The conference *Challenges to Democratic Thought and Practice in Global Perspective* was held at Duke Kunshan University from May 1 to 3, 2026. Hosted by the Lab for Global Social and Political Thought at the Humanities Research Center, the event brought together scholars working across democratic theory, comparative political thought, Confucian political theory, Islamic political thought, and the history of political institutions.
The conference was organized by Quinlan Bowman, Assistant Professor of Ethics and Public Policy at Duke Kunshan University, whose work focuses on democratic theory and political thought; Rasoul Namazi, Associate Professor of Political Theory at Duke Kunshan University, whose work centers on comparative Islamic and Western political thought; and Lincoln Rathnam, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Duke Kunshan University, whose scholarship examines political thought, conflict, coexistence, and the common good.
The central question of the conference was simple but urgent: how should democracy be understood when its moral authority, institutional strength, and global appeal are no longer secure? The event examined democracy in relation to its critics, rivals, failures, and alternative traditions of political order.
On the first day of the conference, the event began with a keynote lecture by Tongdong Bai, Dongfang Chair Professor of Philosophy at Fudan University. His paper, “To Save Liberalism from Democracy: A Proposal of a Confucian Mixed Regime,” placed Confucian political theory at the center of current debates about liberalism and democracy. The title itself captured a major theme of the conference: liberalism and democracy cannot simply be assumed to support one another. Their relationship has become unstable, and Confucian political thought may offer resources for rethinking political order beyond standard liberal democratic formulas.
The first paper session paired two papers on democracy, liberty, and political scale. John Keane, Professor of Politics at the University of Sydney, presented “The Spirit of Democracy.” His paper began from Thomas Mann’s reflections on democracy during the crisis of fascism. Keane argued that democracy is not reducible to elections, majority rule, or institutional design. It also depends on a shared spirit: a practical disposition that makes people believe democratic life is possible, meaningful, and worth defending. In a world of demagogues, war, inequality, ecological danger, and organized powerlessness, Keane argued that democracy requires habits of vigilance, hope, and resistance to domination.
Adam K. Webb, Resident Professor of Political Science at the Hopkins-Nanjing Center, presented “Recovering Liberty on a Global Horizon: Sphere Pluralism and the Mixed Constitution After the Nation-State.” His paper asked how liberty can be preserved when power moves beyond the nation-state and when technocratic elites gain authority across institutions. Webb argued that modern liberal democracy, built around individual rights and territorial sovereignty, may no longer be enough. He proposed revisiting the mixed constitution, separation of powers, and sphere pluralism. His central claim was that liberty requires the fragmentation of power across social spheres, not only procedural limits within the state.
The discussant for this panel was Seth Jaffe, Associate Professor (Research) of the History of Political Thought at LUISS Guido Carli.
On the second day of the conference, the discussion turned first to Islamic political thought. Alexander Orwin, Associate Professor of Political Science at Louisiana State University, presented “From Medieval Caliphate to Modern International Ideal: Iqbal’s Elucidation of Ibn Khaldun’s ‘Dim Vision.'” His paper examined Muhammad Iqbal’s response to the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924. Orwin showed how Iqbal treated this moment not only as the end of an institution, but as an opening for new political imagination. Orwin showed how Iqbal used Ibn Khaldūn selectively to move from the medieval Caliphate toward an anti-imperial, republican, and international Islamic ideal. Yet the paper did not present Iqbal as having solved the problem. Rather, it showed the difficulty of replacing an old symbol of Muslim unity with a modern political ideal.
Andrew F. March, Professor of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, presented “After Sovereignty: From a Hegemonic to Agonistic Islamic Political Thought.” His paper argued that “Muslim democracy” should not be understood merely as moderation or electoral pragmatism. Instead, March interpreted it as a shift away from the older sovereignty-centered framework of modern Islamist thought. Earlier Islamic political thought often revolved around divine sovereignty, popular sovereignty, or attempts to reconcile the two. Muslim democracy, in March’s account, begins from pluralism, conflict, and constitutional contestation. Religious actors do not abandon religious ends, but pursue them within democratic rivalry. Politics becomes agonistic rather than hegemonic.
The discussant for this panel was Takamichi Sakurai, Senior Researcher at Keio University.
The afternoon session moved from Islamic political thought to institutions and Confucian leadership. Rochana Bajpai, Professor of Politics at SOAS University of London, presented “The Mobilization Role of Parliaments Under Autocratization.” Her paper asked what role parliaments can play when democracy is eroding. Drawing on India, she argued that parliaments under autocratization may be weak, constrained, and sometimes complicit in executive domination. Yet they can still help organize opposition, support protest, create visibility, and connect dispersed actors. Her point was not that parliaments are sufficient. It was that dismissing representative institutions as merely elitist may make authoritarian concentration of power easier.
Elena Ziliotti, Associate Professor in the Department of Public and International Affairs at City University of Hong Kong, presented “Revisiting Confucian Leadership Through Huang Zongxi: A Civic Alternative.” Her paper addressed a problem in democratic Confucian theory. Classical Confucian models often concentrate leadership in morally cultivated rulers and officials. Ziliotti argued that Huang Zongxi offers a more promising resource. In Huang’s proposal for state-funded public schools, scholars and schools become civic sites of political judgment. Huang was not a modern democrat, and his model remained restricted. Nevertheless, his thought suggests a Confucian precedent for civic leadership beyond formal office.
The discussant for the panel was Tongdong Bai.
The organizers intend to develop the presented papers, together with the discussants’ responses, into a collective book project.
