Editing Francis Fukuyama (section)

==Scholarship==

=== ''The End of History and the Last Man'' ===
{{Main|The End of History and the Last Man}}
Fukuyama is best known as the author of ''[[The End of History and the Last Man]]'', in which he argued that the progression of human history as a struggle between ideologies was largely at an end, with the world settling on [[liberal democracy]] after the end of the [[Cold War]] and the fall of the [[Berlin Wall]] in 1989. The book was an expansion on ideas expressed in an earlier article, "The End of History?" published in ''[[The National Interest]]''. In the article, Fukuyama predicted the coming global triumph of political and [[economic liberalism]]:

{{blockquote|What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the [[Cold War]], or the passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.|author=Francis Fukuyama|title='The End of History?'|source=The National Interest, No. 16 (Summer 1989)}}

Authors such as [[Ralf Dahrendorf]] and [[Luciano Canfora]] argued in 1990 that the essay gave Fukuyama his [[15 minutes of fame]], which a slide into obscurity would soon follow.<ref>Dahrendorf (1990) [https://books.google.com/books?id=obx2BX91FQUC&pg=PA37 ''Reflections on the revolution in Europe''] p. 37</ref><ref>[[Luciano Canfora]] [http://temi.repubblica.it/micromega-online/la-grande-illusione-del-capitalismo-eterno/ ''La grande illusione del capitalismo eterno''] preface to Ercolani, Paolo ''La storia infinita. Marx, il liberalismo e la maledizione di Nietzsche'' quotation: {{blockquote|Quanto detto sin qui può forse bastare a non prendere sul serio saggi troppo fortunati (ma già quasi avviati al dimenticatoio) come La fine della storia del nippo-statunitense Fukuyama. Libro che, comunque, è stato ampiamente stroncato per le sciocchezze che contiene: e non già da tardi epigoni del marxismo-leninismo, ma da filosofi 'liberal' come Dahrendorf, il quale ha anche avuto il buon senso di elencare gli errori di fatto (tali da mettere in forse il conseguimento della "maturità classica"!) che il troppo fortunato libretto contiene.}}</ref> However, Fukuyama remained a relevant and cited [[public intellectual]], which led American [[communitarianism|communitarian]] [[Amitai Etzioni]] to declare him "one of the few enduring public intellectuals. They are often media stars who are eaten up and spat out after their 15 minutes. But he has lasted."<ref name="guardianprofile">{{Cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/may/11/academicexperts.artsandhumanities |title=History's Pallbearer |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=May 10, 2002 |last=Wroe |first=Nicholas}}</ref> [[Bernard Crick]] in his book titled ''Democracy'' spoke of Fukuyama's principle of "the end of the world" as being a poor misreading of the historical processes involved in the development of modern democracy.<ref>Bernard Crick. ''Democracy: A Very Short Introduction''. Oxford Univ. Press. p. 112.</ref>

According to Fukuyama, one of the main critiques of ''The End of History'' was of his aggressive stance toward [[postmodernism]]. In Fukuyama's opinion, [[postmodern philosophy]] undermined the ideology behind liberal democracy, leaving the Western world in a potentially weaker position.<ref>'Francis Fukuyama, "Reflections on the End of History, Five Years Later", ''History and Theory'' 34, 2: "World Historians and Their Critics" (May 1995): 43.</ref> The fact that [[Marxism]] and [[fascism]] had proven untenable for practical use while liberal democracy still thrived was reason enough to embrace the hopeful attitude of the [[Progressive Era]], as this hope for the future was what made a society worth struggling to maintain. Postmodernism, which, by this time, had become embedded in the [[cultural consciousness]], offered no hope and nothing to sustain a necessary sense of community, instead relying only on lofty intellectual premises.<ref>'Francis Fukuyama, "Reflections on the End of History, Five Years Later", ''History and Theory'' 34, 2: World Historians and Their Critics (May 1995): 36.</ref>

=== ''The Origins of Political Order'' ===
{{Main|The Origins of Political Order}}
In the 2011 book, Fukuyama describes what makes a state stable, using comparative [[political history]] to develop a theory of the stability of a [[political system]]. According to Fukuyama, an ideal political order needs a modern and effective state, the rule of law governing the state, and accountability.<ref>{{Cite book | last1 = Fukuyama | first1 = Francis | title=Origins of political order: from prehuman times to the French revolution | year = 2011 | publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux | location = New York City | isbn = 978-0374-5332-29| edition=1st paperback|pages=312, 420}}</ref>

=== ''Political Order and Political Decay'' ===
{{Main|Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Present Day}}
The 2014 book is his second book on political order, following the 2011 book ''[[The Origins of Political Order]]''. In this book, Fukuyama covers events since the [[French Revolution]] and sheds light on political institutions and their development in different regions.<ref>{{cite web|title=Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy|url=https://fukuyama.stanford.edu/political-order-and-political-decay-industrial-revolution-globalization-democracy|last1=Fukuyama|first1=Francis|publisher=Stanford.edu|access-date=December 29, 2016|archive-date=August 4, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200804110412/https://fukuyama.stanford.edu/political-order-and-political-decay-industrial-revolution-globalization-democracy|url-status=dead}}</ref>

After tracing how a modern and effective government was developed in the U.S., Fukuyama asserts that the country is experiencing [[political decay]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|last=Berman|first=Sheri|date=2014-09-11|title=Global Warning|language=en-US|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/books/review/francis-fukuyamas-political-order-and-political-decay.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220102/https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/books/review/francis-fukuyamas-political-order-and-political-decay.html |archive-date=2022-01-02 |url-access=limited |url-status=live|access-date=2020-05-15|issn=0362-4331}}{{cbignore}}</ref> Fukuyama believes that political decay can be seen in the deterioration of bureaucracies, [[special interest groups]] capturing the legislature, and inevitable but cumbersome judicial processes challenging all types of government action.<ref name=":3">{{Cite news|last=Fukuyama|first=Francis|date=2016-12-08|title=America in Decay|journal=Foreign Affairs: America and the World|language=en-US|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2014-08-18/america-decay|access-date=2020-05-15|issn=0015-7120}}</ref>

=== Other works ===
{{Human enhancement sidebar|opposition}}
Fukuyama has written a number of other books, among them ''Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity'' and ''[[Our Posthuman Future|Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution]]''. In the latter, he qualified his original "[[end of history]]" thesis, arguing that since biotechnology increasingly allows humans to control their own [[evolution]], it may allow humans to alter [[human nature]], thereby putting liberal democracy at risk.<ref>For a critical analysis of Fukuyama's bioethical argument, see: {{Cite journal|last1=Jordaan|first1=D. W.|year=2009|title=Antipromethean Fallacies: A Critique of Fukuyama's Bioethics|journal=Biotechnology Law Report|volume=28|issue=5|pages=577–590|doi=10.1089/blr.2009.9915}}</ref> One possible outcome could be that an altered human nature could end in radical inequality. He is a fierce enemy of [[transhumanism]], an intellectual movement asserting that [[posthuman]]ity is a desirable goal.

In another work, ''The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order'', Fukuyama explores the origins of social norms and analyzes current disruptions in the fabric of human moral traditions.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=McNicoll |first=Geoffrey |date=1999 |title=Review of The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order, by F. Fukuyama |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/172490 |journal=Population and Development Review |volume=25 |issue=4 |pages=793–795 |access-date=March 8, 2025 |jstor=172490}}</ref> He considers these disruptions to arise from a shift from the manufacturing to the [[Information Age]]. This shift is, he thinks, normal and will prove self-correcting, given the intrinsic human need for social norms and rules.

In 2006, in ''[[America at the Crossroads]],'' Fukuyama discusses the history of [[neoconservatism]], with particular focus on its major tenets and political implications. He outlines his rationale for supporting the Bush Administration and where he believed it was going wrong at the time.

In 2008, Fukuyama published the book ''Falling Behind: Explaining the Development Gap Between Latin America and the United States'', which resulted from research and a conference funded by Grupo Mayan to gain an understanding of why Latin America, once far wealthier than North America, fell behind in terms of development in only a matter of centuries. Discussing this book at a 2009 conference, Fukuyama outlined his belief that inequality within Latin American nations impedes growth. He stated that an [[Economic inequality|unequal distribution of wealth]] leads to social upheaval, resulting in stunted growth.<ref>{{cite web|title=Fukuyama: 'Social Agenda' Needed to Combat Poverty in Latin America|url=http://www.devex.com/blogs/17/blogs_entries/59071|author=Ryan Weddle|date=February 18, 2009|work=[[Devex]]|access-date=February 19, 2009}}</ref>

In 2018, in ''Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment'', Fukuyama enlists [[Plato|Plato's]] notion of [[thymos]] to understand the politics of grievance and [[resentment]].<ref>Addis Goldman, ''Finding Fukuyama’s Ends Between Aspirations and History'', THR Web Features, July 22, 2021</ref>

At the start of the following decade, he published some reflections on his work in the form of conversations under the title ''After the End of History''.<ref>''After the End of History: Conversations with Francis Fukuyama'', Edited by Mathilde Fasting,
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2021.</ref>

In 2022, Fukuyama published the book ''Liberalism and Its Discontents'', in which he defended liberalism from critics on the [[Right-wing populism|populist right]] and the [[Progressivism|progressive left]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Anthony |first=Andrew |date=March 8, 2022 |title=Liberalism and Its Discontents by Francis Fukuyama |language=en-GB |work=[[The Guardian]] |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/mar/08/liberalism-and-its-discontents-by-francis-fukuyama-review-a-defence-of-liberalism-from-a-former-neocon |access-date=July 13, 2023 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> He also criticized [[neoliberalism]] and [[identity politics]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Fanjul |first=Sergio C. |date=September 7, 2022 |title=Francis Fukuyama: 'The neoliberals went too far. Now, we need more social democratic policies' |url=https://english.elpais.com/culture/2022-09-07/francis-fukuyama-the-neoliberals-went-too-far-now-we-need-more-social-democratic-policies.html |access-date=2023-07-15 |website=[[El Pias|EL PAÍS English]] |language=en}}</ref>