Does History deserve a sequel?
the absolute brass balls of this guy to publish this two years after tiananmen square
>>18495527You don't understand his thesis. Fukuyama did not argue that events would stop happening, wars would cease, or politics would disappear. He argued that humanity might have reached the endpoint of ideological evolution. Liberal democracy combined with market capitalism had shown its superiority and emerged as the final, universally legitimate form of political and economic organization.His argument drew on Hegel and Alexandre Kojève. In this philosophical tradition, “history” means not merely chronology, but the grand struggle among competing political and social systems over how human beings should live. Fukuyama’s thesis was that the great ideological alternatives to liberal democracy, be they absolute monarchy, fascism, and especially Marxist-Leninist communism had either collapsed or lost their global legitimacy by the late twentieth century.He was not arguing that authoritarianism would disappear, but he was correct that in the states without a liberal free market system there is no ideological system granting legitimacy, just strongman rule.
>>18495603The neoliberalist regimes he championed are rapidly losing legitimacy too tho
>>18495389I would posit that democracy is an experimental dangerous process often superfluous and frivolous compared to the push and pull of the tides of everyday life and thinking between athens in the golden age and macedon in the golden age of philip and alexander and i think the difference is clear not that democracy especially helped athens if anything probably hurt athens and caused the founding of the delian league but isocrates is still remembered today, sometimes
>>18495603>but he was correct that in the states without a liberal free market system there is no ideological system granting legitimacynot at all. Fundamentalist Sunni Muslims spreading Sharia by the sword are currently in control of an area the size of the Midwest in Africa. Whether or not they engage in what could be considered liberal free trade is up for debate; i'll grant him that.
lol fukuyama
>>18495603He was wrong.
>>18495603The problem with Fukuyama's argument is that it hinges upon neoliberal democracies being equivalent to democracy in general.This is where I think he's wrong. Although neoliberal democracies are democracies of sorts, they don't hold an exclusive monopoly on democracy. Even more, neoliberal democracies are more "liberal" than they are "democrats". Their governments would rather support personal property rather than advocate for the general interest, on which the "end of history" hinges. Kojève iirc made a similar claim in his works. He thought that although democracy worked well in the West, the lack of recognition when it came to property, whether in part because of wealth inequality, wage-labour, lack of unions etc, could potentially create a new evolution in favour of socialist policies.
>>18495603How do you argue against China, a communist state rising now? Clearly we still have a lot to learn.
>>18495527He was kind of right China is just an evolution of state backed neoliberalism that has become the basis of western capitalism since the 70's not a revolution.
>>18495389>The End of History: Tokyo Drift
>>18495603>liberal free market systemexcept not a single modern country actually embraces its definition and the only use it sees is when it's being waved around as a generic term to indicate "us" vs "them". arbitrary mental schemes made by humans for humans and nothing else.
>>18497806What if we're really at the end of history but the end is actually technofeudal oligarchy
>>18495603>Liberal democracy combined with market capitalism had shown its superiority and emerged as the final, universally legitimate form of political and economic organization.That is arguing the end of wars, politicial infighting, or international conflicts though. I agree that liberal democracy+market economies have objectivly proven to be the last man standing and the only viable real choice, BUT Francis is making the mistake of many autistic academics unplugged from the real world. People are emotional and stupid and act on impulse. They will reject this objective truth for any number of retarded reasons and this is why we had the international islamist terrorist wars and attacks, the migrant crises, and lost souls embracing the corpses of communism and nazism out of contrarian spite.
>>18498197>liberal democracy+market economies have objectivly proven to be the last man standing and the only viable real choice>People are emotional and stupid and act on impulse.ironic
>>18495603>He argued that humanity might have reached the endpoint of ideological evolution.Holy fuck that's even more retarded. How did anyone take this stupid christcuck jap seriously LMAO
>>18498197>That is arguing the end of wars, politicial infighting, or international conflicts though.Pretty sure he never argued that? It's more that today nobody even pretends to oppose the liberal democrat status quo. Dictators hold ridiculous sham elections because they can't be open about the fact that they hate democracy. "Communist" countries complain about sanctions because they can't commit to their supposed opposition to free trade and profit. He never argued for perfection, just for the idea that there's an inexorable trend toward liberal democracy. It's like how you can't predict what each molecule in a gas is doing, but you can build a reasonable model of the cloud as a whole and make some solid guesses. Democracy isn't supposed to "win" by becoming ubiquitous and perfect.
>>18498211How are these two statements contradictory at all? A perfect example of what Im talking about is when American e-commies point to Denmark as their ideal society because they are stupid and think its socialist when its a constitutional monarchy with a market economy.
>>18498197PFFFT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAwait, I need a secondAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>18498225nta but you yourself are a retard clinging to a corpse. the political+socio-economic turmoil that's snowballing rn is a product of liberal democracy and market economics, the wholesome chungus YES WE CAN obama-era optimism isn't coming back bud
>>18498244>the political+socio-economic turmoil that's snowballing rnPlays entirely within the framework of liberal democracy and doesn't even pretend to do otherwise. Whoa people are shitposting more about politics in social media. Who cares, at the end of the day they still have no macroeconomic models that operate outside of capitalism, they still simp for politicians, they still vote and play by the rules.
>>18498222What about the expanding threat of Islamism and in particular Salafi jihadism? They don’t pretend to be democratic, and they are an existential risk to liberal/left movements
>>18498197>the migrant crisesWhy do you include that in your list? People who migrate are often doing so for very reasonable reasons. It's just a question of whether and to what degree target states can or should accommodate and try to integrate them.
>>18498260>expanding threat of IslamismWhat "expanding threat", Muslims spend the majority of their time bombing one another and are chronically incapable of fighting battles to save their lives. Islamists also utterly fail to achieve power in the majority of Islamic countries themselves because people resent them. Most Muslim majority countries have either a monarchy or a secular dictator at the helm, the only two Islamist theocracies right now are Afghanistan, which is one of the worst countries in the world, and Iran, where the regime has to actively massacre its population by the thousands to cling to power and who get helplessly bombed by Israel and the US whenever they get bored.
>>18498225you don't find advocating for liberal democracy and free markets while acknowledging how stupid and exploitable individuals can be a bit ironic?besides, the comment was partly aimed at you and your utterly stupid "objective truth" comment, which I'm not even sure if I should take seriously.
>>18498285>you don't find advocating for liberal democracy and free markets while acknowledging how stupid and exploitable individuals can be a bit ironic?No? It's a system born out of pessimism that accounts for that by design. We start by assuming that everyone is retarded, no exceptions, and reach it by a process of elimination to find the least bad compromises while accepting that perfect can't be the enemy of good.
>>18498260It might be a threat if the principle actors of these "Islamist" movements were Arabs, who are among the least competent warriors on earth.
>>18498296that is one way to see it. another way is that it is designed to promote and maintain a state of permanent civil conflict making its population easy to control and exploit, while giving them individual rights and a state that enforces them, just to make sure that no one actually tries to kill each other or enact any meaningful change.
>>18498367If that was the case, people wouldn't overwhelmingly leave undemocratic states and choose to move to democratic states when given the choice and dictators wouldn't suck the cock of democracy and swallow with their ridiculous 101% vote elections just to pretend they're totally democratic too. Revealed preferences. It wasn't West Germany that had to build a wall and shoot people to keep them in.
>>18498262Because it is a strain on western society. They are migrating because the economy and living standards of the western world are objectively better than their home countries.
>>18498252>Whoa people are shitposting more about politics in social mediaif you're solipsistic enough to think this is the extent of it then I won't bother>Who cares, at the end of the day they still have no macroeconomic models that operate outside of capitalism, they still simp for politicians, they still vote and play by the rules.perhaps, but it's dumb to assume the wheels won't keep turning when contradictions come to a head. authoritarian systems give way to representative democracy when a growing middle class uses its economic leverage to bargain for suffrage, what happens when that process kicks into reverse? if conditions set by a market economy create fewer, poorer participants over time then you can't have an economy based on consumption, nor can you retain competitive advantage with a contracting (read: expensive) labor force. how do you even manage this spiral when universal franchise makes it unfeasible to act with foresight (which means alienating strong voting blocs and interest groups)? even if some theorycel hasn't stepped up with a new "-ism" to replace what we have, you can't expect it to hold when its enabling principles disappear
>>18498244Well this is just you conflating my take that liberal market economies are the best with the "end of history" take which I dont subscribe too. I think its the best system, not one without faults. And by this I that the industrial revolution created a new paradigm that all states must operate in and out of all these competing camps of communism or fascism or capitalism, the sort of hybrid liberal democracy+market economy+welfare system objectively won while all the other models are dead. People being retarded is a constant no matter what.>>18498285not at all.
>>18498385>people wouldn't overwhelmingly leave undemocratic states and choose to move to democratic states when given the choicemost migration correlates primarily with things like the wealth of the destination country rather than their political structure>dictators wouldn't suck the cock of democracyhuh?>and swallow with their ridiculous 101% vote elections just to pretend they're totally democraticthat's just another way to say that their population is united behind their lead. you, a liberal democracy believer, are their main target, so they adapt their language to something you understand.>It wasn't West Germany that had to build a wall and shoot people to keep them inread my first reply. these points you're making are high school debate tier, i'm not going to reply further.>>18498424>not at all.k
>>18495389>Does History deserve a sequel?No, it need rework
>>18498424in the sense that liberal democracy + market economics were most adept to the material realities of the past 300 years? sure. but you're implying liberalism is equally suited to the paradigm of 20XX and beyond, absent the context of its own success>Well this is just you conflating my take that liberal market economies are the best with the "end of history" take which I dont subscribe toothen why is it "retarded" to move on? people look elsewhere because liberalism is full of shaky assumptions which walked us into crisis, unless you think we're not in one (lol) the answer isn't to stay the course. maybe emancipating everyone to pursue their (short-sighted, mutually exclusive) interest creates a self-sabotaging clusterfuck with ever-few winners :O
>>18498385I take it the history channel had a cold war segment after the friends rerun on cbs, eh unc
>>18498197you sound like such a very good muttgoy
>>18498447>most migration correlates primarily with things like the wealth of the destination country rather than their political structureAnd guess what the wealth of the destination country is correlated with. Liberal democracies with transparent institutions and clear separation of powers.>these points you're making are high school debate tierI'm sorry that you're below that tier then!>>18498649>people look elsewhereThey don't. No one is moving out of liberal democracies to go live in authoritarian shitholes in meaningful amounts.>walked us into crisis, unless you think we're not in one (lol)We objectively aren't in a crisis and you don't personally believe it. Just to clarify, if you did, you'd be leaving this so-called "liberal democracy crisis" and fucking off to go live in Russia or China or wherever.
>>18498769>We objectively aren't in a crisis and you don't personally believe it.Bro...>Just to clarify, if you did, you'd be leaving this so-called "liberal democracy crisis" and fucking off to go live in Russia or China or wherever.>heh, why didn't everyone in 1910s russia just go live in denmark or something huh chuddy? checkmate :^)
>>18498813>why didn't everyone in 1910s russia just go live in denmarkThey did. Massive amounts of Russians fled the revolution. Where are the people leaving liberal democracies to go live in authoritarian shitholes?
>>18498649I dont think its retarded to move on and I do infact think we need to because stuff that worked in the past doesnt anymore. But a lot of people are not moving on, they are just becoming nostalgic reactionaries and contrarians. The liberal system is cracking now and instead of figuring out a new path forward people are just looking to dead ends like communism or fascism or whatever else and saying "see?! This system should have won bc liberalism is breaking down!"Also, part of why I think liberalism wins out is because of its looseness and ability to adapt. The rigidness of other systems appears to be a strength, but too much rigidness always breaks under enough stress.
>>18498822I don't think there's anything you can see that would convince you to dig your head out of the sand, you are a cultist and your brain is mush. No doubt in 10 years when everything is measurably worse, you'll still be wasting peoples time with this wikibro plebbitor sophistry.
>>18498276Muslim countries might mostly be led by non-Islamists for now but it is a temporary state of affairs. The populations of these countries are increasingly radicalizing and embracing Islamism. Everywhere from Syria to Mali Muslims are choosing to embrace jihadism. It is a clear trend and on the global scale it is the main challenge to liberalism.
>>18498869Wow, immigration dropped in 2025? Shocker, what could possibly have changed in that year? By the way, where are the emigrants moving into? Is it to authoritarian shitholes, or is it to other liberal democracies, because there is zero legitimate alternative and no valid framework outside of liberal democracy?
>>18498878>Muslim countries might mostly be led by non-Islamists for now but it is a temporary state of affairs.What's your model?>The populations of these countries are increasingly radicalizing and embracing IslamismNo, they flatly aren't because Islamists routinely kill random civilians in terror attacks and cause resentment.>Everywhere from Syria to Mali Muslims are choosing to embrace jihadismNigga did you just cite fucking Syria, the country where a former Jihadi got into power and immediately dropped the whole LARP to start wearing suits and talking about institutions and economic reforms like he just read Why Nations Fail?
>>18498892>Whats your model?Look at the Sahel, Pakistan, Somalia, the Levant or for that matter Muslim populations in Europe. In every case over the past few decades the Muslim populace has rejected secular, liberal and left-wing thinking in favor of ideologies like Salafism and strict Islam. They have gotten more extreme with time: secular stuff like Baathism was abandoned for democratic Islamism (see Pakistan or Muslim Brotherhood) which was abandoned for militant Islamism.As for terrorism, I don’t think (Sunni) Muslims care. The victims of Islamist attacks are non-Sunnis, and Sunnis as a collective tend to justify such attacks. Shias are different (Hezbollah condemned attacks on civilians like 9/11, etc) but I have seen zero signs of that from Sunni groups.As for Jolani the dude fooled you with a suit, that’s all it took. He’s still cheerfully killing Alawites, Christians, etc. and turning a secular country into a Salafi state.
>>18498832ok, that's fair to say>But a lot of people are not moving on, they are just becoming nostalgic reactionaries and contrarians.but I don't think this is entirely true. the bulk of so-called fascists/communists aren't miming these ideologies as they were understood during the twentieth century, they're appropriating the aesthetics of an older identity like american/french anti-monarchists larping as republican romans. no one has articulated a cogent "-ism" in response to the twenty first century, there's still just a vague notion that it should be illiberal. that "brand" will take time to converge on a coherent doctrine or create its own imagery, until then approximate labels like "fascist" or "communist" will persist without necessarily describing a direct callback
>>18498926>Sahel, Pakistan, SomaliaThese are all unstable as shit where whoever has the guns gets to rule, it's like calling the Congolese ideologically pro-warlord.>LevantThey also mostly kill each other over there.>Jolani the dude fooled you with a suitNot really? He's not even the one>cheerfully killing Alawites, Christians, etcThese are the result of decades of butthurt about Assad's minority rule, leading to chimpouts he's failing to contain. It's also not like Assad was ever married to secularism, nigger ran sharia law and and a painfully obvious pro-Alawite bias, not that that's necessarily worse than Sunni brainlets having the power but you get the point.
>>18498887Literally all of those countries are more illiberal than the United States, economically and in respect to legal freedoms. The entire premise of libtard dogma is that every woe can be solved with more "freedom", nobody would leave the United States for fucking ***Britain*** if it were so.
>>18499000>UK, a bastion of illiberalismKek. It's a representative democracy with a market economy.>b-but it's marginally less liberal in this or that axisIt's still a liberal democracy. Show me Americans moving to authoritarian shitholes in droves.
>>18499007China is wildly popular among GenZ. Unless China is somehow a liberal country now?
>>18499013>China is wildly popular among GenZNet negative across all age brackets. Also where are the Americans moving to China? In fact is there anyone from anywhere who wants to live there? Or do the Chinese still keep leaving their supposedly awesome country and moving to liberal democracies?
>>18499007>Show me Americans moving to authoritarian shitholes in droves.Are you really saying that an absence of liberalism is why Cuba is poor or whatever? Nothing else? Does this one-dimensional analysis apply to India, a dirt poor liberal democracy? Why are Americans moving abroad if their homeland affords them more liberties than any of their destinations? Don't even know what the premise of your stupid, half-baked gotcha is, but you've made it clear that more liberalism = more prosperity so go on.
>>18499037>Are you really saying that an absence of liberalism is why Cuba is poor or whatever?Yes, Cuba is poor because it doesn't have a market economy and even the pretend commies like China have tried asking them to stop being retarded and just liberalize the economy already.>India, a dirt poor liberal democracyIndia was a hardcore socialist country until 1991, and besides, liberal democracy is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for not being a shithole. You can't not be a shithole without being a liberal democracy, but you can still be a shithole while being one.>Why are Americans moving abroad if their homeland affords them more liberties than any of their destinations?They're moving abroad to slightly different liberal democracies, and the US is a massive immigration destination anyway. And they're also not moving to *authoritarian shitholes*, which is the point. There is no alternative to liberal democracy other than authoritarian shitholery. Show me the masses of Americans moving to authoritarian shitholes. Where are they? If you're pro-authoritarian shithole, why aren't you moving to one? Must be because you prefer liberal democracy.
>>18499037Oh and>s-some Amerifats are moving to britbongistanSo you think the UK is a model to be followed? Should the US become like the UK then? But the UK is a liberal democracy. I thought you wanted to pretend that there can be such a thing as a viable alternative to liberal democracy?
>>18498185>the end is actually technofeudal oligarchyOligarchies always end in revolution when the disparity between haves and have-nots grows exponential. The only way these hierarchies perpetuate is through distribution programs; noblesse oblige. When the rich avoid paying their taxes, as is happening now in a corrupted system, pressure to overthrow the system grows.
>>18499201What happens when AI gets good enough to predict and prevent rebellion
>>18499208do you really need ai for that?
>>18499208>What happens when AI gets good enough to predict and prevent rebellionI think TPTB underestimate the intelligence, or perhaps the intuition, of the populace. Regular folks can feel the "disturbance in the Force" all the datacenters and AI shit is causing; the resistance movement is growing far more rapidly than they predicted, especially in the US, which still has a bunch of people in it who care about liberty.
>trump 2 has been such a disaster that far-right candidates in other countries are starting to get fucked in elections, and america itself will never elect anyone trump-adjacent ever again>america still leads in tech, chink ai has been thoroughly btfo and will never catch up at this rate>china's demographics are so fucked that this is probably their peakHistory is over. Every single attempt to outdo liberal democracy is falling flat on its face and I cannot see any possible serious rival horizon.
>>18499553China doesn't have to worry about birth rates because they don't have internal multicultural resoucre competition and so the excess resources just makes your average chink richer, and modern warfare doesn't require the same population presuming sufficient material. Birthrates are a meme for everyone who lives in ethnocentric countries.
>>18499556Do people still not understand why fucked up birthrates are bad? The percentage of the population that can produce wealth shrinks. There is no "excess wealth" in a situation like this because everyone is too old to work and produce wealth.
>>18499569>everyone is too old to work and produce wealthGuess it's a good thing they, and every east asian country, and the US, is barreling headlong into automatizing every automizeable job then
