science, philosophy, history, politics, art and so much else
Reposted by Gavin A. Schmidt, Valerie P. Hans, Jordi Cat
It comes as numerous climate cases make their way through state and federal courts.
Principal Research Scientist at the Wikimedia Foundation's
Research team for the area of knowledge integrity
Job posting: job-boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jo...
Reposted by Jordi Cat
Reposted by Jordi Cat
Reposted by Alan Richardson, Jordi Cat
reckoningscience.org/launching-re...
Please take a look, read, and subscribe! All proceeds will go to supporting the underfed post-doc.
Reposted by Jordi Cat
TAT: [Attacking Science]
Reposted by Jordi Cat
TAT: [Attacking Science | Controlling Information]
![Voting in Authoritarian Elections
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2025
TURKULER ISIKSEL
Open the ORCID record for TURKULER ISIKSEL [Opens in a new window]
and
THOMAS B. PEPINSKY
Open the ORCID record for THOMAS B. PEPINSKY [Opens in a new window]
Show author details
Article
Figures
Supplementary materials
Comments
Metrics
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]
Abstract
Democratic theorists hold that voting contributes to some political good: individual and collective autonomy, equality, justice, pluralism, stability, better policies, and many others. But elections are common under authoritarianism, and empirical research finds that holding elections can stabilize authoritarian regimes. This creates what we term the democrat’s dilemma, where citizens who vote in authoritarian elections may bolster the regimes they wish to unseat, even when they cast a vote for the opposition. We identify three major ways of thinking about the democratic value of electoral participation—justice-based, epistemic, and proceduralist approaches—and use them to examine the complex moral considerations that confront voters in authoritarian regimes. We contend that authoritarian elections’ residual democratic value can justify voting, even when doing so could further entrench the autocrat. Our argument also implies that the democratic principles that justify voting in authoritarian elections oblige citizens to choose the most democratic alternative.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:2c4hmyxdfk4aky3jeoulhog5/bafkreig6uaxlnavb3rnzc65gpm4f7rlwassqjaqgx5spnhay25qlar6h2y@jpeg)
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
Reposted by Jordi Cat
Reposted by Christina Pagel, Jordi Cat, Élisabeth Vallet
TAT: [Attacking Science | Controlling Information]
Reposted by Jordi Cat
Reposted by Jordi Cat
On the ballot for reelection is #hpbio Prof Jane Maienschein who is Director of the Center for Biology & Society at ASU
search.asu.edu/profile/10486
Look for email & vote by Feb 4th
Reposted by Steven French, Jordi Cat
Reposted by Mark Petticrew, Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò, Jordi Cat
Hair forensics, for instance, is totally nonsense.
They admitted it.
slate.com/news-and-pol...
Reposted by Alan Richardson, Jordi Cat
