Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • W4S1

    Uploaded by

    TiasBradbury
    6 views15 pages
    Francis Fukuyama argued that liberal democracy represented the end point of humanity's ideological evolution and was the final form of government, as it resolved issues faced by other ideologies. He believed the triumph of liberal democratic principles in the West showed they were best suited for all societies. However, critics argue that declaring an "end of history" was premature and triumphalist. The persistence of issues like inequality and the rise of countries like China disprove notions of liberal democracy's inevitable global victory. Fukuyama also failed to anticipate how the dominance of any single power is temporary and how new powers would emerge over time.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Francis Fukuyama argued that liberal democracy represented the end point of humanity's ideological evolution and was the final form of government, as it resolved issues faced by other ideologies. He believed the triumph of liberal democratic principles in the West showed they were best suited for all societies. However, critics argue that declaring an "end of history" was premature and triumphalist. The persistence of issues like inequality and the rise of countries like China disprove notions of liberal democracy's inevitable global victory. Fukuyama also failed to anticipate how the dominance of any single power is temporary and how new powers would emerge over time.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views15 pages

    W4S1

    Uploaded by

    TiasBradbury
    Francis Fukuyama argued that liberal democracy represented the end point of humanity's ideological evolution and was the final form of government, as it resolved issues faced by other ideologies. He believed the triumph of liberal democratic principles in the West showed they were best suited for all societies. However, critics argue that declaring an "end of history" was premature and triumphalist. The persistence of issues like inequality and the rise of countries like China disprove notions of liberal democracy's inevitable global victory. Fukuyama also failed to anticipate how the dominance of any single power is temporary and how new powers would emerge over time.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 15

    Unipolarity: The End

    of History?
    Francis Fukuyama

    Questions:
    • What did Fukuyama mean by the ‘end of history’?
    • Who turned out to be the winner of the twentieth
    century, according to Fukuyama?
    • Did he think the triumph of the west/liberal democracy
    was a good thing?
    • Do you think Fukuyama was right?
    Fukuyama: The End of History?
    • Liberal democracy in the Western model was the ideological endpoint
    of humanity – it effectively resolved all underlying problems and could
    not be improved upon
    • Optimistic view of international relations – opposed the “realist”
    framework that conflict was inherent to the international system
    • Instead took the “liberal” view, in which (liberal democratic) states were
    natural oriented towards cooperation
    Fukuyama: Criticisms
    • Triumphalism – mistaking hegemony and unipolarity for a final victory
    • Lacks understanding of imperialism – hegemony is temporary
    • End of History as new imperialism
    • Third World will naturally follow the lead of the developed countries
    • Iraq War and “regime change”
    • View of class – has the issue of class been resolved?
    • Globalisation as utopia – will the global market resolve social
    problems?
    • Rise of China – what global model will China build?
    Polarity

    Bipolarity – when two states or powers have the


    majority of influence

    Multipolarity – when more than two states have


    nearly equal amounts of influence or power

    Unipolarity – when power is concentrated in one


    state
    Acharya and Buzan (2019): Chapter 7 + 9
    • P. 217: 1989-2017: 1) expanding core, 2) eroding West-centrism and 3)
    shrinking periphery
    • 1990s and 2000s
    • Unipolarity for US economically (with EU + Japan) and in security matters (through
    NATO)
    • 2010s:
    • instability: populism, nationalism, identity politics
    • China & US in economic interdependence + challenge from BRI
    • Rise of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and regionals (Nigeria,
    Pakistan, Indonesia etc.)
    • Regional organisations (Africa, Latin America, South East Asia etc.)
    • Migration (86% of refugees in Global South and 25% in poorest countries)
    • Climate change as global amplifier or risk
    Oil
    Does Asia’s economic rise pose a
    challenge to the West?

    Is the United States a major power


    in Asia?

    Does China pose an opportunity or


    a threat to other Asian powers?

    You might also like