Francis Fukuyama and panelists debate alternatives to democracy

Francis Fukuyama '74 joined panelists John Mearsheimer, Peter Katzenstein and Isabel Hull Nov. 18, 2014 in a Foreign Policy forum marking the 25th anniversary of his landmark essay, "The End of History."

[@GaminHasard]

After a wopping 16 minutes and 38 sec introduction Mr Fukuyama will start to speak. Yes, 16:38. Good luck and have fun!

[@qwert9438]

Thank you… I skip the introduction

[@ferjo3192]

thanks

[@whome8444]

Thank you

[@ivantamayoromero1668]

You are DA MAN! This should be pinned.

[@fordjohnson5321]

@@ivantamayoromero1668 is. E

[@mordecaiben-gurion1199]

John Mearsheimer is the simplest and clearest. It's a pleasure to listen to him.

[@chrishayes5755]

it's true. he's easiest to follow and has the cleanest points that will shift your thinking. he's a very good speaker. this overall wasn't the best lecture though. each speaker probably could have gotten an hour or two.

[@LunwenZhang]

great debate. i have learned a lot.

[@stephenyang2844]

Very enlightening, Professor Mearsheimer and Katzenstein make concise and rational points, also perspectives and predictions.

[@pzubets]

Prof. Mearsheimer is damn good, as always.

[@moradkhan8945]

This is an excellent event and a debate on the End of History. Professor John J. Mearsheimer has made some outstanding points.

[@tommyodonovan3883]

Fukuyama made a GD fool of himself with that book. The end of the USSR ushered in the American Unipolar era 1989 to 2014, from 2014 to 2022 we have entered a multiple polar era. *Hardly the end of History.*

[@guddubhaiya2815]

16:30 is the time when Francis Fukuyama starts to delivers his lecture. 48:20 John Mearsheimer walks in (I loved his part, personally) 1:06:00 Peter Katzenstein came at the podium. 1:21:50 Bhaiya humare, Calcutta wale sawal puchne uthe hai. PM Modi ke baare!!!

[@ashishchauhan9671]

Modiji is the only constant

[@simonsaragih3468]

The assumption behind the end of the history is democracy for all. Unfortunately even the democratic countries seems to me act undemocraticly in many parts of the world. Hopefully we keep learning from each other

[@nikhilprem7998]

different people have different definition of democracy.

[@an000n]

@fraswiss democracy by design can not be for all

[@ml4173]

Well said everyone. I wish talks like this were more prevalent.

[@Po-village-chief]

pretty funny how a guy who has been proven spectacularly wrong (with his prediction of end of history) is given a platform to share his mangled thinking to more unsuspecting audience. i guess this is what you call a zombie resurrection.

[@ot23234]

No, it's what you call 'academia.'

[@oliverjamito9902]

Beloved remember you are worth more than anything nor everything that exists! Why beloved? Remember sincere conversations with one another availeth much indeed. Specially utterance is resting upon 1st. Love God so we may know how vital to 2nd. Love thy neighbors as thyself truly without ceasing but with boldness beloved. Asked thyself? How else can you show off to God without our neighbors beloved. Now depends of our intent, based, foundation, and where your heart will be also. Towards your neighbors, writing a book, nor utterance from our mouths can be eaten or utterance with no taste! Utterance has a Foundation before leaving the mouth beloved. Keep thy crown and I shall do the same. WASHERS of FEETS of neighbors and wiping tears from all eyes

[@lizzia7152]

It’s such an amalgamation of words, from all of them, to say nothing in the end. Just theories and speeches to raise their image, but this changes nothing in the world

[@clovisra]

Fukuyama should come now to Brazil to see by himself how the brazilian congress is trying to legislate to stop investigations that may put a lot of representatives in prison. That is not the way for democracy to act but in the real world that is what happens.

[@fewblack1572]

great point....but dont just complain....what do u propose as being better for society?

[@supahsmashbro]

What, no one can make a valid, standalone comment? I doubt he has a good answer, few do. I can say X is extremely corrupt. Now I gotta explain myself how to remove corruption? Lol

[@view1st]

If they are corrupt then they should be removed... and imprisoned.

[@TheMwegasShow]

Fundamentally democracy is a facade. It assumes that the majority will take the day but actually it is the minority (elected) who decide a lot of things most of which are in their own interests.

[@clovisra]

@@fewblack1572 I can't. I have no solution. Maybe if God exists he could come out from his hiding and omniscient, benevolent and powerfull God as he is, give a hand in controlling effectively the always dishonest human acctions.

[@suthongsaebe]

The end of Fukuyama and his lier conspiracy theory over China.

[@KeplersKeep]

getting close - not bad as a discussion. I'd probably be happy to assign this as a pre-read for my students before I discussed identity creation and maintenance. Some heavyweights here for sure and they were seminal to my thesis. Without Fukuyama and Mearsheimer, I'd not have been able to move the bar forward. If you're reading comments and wondering if it'd be worth your time to watch/listen to this - you should listen to this and then chase down their texts. FWIW, Katzenstein was a great resource for tackling the concept of identity and face - referring to his focus on Japan that is.

[@cheekoonwong5468]

🎉Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Welcome to Gboard clipboard, any text that you copy will be saved here.Welcome to Gboard clipboard, any text that you copy will be saved here.Touch and hold a clip to pin it. Unpinned clips will be deleted after 1 hour.Welcome to Gboard clipboard, any text that you copy will be saved here.Touch and hold a clip to pin it. Unpinned clips will be deleted after 1 hour.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Tap on a clip to paste it in the text box.Welcome to Gboard clipboard, any text that you copy will be saved here.🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉😮🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉😮🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉😮🎉🎉😮🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉😮🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉Use the edit icon to pin, add or delete clips.🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉😮🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@kooisengchng5283]

Political systems do not remain static and remain the same 60 hence or longer. Systems will change according to the needs of the population. China and India with huge populations have great problems moving their people in the direction they want. Even if the change is people directed, it is very difficult for more than 1 billion people to move by themselves in the direction they want. How is that possible. 1 billion people will have a few million ideas and also a few thousand leaders who want to lead.

[@vijay-1]

Extremely insightful

[@JaCkmArc0]

Democracy is a means to an end. Unfortunately it is very commonly treated today as an end itself.

[@user-gf6ej9rz8p]

haha

[@ozymandias2178]

*while expressing a political opinion* lmao. GTFO

[@ot23234]

I'd say democracy is a veil to cover up the real ends.

[@FanMusicIndian]

Very articulated speakers and civilized debate.

[@eskinderyeshewalul7148]

This is a profound discussion on alternatives to democracy ,thank you for the organizers Cornell University people.

[@dougspray7160]

Sadly it must be accepted that America has a very flawed Democracy which is why trying to install such a Political System on other countries has mostly been an abysmal failure.

[@MsColl90]

America never tried to impose democracy. It imposed capitalism for the benefit of the 1%. Fortunately, there are better systems of democracy in the world than the USA.

[@joshborja8012]

This video should have millions of views

[@kazkaskazkas8689]

Yeah, everyone should witness how Fukuyama makes the same blunder as he did a couple of decades previously 😂

[@DucksDeLucks]

The policy of the United States is that no incorruptible person will be allowed to lead a Muslim country. Say what you will against fundamentalists: our main objection to them is that they are hard to manipulate.

[@DucksDeLucks]

***** I don't see that our way of life is so obviously superior. They err on the side of puritanism and we err on the side of hedonism. Our error results in our inability to replace our population. We no longer bother with marriage and orderly reproduction since it's more fun to live irresponsibly. We abort a lot of kids and bounce around a lot of others. Our affluence was created in an earlier time when we lived with greater restraint.

[@DucksDeLucks]

***** Western culture is historically very Christian. The secular strain associated with Rousseau and Marx has been the source of utilitarian ethics and genocide in the name of future utopia. In Islam, as Huntington remarks, science and faith coexist easily. Contrary to stereotype, says Huntington, in the Musilm world the young are more devout than the old, the educated more devout than the uneducated, the urban more devout than the rural. So stick that in your equation. And thanks for confirming my hunch that animosity to Islam is largely animosity to religion as such and therefore to Christianity, largely promoted by Jews, who, as a group, are mostly atheists.

[@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisy]

DucksDeLucks No, the problem is that they do not act in our strategic interests.

[@kalinda619]

How did the questioners manage to get into Cornell?

[@kayem3824]

I was wondering the same, not just about those who asked the questions, but about F.ukuyama.

[@MarioSanchez-fq3tq]

Is there a transcript of this debate?

[@mikely8236]

Francis Fukuyama discusses a very fundamental question about human institutions. Read his book before you comment! He is a scientist in the sense that he investigates the nature of things with a critical mind. You can't make social science a hard science, but Frank went the furthest in his arguments and in his scholarly effort to detail those arguments, he almost made political science a hard science of physics. This description of the man is no exaggeration; his arguments are deep. His thinking should be much appreciated. It is a very good thing that You Tube is a medium to propagate information much needed for our democratic society, but it is also unfortunate that I have to encounter idiotic comments from simple minded folks. Let us have a real discussion!

[@NangongReng1973]

Don't underestimate the argument of simple minded folks, like me . A wise leader will also seek out the opinions of the grassroots, to understand the true feelings of the common people. Look at all these elitists who thinks they know all the answers to our problems yet couldn't solve the problems the way they like. A high IQ is not enough, you also need high EQ.

[@kayem3824]

He isn't a scientist. He is a lobbyist.

[@georgesalgueirinho4440]

Lol... What happened with the "end of history"?

[@xulongchen2311]

ended

[@whome8444]

It kept going

[@kayem3824]

It made a lot of money for this guy.

[@davidhorvath7427]

@@kayem3824 this guy just a showman not a serious philosopher

[@bboucharde]

Before the first speaker strolls to the podium, let's indulge in another 16 minutes of introduction and promotion.

[@Lululemon2023]

Obviously Mr Fukuyama excels in selective amnesia on historic as well as current events. There is no limit on what strange things a person would do/say when a paycheck is dangled in front of his/her face. This is especially true for those live in the think tanks.

[@bathurkhan1367]

Can you please elaborate

[@da_revo5747]

Yeah elaborate pls

[@joeoconnor7725]

There is nothing wrong with democracy what needs to be done is strict acountability and laws that restrict the ability of leaders who manipulate the system for greed and unlawful exercise of power

[@ishrendon6435]

There are things wrong with democracy lol most democracies are very wrong

[@dexterdextrow7248]

Still better than authoritarian dictatorship. It's by far the best system out of a plethora of flawed choices.

[@HiHello-dj8if]

Democracy only measures popularity, but popularity is not goodness.

[@HiHello-dj8if]

Roman Republic + election by random few = perfect

[@dexterdextrow7248]

@@HiHello-dj8if and that system is not in accordance to modern defenition of democracy. It like claiming that it's a bad to have a legal system with laws and regulations because in the 1800 you could legally own slaves and prosecute homosexuals. ideas, concepts, ideals and theories evolve such is the way of things. The Roman or Greek "democracy" wouldn't be classified as democracy in this day and age, it was aristocracy, usually preferable to monarchy. Also, it wasn't "random" few, it was certain deliberately designated individuals and groups.

[@fkaramagi]

What about monarchies?

[@theH0UNDSofD00M]

Like Slavoj Zizek says "nowadays not even Fukuyama is a fukuyamaist"... The End of History, my arse!!

[@yudhiadhyatmikosiswono9082]

Democracy is not panacea for every solution, it's just a concept that can be adapted as long the benefited to people.

[@view1st]

yudhi adhyatmiko siswono, which I would say is mostly everyone. When a people are given a fair say in the way a country's resources are allocated then poverty due to inequalities between groups (which creates political instability) can be minimised and may eventually even be overcome.

[@Marmer]

Turkey is a democracy? Okay, clearly this Fukuyama has no idea what he is talking about or has a totally different definition of democracy than I do.

[@engtuantee2314]

The Fuku fellow was totally short sighted!

[@AtlasandLiberty]

A Republic which contains all 3 of the Good forms of Government (Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy) which Today is 3 Branches of Government Presidency, Legislature, Judicial.

[@robreich6881]

In that order? The Presidency is the most Democratic institution in the US, the Senate the most aristocratic, the SCOTUS the most monarchical.

[@AtlasandLiberty]

@@robreich6881 Does it matter? We have a Constitution intended to limit government. Because 'We the People' rarely agree about anything. Even majorities of 60% are near impossible. So limited government is the only legitimate government.

[@rpnabar]

Great talk. But the introduction was excessively long.

[@deeplife9654]

What an era of privileges we live in . I did not go to study at Cornel university but I can watch the debate of two highly intellectual . And it’s free 😶‍🌫️🥶🥵

[@muhasdazukhri6063]

liberal democracy and economy free market bring us a phenomenon "a few family earns much money and use the money "to buy due process of democracy" such as eletroral democracy system and due process of law making in legislative office. in my opinion this liberal democracy implementation toward to "oligarch making concensus with "elite" who runs in office". what is a solution of all "toward" which trying to democracy it self, govern of the people, by the people and for the people. middle class desire and need as a rights and state responsibility which i concern that for example, "all democracy nation such as US and Indonesia are diseapering of middle class". this is the impact of the strong market economy, "money earns democracy". iam looking foward having an answer.

[@vecvan]

"America, a paradigmatic democracy" you've got to be kidding me, vote with your wallet democracy

[@buckeye200175]

Why we have a provision for ..martial law .

[@twenlil]

Democracy is a great success in USA. In 2016 Presidential election, we will most likely see a contest between two exceptional politicians - Hillary ("We came we saw he died ha ha ha ha") vs Trump ("I am going to build a great wall") . All Americans should be so proud of their exceptional political system... Way to go ! Going to hit the 19 trillion mark soon....

[@kenanalcantara7397]

twenlil one year later after this comment Trump won the election and finally see the problem with Democracy

[@kiraasuka9943]

@@kenanalcantara7397 how's your feeling right now? Just wondering. June 14th, 2020

[@SisyphusJP]

Kenan Alcantara above comment is a Salty authoritarian shaking his fist at the proles for being so stupid.

[@fsteh787]

@@SisyphusJP Aren’t you embarrassed with democracy hypocrisy?

[@SisyphusJP]

@@fsteh787 I’m embarrassed I even posted in this low IQ thread

[@Magnulus76]

One possibility that hasn't been considered is that the future liberal "End of History" state of Fukuyama will be secular, largely secular, or will have forms of spirituality that transcend what we in the modern western world understand. Perhaps people will genuinely embrace pluralism because they have discarded in part, or in whole, the Judeo-Christian patrimony.

[@jifa17]

LOL, "the end of history". How arrogant are the Americans.

[@zetsui0411]

Fukuyama's thought process reveals a lot about Western thinkers, especially the way they look at China India and Islam....India China and Iran for instance aren't trying to export their governance. Iran today looks like the borders of Iran in 2000BC, Same with CHina. Meanwhile look at the US or Austrailia Liberal democracies are the most warlike and unaccepting of criticism

[@robertapompilii5764]

Well, China territory has got bigger, if you compared how it was in 2000 BC and now

[@MartinHadek]

How's that end of history been going? :-))

[@vincenth3267]

This universal development system is absolutly absurd!! Like all people peoples will eventually develop the same ways. NO, NO and NO!! People are different and will always strive for different systems, that suit them best!!

[@mustafaaziz6731]

1:03

[@eisvogel8099]

If you want alternatives for democracy you should have one in the first place.

[@frankchiang6904]

Fukuyama should promote Japan model.

[@loadingmikke7451]

Would love to do the orders given by an ai overlord. All hail the algorithm! All hail the ones and zeroes!

[@kazkaskazkas8689]

Ones and zeroes? That's so cis!!! Let's force computers to work on non-binary numbers and identify them not as bits, but... umm... zits

[@politics4270]

Scholar par excellence

[@eriangelino7800]

Frankly, there is nothing new from fukuyama's lecture. He just ascribed different terminology to the 3 components of government.

[@leebarry5686]

Muslims has the system, especially economic system to solve problems from both capitalism and socialism if left alone and without interference from the powers.

[@bobthompson2182]

I was going to leave a comment about the lecture until I read the comments and saw no one mentioned Ellen De Generous was hosting.

[@ot23234]

She is a lot funnier here than in her stand-up or her TV show.

[@Simon-cb1cm]

I believe in reality Fukuyama has conceded to the fact that liberal democracy is no longer dominanting the world, and in a foreseeable future U.S. might have a real risk losing hegemony. In his more recent lectures and speeches he gives a lot of credit to Chinese for nation building, merits of ancient Chinese government. At least they are attempts to explain limits of democracy,and why China did well without liberal democracy.

[@yp77738yp77739]

Yes, but with one caveat. It works well, but only with associated controls put on excesses of power. Deng put those controls in place to prevent another return to Mao. Now that Xi has removed those controls, for no good reason other than to extend his power, I fear tor the Chinese people again and I warn my friends there. Absolutely everything he does points to him developing into the next Mao or Stalin.

[@milandalosur1850]

The dominant forces in the world are still mostly liberal democracies. Unsure what you mean saying this isn’t the case.

[@mogligondorff8700]

One pillar of a liberal democracy Fukuyama did not mention is a diversified economy.

[@elbarca223]

Capitalism, or some form of it. can exist without democracy.

[@zetsui0411]

24:00 middle class govt seizee assets 27:30 30:00 modern state three things 33:00 dictatorship +s 36:42 bad emperor 39:40 3 factors 40:45 41:40 china context 46:25 insider capture

[@leanderbarreto6523]

45:50 India

[@vladdumitrica849]

Countries with parliaments are in fact oligarchies (few lead). In order to be a true democracy, the decisions of the Parliament should be submitted to the approval of the citizens. The democratic aspect is a side effect in societies where economies have a strong competitive aspect, where the interests of those who hold economic power in society are divergent. Thus, those with money, and implicitly with political power in society, are supervising each other so that none of them have undeserved advantages due to politics. Because of this, countries with large mineral resources, like Russia and Venezuela (their share in GDP is large), do not have democratic aspects, because a small group of people can exploit these resources in their own interest. In poor countries, the main resource exploited may even be the state budget, as they have converging interests in benefiting, in their own interest, from this resource. This is what is observed in Romania, Bulgaria, when, no matter which party comes to power, the result is the same. The solution is modern direct democracy in which every citizen can vote, whenever he wants, over the head of the parliamentarian who represents him. He can even dismiss him if most of his constituents consider that their interests are not right represented

[@kenanalcantara7397]

How about Plato's philosopher kings or an intellectual government that can be a great alternative to democracy.

[@langora1676]

I found Francis to be clueless when he mentioned inequality and self-naked-interest as problems. These shouldn't be problem. It is prerequisite for evolution to be sustainable or else we would tolerate and proliferate defects and weakness. This will ultimately turn into genetic decay which is a nightmare for humanity (which includes my own children so yea I am still for self-naked-interest even when I care about humanity)

[@spadeysay6846]

In reference to the 2nd questioner about islam, she claimed that ISIS does not represent true islam. Who is she to say that ISIS does not?

[@bunger69]

Because every current scholar in the islamic world reject them ?

[@osmanjerry3272]

The worldly intelligence is in definition. It's not what the rights are, it is who's rights. To understand go to the preacher of god.

[@abrambadal8997]

Of course there is a basic line in establishing Democratic rule or rules , why closing your eyes on it ? ! ! ASK THE PEOPLE , said the YELLOW VESTS' MOUVEMENT IN FRANCE , by spreading people's basic right to organize and ask the questions in referrundums local to a more regional or national to wider continental scales for adoption of best rules ( and I added revisions in a given time , if necessary to improve or suspend rules ; the advantage is to eliminate multiple assemblies and unnessessary bureaucracies ) , greatly broken by over 50 000 citizens becomming prisonners or small criminals , as Julian Assange , repeating the truth of a basic democratic reality wich is dooable and quite practicable in our modern developped networks and communications world !

[@wangray9456]

How about liberal authoritarian? Lol

[@Nootathotep]

this but unironically but also sadly

[@23PowerL]

Austria-Hungary has been described as such. Not so prevalent in the world now.

[@reddoctorproductions3746]

Napoleon?

[@thedukeofdukers]

AKA Prussia.

[@frankyong2607]

Oxymoron

[@robertfeinberg748]

Democracy in postwar America has given way to authoritarian socialism under a single party dominated by Demigarchs. LGBFJB!

[@vladislavdracula1763]

How, exactly, is the US socialist in literally any way?

[@robertfeinberg748]

@@vladislavdracula1763 The USSA has been socialist in every way since FDR, and under Biden it has turned communist, with the authorities conducting an industrial policy to bail out failed Demigarchs. LGBFJB!

[@vladislavdracula1763]

@@robertfeinberg748 OK, and what are your definitions for communism and socialism?

[@robertfeinberg748]

@@vladislavdracula1763 Socialism can be a democratic welfare state, whereas today's Dem party has become communistic in that it is a single-party entity that rules by decree. I have never thought that Biden was benign, but now he, or is ever is the president, has emerged as a full-fledged communist. LGBFJB!

[@vladislavdracula1763]

@@robertfeinberg748 The US literally isn't a one party state though. There are two parties with representation in Congress. This wouldn't be the case in a one party state.

[@anthonylemkendorf3114]

Eccl 12:2

[@wickedgoodsoul]

How is it possible to discuss a thing that doesn't exist per se? There is no country on our planet where people rule. Money does.

[@manuelmanuel9248]

What is the definition of democracy according to apologists like Fukuyama? He assumes every one is thinking of whatever Gringoland does is democratic. He vaguely mentioned “countries that have elections”. Cuba has elections. Does that mean that Cuba is a democracy? Moreover, he probably assumes that Gringoland is a democracy when it demonstrably is not. There can be no democracy in a country that has colonies like Puerto Rico. In 1898, Gringoland invaded Puerto Rico and has remained there ever since to govern Puertoricans as they please. Fukuyama also says that Russia does not manufacture any products that other countries buy. Guess he has not heard of Migs. Fukuyama’s bullshit is built on the gossamer threads of confirmation bias and plutocratic propaganda.

[@view1st]

His concept of democracy is 'liberal democracy' which to me means capitalist democracy. It therefore seems an oxymoron because capitalism is profoundly anti‐democratic, indeed, the very antithesis of what popular democracy is all about. Also, by liberal I'm pretty sure he means like how that word is used in the USA. to mean those who support the Democratic Party of the USA and those who follow its vaguely left wing, ameliorist, gradualist, so‐called progressive approach to tackling the great social and environmental problems created by the system of human and planetary exploitation known as capitalism.

[@eduardohope4909]

@@view1st, how Fukuyama uses 'liberal' is not how the word is popularly used in the United States. The way he, Mearsheimer and Katzenstein use it in this talk is consistent with the traditional meaning of an individual with the right to live according to the dictates of their conscience and with responsibilities to the state, which protects those rights for all individuals. If you unpack this, 'liberal' is simply the adjective form of the noun 'liberty', and capitalism becomes only a form of economic activity that works well with 'liberalism'. In western Europe, with socialist democratic systems, 'liberalism' has also demonstrated being compatible.

[@view1st]

@@eduardohope4909 Thank you for that clarification.

[@joekerr9036]

China: The end of history ? We are only getting started !

[@stephencyang6628]

More and more China's unique model will achieve further success above all others, based on Prof. Fukuyama's theory. Prof. Mearsheimer then describes aggressor America's trapped liberal democracy under unconstrained capitalism will limber along, or decline.

[@hadid1092]

Amazing how this guy -who is a laughing stock in academic circles- is still giving lectures.

[@Hboybatman]

He is in no way a laughing stock, his books are widely read in university courses and is an immensely influential intellectual regardless if people agree with his idea of the end of history

[@rachedel-moctar4290]

You should probably read his book instead of just hating on the "end of history" aspect.

[@lenkiatleong]

There is no such thing as end of history. Frank should research Korea's Silla dynasty that ruled for one thousand years. People at that era definitely thought that it was the end of history too

[@Aman1nFull]

Clearly, Fukuyama's theory still stands tall. I agree with him that the China-model comes closest as a rival. Nevertheless, we shouldn't forget that China is still a developing nation with a newly-formed middle class. In the end, it is hard to see how, when educational and living standards rise, these people can continue to be shut out from government and political freedom. In other words, authoritarianism might be, or probably is, a better model for countries that have not yet reached full development, but only under those conditions. Another great point by Fukuyama with which I agree is that the possibly biggest global issue is not the transition from autocracy or authoritarianism to democracy, but from feeble, what he calls "(neo)patrimonial states" to democracies. Also, concerning the quite agitated remark from the Muslim woman in the public, I have no clue as to what kind of countries she has in mind that are doing well under Islamic regimes. Fukuyama, in his response to her, mentions Indonesia and Turkey as supposedly "more enlightened" or prospering states following an Islamic model. Yet it is precisely in these countries that the Islamic element is hurting democratic, liberal culture, the growing power of Erdogan and his imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of people and limiting of press freedom as well as the deposing of the immensely successful Indonesian Christian governor of Jogyakarta "Ahok" (that's his name) are cases in point. In sum, I think Fukuyama is right to say that not a single country on earth that follows the Islamic model (whether full theocracy like Iran or a kind of sharia-infused and Islam-dominated society) is a very attractive place to live in, unless of course you have been raised or converted under the spell of Islam to begin with.

[@lovingfoe1444]

Looking at the world today, I am pretty certain liberal democracy is no match for Chinese authoritarian government. It is not that Chinese system is without flaws. It is because liberal democracy is too flawed to be fixed by itself. Americans try to push democracy everywhere as the world hegemon, whereas democracy is even not working in US. It never worked in Taiwan, it only developed before democracy in a modern sense exist there. It never worked in India where slums have been there. China model today developed not because of “western liberal democracy” but because it actually does stuff, infrastructure and education. If you only see China as a authoritarian government that does not care for the people and the middle class, well, I know cannot convince you, we just have to wait and see. This is not the world where you only have democracy and authoritarianism. It has changed.

[@lovingfoe1444]

And what you say about middle class is not correct. China has over 400 millions middle class right now and it is still pushing the limit. If your concerns about China is right, it would be a problem right now. Chinese model did more justice and less corruption than you think. So called “Xitler” himself used 50 years to climb to his position, even as the son of esteemed government official. Look at George W Bush only stays in power because of his family history. China vs US is not democracy vs autocracy but essentially meritocracy vs plutocracy. Trust me, meritocracy wins. Democracy va autocracy? Democracy wins. It is just not the same type of democracy that exists today. It would be a more combinated system of democracy/meritocracy that limits the irrationality of the people(which cannot be eliminated unless they are robots) and enables higher potential of reflections/thinkings based on facts and science. Your reasoning however is not entirely wrong. I can agree that there is an intermediate situation in the process of solving problems. But there needs to be a strong and just government no matter what stage you are in. There needs to be a patriarch that dominates because without that the power falls into the hand of others few. Patriarch should be practiced at least for the people. By the people and of the people are maybe a corollary of the goal. Patriarch should be just and uncorrupted by those few. But we can’t contain power by putting power into the hand of others. We have to believe that we can create a just and uniform guidelines from our education and from our media. We must choose to educate the people instead of letting them fighting for their own interests. We might not be able to do that. But we have to try. And we can let them be contain the government with the power of democracy within that patriarch/government.

[@zetsui0411]

lol Turkey under the secularists would literally throw you in prison if you wore a hijab to your university. Erdogan who is against the situation made by Westereners in Iraq is now the bad guy...go figure. Always playing victim. Not with your body count

[@ZZ-np8vm]

1:30:00 Mearsheimer get's to the essence of Fukuyama's misunderstanding, which Fukuyama himself represents. This bald bookish professor that looks like he could be a Meiji official actually speaks not a lick of Japanese and is so thoroughly detached from his native culture (his mother and grandfather were born in Japan) into this amorphous American identity that he thinks that this experience of stripping one's identity to the State will naturally happen in the rest of the world...

[@kchoo1118]

I think countries generally become more liberal and free as the they become more prosperous. We should not forget that all the western european countries industrialised under a monarch or dictator. Only after they have gained a certain amount of wealth and prestige, did they very gradually shift towards democracy. I think there is no best form of governance. Rather, the ideal political system depends very much on the living standard as well culture of the people.

[@usenlim]

european countries have christianity, which could act like another internal government that protect people from tyrans. religions are the foundation of rule of law , according to Francis Fukuyama. Rule of law is the liberal part of liberal democracy. Election or accountability of the rulers, is the democracy. So, there are two parts, liberal and democracy. Meanwhile, according to Daron Acemoglu, a political economist, democracy help every nation from any level of living standards to improve their GDP.

[@usenlim]

@kick rrr no. you are the one who have neither facts nor logic.

[@usenlim]

@kick rrr no. you are the one who is childish and ignorant.

[@usenlim]

@kick rrr LOL.

[@usenlim]

@kick rrr and you are 6 years old. lol.

[@ZZ-np8vm]

1:25:00 props to the Hindu calling out Modi and the deluded liberal in a turtleneck's arrogant response is thinking Hindutva's (or Muslims) will change their identity???

[@eijikenji7149]

democracy = nokia phone people begin to lose faith in their new god.

[@colocracy7427]

55:44 "The alternative to democracy is an authoritarian regime" Actually, colocracy is a representative non-authoritarian system of appointment, free from party politics, patronage, clientelism, pork barrelling and all the other dirty laundry that electoral democracy carries with it and it guarantees a legislature that mirrors the constituency.

[@23PowerL]

Dude, that's literally the Soviet system.

[@johnmackay1961]

How?

[@23PowerL]

@@johnmackay1961 Bourgeois parliaments will only serve the interests of finance capital, therefore all power to the soviets. You use different terms, but it's the very same idea.

[@johnmackay1961]

23PowerL what specific terms in my comment implies that colocracy serves the “interests of finance capital?”

[@23PowerL]

@@johnmackay1961 No, you imply "electoral democracy" does. The communists called it bourgeois parliamentarianism, otherwise it's the exact same rhetoric.

[@onishomar489]

Such a horrible question in such an enlightening lecture.

[@goedelite]

Mr. Fukuyama told us, in 2014, there are 25 democracies in the world. Then and now, 2022, I don't find the USA one of such a set, no matter its size.

[@yellowburger]

Fukuyama was wrong on China.

[@joed3325]

I think he is the singularly most knowledgeable person about Chinese political theory and practice on earth. Even China's vice-president Wang Qishan consulted him personally.

[@RLH-xv4ld]

Joe D “singularly most” knowledgeable person on Chinese political system....lol, too bad you don’t understand Chinese. Yeah, a American Japanese scholar knows the best about China. I admire your arrogance.

[@lovingfoe1444]

Joe D the fact that even Wang Qishan consulted him should give you the answer why China is exceeding today. A model that is based on facts rather than propaganda.

[@calvyncraven1141]

Well he was wrong.

[@manuelalonsodominguezvazqu2145]

A *pure democracy* is undoubtedly the best system ever created, due to his ability to regulate itself. But, I agree that China's transition would be better into a few decades.

[@crikeycant2633]

democracies can't handle pain when it's necessary. they will avoid any pain whatsoever and vote out ambitious leaders.

[@lovingfoe1444]

Crikey Can't Democracy is too ideal at this moment for al, the stupidity people have.

[@robertfeinberg748]

The USSA has developed a one-party authoritarian regime that administers an industrial policy for the benefit of Demigarchs. LGBFJB!

[@Love.life.ashigzoya]

Fukuyamas philosophy is too tailored to converge on to liberal democracy as ultimate model despite alternatives he has examined and discarded. His focus has been on Soviet system and calibrated his theory on that yardstick coming to conclusion . The stamp of Anglosaxon interpretation of democracy is clearly imprinted in his postulation. This theory as transplated dito by mother of parliaments on India along with all the contraptions courtsy Gandhi has failed in every respect except for drawing cheers from those who once ran the empire and their cousins. Chinese were wise not to fall into this trap To call India world's largest democracy is to draw comfort from how succesfully the people could be cheated . This only proves Socratese was right when he spoke against democracy . This was certainly not the system of polity during our ancient monarchical system which was more democratic than what we have today . Based on highest codes of conduct demanded of the king to provide for his people as a tree of prosperity and learning .

[@Glebean]

I think Francis Fukuyama is trying his best to breath life back into his failed theories! frankly most of his points are repetitive lacking any real insight!

[@bakhithaggar3940]

Mr Fukuyama forgotten to tell us The Libiral Authoritarian and exceptionalism and nationalism. When you do not respect my culture.and my heritage, and ask me to cancel it and shift to your way of life, you are wrong,.you talk about morals but in same time support military intervention. That means you are far far away from the democracy. You are neoconservative one, that is so bad. USA to accomplish the democracy needs three centuries, and still until today there are minorities suffering discrimination, why buyback somewhere else to adept your idea so fast.. Do not forget that all the Authoritarian Governments support by USA.

[@Teporame]

Francis Fukuyama is a joke. End of history? Hahaha!

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

Ya right, not _debate alternatives to _*_capitalism_*. Nope, rampant unfettered greed-based _democracy_ is the big problem...

[@view1st]

chris, only if that democracy is merely formal (or sham). Wherever people are properly educated and made aware of the alternatives _and_ circumstances permit, capitalism always finds itself challenged. A genuinely enfranchising democracy (one that distributes power more or less equally amongst _all_ socio-economic groups) could effect real and equitable change if it were allowed.

[@mqz3365]

Shameful person with a shameful book called "end of history" still make public speech.

[@bihailantian929]

I respect professor Fukuyama. Before I listened to his talks and speeches, I also think badly about him, knowing his essay (book) the End of History was such a controversy. But after listening to him and came to know of his researches after the book, I deemed him a decent scholar, willing to adjust and expand his view, keep learning and growing in his perspectives. He researched quite deeply into the Chinese history of the confucious meritocracy system as well as the contemporary chinese political system. To me, he is a humble, seasoned scholar. I am willing to listen and learn from him, though I not necessarily agree with him in everything.

[@oliverjamito9902]

Beloved, what other Foundations can be like YESHUA the only 1 who is good beloved? Kingdom of God and its righteousness by becoming a child in front of God. FEETS resting upon 1st. Love God 2nd. Love thy neighbors as thyself. Worth more than anything nor everything that exists are my neighbors. As long we have our neighbors beloved. Meaning I can show off to God. Now is about the intent and Aim of the Child utterance unto all flesh. Love one another beloved

[@JibranTughlaq]

No learning from it.....I found him to be confused and working on his ideas without research. he brushed Indian democracy as corrupt and...., on the contrary its a triumph of Democracy, as Democracy was understood to be a tool for Homogeneous people one language, one Culture and One Religion and one so on.... and India it is Opposite of it, and still a Democracy. yes we have flaws but we handle them well. and the same European champions of Liberalism and democracy find hard to do example banning of Head covering like the Turban, scarf and so on

[@Xind0898]

Jibran Tughlaq you indeed learnt nothing from this... democracy is a means to an end. whats the point of reaching democracy if it can't bring the country towards prosperity? it surely is a triumph of democracy, but its not the triumph of India, and its really the latter that matters

[@RSitu]

+Xind

[@alihammadshah]

You can't even clean the shits off your streets. Democracy was unable to teach you how to take a shit properly.

[@PhiloSurfer]

Trump rules by law; not rule of law.

[@stevejurgens9836]

Fukuyama is such a dud...

[@yellowburger]

"The fact is that sometimes people do like authoritarian states." Yes, especially when they will be imprisoned, tortured, and potentially executed if they don't "like" them. Mearsheimer, what a guy.

[@andreytrifonov1614]

I wonder what kind of state is the US in the eyes of Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Jullian Assange and for the latter - the same question about Sweden and England/UK/.

[@IK-wc4od]

No, they like them when they use their power to destroy the corrupt, the wealthy, the media and anyone else they don't like. The loss of their own rights comes later.. According to liberal democrats. In reality, those rights don't exist at all (in liberal democracies) and are thrown aside as soon as its politically convenient for corrupt interests (pharma) and bureaucrats (mandarins see covid). We all live in tyranny.. Some tyrannies are honest about it.

[@yellowburger]

@@IK-wc4od Well, there is the kind of tyranny where you are fired from your government job for saying bigoted things, and there is the kind of tyranny where millions are hauled off to camps to be murdered. There not exactly the same thing.

[@ot23234]

He was stating an observed fact. I'd rather have an authoritarian state whose leaders agreed with me than to continue living in the US where corruption rules.

[@DucksDeLucks]

What an illiterate! He misuses the expression 'begs the question' 24.34. It doesn't mean "raises the question" it means to assume one's conclusion in the guise of arguing for it..'

[@view1st]

Sorry to contradict, but it _can_ indeed be used that way. The phrase _begging the question_ now has both these two meanings even if it didn't originally. Language is forever changing and the use of that phrase is one instance of this.

[@DucksDeLucks]

***** "Begs the question" in its recent (mis)use obviously is a mishearing of the earlier use and ought to be condemned. We have the expression "raise the question" for the recent use. To accept both uses is harmful since the older use will now be confused with the later one. Correct English is not defined as "whatever people say." Were it so we would have to admit all sorts of misconceived uses, not to mention slang such as "bitches" and "hos" for women. Often no harm is done but in this case there is. And if trendy language 'authorities' say it's okay, they need a better argument than "people say it."

[@view1st]

DucksDeLucks I understand what you are saying and _raise the question_ is a perfectly acceptable alternative (the only "correct" alternative some would say). However, you know perfectly well what the phrase means from the context and so do I and, I suspect, so do most others. And if context makes it clear what a word means then, personally, I see no problem with that. A problem only arises when there is insufficient context that leads to ambiguity. Otherwise, more ways of saying the same thing enriches the language.

[@DucksDeLucks]

***** Disagree. Having more ways of saying the same thing increases learning and processing time without increasing the range of information that can be expressed. While in this particular example it is clear enough what is meant, there are possible cases where it would not be clear.

[@view1st]

DucksDeLucks There are two things to understand here about the information content that a word or phrase can contain. One is _DENOTATION_ - the explicit, primary, or literal meaning of a word; the other is _CONNOTATION_ - the secondary, non-literal associations that accompany a word. An example would be the difference in usage of the words _house_ and _home_ where the former, by connotation, refers strictly to a physical building used for domestic purposes, while the latter extends beyond this to include more metaphorical meanings even though both words, by denotation, both refer to a domestic building. As an example, you would not substitute the word 'home' for 'house' in the phrase 'homeland' or the phrase 'home is where the heart is'. Therefore, I think it would be safe to conclude that more words to describe the same thing can, indeed, _increase_ the amount of information that can be expressed.

[@10-AMPM-01]

These filler "uh" and "umm" utterances are out of fucking control. Even speakers for Cornell, at a goddam podium feel the fucking need to use fillers.

[@cosmicwakes6443]

This man is a fool.

[@Chameleon1616]

This comment section is overflowing with emotionally driven pseudo intellectuals. how many do you think graduated from Harvard like Fukuyama?

[@akoh87]

Richard Wolff, graduated from Harvard, Stanford, and Yale. kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5_FmICBmNGKjcU . What do you think?

[@abhimanyukarnawat7441]

I thought liberals believed in equality

[@joekerr9036]

Harvard may sound prestigious 5 years ago.... but this university has racist policies favoring people of a darker complexion !

[@voiceofchina1788]

end of the end of history