The End of History
Francis Fukuyama is well known for his theories and books he has published. Most acquitted for dealing with civilization is his book The End of History and the Last Man. In this book he argues that the start of Western liberal democracy may signal the endpoint of humanity's sociocultural evolution and the final form of human government. Fukuyama’s theory and the contributing factors lead me to believe that this theory is a failure. Fukuyama’s theory of “The End of History” was that a liberal democracy is the endpoint in man’s sociocultural evolution. In which sociocultural evolution is the process by which social structural reorganization is affected through time, eventually producing a form or structure which is qualitatively different from the ancestral form. This means that there wouldn’t be any changes in government structure. This theory goes along with that of John Marx, which states that the end of history is when there is a final government structure in the form of communism. Where everyone is equal and are of the same social class. Which also, I think is wrong because there is no way to get everyone to be equal. Also there is no such thing as a perfect form of government as it always is changing and sometimes cannot make a decision then shuts down. Using “The End of History” does not mean the end of the world. History in this case, as Marx says, is the events of class struggle. Meaning that when a class does not like where they are, they will fight wars and sign treaties in order to change and in the process make history for their heroic or evil ways. Fukuyama’s theory does in some ways contradict Marx’s theory, but Fukuyama has taken many aspects from what Marx has preached. For example the way John Marx sets up history. Marx sets up history into five periods: Primitive communism, Slavery, Feudalism, then Capitalism, and finally Communism. Primitive communism would be the first form of social structure and sociocultural...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document