rich, Better Welfare: 21-Country OECD Survey, New York Times, March 19, 2019; Tax the rich and give us more services, Canadians say in OECD survey, CBC, March 19, 2019. Risks that Matter: Main Findings from the 2018 OECD Risks that Matter Survey, OECD, 2019; Jennifer De Pinto, Fred Backus, Kabir Khanna and Anthony Salvanto, Most back tax cut for middle class, tax increase on wealthy and corporations, CBS News, November 1, 2017; Julia Manchester, Poll: Most back tax increase for wealthy, corporations, The Hill, November 1, 2017. Also see, Frank Newport, Americans Still Say Upper-Income Pay Too Little in Taxes, Gallup.com, April 15, 2016; Matthew Sheffield, Poll: A majority of Americans support raising the top tax rate to 70 percent, The Hill, January 15, 2019; Matthew Yglesias, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is floating a 70 percent top tax rate – here’s the research that backs her up: some studies indicate she’s aiming to low, Vox, January 7, 2019; Patricia Cohen and Maggie Astor, For Democrats Aiming Taxes at the Superrich, ‘the Moment Belongs to the Bold’, New York Times, February 8, 2019; Ben White, Soak the Rich? Americans say go for it: surveys are showing overwhelming support for raising taxes on top earners, Politico, February 4, 2019; Megan Cerullo, Millionaire (and billionaire) taxes: An idea whose time has come?, CBS News, February 8, 2019.

[280] Ian McGugan, Taxing the rich and finding the sweet spot in the tax debate, Globe and Mail, March 15, 2019.

[281] Megan Cerullo, Millionaire (and billionaire) taxes: An idea whose time has come?, CBS News, February 8, 2019 (referencing the Tax Foundation).

[282] Ian McGugan, Taxing the rich and finding the sweet spot in the tax debate, Globe and Mail, March 15, 2019.

[283] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[284] Anup Shah, Tax Avoidance and Tax Havens; Undermining Democracy, Global Issues.org, January 7, 2013; Prem Sikka, Accountants: a threat to democracy, Guardian, September 5, 2005; Joseph Stiglitz, Globalisation isn’t just about profits. It’s about taxes too, Guardian, May 27, 2013; Wayne Swan, Tax avoidance impoverishes us all. Fighting it requires challenging the powerful, Guardian, January 11, 2016.

[285] Eric Sigurdson, Making the case for ‘digital taxation’: Into the Kingdom of Tech Giants – international tax avoidance and the modern digital economy, Sigurdson Post, January 21, 2019; Eric Sigurdson, Taxation, Corporations, and the Financial Elite: a pathway for leadership, social responsibility, and economic growth – can society avoid the dangerous ‘race to the bottom’?, Sigurdson Post, March 31, 2019.

[286] John Christensen and Richard Murphy, The Social Irresponsibility of Corporate Tax Avoidance: Taking CSR to the Bottom Line, 47 Development 37, 2004.

[287] OECD Work on Taxation: 2018-2019, The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (oecd.org), 2018.

[288] Megan Cerullo, Millionaire (and billionaire) taxes: An idea whose time has come?, CBS News, February 8, 2019.

[289] Ian Bremmer, A world in turmoil: What we must do to survive the coming political crisis, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[290] Matthew Stewart, The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy: the class divide is already toxic, and is fast becoming unbridgeable, The Atlantic, June 2018.

[291] Kevin Carmichael, Business leaders are worried politicians aren’t paying enough attention to the long haul: It’s the quality of government spending that matters now, not the quantity, Financial Post, February 18, 2021.

[292] World Economic Forum in Davos out to heal ‘a fractured world’, Deutsche Welle (DW.com), January 23, 2018.

[293] Valerie Keller, Healing a fractured world by changing the rules of the game, LinkedIn, January 24, 2018.

[294] Katharine Murphy, Australia’s political donations system is a joke – it’s time parties put people before tribe, The Guardian, June 9, 2017.

[295] Luke Kingma, Universal Basic Income: The Answer to Automation?, Futurism.com; Vincent Gasparro, Why the left and right should embrace a universal basic income, Globe and Mail, March 15, 2018; Noah Smith, A Basic Income for Everyone? It’s Not a Crazy Idea, Bloomberg, January 23, 2018; Chelsea Gohd, Experts Say Universal Basic Income Could Reach the Mainstream in 2018: the debate is getting serious, Science Alert.com, January 20, 2018; Richard Feloni, The entrepreneur who says there’s a ‘war on normal people’ is running for president on a platform of giving nearly every American $1000 each month, Business Insider, April 7, 2018; Annie Nova, More Americans now support a universal basic income, CNBC.com, February 26, 2018.

[296] Kemal Dervis and Laurence Chandy, Are technology and globalization destined to drive up inequality? Understanding inequality and what drives it, Brookings.edu, October 5, 2016.

[297] Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, and Andrew Schwedel, Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality, Bain Report (bain.com), February 7, 2018.

[298] Ian Bremmer, A world in turmoil: What we must do to survive the coming political crisis, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018.

[299] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[300] Josh Bivens, Progressive redistribution without guilt: Using policy to shift economic policy and make U.S. incomes grow fairer and faster, Economic Policy Institute, June 9, 2016; Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Statcheva, Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 2014; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Belknap Press, 2017; Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018. Also see, Diane Taylor, Air pollution will lead to mass migration, say experts after landmark ruling, Guardian, January 15, 2021; Juliana Kaplan, Joe Biden’s plan to increase the minimum wage to $15 won’t just help workers: A new study finds that lower wages cost taxpayers over $100 billion a year, Business Insider, January 15, 2021; Ways and Means Democrats Release Framework to Achieve Health and Economic Equity, Ways & Means Committee (waysandmeans.house.gov), January 11, 2021 (Chairman Neal: “There is no silver bullet to correct the inequities that are 400 years in the making and deeply ingrained in our systems, institutions, and laws. But we cannot allow the scope of these challenges to intimidate us”.).

[301] Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015;

[302] John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; How to get infrastructure right: Every country wants to build more bridges, roads and renewable-power grids. It won’t be easy, The Economist, January 2, 2021.

[303] Paul Polman, A Marshall Plan for the Planet, Project Syndicate, December 30, 2020; A European Green Deal: Striving to be the first climate-neutral continent, European Commission (ec.europa.eu); Prime Minister Boris Johnson outlines his Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution for 250,000 jobs, Gov.uk, November 18, 2020; The Biden Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice, joebiden.com.

[304] Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015; John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; How to get infrastructure right: Every country wants to build more bridges, roads and renewable-power grids. It won’t be easy, The Economist, January 2, 2021; Paul Polman, A Marshall Plan for the Planet, Project Syndicate, December 30, 2020; A European Green Deal: Striving to be the first climate-neutral continent, European Commission (ec.europa.eu); Prime Minister Boris Johnson outlines his Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution for 250,000 jobs, Gov.uk, November 18, 2020; The Biden Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice, joebiden.com; Robert Asselin, The trillion-dollar question is how federal spending will position the economy for post pandemic success: Amidst massive federal stimulus spending, where is Canada’s strategic vision for the future, CBC News, January 6, 2021.

[305] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019; John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; Tess Kalinowski, ‘Everybody in the middle getting squeezed out and it’s painful’: Toronto’s lack of affordable housing hits those in higher income brackets, say experts, Toronto Star, December 28, 2020.

[306] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019; Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015;

[307] Dessislava Dimitrova and Vanessa Candieas, Healthcare costs impoverish millions. 4 ways to end injustice, WEForum.org, April 5, 2018; Tanya Abraham, One in three Brits say the Suffragettes’ campaign makes them especially proud to be British, YouGov.co.uk, February 6, 2018; Universal health care, worldwide, is within reach: the case for it is a powerful one – including in poor countries, The Economist, April 26, 2018:

“Universal basic health care is sensible in the way that, say, universal basic education is sensible—because it yields benefits to society as well as to individuals. In some quarters the very idea leads to a dangerous elevation of the blood pressure, because it suggests paternalism, coercion or worse. There is no hiding that public health-insurance schemes require the rich to subsidise the poor, the young to subsidise the old and the healthy to underwrite the sick. And universal schemes must have a way of forcing people to pay, through taxes, say, or by mandating that they buy insurance.

But there is a principled, liberal case for universal health care. Good health is something everyone can reasonably be assumed to want in order to realise their full individual potential. Universal care is a way of providing it that is pro-growth. The costs of inaccessible, expensive and abject treatment are enormous. The sick struggle to get an education or to be productive at work. …According to several studies, confidence about health makes people more likely to set up their own businesses.

Universal basic health care is also affordable.”

[308] Brendan Shaw, Universal health coverage needs a new political campaign, shawview.com, April 7, 2018.

[309] Canadian Press, Poll: Canadians are most proud of universal medicare, CTVnews.ca, November 25, 2012; Jim Watson, Canadians differ from Trump on view of public health care, poll shows, Globe and Mail, November 14, 2016, updated April 8, 2017; Executive Summary, Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, 2014 Update: How the U.S. Health Care System Compares Internationally, Commonwealth Fund.org, 2014; US Health System Ranks Last Among Eleven Countries on Measures of Access, Equity, Quality, Efficiency, and Healthy Lives, Commonwealth Fund.org, June 16, 2014. Note: Canadians chose Tommy Douglas, known as the father of medicare, as the Greatest Canadian of all time – Tommy Douglas “The Greatest Canadian” gets stamped, Canada Post.ca, June 29, 2012; Jim Coyle, Canada 150: Saskatchewan’s glory, from sodbusters to Scheer, Toronto Star, June 3, 2017; Rebecca Joseph, Top 10 most influential Canadians, Global News, June 14, 2017.

[310] Pedro Nicolaci da Costa, Tech Talent Scramble: Global competition for a limited pool of technology workers is heating up, Finance & Development, Vol. 56, No. 1, March 2019.

[311] See generally, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[312] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019; John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; Heather Long, Millions of jobs probably aren’t coming back, even after the pandemic ends: The United States needs to invest more in retraining workers, economists warn, Washington Post, February 17, 2021.

[313] Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018; Niall McCarthy, The Countries Where Jobs Remain Unfilled The Longest, Forbes, January 11, 2017; Hadi Partovi, A trillion-dollar opportunity for America, LinkedIn, January 9, 2017; Scott Scanlon, 4 Reasons Why Companies Aren’t Bridging the Talent Gap, Hunt Scanlon.com, October 31, 2016; Scott A. Scanlon, Job Forecast is Best in a Decade: key challenge will be bridging talent gaps by offering better wages and upskilling workers, Hunt Scanlon.com, January 11, 2017.

[314] Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015; The Future of the Corporation: Moving from balance sheet to value sheet, World Economic Forum (in collaboration with Baker McKenzie), January 2021;  Corporate Boards Are Critical Starting Points for Implementing Stakeholder Capitalism, Eurasia Review, January 13, 2021; Klaus Schwab, Why we need the ‘Davos Manifesto’ for a better kind of capitalism, World Economic Forum, December 1, 2019; Klaus Schwab, What Kind of Capitalism Do We Want?, Project Syndicate, December 2, 2019; Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote ‘An Economy That Serves all Americans’, Business Roundtable (businessroundtable.org), August 19, 2019; Alan Murray, America’s CEOs Seek a New Purpose for the Corporation, Fortune, August 19, 2019; Addisu Lashitew, Building a stakeholder economy, Brookings, October 28, 2020.

[315] Peter Goodman, Davos Elite Fret About Inequality Over vintage wines and canapes, New York Times, January 18, 2017. Also see, Nick Hanauer, To My Fellow Plutocrats: You Can Cure Trumpism – pay your workers a decent wage, Politico.com, July 18, 2017. Also see, William Lazonick, Profits Without Prosperity, Harvard Business Review, September 2014; Hedrick Smith, Think corporate tax cuts will mean more jobs? Here’s how you’re being conned, Sacramento Bee, September 20, 2017; Nick Hanauer, Stock Buybacks Are Killing the American Economy: profits once flowed to higher wages or increased investment. Now, they enrich a small number of shareholders, The Atlantic, February 8, 2015; Too much of a good thing: profits are too high. America needs a dose of competition, The Economist, March 26, 2016; Leo Gerard, Our Plutocracy Problem: when the 1% and politicians join forces, democracy loses, In These Times.com, March 25, 2014.

[316] Paul Polman: Why Business Can’t Be a Bystander in a Post-Covid World?, TheBeautifulTruth.org.uk, December 16, 2020.

[317] Addisu Lashitew, Building a stakeholder economy, Brookings, October 28, 2020.

[318] Victoria Graham, ‘Big Isn’t Bad’, Justice Dept. Antitrust Chief Says, Bloomberg Law, April 13, 2018; Alexei Alexis, Big Tech on Notice as Trump Antitrust Picks Arrive at FTC, Bloomberg, May 4, 2018. Also see, Moderator Christine Lagarde, Digitalization and the New Gilded Age, International Monetary Fund Spring Meetings 2018 (imf.org), April 18, 2018 (panel: Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, IBM’s Bridget van Kralingen, Author Alex Ross, Stanford Professor Richard White); Michael Birnbaum, Europe’s antitrust cop, Margrethe Vestager, has Facebook and Google in her crosshairs, Washington Post, May 12, 2018; Jon Talton, Big Tech needs to face a Theodore Roosevelt style trust busting, Seattle Times, March 18, 2018:

“Big Tech’s greatest sins are locking in a winner-take-all economy, decimating the middle class and exercising monopoly-like powers that cause the free market to fail. Competition is stymied. Power is in the hands of too few.”

[319] Lina M. Khan, Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox, The Yale Law Journal, Volume 126 (pg. 710), 2017; Olivia LaVecchia and Stacy Mitchell, Amazon’s Stranglehold: How the Company’s Tightening Grip Is Stifling Competition, Eroding Jobs, and Threatening Communities, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, November 2016; Ben Schiller, Is Amazon Killing Jobs and Destroying Communities? At what cost does convenience come? A new report says it’s not just jobs, but the rest of the economy as well, Fast Company, December 2, 2016; Daniel DeMay, Amazon criticized for vast online reach amid record sales, San Francisco Chronicle, November 30, 2016. In addition see, Matt Stoller, How to Educate yourself on Monopoly Power, Medium, August 30, 2017; Bryan Menegus, A Worrying Number of Amazon’s Warehouse Workers Are Reportedly Living Off Food Stamps, Gizmodo, April 19, 2018; Shannon Liao, Amazon warehouse workers skip bathroom breaks to keep their jobs, says report – in the UK, an undercover reporter and a labor survey exposed harrowing work conditions, The Verge, April 16, 2018; Shona Ghosh, Peeing in trash cans, constant surveillance, and asthma attacks on the job: Amazon workers tell us their warehouse horror stories, Business Insider, May 3, 2018.

[320] Rohitesh Dhawan and Sean West, The CEO as Chief Geopolitical Officer, KPMG.com, 2018. Also see, 10 biggest corporations make more money than most countries in the world combined, Global Justice Now, September 12, 2016. Also see, Robin Wigglesworth, Larry Fink identifies China as critical BlackRock priority, Financial Times, April 8, 2018. Also see for example only, Amazon corporation and its CEO Jeff Bezo: Flora Carr, Amazon Is Now More Valuable Than Microsoft and Only 2 Other Companies Are Worth More, Fortune, February 15, 2018; Kate Vinton, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is the Richest Person in the World, Forbes, October 27, 2017; Chris Isidore, Jeff Bezos is the richest person in history, CNN, January 9, 2018.

[321] Lina M. Khan, Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox, The Yale Law Journal, Volume 126 (pg. 710), 2017. Also see, Olivia LaVecchia and Stacy Mitchell, Amazon’s Stranglehold: How the Company’s Tightening Grip Is Stifling Competition, Eroding Jobs, and Threatening Communities, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, November 2016; Matt Stoller, How to Educate yourself on Monopoly Power, Medium, August 30, 2017.

[322] John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015; Juliana Kaplan, Joe Biden’s plan to increase the minimum wage to $15 won’t just help workers: A new study finds that lower wages cost taxpayers over $100 billion a year, Business Insider, January 15, 2021; Peter Coy, Oren Cass Urges Conservatives to Shed Free-Market Orthodoxy, Bloomberg, February 16, 2021.

[323] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[324] John Harwood, 5 ways to fight wealth inequality, according to economists, CNBC, June 19, 2019; Jared Bernstein an Melissa Boteach, 10 Solutions to Fight Economic Inequality, Talk Poverty, June 10, 2015;

[325] Johan Falk and Owen Gaffney (lead authors), Exponential Roadmap: Scaling 36 Solutions to Halve Emissions by 2030, Future Earth, September 2019; UN Climate Action Summit 2019, United Nations (un.org); Eric Sigurdson, Business Leadership and the Climate Crisis: Corporate Strategy, Purpose, and long-term sustainable value creation – a primer for ‘the century of living dangerously’, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2019; Bill Gates, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need, Knopf Canada, 2021; Bill Gates, To avoid climate disaster, governments must take these seven steps, Globe and Mail, February 13, 2021; Robin Pomeroy, Mark Carney: This is how we get big finance to take big climate action, World Economic Forum, January 27, 2021.

[326] Lauren Oakes, Playing Offense and Defense on Climate at the Same Time – We need to focus on responses to climate change that both reduce emissions and help people cope with an altered environment, Scientific American, August 26, 2019.

[327] See, Eric Sigurdson, Business Leadership and the Climate Crisis: Corporate Strategy, Purpose, and long-term sustainable value creation – a primer for ‘the century of living dangerously’, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2019; Eli Boufis, Is There A Windfall in Climate Change for PE?, Forbes, July 31, 2019. Also see, Jens Burchardt, Philipp Gerbert, Stefan Schönberger, Patrick Herhold, and Christophe Brognaux, The Economic Case for Combating Climate Change, BCG, September 27, 2018; Climate-Smart Development: Adding up the benefits of actions that help build prosperity, end poverty and combat climate change, The World Bank and ClimateWorks Foundation, 2014; Helen Mountford, Amar Bhattacharya, Lord Nicholas Stern, etal, Unlocking the Inclusive Growth Story of the 21^st  Century: Accelerating Climate Action in Urgent Times, New Climate Economy, The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, newclimateeconomy.report, 2018; Michael Gerrard and John Dernbach (editors), Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States: Summary & Key Recommendations, Environmental Law Institute, 2018; Adele Peters, Fighting climate change could boost the global economy by $26 trillion, Fast Company, September 5, 2018; Catherine Bosley, Fighting Climate Change Will Help Economic Growth, Study Finds, Bloomberg, August 19, 2019; Matthew Kahn, Kamiar Mohaddes, Ryan Ng, etal, Long-Term Macroeconomic Effects of Climate Change: A Cross-Country Analysis, NBER Working Paper No. 26167, National Bureau of Economic Research, August 2019; Joel Jaeger, Tackling Climate Change and Promoting Development: A ‘Win-Win’, Our World (ourworld.unu.edu), September 18, 2014; Michael Webber, How Oil-Loving, Frack-Happy Texas Could Lead the Low-Carbon Future: And get rich doing it, Texas Monthly, September 2019; Max Fawcett, The conversation Calgary needs to have: How does an oil city adjust to a new reality?, CBC News, September 12, 2019; Climate capitalists have serious money in climate-friendly investments, The Economist, September 21, 2019; Lauren Silva Laughlin, Green Investments Are in the Black, Wall Street Journal, September 27, 2019.

[328] Lubos Pastor and Pietro Veronesi, Populism: Why in rich countries and in good times, VoxEU (voxeu.org), December 12, 2019.

[329] Barry Eichengreen, The two faces of populism, VoxEU (voxeu.org), October 29, 2019; Dani Rodik, What’s driving right-wing populism? It’s both economic insecurity and the culture wars, Market Watch, July 16, 2019.

[330] Klaus Schwab, Why we need the ‘Davos Manifesto’ for a better kind of capitalism, World Economic Forum, December 1, 2019; Klaus Schwab, What Kind of Capitalism Do We Want?, Project Syndicate, December 2, 2019; Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote ‘An Economy That Serves all Americans’, Business Roundtable (businessroundtable.org), August 19, 2019; Alan Murray, America’s CEOs Seek a New Purpose for the Corporation, Fortune, August 19, 2019; Addisu Lashitew, Building a stakeholder economy, Brookings, October 28, 2020.

[331] See generally, Mark Ptak, Breaking the News: The Case for American Public Media, Medium, May 2, 2019; Lois Beckett, Facts won’t fix this: experts on how to fight America’s disinformation crisis, Guardian, January 1, 2021; John Villasenor, Why creating an internet ‘fairness doctrine’ would backfire, Brookings, June 24, 2020.

[332] Alex Barker, James Murdoch blasts US media for unleashing ‘insidious forces’, Financial Times, January 15, 2021; Lawrence Martin, To fix America, fix the media, Globe and Mail, February 18, 2021; Max Boot, Trump couldn’t have incited sedition without the help of Fox News, Washington Post, January 18, 2021; Graham Ruddick, Fox News shows broke UK TV impartiality rules, Ofcom finds, Guardian, November 6, 2017; Stewart Clarke, British Media Regulator Censures Fox News for Breaking Impartiality Rules, Variety, November 6, 2017; Elisabeth Braw, The United States Needs a BBC: The Beeb’s influence is rising stateside, revealing a hunger for nonpartisan news. America’s own networks should take note, Foreign Policy, January 28, 2021; Kori Schake, The U.S. Puts Its Greatest Vulnerability on Display: Runaway partisanship endangers the United States more than foreign enemies do, The Atlantic, February 18, 2021.

[333] Steve Randy Waldman, The 1996 Law That Ruined the Internet: Why I changed my mind about Section 230, The Atlantic, January 3, 2020; Ursula von der Leyen, Ursuala von der Leyen’s message to Davos Agenda: Full Transcript, World Economic Forum, January 26, 2021. Also see, Big tech and censorship: Silicon Valley should not be given control over free speech, The Economist, January 16, 2021; Alex Barker, James Murdoch blasts US media for unleashing ‘insidious forces’, Financial Times, January 15, 2021; Max Boot, Trump couldn’t have incited sedition without the help of Fox News, Washington Post, January 18, 2021.

[334] Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression, Harms Reduction: A Six-Step Program to Protect Democratic Expression Online, Public Policy Forum, January 2021; Diane Francis, Tackling Big Tech – Diane Francis: Canada must move quickly to combat the social media onslaught, Financial Post, February 2, 2021; Elizabeth Thompson, Facebook calls on Canadian government to set social media rules, CBC, January 29, 2021; Julian Walker, Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression: Legal Boundaries in Canada, Parliament of Canada (lop.parl.ca), June 29, 2018.

[335] Editorial, Money and politics: How to end the corruption and conflict of interest, Globe and Mail, editorial, April 8, 2016 (updated March 24, 2017); David Callahan and J. Mijin Cha, Stacked Deck: How the dominance of politics by the affluent and business undermines economic mobility in America, Demos.org, 2013. Also see, Tom Blackwell, Ontario PC Leader Doug Ford says he would end subsidies to parties, calls it political welfare, National Post, April 19, 2018.

[336] Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Don’t let big and dark money ‘drown out the truth and drown out your voice’, Washington Post, April 3, 2018 (citing United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer). Also see, Dahlia Lithwick, Justice Roberts Hearts Billionaires: The chief either doesn’t believe, or doesn’t care, that money corrupts politics, Slate, April 2, 2014.

[337] Russell Berman, How Can the U.S. Shrink the Influence of Money in Politics?, The Atlantic, March 16, 2016.  Also see: Paul Waldman, How Our Campaign Finance System Compares to Other Countries, The American Prospect, April 4, 2014; Marian Sawer, Australia trails way behind other nations in regulating political donations, The Conversation, June 1, 2016; Katharine Murphy, Australia’s political donations system is a joke – it’s time parties put people before tribe, The Guardian, June 9, 2017; Alexandra Beech and Stephanie Anderson, Political Donations: Parliamentary committee recommends banning foreign contributions, ABC.net.au, March 9, 2017; Germany’s campaign financing not transparent enough, report finds, DW.com, February 23, 2018; Samuel Jones and Sam Van Der Staak, How to fix UK political party finance, Open Democracy.net, June 25, 2015; Stefan Passantino and Orestis Omran, Campaign finance in the US and the UK: a comparative assessment, Lexology.com, August 4, 2015; Nick Thompson, International campaign finance: How do countries compare?, CNN, March 5, 2012; Evan Annett and Tu Thanh Ha, Political donations in Canada: A guide to the ‘wild west’ vs. the rest, Globe and Mail, November 12, 2017.

[338] Clara Jeffery and Monika Bauerlein, How to Sweep Dark Money Out of Politics: Undoing Citizens United, the DIY guide, Mother Jones, July-August 2012.

[339] Russell Berman, How Can the U.S. Shrink the Influence of Money in Politics?, The Atlantic, March 16, 2016; Jana Morgan, Congress needs to seize the moment, end the influence of Big Money, and save American democracy, Insider, February 23, 2021 (“The bill aims to amplify the power of small donors, who more closely represent the average constituent in terms of gender and race … establishing a small-donor matching system”).

[340] Christina Pazzanese, Economic and political inequities are interlaced, analysts say, leaving many Americans poor and voiceless, The Harvard Gazette, February 8, 2016; Benjamin Sachs, The Unbundled Union: Politics Without Collective Bargaining, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 123, No. 1, October 2013.

[341] Tim Smart, The 2020 Economy Set All Kinds of Records, Both Bad and Good, U.S. News, January 29, 2021; Todd Mattina and Jules Boudreau, Market Insights: Biden’s growth gambit, MacKenzie Investments, February 2021.

[342] Alan Blinder, The Risks of Skimping on Covid Relief: Some economists warn about too much spending, but too little could hurt the economy more, Wall Street Journal, February 17, 2021.

[343] Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, and Andrew Schwedel, Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality, Bain Report (bain.com), February 7, 2018; Ben Schiller, How Demographics, Automation and Inequality will shape the next decade: A new report says that by 2030, 25% of jobs will be automated – and without government intervention, income inequality will get even worse, Fast Company, February 21, 2018.

[344] Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, and Andrew Schwedel, Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality, Bain Report (bain.com), February 7, 2018.

[345] Josh Bivens, Progressive redistribution without guilt: Using policy to shift economic policy and make U.S. incomes grow fairer and faster, Economic Policy Institute, June 9, 2016. Also see, Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Statcheva, Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 2014; Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Belknap Press, 2017.

[346] See, Andrew Gamble, The Welfare State and the Politics of Austerity, in The Age of Perplexity: Rethinking the World We Knew, BBVA Foundation (bbvaopenmind.com), OpenMind, Penguin Random House Grupo Editorial, 2018.

[347] Laura Paddison, The Radical Idea of Making Sure Everybody has Enough Money to Live On: The idea of a universal basic income is going mainstream as the coronavirus pandemic collapses economies and wipes away millions of jobs, Huffington Post, December 1, 2020.

[348] Robert Reich, Joe Biden’s economic team beats Trump’s goon squad – but it faces a steep challenge, The Guardian, December 6, 2020. Also see, Robert Reich, Beware going ‘back to normal’ thoughts – normal gave us Trump, The Guardian, November 29, 2020.

[349] Don Pittis, Economic issues that the big thinkers say need the world’s attention in 2021, CBC News, December 21, 2020.

[350] Robert Reich, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, Knopf, 2020; Robert Reich, Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few, Vintage, 2016.

[351] Under Pressure: The Squeezed Middle Class, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, 2019.

[352] Andrew Ross Sorkin, Business makes the case for a post-Trump reset, New York Times, January 19, 2021.

[353] Dambisa Moyo, Why the survival of democracy depends on a strong middle-class, Globe and Mail, April 20, 2018. Also see, Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Strategy and Geopolitical Risk in a G-Zero World: Inequality, Polarized Democracies, and the shifting economic and political landscape, Sigurdson Post, May 31, 2018.

[354] Paul Polman: Why Business Can’t Be a Bystander in a Post-Covid World?, TheBeautifulTruth.org.uk, December 16, 2020.

[355] Susan Smith Blakely, How to restore trust for a profession in transition, ABA Journal, January 26, 2021.

[356] Eric Sigurdson, A Toxic Brew: The Politicization of the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence, Sigurdson Post, September 30, 2018.

[357] Eric Levitz, House GOP Admits It Opposes Democracy, Not Voter Fraud, Intelligencer (nymag.com), January 4, 2021.

[358] Tim Hanstad, Trust is the glue of a healthy society. Here’s how to bring it back, World Economic Forum, December 17, 2020. Also see, Trust in Government: Assessing the Evidence, Understanding the Policies, 47^th Session of the Public Governance Committee, OECD Conference Center, Paris, France, April 25-26, 2013; Investing in Trust: Leveraging Institutions for Inclusive Policy Making, OECD, 2013; The Framework for Policy Action on Inclusive Growth, Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level, OECD, 2018; Lisa Kimmel, Canada’s unprecedented trust gap: Who will build the bridge for a country divided?, Globe and Mail, February 14, 2019. See generally, Yuval Noah Harari, The world after coronavirus: This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come, Financial Times, March 20, 2020.

[359] 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report, Edelman.com, 2019; Lisa Kimmel, Canada’s unprecedented trust gap: Who will build the bridge for a country divided?, Globe and Mail, February 14, 2019.

[360] Wayne Swan, Tax avoidance impoverishes us all. Fighting it requires challenging the powerful, Guardian, January 11, 2016.

[361] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018.

[362] Joseph E. Stiglitz, The American Economy is Rigged: And what we can do about it, Scientific American, November 1, 2018.