Is There An End Point to History?

 by Flixy Coote

Francis Fukuyama is an American writer, economist, providentialist and idealist who is best known for his influential essay and book on the concept of the end of history. In a recent historiography session, we were asked to listen to a podcast focusing on Fukuyama’s principle and this led to a further interesting discussion as to whether Fukuyama holds a valid point, something which historians and critics have been arguing over since the essay and book was first published.  

In 1989, Fukuyama published his first essay on the concept of the end of history. Within this essay, he formed his ideas around the principle of liberal democracy and its triumph during the cold war, arguing that humans would never create a better system, as Fukuyama says in his essay “the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” The eventual worldwide spread of liberal democracies would signal the end of sociocultural evolution therefore signalling the end of history. He argued that any future political conflicts would purely be over refining democratic principles rather than fundamental ideological struggles, as the end of the Cold War led to the collapse of the last ideological opposition to liberal democracy and in turn marked liberal democracy as the final form of human government. 

Fukuyama’s idea of liberal democracy being the most desirable and greatest system that humans will ever experience is based around human nature and fundamental human desires. Liberal democracy is focused around the idea of individual rights therefore fulfilling key human desires of recognition, dignity and respect. The system also has a key focus on the protection of individual rights, another concept which humans thrive off of, and Fukuyama argues that it provides the best protection for individual rights while ensuring limitations to the power of individuals and the government. To Fukuyama, liberal democracy was also highlighted as an item of prosperity which results in stability. The freedoms associated with liberal democracy are closely linked with entrepreneurship and innovation resulting in economic growth and therefore a better standard of living. If people have the ability to live a better life, they will be more prosperous and in better support of their governments. If this is to happen, political stability will follow as people believe that they have a voice by being involved in general elections will in turn have a desire to support their governments and resolve conflicts. Fukuyama also suggested that the superiority of liberal democracy came from the idea of “ideological hegemony”, meaning that liberal democracy had become the dominant political system after the collapse of communism, facism and other political systems. Overall, he creates the impression that liberal democracy will forever provide the ultimate and only answer to all of our needs. 

The idea of the end of history, however, was not a concept created by Fukuyama, it links back to the German philosopher Hagel. He argued that history had an endpoint which was equivalent to a perfect and just state, existing in perpetual peace with any other states while fulfilling the development of all human capacities.  

Critics have disagreed with the idea of there being an endpoint to history for multiple reasons. A key reason why people disagree with his writings is the idea of the unpredictability of the future, and that no matter how much we study the past there will always be a level of uncertainty as to what is to come, especially relating to the impact that technology has the power to have. Another factor is the problem of ongoing conflicts, although the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 signalled the end of the Cold War and Fukuyama argued that this would be the final ideological war, ongoing wars in Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe question this theory. Critics argue that liberal democracy is not the best system to satisfy human needs due to the rising inequality crisis, socially, economically and environmentally as these problems have persisted over centuries and liberal democracy has not yet found a way to fully solve . Fukuyama's principle is based on the idea that liberal democracy will carry on strengthening and evolving over time but ongoing issues such as social inequality suggest weaknesses in the system. Finally, it is important to note that the concept of liberal democracy that Fukuyama so strongly believes in most often does not come about liberally or democratically and thus contradicts Fukuyama's belief of the basic human right to have a choice within a governmental system. 

Fukuyama’s essay received so much interest that he was contracted to turn his essay into a book so in 1992 he published The End of History and the Last Man. Although his essay and book has received a lot of criticism over the years since publication, Fukuyama published an article for The Atlantic in October 2022 appearing to stick to his original writings, he titled the article “More Proof That This Really Is The End Of History” and discussed the two key core weaknesses of Russia and China and why countries like these superpowers who do not follow the idea of liberal democracy remain vulnerable. These two weaknesses were the reliance on a single leader/ small leadership group and the lack of public participation in politics. However, Fukuyama has acknowledged since publishing his essay and book the complexities of political systems, the challenges to liberal democracy and the impact that both globalisation and technological change will have and are having on liberal democracy and although still values liberal democracy has accepted that there are arguments and gaps to his thesis.  

The concept Francis Fukuyama published originally in 1989 did not suggest the literal end to developments or events but the end to ideological evolution particularly regarding politics leading to a period of relative stability. Whether Fukuyama’s argument is correct is very much an ongoing discussion which will carry on for many years to come as the impact of scientific and technological advancements take place. Although many will not agree with Fukuyama’s concept, it provides a very interesting insight into what history really is and as to whether one can mark an end point to it or whether it will be an infinite trajectory.