The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Philosophy Now
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am

The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by Philosophy Now »

David Macintosh reaches The End of History.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/106/Th ... s_Fukuyama
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

Fukuyama writes about my favourite subject, human governance. But I am surprised that it has taken PN so long to review this seminal book. After all, determining how humans ought to govern themselves has been one of philosophy's top priorities.

Liberal democracies don't go to war with each other. That in itself is a good reason why it should be the final point in human governance. There is no alternative if you want universal peace and prosperity.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

Ten years after Fukuyama came out with his hypothesis about the end of history (1989) he wrote an article called Second Thoughts. He hadn't changed his mind about its central theme, that humans have reached an endpoint in human governance. What was different is that he realized the end of history would never occur "as long as modern natural science has no end".

History will never come to an end as long as there are humans on earth or anywhere else to make it. What I believe Fukuyama was really saying is that a certain kind of history had come to an end, the historic struggle of determining the final form human governance would take. History will still continue but within that final frame work of liberal democracy.

So let's say you want to restore Marxism. It would not replace liberal democracy. It would occur within the context of liberal democracy. Liberal democracy would taylor Marxism to fit within its frame work.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

This issue that reviews Francis Fukuyama's book is about How To Think.

One way to think is think BIG. Fukuyama was thinking big when he wrote The End Od History.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

Francis Fukuyama has a new book out "Political Order and Political Decay".

Fukuyama didn't discuss political decay in his treatise about the end of history. (The end of history he talks about is not really the end of History but the end of a particular history, the one about how humans should ultimately govern themselves.) However, in essence that's what is at its core.

In his End Of History Fukuyama concluded that liberal democracy represents the end point in human governance in light of the fact that it had defeated all its rivals throughout History, including the last one, communism. The reason why liberal democracy won out over all the other forms of governance is because all the others were prone to natural and structural decay, whereas liberal democracy has a builtin capacity to overcome decay and renew itself. In other words, liberal democracy won top honours in human governance because it is the only one that is capable of renewing itself in order to avoid decay.
User avatar
WanderingLands
Posts: 819
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:39 am
Contact:

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by WanderingLands »

Francis Fukayama is at best naive about the utopist idea of 'liberal democracies' dominating human civilziation and continuity. Just look at the consolidated power that our world elites have; the US, NATO, UN, Bankers, etc., and look at how much coercion that they're causing in the world. There's no genuine 'liberal democracy' existing in this world, and at best the future and the present looks more like an Orwellian-type dictatorship.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

In this book Francis Fukuyama popularized the term liberal democracy. He talked about the triumph of liberal democracy over its last standing rival, communism.

That term has confused many, not knowing what it real means. Liberal democracy incorporates two branches of human governance, liberal representing the material aspect in human existence and democracy the ideal. In a way it represents the two ends of the philosophical spectrum of materialism and idealism, thus encompassing the full scope of what people require in human governance. What could be better?

Liberal democracy is the combination of capitalism/democracy. Fukuyama chose to use the term liberal democracy instead, as he explained, because of the negative connotation he felt the word capitalism carried. The origins of liberal as capitalism came from John Locke who believed that governments should liberalize to allow individuals to purse and determine their own material needs.

Fukuyama wrote that liberal democracy is "the only viable alternative for technologically advanced societies". That prompted Niall Ferguson to ask "Are capitalism and democracy - to borrow an analogy from the field of genetics - the double helix of the modern world?" Yes! I think that if everything else in the universe requires a double helix to function properly why not human governance.

A Russian philosopher by the name of Nikolal Berdyaev, who was banished from his country by Lenin, foresaw the danger of a society built on only one philosophical idea or a 'single helix' as communism was. He believed it would lead to a totalitarian state. He was right. Without a double helix a system doesn't have the inner wherewithal to survive and continue.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

One reason the world has gravitated to a form of human governance like what liberal democracy offers, as Fukuyama pointed out, is because it best addresses the needs and aspirations of all people. But one thing Fukuyama didn't delve into is the standardization liberal democracy brings to the world.

Because of the growing interdependence and interconnectedness of the world the world needs a standard means of interacting and doing business. The world has grown so complex and interwoven in its activities that it can no longer do with competing systems of governance. The world has had to standardize. Liberal democracy emerged the winner in this process because it proved to be the most efficient and just. Over its course only it developed the rules and regulation that are capable of running a complex world. Liberal democracy is the one that cultivated the openness and accountability needed to run such a huge enterprise. It only offers the vitality and legitimacy that Civilization needs to carry on.
duszek
Posts: 2356
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by duszek »

No room for improvement ?

No weaknesses of the liberal democracy ?
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

duszek wrote:No room for improvement ?

No weaknesses of the liberal democracy ?
There's always room for improvement. It's always a work in progress. That's why liberal democracy, because other systems of governance didn't leave room for improvement. It not an absolute like communism was.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

At the beginning of this post I wrote that I was surprised it took so long for PN to review Fukuyama's book, in issue 106. So it is obvious to me that nobody from the magazine reads this form because as I just discover PN had reviewed the book back in issue 6: https://philosophynow.org/issues/6/The_End

The reviewer back then, in 1993, didn't seem very impressed with Fukuyama's conclusion. He, Mike Fuller, didn't see it as a milestone. However, it is, because whenever there is a political shift in the world Fukuyama's idea is always mentioned.

The last time I recall it mentioned outside the realm of PN was after Putin annexed Crimea. The question then was, did Fukuyama have it wrong because Putin seemed to have changed the political paradigm by acting unilaterally, as he did. I argued no! because in the annexation Putin had not upset the prevailing world order of globalization, which was a product of liberal democracy. And Putin's Russia hadn't changed that much because even thought it wasn't a full blown liberal democracy it still depended on capitalism and a sense of openness to survive.
spike
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukuyama

Post by spike »

Fukuyama didn't imagine the resistance liberal democracy would face when he opined that it was destined to be the final form of human governance. He hadn't considered the world's cultures. Must of the resistance to liberal democracy has come from culture.

One of Fukuyama's mentors and teacher was Samuel Huntington. He wrote The Clash of Civilizations. Huntington thought the future would be ruled by civilizations fighting each other. But the way it seems to have turned out is that the cultures within Civilization are the ones doing the clashing.

A big test for liberal democracy's onward march came with the US innovation of Iraq. The US and the neocons that were in charge thought they could establish democracy in Iraq fairly easily. But Iraq had never experienced such a system before. Nevertheless, the US and its self proclaimed experts believed Iraq and its people would accept it with open arms. However, their culture prevented them from doing so. Their culture wasn't prepared for the contradictions and nuances of liberal democracy.
Post Reply