Featured resource widget test page

This is the golden age of transnational repression, or the targeting of exiles and diasporas by the states they left behind. Freedom House research shows that people were targeted with direct, physical transnational repression in 103 host states by 48 origin states from 2014 to 2024. The number of host states, origin states, and incidents has grown each year since Freedom House started publishing data in 2021. This “golden age” is due to a convergence of multiple factors: growing impunity for authoritarian actions abroad; the spread of powerful information and communications technologies (ICT) that have increased the relevance of diaspora politics and the capacity of states for transnational repression, both digital and nondigital; market forces that have lowered the financial cost of transnational repression and created new models of surveillance and subversion; and increased migration globally, which has increased the pool of potential targets and spurred efforts in many host states to make migration more difficult and more dangerous. Finally, the essay identifies reasons to expect that the problem has not peaked. The consolidation of modernized, globally integrated authoritarian states; the subversion of international norms against extraterritorial violence; the pace of technological change; and a backlash against migration in democracies all make it more likely than not that transnational repression will continue to grow as a problem.

Generative AI is poised to revolutionize citizen-initiated mechanisms of direct democracy. This article argues that AI functions as a powerful accelerator, lowering historical barriers and making these mechanisms not only cheaper but also more frequent, by automating law-drafting, optimizing mobilization, and enabling hyper-personalized persuasion. However, this efficiency threatens the core conditions of democratic legitimacy. By eroding deliberation, weakening civil society, and corroding trust through synthetic content, AI risks converting citizen-initiated mechanisms of direct democracy from essential “safety valves” into engines of plebiscitarian instability. This essay contrasts a dystopian future of Automated Plebiscites with a preferable path of Augmented Deliberation. To steer toward the latter, the essay proposes a governance roadmap of digital guardrails—including AI watermarking, public-interest AI platforms, and independent algorithmic audits—aimed at ensuring AI augments rather than undermines democratic practice.