There is no End of History

Both Walzer’s theory and Fukuyama’s “End of History” theory fail to convince me. A big part of this is because, as we discussed in class, they are very difficult to falsify (which I think is totally intentional in this case). I am wary of believing any theory that cannot be proven or disproven until years later – it seems as though such theories aren’t based in anything solid enough to truly convince. In Fukuyama’s case specifically, the final line of his essay (which suggests that when this end of history comes, “boredom” may lead us to restart history) is somewhat contradictory to the rest of his thesis and makes it even more impossible to falsify, which gives it less credibility in my eyes. Attributing something like this to “boredom” also seems a little silly, and definitely unconvincing.

Beyond these difficulties with falsification, I am also generally unconvinced by the idea of an end to history. As he have been saying in class all year, democracy is a second-best solution. I think that, while democracy is the best system of governance around today, it is just a stepping stone in our political evolution – it is a system we can, and I think will, improve upon eventually, and it is for this reason that I am 1) doubtful that it will ever be adopted universally, and 2) sure that humankind will move on from democracy at some point.

2 thoughts on “There is no End of History

  1. It’s fascinating how these discussions not only challenge our understanding of history but also the way we foresee its progression. This skepticism towards broad, untestable theories underscores the importance of grounding our understanding in detailed, empirical analysis, especially when studying history. For those of us delving deeper into historical studies or looking for support in academic assignments, offers specialized assistance in history that can help unpack complex theories and provide solid, research-based perspectives. It’s crucial to have a resource that helps navigate through history with a critical and analytical lens, making the study of history as comprehensive and nuanced as the subject demands

  2. I agree with you in that I do not believe this is the end of history. Your concept of democracy being a system we can improve upon is also in agreement with my claims on the two articles. While I cannot see a new form of government taking the place of democracy as being the main governance of the world order coming about voluntarily, I do believe that democracy is leaving out many of the people that it could be used to protect and give a voice. Democracy itself as a from of government should and must be improved upon. Additionally, our claim that you are sure that humankind will move on from democracy at some point is also unfalsifiable to some extent. But as is mine, and all claims seeking to predict occurrences infinitely far into the future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.