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 that, Fukuyama believe that the American way of life is the best and that other ideologies should adapt to western liberalism and not the liberal ideologies adopting to the different regions around the world. This is where the true conflict and resistance to liberalism lies. The real end of history will only arise when civilization is allowed to adopt and practice the ideologies that best serve and protect the various ethnicities, religions and traditions present throughout the world while also up holding the values preached in democracy such as freedoms and equalities.
Fukuyama seems to believe that the two greatest threats to liberal democracy lie within fundamentalism such as Islam and nationalism. He argues that even though they pose certain risks to western democracy, they don’t pose a significant threat of uprooting liberal ideologies. In describing Islam, “…the doctrine has little appeal for non-Muslims, and it is hard to believe that the movement will take on any universal significance.” As the events unfolded in the years after Fukuyama’s essay, it was shown that he was right. It can now be observed that radicalism and fundamentalism that has been challenging liberalism, has had very little effect on the rights,...