for, for i'm retentive and i'm here to plead with you whatever you do, you do not watch my new show. seriously. watch something that's so different. my little opinions that you won't get anywhere else. look at it please, or do you have the state department, the cia weapons makers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations, to your fax for you, go ahead, change and whatever you do, don't want my show to stay mainstream because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't wanna watch it because it might just change the way. thank ah,

lisa canter. russian state will never be. i've side as i phone in the most 19 div mckindoe's house, a group in 55 with will ban in the european union. the kremlin, ca, yep, machine. the state on russia for date and split our t spoke neck. even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with me. ah

ah ah ah ah ah, since the 1st for them was held in 1640 and the massive people, fakeholing, reverend them have been the best tool to address constitutional morale, territorial, and other issues directly by the people. i'm guy now use it on today. the $360.00

view we're going to look at referendums around the globe. and if referendums continue to be the most effective way for society to reminded leaders who actually has the power. ah, a referendum is defined as a direct vote on a law proposal or political issue. and it sounds simple in theory, but everything else in politics can be made to be extremely complicated. if a political class wishes it to be, europe counts for 2 thirds of all national referendum held in the world. this is mainly due to switzerland who alone counts for more than a 3rd of all national referendums, and 2 thirds of referendums held in a democratic society. now we saw in 2016, a record number of popular direct democracy votes or national referendums around the world. $26.00 countries held a national referendums, which was far more than the last record year of $991.00 in 1992 or most of those

votes were held as a response to the political developments following the cold war. now the class, the communism and the soviet union, which spurred the use of referendums all around the world. you know, the 1st vote on the case you membership and the columbia piece agreement were 2 of the most significant. and as we saw with u. k. brecht vote one referendum was not enough. another had to take place where the outcome was not what they really wanted . referendums are not just for large issues which impact the entire country. they also could apply to individual territories, districts, or states. now these reference or type of rebellion and in the present, most about social issues which go against the national policy already in place. this is where interest groups can influence government by the threatening to call a referendum. if proposed legislation is not satisfactory or call referendum and hope the people will choose their side. now in the past, this is a tool mainly used by conservatives against more liberal policies,

which extended government reach. harvard, today's referendums to find themselves mainly about environmental movements and immigration policies. so for more on this, here's our international report. referendum is supposed to be a vote given by work to the people of the government. we have seen this many times in history. most recently, nearly 4000000 cubans voted in favor of a referendum to legalize same sex unions, an adoption of seal, driven by homosexuals. that preliminary resorts, so 66.87 percent of votes in favor. with 33.13 percent against many christians as social conservatives of post amendments. while the islands government once criminalized at homosexuality, this referendum was accepted. the niece of late liter castile, my dear le,

has taken the lead in advocating for l g b t, right. president miguel diaz kani who has promoted the law, celebrated the passing referendum. tweeting out love is now the law while referendum is supposed to be people power over their government. this past year the you in stepping to stop the referendum from region you seem to separate from ukraine. the un general assembly is accusing moscow of attempted illegal annexation, and calling a member states to ignore the results of referendums in 4 former east ukrainian regions. on joining russia, the $143.00 to $5.00 boat followed the general assemblies, refusal to secret balance. this was a request by russia due to the intense pressure from the us and its allies to condemn ma school for trying to acquired the regions. brush us,

you and bossa lower. celia newman zia, are you for many countries may be very difficult to express their views publicly due to the existence of other countries. this pipe immense pressure for nations doing bratia in voting against the un resolution. this where bela ruth, syria, me cut out what and north korea. it is important to note just how many countries chose to abstain from the boat. there were $35.00, including china, india, south africa, pakistan, thailand, cuba, vietnam, armenia. and i'll d area before launching it special military operation ukraine. russia recognize the sovereignty of the nist. a new guns people's republics argue give fails to represent and protect people, leaving their residents up to other regions, voted by wide margins in public referendum to declare independence and joint russia

. precedents loving mean putting sign only vacation treaties with the for new russian regions. however, the un general assembly can then put these actions as illegal saying the 4 regions are temporarily occupied because of russia's aggression in violation of a crane stay. rhetorical integrity and sovereignty that you impress are all nations to refuse to recognize the region of. 1 prussia, moscow argue referendums are the only way for the people to exercise their rights and make their own decision on what country they want to be part of and protect himself from their former government. referendums have been use throughout history to make changes by a government system in 1991. for example, banker base ask waters to decide whether or not to reintroduce a parliamentary government. this led to the precedent becoming the constitutional

head of state and allowed parliament to elect the president. these also moved the position of prime minister to become the executive head of the country and completely got rid of the rule of the vice president says the stern critics have said parliament has failed to become the center point of bangladesh, political, and legislative activities. this is because parliament has been this functional and ruling parties will completely bypass it when making los i'm kind of solano for 360 view. back to you, scottie de, kim. we'll be back after the break with a more on global reference with the the

what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation, let it be an arms race is on offense. very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult time time to sit down and talk ah ah

oh, is your media a reflection of reality? in the world transformed what will make you feel safe? hi sir. lation whole community. are you going the right way or are you being led somewhere? which direction? what is true? what is faith? in the world corrupted, you need to descend a join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. so look forward to talking to you on that technology should work for p.

a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. and the point obviously is to create trust rather than fear a job with artificial intelligence real summoning with a robot most protective phone existence with oh, welcome back. during this now it's dr. richard albert frederick government at the university of texas. he's at work focuses on the role of referendums worldwide.

he's also the author of a recent edited volume entitled, the limits and the legitimacy of referendums. welcome professor frederick, tell us about your research and what you have found in your work. regarding referendums, a rate and research about constitutional change. so how constitutions all around the world change a change by amendment, a change by revision, the change by interpretation. they change by revolution. a change by replacement. i write about that from a comparative perspective. from a doctrinal perspective, historical and also theoretical. so the books that i've written, the books, i've edited the articles that i've written all deal with these kind of subjects with specific regard to referendums, i found some fascinating results in my research about referendums all around the world. let me give you 3 of the results that i found that to me are quite

interesting. one, when you put a referendum question to the people, they're likely to vote yes if it's a constitutional referendum. so about 94 percent of all constitutional referendums in the history of the world had been approved by the people. this is a finding that appears in a book that i recently quoted, it called the limits and legitimacy referendums to chapter written by zach elkins and alex hudson. a fascinating finding. second thing that's very interesting is that some constitutions around the world actually make it mandatory for referendums to be held in relation to constitutional amendments. very, very interesting. 3rd and final interesting point that i'll mention there are

dozens that i can mention 3rd and final that i'll mention just now. even when constitutions do not make it mandatory, or even mention a referendum in their constitutions, when it comes to how to amend the constitution, sometimes political actors all use a discretionary optional referendum when they seek to amend the constitution. so these are 3 fascinating elements. i think about the use of referendums all around the world. do we see any geographical distribution of referendums throughout the world? did they tend to take place in certain regions or even under certain types of governments? we see referendums all around the world. busy whether or not the country is a common law country or a civil law country, whether it's american or european, whether it's a presidential system or parliamentary system. referendums really haven't all

around the world. now for example, in the united states, there has never been a national referendum, or there are hundreds of state wide referendums that happen all the time. in canada, where i'm from, we've had 3 national referendums, but in many provincial referendums, recently there was a referendum in cuba. there was one in she lay there been some in ukraine, russia. they're always referendums in switzerland. so they happen all over the world to reverend ends. and their results tend to surprise or do we find a polling can usually accurately predict the outcome. the most recent example i can share with you comes from chile. so chile just held a nationwide referendum on whether or not to ratify the proposed constitution. leading up to the day of the referendum,

it was very close. people weren't sure whether the people would vote yes or no on adopting the new constitution. but i think most analysts believe that the answer would be no but not by much. and then the referendum was held on september 4th, if i'm not mistaken. and the result came back. surprising and shocking to everyone, because just how poorly the advanced polls fared in predicting how the people would vote. and so i, i'm not surprised that polls don't get it right just as i'm not surprised that polls don't get election predictions correctly. we know what happened in 2016 here in the united states, for example, that happens often around the world. so where a friend is actually considered legitimate, and when are they considered illegitimate? referendums are a powerful tool for authoritarians. they're powerful because authoritarians can

abuse them. and they can send a message to the world that the people are standing firmly with them. and that's a problem, it's a problem because when you can abuse referendums in this way, you distort the true views, the true feelings, the true hopes and aspirations of the people and you're doing so for 2 purposes, as an authoritarian leader, you're doing so for a domestic purpose and you're doing so for an external purpose domestically your rigging, the rules of the vote and breaking the outcome of the vote to signal to your people that they stand with you as the leader. you're also doing so for the world, this is like a public relations campaign to show the world that the people are standing with you . and so even if you're departing from the norms of international law,

from the norms of democratic governance, when you hold a referendum and you rigged the rules so that it suggests that the people are standing with you as the leader. the world sees that and you as the authoritarian leader, wants the world to believe that you have the support of your people. now we know better. we know better when authoritarian leaders misuse and abuse referendums. we know what they're doing, but that doesn't obviate the reality that the people in the country may not know. and that's a problem. okay, professor, just between us, are you actually ever surprised by the result of a referendum? i'm i'm never surprised about the results of referendums. because i don't purport to know what the people believe, that's why we're all referendums. you asked earlier about what makes a referendum legitimate? i think a couple of things need to go into the design of

a referendum in order for us to be confident about the outcome. so there are inputs that you put into the design of the referendum and then the output is the result. so some things that you must input into the design in order to be confident of the legitimacy of the outcome. one, the people have to go into the ballad box to vote. fully informed and aware of the consequences and implications of their vote. that was not the case and breaks it, for example, right. that's why you had a lot of people suggesting that there should be a 2nd confirmatory vote after the 1st vote, because a lot of people were shocked after they voted yes, rex it. and they're like what this means we're leaving with you. this means that i have maybe to get a new job. and so the design of the referendum has to be such that the people are fully aware of the consequences and implications of a vote either yes or no. in order to help them do that. those for holding the

referendum have to be willing to fund informational campaigns. that's best done by having an independent 3rd party institution that's responsible for managing, administering, and running referendums in some countries. this is a electoral branch that operates independently of the political actors who are elected. that's the best way to do it. but you see this. busy electoral branch of electoral body, this independent body would go around and hold these roving informational sessions for people in different parts of the country to learn about the referendum stakes about everything that it entails and to ask questions. another thing that i think is useful to design a referendum is to fund opposite sides. so you have money,

public monies that are available to a yes campaign with its own spokespersons and representatives, and a no campaign with its own spokespersons in representatives. so that's also very important. one more thing for design of the actual question itself must be such that it's seen as fair referendum and psychology very, very closely connected because you can phrase a question in a way that leads you to a particular kind of answer. and so it's a very important that in the phrasing of the referendum question, the question be posed in a, whether it's neutral, impartial, and crystal clear. so these are just 3 things that i think are important as inputs in the design of a referendum that can then lead you to be confident in the outcome of the referendum in terms of its legitimacy. there are many other things that we can talk about when it comes to the design, but those are 3 very important things. so what is the future of referendums

globally moving forward into the 21st century, where we see more or less of them and how will they be used? i predict 2 things about the future of our friend homes in all the world. one is that when new constitutions are written, you are going to see more and more constitutions require. the use of referendums, in connection with amending the constitution, revising the constitution, and replacing the constitution to you're going to see increasing recourse to referendums all around the world. whether or not existing constitutions make referendums a requirement. and this is because there isn't an irresistible siren song that referendums, i think i issue to leaders. it's an irresistible call to go to the

people that ask them for their input to get that input. and then close yourself. as the leader in a veneer of sociological legitimacy, the kind of sociological legitimacy that comes only from the will of the people as expressed in a direct vote, which is what a referendum is. so those are my 2 predictions about the future of referendums in the world. if you don't like them to bet, because we're going to see a lot more of them everywhere in the world. well, thank you. professor richard albert to professor government at the university of texas. many countries like to say their use of our friends solidifies their country is a democracy. and in many cases it is a good benchmark. while many referendums do occur underneath democratic regimes throughout history, authoritarian regimes have also had their share of referendums from napoleon to nazi germany, to romania and so forth. just like with elections. those and power can limit

opposing views, controlled choice for strict voters and produce false results or even dismiss if those results are not to their liking. while telling the outside they to our democracy because they let the people have the power of choice. however, usually in those cases, it is obvious going in to the referendum as well as with the results. there's little credibility, but the accusation of a false referendum can be just as insulting to the voters as well. and back those empower upset with the results of a referendum, especially if it's overwhelmingly against their position. discrediting the process is the only tool left to try and justify their position in africa. only 9 of the $92.00 referendums, which had been held have failed to produce a 90 percent. yes. vote. one of the biggest changes in india history was a referendum to abolish the monarchy, which was held in 1975 and overwhelmingly support of 97.5 percent of voters

resulted in 6 them becoming an indian state was actually wonder though when results referendum where the people voted, are so overwhelmingly to one side. what did you say about those who are against who side? are they? exactly. i am sky hughes, and this has been your 360 view. other news which matters to you until next. huh. ah, ah, i think you crane who does exist should exist and it is precisely the best option i suspect for its future is to find that amalgam of the cultures that are within it and turn it into something

unique and flourishing. that that would define it in distinction but not conflict, but simply the difference between itself and its neighbor. mm hm. mm. is for melissa and this will stream manipulators or not, but missile is not at all. what cold showed mister vondik the adored your nick was laquia and rhetoric are actually still center course rush. yeah, them for you. daniel. is your nearest amendment or smart? also some will take which if somebody image ocr, nice to probably spend us with stanley kit to look seller

the doors. yeah. which are fed in your theater. yeah, no more. so i've been a glove the under seymour style. him a nasty talk loud cuz you'll be blacked. dyslexia i studied more to watch and loud enough where you'll be put it down that you're not alone. but i mean, nice said i would show you that, you know, nice is going to learn the language. i forget who to talk. squatter is mark low, but honestly it is only one main thing is important for naziism, internationally speaking, that is, that nations, but that's allowed to do anything, all the mazda races, and then you have the mind, the nations who are the slaves, americans, brock obama, and others. have had a concept of american exceptionalism. international law exist as long as it serves american interests. if it doesn't,

it doesn't exist by turning those russians into this dangerous go. you man, that wants to take over the world. that was a culture strategy. so some wolf out of it on your own, i not leashed it off. tim, zip on and tablet block. nato took it out. we moved east and the reason us had gemini is so dangerous. is it? the law is the sovereignty of all the countries. the exceptionalism that american uses and its international war planning is one of the greatest threats to the populations of different nations. if nature, what is founded, shareholders in united states and elsewhere in large obs companies would lose millions of millions or is business and business is good. and that is the reality of what we're facing, which is fashion. with

the headlines of this our, the u. s. and in the middle east, as they is iran of story of travel around the world. quite a grown attack on a rainy and medical facility. some media outlets have accused both the us and israel, conducting his problem the policy to help him in an exclusive interview during which he is with killing innocent people on call for help from the international in the mission committee. it especially at this moment that is it with a new development that is existing and with new policies.