Francis Fukuyama: ‘The End of History Francis Fukuyama: ‘The End of History?’, The National Interest, Summer 1989.

Fukuyama declares the ultimate triumph of Western liberal democracy: “an unabashed victory of economic and political liberalism”. The triumph of the West, of the Western idea, is evident first of all in the total collapse of viable systematic alternatives to Western liberalism. Significant reform movements observed in the 2 biggest communist countries (USSR and China) – a change in the intellectual/ideological level.

This 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: It is the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. This is not to say that there will no longer be international events of significance, because the victory of liberalism has occurred primarily in the realm of ideas or consciousness and is as yet incomplete in the real or material world.

Summary of main argument Francis Fukuyama argued that that the end of the Cold War signals the end of the progression of human history. Fukuyama famously argues that ‘What we may be witnessing in 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.’

Hegel and Marx We now have the answer to one of the most fundamental questions of political science – ‘how best to organize human society’. Fukuyama's thesis is an obvious reference to Marx. However, Fukuyama reverts back to the work of Marx's original source, Hegel

Intellectual Roots of the Argument: Hegel Hegel sees history as a dialectical process with a beginning, a middle, and an end (Historical Idealism). Hegel believed that history culminated in an absolute moment - a moment in which a final, rational form of society and state became victorious. Accordingly, he proclaimed history to be at an end in 1806. For as early as this Hegel saw in Napoleon's defeat of the Prussian monarchy at the Battle of Jena the victory of the ideals of the French Revolution, and the imminent universalization of the state incorporating the principles of liberty and equality.

The Battle of Jena marked the end of history because it was at that point that the vanguard of humanity actualized the principles of the French Revolution. While there was considerable work to be done after 1806 like abolishing slavery and the slave trade, extending the franchise to workers, women, blacks, and other racial minorities, etc. -the basic principles of the liberal democratic state could not be improved upon. The two world wars in 20th century and their attendant revolutions and upheavals simply had the effect of extending those principles geographically, and of forcing the vanguard of civilization to implement their liberalism more fully.

all prior contradictions, which characterized the flow of history (e.g. the class conflict), are resolved, and all human needs are satisfied. There is no struggle or conflict over “large” issues, and consequently no need for generals or statesmen; what remains is primarily economic activity (Example: the Common Market). For Hegel, all human behavior in the material world, and hence all human history, is rooted in a prior state of consciousness. … And this consciousness in the long run creates the material world in its own image.

A common misunderstanding… The most basic error in discussing Fukuyama's work is to confuse ‘history’ with ‘events’. Fukuyama does not claim at any point that events will stop happening in the future. What Fukuyama is claiming is that in the future (even if totalitarianism returns, or if fundamentalist Islam becomes a major political force) democracy will become more and more prevalent in the long term. However, democracy may experience ‘temporary’ setbacks Fukuyama argues that ‘the victory of liberalism has occurred primarily in the realm of ideas or consciousness, and is as yet incomplete in the real or material world’.

Democracy Fukuyama's thesis consists of two main elements. First, Fukuyama points out that the number of democratic states has expanded to the point where the majority of governments in the world are ‘democratic’. He also argues that democracy's main intellectual alternatives, which include Nazism, Fascism, Communism, nationalism and religion have been discredited.

Thymos Second, there is a philosophical argument, taken from Hegel. Hegel sees history as consisting of the dialectic between two classes: the Master and the Slave. Ultimately, this thesis (Master) and antithesis (Slave) must result in a synthesis, in which both manage to live in peace together. This can only happen in a democracy. The Platonic idea of ‘thymos’ and the ‘struggle for recognition’ are important here.

The end of history – when? Fukuyama’s thesis is often misinterpreted and misunderstood. For example, it is frequently claimed that Fukuyama believes that history ended in 1989 (with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War). In fact, Fukuyama believes that history ended in 1806, with the Battle of Jena. Since the French Revolution of 1789, democracy has repeatedly proven to be a fundamentally better system (ethically, politically, economically) than any of the alternatives.

Criticisms of the End of History thesis Some critics have suggested that Islamic fundamentalisms (as represented by the Saudi Arabian government, the Taliban and Bin Laden) offer an intellectual alternative to liberal democracy. However, Fukuyama argues that Islam has little intellectual or emotional appeal outside the Islamic ‘heartlands’. In order to provide genuine competition for liberalism, a competing belief system must have global appeal. Moreover, when Islamic states have actually been created (for example in Afghanistan), they were easily defeated militarily by the powerful democracies.

Criticisms of the End of History thesis Marxism is another End of History philosophy. Therefore Marxists have been amongst Fukuyama's fiercest critics. Marxists claim that capitalist democracies are still riven with poverty, inequality and racial tension. They also reject Fukuyama's reliance on Hegel. According to them, Hegel's philosophy was fatally flawed until Marx ‘turned it on its head’ to create historical materialism (regards material economic forces as the base on which sociopolitical institutions and ideas are built). Social structures derive from economic structures and that these are transformed as a result of class struggles, each ruling class producing another, which will overcome and destroy it, the final phase being the emergence of a communist society

dialectical materialism Political and historical events result from the conflict of social forces and are interpretable as a series of contradictions and their solutions. The conflict is seen as caused by material needs.

The Collapse of Communism Why was it that China and the USSR moved away from central planning in the 1980’s? The deep defects of socialist economies (material causes) cannot be an answer because this was evident even 30-40 years ago. The answer must be found in the consciousness of the ruling elites. That change was in no way made inevitable by the material conditions, but instead came about as the result of the victory of one idea over another.

Are there, in other words, any fundamental “contradictions” in human life that cannot be resolved in the context of modern liberalism; that would be resolvable by an alternative political- economic structure?

Criticisms of the End of History thesis Fukuyama admits that there is poverty, racism and sexism in present-day democracies. However, he argues that there is no sign of a major revolutionary movement developing that would actually overthrow capitalism. Whether such a movement will develop in the future remains to be seen.

The Environmentalist Challenge There is also the environmentalist challenge. Environmentalists argue that the capitalist economies' propensity towards growth will eventually collide with the Earth's natural ‘limits to growth’. Some radical alteration in the socio- economic situation of the West would then have to take place.

The Clash of Civilizations Numerous other intellectuals and thinkers have disagreed with the End of History thesis. For example, Samuel Huntington, in his essay and book, The Clash of Civilizations argues that temporary conflict between ideologies is being replaced by the ancient conflict between civilizations. The dominant civilization decides the form of human government, and the dominant civilization will not remain the same over time.

A justification of US style democracy? Some argue that Fukuyama presents ‘American- style’ democracy as the only ‘correct’ political system and that all countries must inevitably follow the this example. However, many Fukuyama scholars claim this is a misreading of his work. Fukuyama's argument is only that in the future there will be more and more governments that use the framework of parliamentary democracy and that contain markets of some sort. There will remain a substantial variety of different political systems that remain broadly democratic and free market oriented.

Conclusion The end of history does not by any means imply the end of international conflict per se. For the world at that point would be divided between a part that was historical and a part that was post historical. Conflict between states still in history, and between those states and those at the end of history, would still be possible. There would still be a high and perhaps rising level of ethnic and nationalist violence, since those are impulses incompletely played out, even in parts of the post historical world. This implies that terrorism and wars of national liberation will continue to be an important item on the international agenda. But large-scale conflict must involve large states still caught in the grip of history, and they are what appear to be passing form that scene.