In the summer of 1989, a relatively unknown political scientist penned a lengthy, extremely boring entry into a tiny politics-oriented magazine with a limited circulation of fewer than six thousand readers. Usually, bloggers posting obscure pieces wouldn't really be considered a notable historic event, I mean the article to this day was never picked up on by the general public. But, the ideas put forward by the conservative political scientist and writer Yoshohiro "Francis" Fukuyama and his article "The End of History?" would become so globally influential not just because of it's origins, but because of the underlying ideas he put forward to justify his conclusions. And, ultimately he would inspire a generation of writers to analyze his piece and rightly come to the result that his ideas were just loud, wrong, and completely dumb. But, why was Fukuyama so confident in declaring the "end of history" in the first place when we can obviously see that history is unfolding right in front of our eyes thirty years after his prediction?
Well, Fukuyama's reasoning (like a lot of the ideas he put forward in his eighteen page article) rambles on a lot, leans pretty heavily on European concepts of history and philosophy that are way too long and boring to get into here, but, if you hate yourself enough to read his piece in full like the author of this publication does, you come away with three main ideas:
1. At the time that he wrote the article, the future of the world basically hung in the balance based on the outcome of the Cold War, which was the old "eternal" political and ideological conflict countries around the world found themselves thrown in after WWII, with every country on the globe having to choose between creating ties with the capitalist US or the vaguely "socialist"' Soviet Union. Back in the late 80's and early 90's there were obvious and noticeable signs that the Soviets were about to collapse and America would be able to claim victory in this ideological struggle, the main one being the fall of the Berlin Wall which separated two halves of the U.S. supported West Germany and Soviet supported East Germany that had remained separated since the fall of the Nazi regime. The event represented according to Fukuyama the "end of history", saying:
"The triumph of the West is evident in the total exhaustion of viable systematic alternatives to Western liberalism.".
2. The form of democracy that most wealthy and influential countries (i.e. the US, UK, Germany, etc.) use to govern themselves called "Western Liberal democracy" by Fukuyama's article, represents to him, apparently, for....whatever reason, the "peak" of human social development because of their "unique" aspects like the rule of law, consent from the governed, and consumer culture. And, because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Fukuyama had the idea that this "western liberal" culture would slowly spread across the world and manifest in countries that made up some of the old battlefields America waged it's ideological wars on where they would become part of what he called the "post-political" or "post historical" world.
3. What few negatives that our capitalist system actually does have compared to any alternatives is due to "factors outside of the system's control" which is Fukuyama's argument explaining Black poverty, or, doesn't exist at all as an issue which is his argument for income inequality. He says on the topic:
"The root causes of economic inequality do not have to do with the underlying legal & social structure of our society, which remains egalitarian and moderately redistributionist. [But] so much as the the cultural and social characteristics that make it up, which are in turn the legacy of postmodern conditions. Thus Black poverty in the U.S. is not the inherent product of liberalism, but rather the legacy of racism & slavery which persisted long after the abolition of slavery.".
(Side note, Fukuyama was paid six figures to turn the ideas in this article into a book deal).
The reason why Fukuyama even came to these conclusions in the first place and caused his own special brand of "end times" philosophy to become so popular is because Fukuyama didn't develop these ideas in a vacuum. The 1980's were a time defined by a massive social shift caused by events in the cultural and political zeitgeist. It was the decade that propelled politicians like Prime Minister Margret Thatcher and President Ronald Reagan who were notoriously fanatic free market absolutists into power, where they changed the fundamental structure of law and government to allow private enterprises to gain social power and wealth while at the same time diminishing government power and reducing it's ability to regulate business in the "free market" for purely ideological reasons. They did things like cut budgets for schools and social programs for the poor because they inherently saw things like government services, welfare, or public housing no differently than socialist programs carried out by the Soviets. Thatcher went so far as to famously say that "There is no alternative" when it came to the question of if capitalism was the best of all possible systems.
Across the world, opposition parties that found themselves out of power in this new political generation (the UK Labour party and the US Democratic party being prime examples) took the success of their political opponents as a signal to change tactics and, instead of clarifying their differences, switched their platforms to be *even more* like their ideological opposition by becoming more conservative on key issues like the economy and social welfare so that they could gain support from more "centrist" voters. This gave birth to a political project they called the "Third Way" and launched the careers of many prominent politicians, from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (who, incidentally Thatcher called one of her "greatest achievements"), to Bill and Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama, and even current presidential nominee Joe Biden. In a weird, twisted way, this development is one of the few things Fukuyama got right about his theory of "post-political" politics that he suggested would emerge after the End of History. Because major parties on the left and right were starting to blur the lines between one another due to their newfound common belief on fundamental questions such as how our society should be run.
Now, as mentioned before, the main criticism dealt against Fukuyama's "End of History" hypothesis by many writers throughout the years is the fact that we are still witnessing history... happen. While the criticism is completely accurate, a more useful and interesting rebuttal against over-educated idiots like Fukuyama would be to point out how all of their prior beliefs about our capitalistic system has been proven, especially by recent world events, to be completely wrong. First of all, the fact that Fukuyama could unironically think that the levels of poverty Black Americans face in the economic centers of the quote-unquote "wealthiest and greatest country in the world" is some sort of "bug" in the system rather than realizing the need for a permanently persecuted and impoverished underclass being one of the defining characteristics of capitalism and still, somehow, is able to be taken seriously in high society should tell you all that you need to know about the people who hold political power. Secondly, even though Fukuyama states in his article that the end of history wouldn't necessarily mean the end of shocking news headlines, his notion that these seemingly "random" news stories being set in these "post-historical" corners of the world contradicts his own argument about the historical importance of the Cold War. If the two global superpowers of the time were ready to use nuclear weapons to turn the world into a gigantic parking lot over conflicting ideologies and happenings in places like Africa and South America.. just how in the hell does history "end" for these places if they continue to exist under political systems that were set up by America during the Cold War, or, even worse, systems left behind by European countries in the age that came just after colonialism? Third and finally, Fukuyama attempts to humble himself towards the conclusion of his article by trying to paint this new "post-political" world as some sort of tedious, boring existence when he very obviously favors the dominance of capitalist society, not only that but the very events that we see play out on our TV screens and in the nightly news are all results of the inherent entropy that has always been lurking in the background of our supposedly eternally stable system.
Finally, and most seriously, we live in a time unheard of in human history. A massive global pandemic, increasingly frequent times of financial turmoil, endless wars and conflicts overseas, unheard of levels of income inequality never before seen, the return of reactionary fascist and racist government to power, and an existential climate crisis poised to achieve species extinction within a generation if not addressed immediately all conspire together to make the lives of those born in the wake of Fukuyama's 1989 prediction some of the most socially interesting times in world history. We, as a generation, and as a collective, have two colossal choices ahead of us: Do we succumb to pressures being exerted on us by the extraordinary times we live in and further drive ourselves into depression, getting even more jaded at the state of our lives and their seemingly inevitable downward trajectories because of the inescapable feeling that we are as disjointed and directionless as the rest of the world is? Or, do we take this time to recognize the absolutely monumental potential opportunity that this crisis affords us as a people? Albert Einstein, the godfather of physics and the man who illuminated so many aspects of how the world truly works is quoted as saying "In the midst of every crisis, lies an opportunity", so, what exactly is the opportunity that we shouldn't dare pass up on? The ability to declare once and for all that the "End of History" as described by Fukuyama is dead and buried forever, and never allow history to come to a stop ever again. We can do that by developing the creativity within ourselves to imagine newer and better systems instead of settling for what currently exists, and finding more rational ways to live on this planet. We do it by being stubborn enough to ask far more from the "powers that be" while building our own centers of power and influence at the same time. We strive for it by being some of the most provocative artists, tenacious creators, resourceful rebels, inquisitive writers, & uncompromisingly radical thinkers that we can possibly be. Since we live in a time of nearly biblical importance, our goal as a generation, if we choose to accept it, is inherently divine in nature. That goal is to break out of the matrix that has sought to contain our true potential since before we were born and build a new world out of the ashes of the old. It doesn't have to be a utopia, and it probably won't be, it just has to be better than this, and we have to be prepared fight for that better world relentlessly. Everything we hold dear in this life is at stake, if we lose, we also lose those cherished aspects of existence, but, if we win this battle against the death of history, we unlock an unlimited world of possibilities.
Across the world, opposition parties that found themselves out of power in this new political generation (the UK Labour party and the US Democratic party being prime examples) took the success of their political opponents as a signal to change tactics and, instead of clarifying their differences, switched their platforms to be *even more* like their ideological opposition by becoming more conservative on key issues like the economy and social welfare so that they could gain support from more "centrist" voters. This gave birth to a political project they called the "Third Way" and launched the careers of many prominent politicians, from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (who, incidentally Thatcher called one of her "greatest achievements"), to Bill and Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama, and even current presidential nominee Joe Biden. In a weird, twisted way, this development is one of the few things Fukuyama got right about his theory of "post-political" politics that he suggested would emerge after the End of History. Because major parties on the left and right were starting to blur the lines between one another due to their newfound common belief on fundamental questions such as how our society should be run.
Now, as mentioned before, the main criticism dealt against Fukuyama's "End of History" hypothesis by many writers throughout the years is the fact that we are still witnessing history... happen. While the criticism is completely accurate, a more useful and interesting rebuttal against over-educated idiots like Fukuyama would be to point out how all of their prior beliefs about our capitalistic system has been proven, especially by recent world events, to be completely wrong. First of all, the fact that Fukuyama could unironically think that the levels of poverty Black Americans face in the economic centers of the quote-unquote "wealthiest and greatest country in the world" is some sort of "bug" in the system rather than realizing the need for a permanently persecuted and impoverished underclass being one of the defining characteristics of capitalism and still, somehow, is able to be taken seriously in high society should tell you all that you need to know about the people who hold political power. Secondly, even though Fukuyama states in his article that the end of history wouldn't necessarily mean the end of shocking news headlines, his notion that these seemingly "random" news stories being set in these "post-historical" corners of the world contradicts his own argument about the historical importance of the Cold War. If the two global superpowers of the time were ready to use nuclear weapons to turn the world into a gigantic parking lot over conflicting ideologies and happenings in places like Africa and South America.. just how in the hell does history "end" for these places if they continue to exist under political systems that were set up by America during the Cold War, or, even worse, systems left behind by European countries in the age that came just after colonialism? Third and finally, Fukuyama attempts to humble himself towards the conclusion of his article by trying to paint this new "post-political" world as some sort of tedious, boring existence when he very obviously favors the dominance of capitalist society, not only that but the very events that we see play out on our TV screens and in the nightly news are all results of the inherent entropy that has always been lurking in the background of our supposedly eternally stable system.
Finally, and most seriously, we live in a time unheard of in human history. A massive global pandemic, increasingly frequent times of financial turmoil, endless wars and conflicts overseas, unheard of levels of income inequality never before seen, the return of reactionary fascist and racist government to power, and an existential climate crisis poised to achieve species extinction within a generation if not addressed immediately all conspire together to make the lives of those born in the wake of Fukuyama's 1989 prediction some of the most socially interesting times in world history. We, as a generation, and as a collective, have two colossal choices ahead of us: Do we succumb to pressures being exerted on us by the extraordinary times we live in and further drive ourselves into depression, getting even more jaded at the state of our lives and their seemingly inevitable downward trajectories because of the inescapable feeling that we are as disjointed and directionless as the rest of the world is? Or, do we take this time to recognize the absolutely monumental potential opportunity that this crisis affords us as a people? Albert Einstein, the godfather of physics and the man who illuminated so many aspects of how the world truly works is quoted as saying "In the midst of every crisis, lies an opportunity", so, what exactly is the opportunity that we shouldn't dare pass up on? The ability to declare once and for all that the "End of History" as described by Fukuyama is dead and buried forever, and never allow history to come to a stop ever again. We can do that by developing the creativity within ourselves to imagine newer and better systems instead of settling for what currently exists, and finding more rational ways to live on this planet. We do it by being stubborn enough to ask far more from the "powers that be" while building our own centers of power and influence at the same time. We strive for it by being some of the most provocative artists, tenacious creators, resourceful rebels, inquisitive writers, & uncompromisingly radical thinkers that we can possibly be. Since we live in a time of nearly biblical importance, our goal as a generation, if we choose to accept it, is inherently divine in nature. That goal is to break out of the matrix that has sought to contain our true potential since before we were born and build a new world out of the ashes of the old. It doesn't have to be a utopia, and it probably won't be, it just has to be better than this, and we have to be prepared fight for that better world relentlessly. Everything we hold dear in this life is at stake, if we lose, we also lose those cherished aspects of existence, but, if we win this battle against the death of history, we unlock an unlimited world of possibilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment