Reminder that Fukuyama wasn’t even being original when he “came up” with the end of history motif:
Economists have a singular method of procedure. There are only two kinds of institutions for them, artificial and natural. The institutions of feudalism are artificial institutions, those of the bourgeoisie are natural institutions. In this, they resemble the theologians, who likewise establish two kinds of religion. Every religion which is not theirs is an invention of men, while their own is an emanation from God. When the economists say that present-day relations – the relations of bourgeois production – are natural, they imply that these are the relations in which wealth is created and productive forces developed in conformity with the laws of nature. These relations therefore are themselves natural laws independent of the influence of time. They are eternal laws which must always govern society. Thus, there has been history, but there is no longer any.
- Karl Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy
holy shit karl preemptively dunking on francis from beyond the grave. incredible.
Did The End of History do that?
Because it certainly didn’t do so from my recollection!
Yeah, but what if I totally reinterpret it decades later and then pretend Fukuyama was doing it the whole time?
I dunno, i’m not the Jacobin
You might be right to mock him for being a neolib bootlicker but have you considered: blah blah blah
Oh yeah the world totally needs more liberal theories on the origin of fascism, maybe this time it’ll finally be one that isn’t dangerously wrong idealist garbage, after all nobody has spewed more dangerously wrong idealist garbage in his life than Mr. Neocon Galaxybrain Takehaver Francis “Fuck Off” Fukuyama himself and at some point he just has to run out of idealist garbage to hurl at people and come up with something good. It’s just a matter of time, the broken clock will eventually be right.
The geese magazine?
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
I’m also wondering what this is about
i adopt ideas to build my coherent worldview based on how fashionable they are and, conversely, critique ideas based on their distance from gatekeeping tastemakers. you see, i put the ideas on and wear them about to dinner parties and charity galas and determine if i should keep them based on their approximation of, what the french call, <<à la mode>>.
obviously, that’s why i’m a marxist-leninist, because it’s so fucking popular and respected among <<la haute société>>, my employers, my professional associates, my banker, mes <<chambres du commerce>> and all the other places that control my fucking life. truly, quoting Mao opens all the doors.
