Tuesday, February 14, 2012


Commentary

At Last, 'The End Of History'

Does Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" actually apply to the ideology he thought had prevailed, Western liberal democracy?
TEXT SIZE - +
By Peter Lavelle
The world is experiencing a paradigm shift that will fundamentally change how we think and live. Conventional wisdoms, some held in the West since the end of World War II and others dating from the end of the Cold War, are not only being challenged, but swept into the dustbin of history.

In 1992, Francis Fukuyama published his "The End of History and the Last Man." At the time, Fukuyama's thesis seemed obvious for the Western world: "What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."

Today these words appear out of place, if not simply gibberish. With the exception of a few neoconservatives, a growing number of people in the West and the vast majority of the world are questioning what was unquestionable in the Western mainstream -- for example, the role of the state in the economy, how the global economy should be run, and whether there should be engagement with groups now labeled as "terrorists."

The global financial slump is destroying not only economies, but also the foundations of the West's worldview. Examples abound. Over the last 20 years, the Western world dangerously deregulated sectors of the economy to the point of privatizing what have been traditionally state services, including the military. Those who questioned the wisdom of doing so were called "socialist," a word that in American political discourse is akin to an expletive. The hard reality today is that the state must also be an active economic player to ensure we don't repeat the follies that have brought the world to its knees.

To date, the world's economy has been dominated by a small group of Western countries, a legacy of the post-World War II era called the Bretton Woods arrangement. However, the global economic order has not kept up with the times. What are known as the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) remain almost invisible when it comes to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. When the G20 countries, which includes the BRICs, meet in London next month, this grouping should replace the Group of Eight and meet twice a year until the worst of the slump has been overcome, when it should become institutionalized.

The issue of "Western liberal democracy" has been monopolized by the West, particularly the United States. The idea of democracy has been so badly abused over the past 20 years that it has been rendered almost useless and nothing more than an ideological weapon of mass destruction by the West.

Dictated Democracy

Since the end of the Cold War, democracy has come to mean one thing: promotion of Washington's foreign-policy agenda. Rarely do we hear anything about the democratization of the global economic order. Russia and China continue to be viewed with suspicion, and the concept of "fair trade" with the rest of the world has been superceded by one-sided policies under the rubric of "free trade" that only and always favor Western economies.

In the area of international security the same applies. Where is "Western liberal democracy" in this sphere? NATO claims that Russia has no right to dictate which country can enter the alliance. Fair enough. However, what right does NATO have to threaten a country, specifically Russia, with its continued expansion? What is democratic about that?

Then there is the issue of democratic elections. The West wholeheartedly supported elections in Ukraine and Georgia (the so-called "Orange" and "Rose" revolutions). Washington gloated, but longer-term results in these so-called democracies have created many doubts about the continued political development of Ukraine and Georgia. Nonetheless, Washington congratulated itself on its ability to fast-forward history -- ending history all together, as Fukuyama prophesied.

What is the result? Both Ukraine and Georgia are becoming, or have already become, failed states, and the security consequences for Russia of that collapse are profound. Washington's misguided and ideologically driven hubris has resulted in Russia being left to pick up the pieces -- and being branded authoritarian and a regional hegemon in the process. And lest we forget, Hamas was democratically elected, but "Western liberal democracy" continues to reject election results elsewhere in the world it does not like. This is simply hypocrisy.

We all face new vistas. For the majority of the world it won't be easy. But the changes we face will be very hard for the West so accustomed to its "special place in history." That place in history is changing, and in the most dramatic way. The rest of the world has funded Western prosperity for decades, making the United States the greatest debtor state in history. As we can see today, this was a failed model and ideology. Now everyone must pay and be rewarded equally an idea the West abandoned long ago.

In a strange way, Fukuyama was right in his "The End of History and the Last Man." History never ends, but bankrupt ideologies do. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was buried two decades ago. In light of recent history, Fukuyama's "Western liberal democracy" should now be preparing for its own burial ceremony. I won't weep at the funeral -- nor will most of the world.

Peter Lavelle is a political commentator for Russia Today television. The views expressed in this commentary are his own, and do not necessarily represent those of Russia Today or RFE/RL
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments page of 5
    Next 
by: Andrew from: Auckland
March 13, 2009 17:18
Correction, Hamas were not elected as the actual government of Gaza, they were elected to represent Gaza's electorates in the Palestinian Authority, a big difference.
They then launched a violent and bloody coup against the lawful government, the Palestinian Authority in Gaza,killing hundereds of thier political opponents.
Once again "Mr" Lavelle twists the facts to suit his (well actually his Kremlin masters) disgusting agenda.
If "Mr" Lavelle had his way, all those who struggle for democracy, rule of law, and freedom of speech in the former USSR will get a one way ticket to a Gulag.
But what else can we expect from a kremlin sock puppet like lavelle?
He does work for "Russia Today" after all.

by: Ivan from: London
March 13, 2009 19:05
Burial of Western Liberal Democracy? What instead? Sovereign Democracy of Putin type? Obviously that is what P.Lavelle always admired and is paid to admire.

by: Ivo
March 13, 2009 20:05
What a waste of time reading this article...

>Since the end of the Cold War, democracy has come to mean one thing: promotion of Washington's foreign-policy agenda.

Really? Such as? And what did democracy mean during the Cold War? How did it differ?

>What is democratic about that?

Well, what idn't democratic about it, monsieur Lavelle?

>Both Ukraine and Georgia are becoming, or have already become, failed states (...)
That's a hell of a statement, a'haftasei! Indeed, Geo & Ukr are just soooo much like Somalia.


>(...) and the security consequences for Russia of that collapse are profound.

Par exemple?

>(...) these so-called democracies (...)

Would you care to enlighten us what makes them only "so-called" democracies? Merci!

by: Michael from: South Africa
March 14, 2009 04:48
Correction again Andrew!!
This is not only Peter Lavelle's opinion, this is the worlds opinion. The Americans believed that they control the world and now the "wheels have fallen off the bus" Americans and their democrocy is filled with lies, deceipt, hypocrocy and are not to be trusted. The American freedom and democrocy includes Torture camps, openly allowing torture, concentration camps in Eastern Europe,invading Iraq on false pretences,weapons of mass destruction?? when it was only for the oil, invading countries as they please and hiding behind the United Nations. But the time for the great "Fall" has arrived as it does with all dictators. You think that everybody has sympathy for the USA? The world is sitting back with glee and enjoying every moment of America's demise. The great American system--they know it all? And so the banks collapse.
Wake up, America and the west is finished, remove your statue of libery and realize that the technology, power and wealth is now in Russia and the east.
Join the trailer trash society of America.

by: Igor (Alex) from: Canberra
March 14, 2009 07:29
Congratulations to both - Peter for posting his excellent analysis here, and to the editors for publishing it. Any good idea can be screwed up by bad implementation - be it the "democracy" as promoted by Bush administration, or "communism" as was implemented by the Soviets. I am not sure which one was actually worse; now is exactly the time for everyone to think about this. That was the main idea of article - the invitation to stop hanging the anti-Russian labels (or personal insults) and just think - as homo sapience are supposed to do.

by: samuel from: Ekiti
March 14, 2009 13:21
that is good

by: justcomment from: tbilisi
March 14, 2009 16:01
agree with previous comment, only Kremnlin regards NATO's expansion as a threat, why? what is the Kremlin's concern? Georgia and Ukraine are not failed states, they are just on their hard road to democratic development, that is imaginable in Russia,and this road is quite difficult,if one day Russia also tries to go through it will be even more painful for it. States do really have to play bigger role today, but I think liberal democracy has nothing to do with today's crisis, this will be overcomed, but Russian imperialism and authoritarian rule definitely collapses one day. I am pretty sure of this.

by: Neuvel from: Great Britain
March 14, 2009 19:16
peter works for russia today, a news channel known for covering the news..that the kremlin wants. on russia today you are unlikely to see the rioters in vladivostok and there reasons explained.RT did a cover story on the soviet invasion of afghanistan and failed to mention any of their atrocities whilst criticing america.
the differnce between america and russia is you can criticise America because you have freedom of speech, whereas in russia you don't and will probably be arrested under the"extremism" act.Nice Peter also known by the alias judas

by: Igor(Alex) from: Canberra
March 15, 2009 00:26
NATO was formed as an anti-Soviet alliance & not a peaceful one.It suffices to remind that in 1946 NATO countries rejected 4 official proposals by USSR ("Stalin's Letters") to unify Germany on only one condition-for Germany to become & remain neutral. The perceived Soviet "threat" of aggression was simply its defensive reaction against aggressive NATO(=US) foreign policies.Why Russia now is perceived as a Soviet Union politically-or "imperialistic"-is yet another question.What should be asked is WHO is pushing for NATO expansion & WHO benefits from it.Having military bases of a country (the US) which values natural resources more than human lives near the Russian border IS an objective security threat.Why eg. Georgia was not offered simply a "protection" treaty with NATO or the US if they are so worried about Russia?Because protecting Georgia or Eas Eu countries is not the purpose of NATO.This won't increase the balance sheet of the US military complex or increase political pressure on Russia.Now imagine how the US NATO bases in eg. Georgia will be used when Russia & the US have a row, say
in Arctic.Does Georgia need it?Does this increase stability in the world?

by: VytautasBa from: Vilnius
March 16, 2009 07:40
Strongly disagree with the pro Kremlin tone of this article. For example statements made about Georgia and Ukrane,...."resulted in Russia being left to pick up the pieces -- and being branded authoritarian and a regional hegemon in the process" seem to come from a paralel universe. One needs to believe in an "end of history" to make such assertions. Sadly in our time there is little understanding let alone memory of what happened in the past.
Comments page of 5
    Next 

Latest Commentary

No records found for this widget:963

More Commentary

Most Popular

               
 
 
 
 
Being Discussed Now

U.S. Hearing On Balochistan Raises Hackles, Awareness In Pakistan

Latest Comment (6 total)

Saleem: If successive Pakistani governments have failed to deal with the 'Balochistan problem' then ... More

UN Rights Chief Scathing On Syria

Latest Comment (2 total)

Chechen: "Moscow also has had a deal since 1971 with Syria "
Sorry that was ... More

U.K. Releases Radical Cleric On Bail

Latest Comment (1 total)

Martin : Modern Europe has deteriorated to such grotesque that its end has to be ... More