Fall '24 Wrapped
thesis writing, weekend hawaii trips, epic rap videos...what could be more electric?
This time last year I found myself in Berlin, Germany. While I fell in love with a new city, I also missed the things that make fall at Stanford so special: biking into confused freshmen, going to football games (and leaving at half time), and observing the turning of the Japanese maple trees from green to rust.
After an intense summer, it turns out what I needed was not CS111, but rather Take-a-chill-pill 101. Fall quarter in short:
The Mindset: electric ⚡️
A term with origin unknown but disseminated by Parthav and Naima. To me an electric mindset, meant a dynamic quarter. One with enough flexibility for last minute vegas trips, exciting projects, and new friends. Perhaps it was living in 680 a co-ed, somewhat chaotic house, but I felt like a freshman again, open, curious and albeit slightly lost.
By the Numbers 🔢
1️⃣2️⃣ hours in Las Vegas
1️⃣ new Ganesan on campus
9️⃣4️⃣6️⃣ words in the Stanford Daily
3️⃣ days in Hawaii
4️⃣5️⃣0️⃣0️⃣0️⃣ in ASSU funds distributed to social life initiatives
7️⃣0️⃣0️⃣0️⃣ words of my thesis written
1️⃣1️⃣ new friends as part of the mayfield cohort
The Classes 📝
I’ll admit, an electric mindset did mean school taking the back burner. While I still retain my intellectual curiosity, I’m at the point in my Stanford career where I have to think about actually graduating (crazy right). Therefore, this was largely a quarter of requirements but still albeit some great learning.
POLISCI 244: Authoritarian Regimes
Summary: The most advanced social science class I’ve taken yet but my favorite one of the quarter. In this small seminar packed with graduate and undergraduate students alike a Lisa Blaydes and Beatriz Magaloni power duo pushed us to see the world not through the lens of democracy but rather autocracy.
Skills/Knowledge gained:
How to frame author contribution’s based on their disciplines (what does a sociology versus IR author say)
How to analyze and critique social science empirical methods
How to elevate seminar participation through connecting authors throughout different classes rather than just within
Core Takeaways:
There are two core threats to authoritarian regimes according to Svolik: authoritarian control and authoritarian power-sharing.
Authoritarian Control: Regimes must suppress or co-opt the general population to prevent uprisings, leveraging repression, surveillance, and economic incentives. For example, the Xu study on China's Golden Shield Project illustrates how digital surveillance enhances state capacity to manage dissent.
Authoritarian Power-Sharing: Leaders struggle to maintain loyalty among elites (within their own government) while minimizing the risk of coups. Geddes highlights how institutionalized systems like single-party regimes manage elite expectations, while Mattingly shows how leaders in China promote either loyalty or professionalism in the military depending on whether domestic or foreign threats dominate.
Political institutions are a key determinant in the success of autocracies, which makes our discussion of democratic institutions even more important.
Blaydes highlights how elections in Egypt are used to manage elite expectations and distribute state benefits.
Magaloni emphasizes the role of hegemonic parties in creating an image of invincibility and maintaining mass and elite support.
The Geddes typology identifies the role of institutionalized systems (e.g., single-party or military regimes) in determining regime longevity and stability.
Scholars are increasingly discussing the critical role of understanding and leveraging identity in stable political systems.
Finkel highlights how selective repression fosters "resistance toolkits," enabling sustained defiance under severe conditions.
Slater and Kuran emphasize the roles of communal elites and revolutionary thresholds in mobilizing opposition to authoritarian rule.
The Roessler framework shows how ethnic exclusion by regimes can reduce coup risks but heighten the risk of civil war.
The rising leaders of the world order are no longer just democracies. This class has convinced me that understanding alternative regime types is essential to predicting regime action.
POLISCI 103: Justice
Summary: This was not my first choice class especially after taking an amazing class on a similar topic with Professor McQueen. One of the negatives of saving your requirements until senior year is freshman classes (love you anyway Tatum and Roshaad).
While I did not learn or gain any particular new skills from this class and found some of the lectures unnecessarily political, I did pour my heart and soul into a final essay on Rawls and college admissions which I think is particularly relevant to recent rulings.
In my paper, Justice in Admissions: Rawls, Universities, and the Case Against 'Lopping,' I argue that universities are part of the basic structure and, as such, must adhere to Rawls’s principles of justice. Consequently, the evidence from the Harvard vs. SFFA case reveals that Harvard’s practice of lopping discriminates against Asian students, violating equality of opportunity. Because such practices prioritize institutional missions over justice, Rawls would render universities' personal goals irrelevant and reject Harvard’s practice of lopping specifically as incompatible with a just basic structure.
A nuance that I didn’t discuss in the paper but am still curious about is the differentiation between private and public universities. I personally think that private and public universities arguably have different roles in our larger society/basic structure. Private universities should be given more institutional autonomy to pursue their mission (now what their mission is…is another story).
IIS 103: Center for International Security (CISAC) Honors thesis
Summary: Beginning my thesis this quarter was a soul searching endeavor. The art of finding a research question that was feasible and interesting was harder than I expected. I was told no and “that’s bad” multiple times before I finally landed on my research question: Why did some private AI companies join the White House commitments in 2023 and why did others not?
I am particularly interested in this question because of the ongoing national debate that pits America’s status as the top AI innovator with prioritizing security and responsibility measures. My personal take is that responsible innovation has actually always been part of the American value proposition…we’ll see if my thesis comes to the same conclusion. I will be interviewing policy leads and c-suite members at a series of AI companies to understand and analyze the incentives behind government collaboration.
I’ll be real—the research process has already helped me determine that I am not meant for a PhD. But I am finding the process as rewarding as it is grueling.
In summary, and up next ⏭☀️
This was a quarter of unexpected change. I faced some celebrations but also rejections and came to my own in finding new routines. Against all odds, I became a morning workout person, stopped going to late night Bhangra practices, and stuck to an 11 pm bedtime. While my plans for the next year solidified—pursuing the Mayfield fellowship and a coterminal masters in computer science at Stanford—my vision has complicated. How will I use the fields i’m interested in to combine entrepreneurship and policy? How do I continue to listen to my intrinsic voice while the extrinsic pressures of life beyond college are getting louder?
There were moments this quarter where I doubted how I spent my time at Stanford. In these times my dad gave me this parable about a horse and an old man. You can go ahead and read it or just get to the main takeaway: at the end of the day, no one decision or turn in life is that deep. So treat what happens to you with curiosity not judgement.
Yours Truly,
Divya “I don’t believe in new years resolutions” Ganesan