INTERNATIONAL AND GLOBAL COMMUNICATION (IGC)
Fukuyama – The End of History?
The end of history: the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the
universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government
- Triumph of the West: modern economic and political liberalism
[Hegel]: Concept of history as a dialectical process with a beginning, middle and end
- Notion that mankind has progressed through a series of primitive stages of
consciousness on his path to the present, and that these stages
corresponded to concrete forms of social organization, such as tribal,
slave-owning, theocratic, and finally democratic-egalitarian societies
- Men as the product of his concrete historical and social environment and
not a collection of more or less fixed "natural" attributes
- History culminated in an absolute moment - a moment in which a final,
rational form of society and state becomes victorious
[Marx]: Historical development as a purposeful direction determined by the
interplay of material forces, and would come to an end only with the achievement
of a communist utopia that would finally resolve all prior contradictions
[Kojève] Universal homogenous state: The state that emerges at the end of history
is liberal insofar as it recognizes and protects through a system of law man's
universal right to freedom, and democratic insofar as it exists only with the consent
of the governed
- All prior contradictions are resolved and all human needs are satisfied.
There is no struggle or conflict over "large" issues (primitive man's quest
for mutual recognition, the dialectic of the master and slave, the
transformation and mastery of nature, the struggle for the universal
recognition of rights, and the dichotomy between proletarian and capitalist),
and consequently no need for generals or statesmen; what remains is
primarily economic activity
- Proclaimed history to be at an end in 1806 (after the Battle of Jena): the
principles of the French Revolution were actualized; the basic principles of
the liberal democratic state could not be improved upon
Hegelian idealism: distinction between the real and the ideal; Hegel did not believe
that the real world conformed or could be made to conform to ideological
preconceptions of philosophy professors in any simpleminded way, or that the
"material" world could not impinge on the ideal
- Consciousness as ideology: may not be explicit and self-aware, as are
modern political doctrines, but may rather take the form of religion or
simple cultural or moral habits
- Understanding the underlying processes of history requires understanding
developments in the realm of consciousness or ideas, since consciousness
will ultimately remake the material world in its own image à if ideological
development had in fact ended, the homogenous state would eventually
become victorious throughout the material world
,The two major challenges to liberalism are dead:
1. Fascism: saw the political weakness, materialism, anomie, and lack of
community of the West as fundamental contradictions in liberal societies that
could only be resolved by a strong state that forged a new "people" on the
basis of national exclusiveness; was destroyed by the lack of success
2. Communism: liberal society contained a fundamental contradiction that could
not be resolved within its context, that between capital and labor; China and
the Soviet Union have put the final nail in the coffin of the Marxist- Leninist
alternative to liberal democracy
The death of Marxism-Leninism the growing "Common Marketization" of international
relations, and the diminution of the likelihood of large- scale conflict between states
,Huntington- Clash of Civilizations
It is far more meaningful now to group countries not in terms of their political or
economic systems or in terms of their level of economic but rather in terms of their
culture and civilization; conflict between civilizations will supplant ideological and
other forms of conflict as the dominant global form of conflict
Civilization: the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural
identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species
- Defined both by common objective elements (language, history, religion,
customs, institutions) and by the subjective self-identification of people
- Dynamic: blend and overlap, may include subcivilizations
– E.g. Arabs, Chinese and Westerners
Why civilizations will clash
§ The differences among civilizations are the product of centuries and thus
fundamental, they will not soon disappear; could lead to violent acts
§ The world is becoming a smaller place: the interactions between peoples of
different civilizations are increasing and enhance the civilization-
consciousness of people that, in turn, invigorates differences and animosities
stretching or thought to stretch back deep into history
§ The processes of economic modernization and social change throughout the
world are separating people from longstanding local identities and weaken the
nation state as source of identity; religion has filled that gap
§ The dual role of the West; the West is at a peak of power but at the same time
a ‘return to the roots’ phenomenon is occurring among non-Western
civilizations (de-Westernization)
§ Cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily
compromised and resolved than political and economic ones
§ Economic regionalism is increasing; governments and groups will increasingly
attempt to mobilize support by appealing to common religion and civilization
identity
Micro-level of the clash of civilizations: adjacent groups along the fault lines between
civilizations struggle, often violently, over the control of territory and each other
Macro-level of the clash of civilizations: states from different civilizations compete for
relative military and economic power, struggle over the control of international
institutions and third parties, and competitively promote their particular political and
religious values
Kin-country syndrome/civilization commonality: groups or states belonging to one
civilization that become involved in war with people from a different civilization
naturally try to rally support from other members of their own civilization
- Replacing political ideology and traditional balance of power considerations
as the principal basis for cooperation and coalitions
- Common membership in a civilization reduces the probability of violence in
situations where it might otherwise occur; conflicts and violence between
states and groups within the same civilization are likely to be less intense
and less likely to expand than conflicts between civilizations
, World politics: the West versus the Rest
- The west is now at an extraordinary peak of power in relation to other
civilizations; It is using international institutions, military power and
economic resources to run the world in ways that will maintain Western
political and economic values
- Source of conflicts between the West and other civilizations: cultural
differences and differences in power and struggles for military, economic
and institutional power
- At a superficial level much of Western culture has indeed permeated the
rest of the world. At a more basic level, however, Western concepts differ
fundamentally from those prevalent in other civilizations
Conflict between the responses of non-Western civilizations to Western
power and values:
1. Non-Western states can attempt to pursue a course of isolation: to insulate
their societies from penetration or corruption by the West and, in effect, to
opt out of participation in the Western-dominated global community
2. Band-wagoning: attempt to join the West and accept its values and
institutions, in most cases major obstacles to accomplish this
3. To modernize but not to Westernize: Attempt to balance the west by
developing economic and military power and cooperating with other non-
Western societies against the West, while preserving indigenous values
and institutions;
A central focus of conflict for the immediate future will be between the West and
several Islamic-Confucian states
For the relevant future, there will be no universal civilization, but instead a world of
different civilizations, each of which will have to learn to coexist with the others
Fukuyama – The End of History?
The end of history: the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the
universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government
- Triumph of the West: modern economic and political liberalism
[Hegel]: Concept of history as a dialectical process with a beginning, middle and end
- Notion that mankind has progressed through a series of primitive stages of
consciousness on his path to the present, and that these stages
corresponded to concrete forms of social organization, such as tribal,
slave-owning, theocratic, and finally democratic-egalitarian societies
- Men as the product of his concrete historical and social environment and
not a collection of more or less fixed "natural" attributes
- History culminated in an absolute moment - a moment in which a final,
rational form of society and state becomes victorious
[Marx]: Historical development as a purposeful direction determined by the
interplay of material forces, and would come to an end only with the achievement
of a communist utopia that would finally resolve all prior contradictions
[Kojève] Universal homogenous state: The state that emerges at the end of history
is liberal insofar as it recognizes and protects through a system of law man's
universal right to freedom, and democratic insofar as it exists only with the consent
of the governed
- All prior contradictions are resolved and all human needs are satisfied.
There is no struggle or conflict over "large" issues (primitive man's quest
for mutual recognition, the dialectic of the master and slave, the
transformation and mastery of nature, the struggle for the universal
recognition of rights, and the dichotomy between proletarian and capitalist),
and consequently no need for generals or statesmen; what remains is
primarily economic activity
- Proclaimed history to be at an end in 1806 (after the Battle of Jena): the
principles of the French Revolution were actualized; the basic principles of
the liberal democratic state could not be improved upon
Hegelian idealism: distinction between the real and the ideal; Hegel did not believe
that the real world conformed or could be made to conform to ideological
preconceptions of philosophy professors in any simpleminded way, or that the
"material" world could not impinge on the ideal
- Consciousness as ideology: may not be explicit and self-aware, as are
modern political doctrines, but may rather take the form of religion or
simple cultural or moral habits
- Understanding the underlying processes of history requires understanding
developments in the realm of consciousness or ideas, since consciousness
will ultimately remake the material world in its own image à if ideological
development had in fact ended, the homogenous state would eventually
become victorious throughout the material world
,The two major challenges to liberalism are dead:
1. Fascism: saw the political weakness, materialism, anomie, and lack of
community of the West as fundamental contradictions in liberal societies that
could only be resolved by a strong state that forged a new "people" on the
basis of national exclusiveness; was destroyed by the lack of success
2. Communism: liberal society contained a fundamental contradiction that could
not be resolved within its context, that between capital and labor; China and
the Soviet Union have put the final nail in the coffin of the Marxist- Leninist
alternative to liberal democracy
The death of Marxism-Leninism the growing "Common Marketization" of international
relations, and the diminution of the likelihood of large- scale conflict between states
,Huntington- Clash of Civilizations
It is far more meaningful now to group countries not in terms of their political or
economic systems or in terms of their level of economic but rather in terms of their
culture and civilization; conflict between civilizations will supplant ideological and
other forms of conflict as the dominant global form of conflict
Civilization: the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural
identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species
- Defined both by common objective elements (language, history, religion,
customs, institutions) and by the subjective self-identification of people
- Dynamic: blend and overlap, may include subcivilizations
– E.g. Arabs, Chinese and Westerners
Why civilizations will clash
§ The differences among civilizations are the product of centuries and thus
fundamental, they will not soon disappear; could lead to violent acts
§ The world is becoming a smaller place: the interactions between peoples of
different civilizations are increasing and enhance the civilization-
consciousness of people that, in turn, invigorates differences and animosities
stretching or thought to stretch back deep into history
§ The processes of economic modernization and social change throughout the
world are separating people from longstanding local identities and weaken the
nation state as source of identity; religion has filled that gap
§ The dual role of the West; the West is at a peak of power but at the same time
a ‘return to the roots’ phenomenon is occurring among non-Western
civilizations (de-Westernization)
§ Cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily
compromised and resolved than political and economic ones
§ Economic regionalism is increasing; governments and groups will increasingly
attempt to mobilize support by appealing to common religion and civilization
identity
Micro-level of the clash of civilizations: adjacent groups along the fault lines between
civilizations struggle, often violently, over the control of territory and each other
Macro-level of the clash of civilizations: states from different civilizations compete for
relative military and economic power, struggle over the control of international
institutions and third parties, and competitively promote their particular political and
religious values
Kin-country syndrome/civilization commonality: groups or states belonging to one
civilization that become involved in war with people from a different civilization
naturally try to rally support from other members of their own civilization
- Replacing political ideology and traditional balance of power considerations
as the principal basis for cooperation and coalitions
- Common membership in a civilization reduces the probability of violence in
situations where it might otherwise occur; conflicts and violence between
states and groups within the same civilization are likely to be less intense
and less likely to expand than conflicts between civilizations
, World politics: the West versus the Rest
- The west is now at an extraordinary peak of power in relation to other
civilizations; It is using international institutions, military power and
economic resources to run the world in ways that will maintain Western
political and economic values
- Source of conflicts between the West and other civilizations: cultural
differences and differences in power and struggles for military, economic
and institutional power
- At a superficial level much of Western culture has indeed permeated the
rest of the world. At a more basic level, however, Western concepts differ
fundamentally from those prevalent in other civilizations
Conflict between the responses of non-Western civilizations to Western
power and values:
1. Non-Western states can attempt to pursue a course of isolation: to insulate
their societies from penetration or corruption by the West and, in effect, to
opt out of participation in the Western-dominated global community
2. Band-wagoning: attempt to join the West and accept its values and
institutions, in most cases major obstacles to accomplish this
3. To modernize but not to Westernize: Attempt to balance the west by
developing economic and military power and cooperating with other non-
Western societies against the West, while preserving indigenous values
and institutions;
A central focus of conflict for the immediate future will be between the West and
several Islamic-Confucian states
For the relevant future, there will be no universal civilization, but instead a world of
different civilizations, each of which will have to learn to coexist with the others
