{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016726403823178016, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.680851063829787, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Ivan Krastev, Democracy Disrupted: The Politics of Global Protest

The initial chapters consider the nature of good democratic leadership. William Galston attempts to resolve the paradox of democratic leadership by highlighting the specific virtue of ‘democratic humility’, namely, the recognition by leaders that their legitimacy flows ultimately from the people rather than their own merit; Thad Williamson asks what good democratic leadership looks like in the context of American urban politics; and Ludger Helms offers an exploration of bad leadership, suggesting that while democracies eliminate the worst forms of political leadership, they also place structural constraints on effective leadership. Nannerl Keohane and Bruce Miroff consider the role of democratic education, the former investigating how civic associations play an educative role for good democratic leaders and the latter offering a taxonomy of styles by which leaders communicate with, and educate, citizens. Roger Smith’s and Ian Shapiro’s chapters explore the question of effective leadership. Smith offers an historical case study of the productive but fragile alliance between abolitionists and Abraham Lincoln, while Shapiro focuses on South Africa’s democratic transition. Both essays point towards the significance of compromise and judgement in good leadership. Robert Elgie, meanwhile, offers a fine discussion of the limits of current institutionalist approaches for leadership analysis. The final chapters expand the discussion in several directions. Elizabeth Saunders offers a conditional elitist account of democratic leadership in foreign policy, while John Kane discusses how democratic leaders might respond to economic imperatives. Kenneth Ruscio addresses the problem of intergenerational justice and how democratic leaders bear responsibility to future citizens. Finally, Haig Patapan discusses how leaders must navigate multiple forms of patriotism while still remaining good democrats. The essays presented here are diverse in terms of both subject matter and approach. Readers seeking a sustained treatment of any of the issues raised here will thus be left unsatisfied. However, this volume presents a research programme which is both long overdue and to which the impressive array of established scholars more than do justice. Like any such work of political thought, it raises more questions than it answers. It does confirm, however, that leadership remains pivotal for good democratic politics.