On April 29 and 30, 2024, Kurt Weyland, Mike Hogg Professor of Liberal Arts at the University of Texas at Austin, gave talks at Lincoln University of Missouri in Jefferson City and at Westminster College in Fulton. 
The topics of the talks, and professor Weyland’s area of academic expertise, was the state of democracy globally. At Lincoln, Weyland’s talk was titled “How Democracy survives Populism” and was based on his newly released book from Cambridge University Press. Weyland argued that Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their 2018 book—How Democracies Die—raised concerns that populist leaders such as Peru’s Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000), Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (1999-2013), and Hungary’s Viktor Orban (2010-present), among others, increasingly smothered democracy in their countries. These leaders did so by getting elected democratically but then once in office, they undermined democratic institutions such as courts, media, and other democratic bodies that provide checks and balances. Weyland, however, is more optimistic about democracy’s ability to survive populist leaders such as these. He argues that if you look at 40 cases between 1985 and 2020 in which populist leaders tried to overthrow democracy, these leaders only succeeded in seven of the cases. Democracy was more robust than Levitsky and Ziblatt’s analysis, which focused disproportionately on negative cases, suggested.
The topics of the talks, and professor Weyland’s area of academic expertise, was the state of democracy globally. At Lincoln, Weyland’s talk was titled “How Democracy survives Populism” and was based on his newly released book from Cambridge University Press. Weyland argued that Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their 2018 book—How Democracies Die—raised concerns that populist leaders such as Peru’s Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000), Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (1999-2013), and Hungary’s Viktor Orban (2010-present), among others, increasingly smothered democracy in their countries. These leaders did so by getting elected democratically but then once in office, they undermined democratic institutions such as courts, media, and other democratic bodies that provide checks and balances. Weyland, however, is more optimistic about democracy’s ability to survive populist leaders such as these. He argues that if you look at 40 cases between 1985 and 2020 in which populist leaders tried to overthrow democracy, these leaders only succeeded in seven of the cases. Democracy was more robust than Levitsky and Ziblatt’s analysis, which focused disproportionately on negative cases, suggested. 
Weyland joined the group for lunch at “The Caf” at Lincoln University of Missouri. LU political science students, Alannah Wade and Amari Fluelen talked to Kurt Weyland (white shirt). Professor of Political science at Westminster College, Tobias Gibson (beard), and LU librarians Ithaca Bryant and Mark Schleer joined the group.
At Westminster College, Weyland gave a talk to students and faculty on the topic of the “Use of Dramatic 
Terms in Politics: How We Overuse ‘Fascism’ and the Like.” Drawing on the ideas of the notable Italian scholar of democracy, Giovanni Sartori, Weyland argued that we too facilely use the term ‘fascism’ in political discourse today. Such over-liberal use of a terms is called ‘concept stretching.’ ‘Fascism’ has a precise technical meaning in political science, and events of today in US democracy, Latin America, and Europe—though troublesome, perhaps—do not fit the technical definition of fascism. Educated audiences’ imprecisely using terms such as ‘fascism’ is dangerous for the reasons that Aesop made apparent in his fable about the boy who cried wolf.
Terms in Politics: How We Overuse ‘Fascism’ and the Like.” Drawing on the ideas of the notable Italian scholar of democracy, Giovanni Sartori, Weyland argued that we too facilely use the term ‘fascism’ in political discourse today. Such over-liberal use of a terms is called ‘concept stretching.’ ‘Fascism’ has a precise technical meaning in political science, and events of today in US democracy, Latin America, and Europe—though troublesome, perhaps—do not fit the technical definition of fascism. Educated audiences’ imprecisely using terms such as ‘fascism’ is dangerous for the reasons that Aesop made apparent in his fable about the boy who cried wolf. 
