Fundamentalism and Nationalism Were Great Threats According to Fukyama's In the End of History
1225 Words5 Pages
In the End of History?, which was written at the conclusion of the cold war, Fukuyama argues that with the collapse of communism and of the Soviet Union, that history in terms of ideological differences had come to an end. What does this mean? Fukuyama believed that liberal democracies in which the western world and Europe had become accustomed too, was reaching its pinnacle, its prime. It had begun to spread throughout the world. He believed that as time went on, every society would adapt their ideologies to converge to varying degrees of liberal democracy. According to Fukuyama, there will be no more real adversaries to liberalism and thus, history in an ideological sense had ended.
In the 21st century, there have been plenty of examples of potential competition to liberalism as seen by the emergence of social democracy and the push for welfare states as well as varying degrees of fundamentalism and nationalism all throughout the world. Fukuyama believed that all societies where converging towards democracy and capitalism and that the world was beginning to embrace the ideas and principles of western liberalism, capitalism and materialism. He argued that “liberal democracy remains the only coherent political aspiration that spans different regions and cultures across the globe.” (Mapping the political landscape p.323). Although Fukuyama believes that with the fall of communism and fascism, liberal democracy had finally assumed it rightful place as that right ideology in the world, he seems to have overlooked the overall flexibility of liberal ideologies as well as capitalism and materialism.
The main problem with Fukuyama thesis is that his idea of liberal democracy is an very Americanized on. The problem with this view is th...
... middle of paper ...
...tical freedom, especially the freedom to participate in and influence the government, have been on the rise all over the world since the 1990’s but it worthy to note that democracy and economic success do not always go hand in hand, China has shown that there is no need for democracy in order to experience economic growth and prosperity it has simply taken the idea that works best for them from the liberal ideologies and applied it to their system. Has history ended? It hasn’t, as societies, even those as advanced as those in the U.S still hasn’t found the right balance to prosper globally and for individuals to proper at home. What will continue to happen, is we will continue to learning, to debate, to argue and to find solutions as a global community, a community that is more integrated and more connected that it was when Fukuyama believed that history had ended.