https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man
The End of History and the Last Man is a 1992 book by Francis Fukuyama, expanding on his 1989 essay "The End of History?", published in the international affairs journal The National Interest. In the book, Fukuyama argues that the advent of Western liberal democracy may signal the endpoint of humanity's sociocultural evolution and the final form of human government.
What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.[1]
Fukuyama's position contradicts that of Karl Marx, who predicted that communism would displace capitalism.[2] Fukuyama himself identifies on some level with Marx, but more strongly with the German philosopher Hegel, by way of Alexandre Kojève. Kojève argued that the progress of history must lead toward the establishment of a "universal and homogenous" state,[3] most likely incorporating elements of liberal or social democracy; but Kojeve's emphasis on the necessarily "post-political" character of such a state (and its citizens) makes such comparisons inadequate, and is irreducible to any mere "triumph" of capitalism.[4]
Was he right? If not, how can we modify his thesis to make it more accurate? If you don't believe that the purpose of scholarship is accuracy, then please explain to me why you think that. I know some of you exist, and I'm not sure how to address you when making threads like this.
>>1122281
It did pretty good things for his career mostly but he was wrong. He did later rescind the idea that we lived in the last era of political development too which is a pretty big indictment anyway.
>>1122318
>It did pretty good things for his career mostly but he was wrong. He did later rescind the idea that we lived in the last era of political development too which is a pretty big indictment anyway.
As a Foucaultian i would tell you that the use of his work to justify the Iraq War makes him right, even if he rescinded his work. Power relations, etc. His work is grounded in neoconservative foreign policies now, it's too late to withdraw it.
>>1122325
I had no idea it was used to justify the Iraq War, pretty interesting. I thought he withdrew it on the basis of flaws inherent in Western liberal democracy.
Western liberal democracy isn't even a concrete term considering the huge array of different methods through the West. We weren't instilling Western values in Iraq it was geo-political and I don't see anything remotely approaching success in instilling Western liberal values in Iraq or anywhere else that foreign policy has led us to.
Ol' authoritarian China is having an unprecedented amount of growth in the 20th and 21st century despite having a centrally planned economy too.
>>1122383
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
The whole "Saddam needs to be a liberal now" thing was, on a propaganda/PR level, done with these ideals in mind.
He was wrong, he knows he was wrong, and the only people who still bring this shit up are butthurt commies.
>>1122281
No need to describe that book. Everyone has heard of it.
You talk of the Kojève/Hegel inspiration, but one could go further and compare it to Leibniz, who used to think he and his contemporaries lived in the best possible world.
Leibniz, Hegel, Fukuyama all speak from the standpoint of the priviledged, trying to turn what is into what ought to be.
Voltaire's answer was laughter (Candide / Pangloss)
>>1122692
>You
That was Wikipedia.
The rest of your post is pic related garbage, speaking from a privileged position does not negate the validity or soundness of an argument, nor does it blind one to the truth. Nothing to do with the content of the book, either.
>>1122708
>That was Wikipedia.
Nope.
If wikipedians wrote the same thing, then fine.
And then calling my post garbage without any argument *is* garbage without any argument.
>>1122719
>Nope.
Yep.
>without any argument
>speaking from a privileged position does not negate the validity or soundness of an argument, nor does it blind one to the truth.
There's a counterclaim against a claim you've made. You have not made an argument. You have made claims.
>>1122757
>>>/pol/
More Anglo shit
>>1123007
>He's evidence that the world does not progress inexorably towards liberal democracy, that even a highly advance liberal democratic, free market nation can regress into autocracy, or can come close to it. He's proof that the Hegelian march towards freedom and reason is not absolute.
How can you possibly make that argument when he hasn't been president?
>>1123018
The mere fact that he's close to being president is evidence enough. He's a symptom of the state of the nation, not a causative factor in his own right.
>>1123019
>>>/pol/
No, seriously, post about politics on /pol/ and not here. I do it, so do a lot of people. You can, too.
That being said: How is Trump an autocrat? He seems more like a populist to me, and you'd have to be memeing pretty hard to think that populism and autocracy are identical, or that demcoracy doesn't have a populist element. You admit that rule by the masses is an inevitable part of democracy, I don't see how that makes Trump an autocrat. Bernie is more of an autocrat than Trump, anyway.
>>1123007
>>1123019
>a candidate I don't like is gonna win!
>democracy is a failure!!!!1!
Payback is a bitch, Establishment shill
>>1122281
The Clash of Civilizations is the best refutation of this there is, and was written to be such.
It's also eerily prescient about damn near everything. Read it, Anon.
The End Point of the Enlightenment is not the Last Man, he is the second to last point, the last point is the will to destruction and a rebellion against existence itself. See Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground", and Father Seraphim Rose's "Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age".
>>1122281
but anon, fukuyama himself admited he was wrong, and that book of his, the end of history, is a running joke for decades now
dude actualy made a whole thing out of how wrong he was, became rather pessimist and paranoid during the 90is and especialy after 2001, and even wrote a book about it, concerned with the resurgence of widespread wars, emergence of advanced biotechnology, ecological issues and changing climate, the state of economic and political crisis the world seems to have slithered into after 89 etc...
your whole thread is off by a longshot
>>1123070
It falls short in certain instances. It doesn't explain the Balkans firstly.
The only thing it has going for it that refutes Fukuyama is that the world is yet divided.
>>1123070
muslim countries becoming more islamic is a temporary hickup.
Even now they're getting instagram accounts, posting selfies, wanting to be part of a wesern lifestyle.
They can't resist. it is inevitable that they will succumb
How are his books "Origins of Political Order" and "Political Order and Political Decay"?
Audible keeps recommending them to me but I haven't read anything by him before.
>>1122281
>Kojève argued that the progress of history must lead toward the establishment of a "universal and homogenous" state,[3] most likely incorporating elements of liberal or social democracy; but Kojeve's emphasis on the necessarily "post-political" character of such a state (and its citizens) makes such comparisons inadequate, and is irreducible to any mere "triumph" of capitalism.[4]
I don't get where people get this political teleology from at all.
Literally anything can disrupt "progress" like that, from famines, to war, to political instability and corruption.
Sounds prettylogical to me.i think itis a solid idea.
>>1124755
>The Clash of Civilizations is also bullshit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Eq9aAlEXgs
>end of history
>human beings are still subjugated
>>1124617
>muslim countries becoming more islamic is a temporary hickup.
I agree. Islamism is based as much on ressentiment towards the west as it is on genuine piety. It's by no means a purely native Islamic development. The Muslim world is more western than ever and the violent Islamism is just a part of the transition.
>>1124780
Hemos pasado, commie fucking shits
