Francis Fukuyama on Trump 47 | The Good Fight with Yascha Mounk

[@makeadifference4all]

This is one of the best post-election discussions I've heard. Thank you for the insightful questions and discussion.

[@lgude]

My father studied economics at Columbia(35) and some his professors were involved in FDR’s brains trust and I grew up hearing about Keynesian economics and Adam Smith as the founder of modern economics, so I was surprised that you experienced a time when Smith was not taken seriously. My dad was a farmer and a farm leader and would often go to see Galbraith to discuss agricultural economics in the context of Smith having said the the basic tension in a capitalist economy was between agricultural and industrial capital. RFK Jr is discussing big Ag and the food industry much as my dad in the mid fifties. I see the roots of the current election in the 90s when Ross Perot got noticeable traction. My high school classmate Col James Bigelow ran his campaign in 98 in New England and said to me in 1999 “these Democrats today are not that same as the ones we campaigned for in Vermont back n 1958.” I didn’t understand then, but I sure do now. The Keynesian world order that Roosevelt instituted in the 30s and which became the liberal world order of the West last worked in the US when Clinton, with encouragement from Gingrich, paid the debt down. It blew up in 2008 and deficit spending has become permanent. At that point the discontent that fuelled Perot came into focus as Wall St vs Main St and the apparent fluke of 2016 happened. It turned out not to be a fluke and now we have four former Democrats: Gabbard, Musk, Kennedy, and Trump himself along with two ‘new Republicans’ Vance and Ramaswamy about to try make changes as ambitious and fundamental as FDR’s. I don’t predict that any will work but it is the blindness of a comfortable establishment including McConnell, the Bush’s and the Cheneys etc as well as the Democrats woke and neo-liberal that has brought this eccentric and unlikely change agent from hell.

[@m.walther6434]

Adam Smith is not the founder of modern economics. Smith assumed that the Wealth of Nation were grounded on arable Land, this in a time when manufacturing were emerging. The true founder of modern economics is in fact Jean-Baptiste Colbert the 1. Minister of Louis IV of France. Colbert understood that the government had to invest in infrastructure (roads and canals) also in manufacturing (Textile Industrie f.e.).

[@matten_zero]

Well said. This has been a disaster 30+ years in the making. I'm not surprised most people don't have the take you just eloquently explained, esp PMC/Yuppie types who reach for the "misogyny/racism" excuse. My personal breaking point was the "you ain't black if you don't vote for me (Joe Biden)." Esp after what they continue to do to third parties or independents like Bernie Sanders

[@jakebarnes28]

​@m.walther6434 what is "modern" economics? Smith thought the worst jobs would pay the most.

[@afganiraksonable]

More or less the points that made West's suicide inevitable. Baby Bush's wars finished us off on the geopolitical level. Ross Perot, Clinton, Papa Bush was the first election I was really aware of and Perot sounded like a crazy old man. Only much later I realized that he was pointing out problems that would have civilizational level consequences. The irony, of course, is that we all would've been better of with him never entering the elections and Papa Bush getting a second term.

[@zwatwashdc]

The idea that the democrat’s lawfare shouldn’t be investigated is nonsense.

[@bluespaceman7937]

The idea that someone should be allowed to get away with crimes because he's popular is nonsense.

[@ritornelloandrefrain]

* democrats' And the idea that Trump et al. shouldn't be prosecuted for flagrantly breaking the law is a special kind of stupid and/or cultish devotion to the demagogue.

[@zwatwashdc]

@@ritornelloandrefrain the idea that this wasn’t the weaponization of the justice system against one’s political enemies is absurd. I tend to believe that the election results prove this is a widely held view. He was never changed with a crime before becoming president and never under an administration that was not hoping to eliminate him as a political opponent- and now we see why. It is scary to me that so many people think it’s ok to politically and legally persecute people because we disagree with them. But then many people believe this is a big part of why the democrats lost. They had become scary drunk with power, hateful and vindictive. And they did a terrible job governing over the last 4 years. The only hope they had was to get rid of trump by any means necessary and they gave it their best shot. We’ll see if there is any accountability.

[@James-ic7vx]

First you need to prove that Democrats are in fact using lawfare. There isn’t any evidence for this. Besides that it’s a bit hypocritical to single out the Democrats for using lawfare when Trump tried to game the courts in an effort to overturn the 2020 election.

[@marcusaurelius9123]

Lawfare is a loaded term. To expect the doj to ignore Trumps criminality is to lack any objectivity

[@ravishingravi]

Neo liberal eco chamber us fun to listen to. They havent learnt a thing. 😅 More pain in the waiting.

[@Pinkdam]

I've been recommended a lot of these 'react to 47' videos, and I notice some odd names: Mounk, Brownstein, Ornstein, Franken, Boxer (Barbara), Litman, Weisberg, Rosin, Pomerantsev, Epstein, Kristol, Applebaum... these neo liberals (and conservatives) sure are an unusual bunch, huh?

[@cosmiceye2067]

@@Pinkdam Oh god, ((they)) have a very high average I.Q and hence will be well represented in most cognitively demanding and influential positions.

[@canteluna]

The pain coming is going to be at the hands of the ignorant populists who elected Trump (the populists, such as Trump and those serving in his administration will mostly be fine). This pain will be self inflicted because Trump will likely not solve anything in favor of the working class. Although the border needs to be secured due to the Biden administration failure there (and, btw, I am not a registered Democrat), he will likely give license to an anti immigrant sentiment that could result in losing the immigrants we need to do the "black jobs" Trump talked about. The America First MAGA xenophobes have no clue as to how much their standard of living relies on migrant labor. The same goes for the tariffs. Politicizing immigration and tariffs can be done effectively or it can be done as Trump would likely do it this term - heavy-handedly and badly, backfiring in a way that Fukuyama described. Neoliberals are sometimes called globalists and so are the opposite of the MAGA America FIrst agenda - which is mostly a collection of bad ideas (many of which have failed in the past) and feel good platitudes - and, while neoliberal policies are not currently popular, their policies have helped create the strongest economy the world has ever seen. That said, they are not perfect or beyond criticism - one thing Trump did in his first term that was good, was to renegotiate the terms of NAFTA. People who think because they re-elected a dangerously ignorant man - who doesn't have a democratic bone in his body - that this equates to being right, and so throwing out the liberal baby with the bath, need to be careful what they wish for. Yes, there is "more pain in the waiting", but it will not be distributed to the "neoliberals" alone.

[@faustoferrari4303]

@@Pinkdam You sure are an unpleasant bigot, huh?

[@faustianfellaheen]

This is why these academics and intellectuals today are not and should not be taken seriously. I say this as someone in academia myself (in a STEM field though). They come up with abstract and convoluted explanations for all these social and political phenomena which are completely detached from the average human experience. They view tradition and the average, intuitive experiences with scorn. They make incorrect (and irresponsible) predictions and observations over and over again and never face any backlash. Dare I say Fukuyama and the ivory tower academics will be wrong about Trump once more and the reputation and influence of academics/intellects will be further tarnished. His analysis of Trump is shallow and dishonest, and ignores all signs of the magnitude and direction of the momentum of Trump's movement in the grand scheme of history.

[@eileenluke9791]

Well said. I thought I was watching an infomercial for Veg-O-Matic and how many ways the election can be sliced and diced. Thankfully the anecdote to my eyes glazing over was when the Prof said "in my humble opinion" I jolted alert just in time to keep myself from falling out of my seat. I am, however, grateful to have tuned to this video because I finally realized my disingenuous longing to be a blue dog Democrat when I'm really of the yellow variety. No highly academic or affluence going on here, but that's getting into the slice and dice s***.

[@TheGoodShepherd117]

So which theories and ideas do you disagree with? These two “academics” have opposed identity politics, have acknowledged the bad effects of Neo-Liberalism, that immigration should be controlled, and that factors like these led to the electoral result. Are they wrong about basic economics with high tariffs and protectionism will hurt the US economy more than helping it? Are they wrong about the issues of angry young men (which I understand), and the increasing gender gap between the sexes? Have you read or watched much from these guys because they do understand how people are angry and are trying to find ways to address it? They get why people voted that way and want America to acknowledge these issues to fix them. Please tell me where they are so wrong about it because all you did was dismiss them and offer no analysis of the current state in America at all.

[@canteluna]

@@jceepf You obviously didn't read the book or understand the concept. Although Fukuyama got things wrong, EVERY intellectual gets things wrong sometimes, otherwise they'd be seers. So, before you go throwing around ideas you don't understand, you should do your homework.

[@canteluna]

@@eileenluke9791 Incorrect and badly said.

[@canteluna]

Your comments represent populist platitudes and the kind of mentality of the average Joe Rogan fan. Fine, you're in a STEM field, but that doesn't qualify you to make sweeping condemning comments of "intellectuals" (without whom there would be no "STEM") because you are "educated". Yes, there are intellectuals guilty of stupid ideas that have been unfortunately amplified in society. Fukuyama has been someone consistenly speaking out against most of them for decades now. Trump and the anti-elites are also guilty of spreading great ignorance (arguably no one on the planet lies more than Trump), and worse, they are speading lies about the democratic process itself. All the "Ivory Tower academics" I listen to have been and remain correct about Trump and the way he abuses power while in office. Winning an election doesn't make you right - except if you're so profoundly anti-democratic - as Trump is - that you then feel entitled to use the power of government to use as recklessly as you can get away with (the man was impeached twice in his first term, think he's gonna go for number 3 or 4?). So I am calling you out on your BULLSHIT. You have made several accusations and now you need to support them with facts. Or, stfu!

[@leanmchungry4735]

I'm done with politics, I hope we survive the next several years...

[@user-by3ks9bp5d]

Of all the crazy things I’ve seen the last 10 years (and I mean ALL of it) the craziest, by far…is finding out that Fukuyama is still taken seriously.

[@redcatofdeath]

Taking seriously a sophisticated political philosopher is like the least crazy thing that has happened in a decade filled with lunacy.

[@paulrussell1207]

How does a quite niche politics podcast end up with a collection of "experts" who know a guy by no more than a 30 year old book title (which they don't quite understand) and not much else, waxing lyrical about how the world is?

[@canteluna]

I got a better one. how about the crazy SHITHEADS like you who've never read anything by Fukuyama yet think you can just jump on the band wagon and criticize him because of some flaws in one of his theses. Try explaining to me what is wrong with the theses of ANY of his books after The End of History. I've read them. You haven't. Or, if you think you're up to it, debate me on ANY of his books. You can't. you're another big mouth letting out your ignorant stink in the ether.

[@subcitizen2012]

The crazy thing is you're too young to know how crazy you are for saying that.

[@faustoferrari4303]

Thus proving that you must live in a very sane world. I daresay you've never read a word he's written. Get back to your mother's basement.

[@liberalcynic]

30:30 Britain and Australia do not have national ID cards but still manage to do the checks described; Oxford the last time I checked is in the UK.

[@canteluna]

Your point here was not refuted by Mounk or Fukuyama, so what are you talking about?

[@stevenyang9008]

Are you asking a question or making a speech?

[@faustoferrari4303]

Yes, I was thinking that, it got almost comical.

[@alexmccloskey6756]

The interviewer talks more than Fukuyama. Shorter questions please

[@sieteocho]

He's also a tenured professor, he can talk as much as he wants.

[@sieteocho]

@@renanoliveira0 I get the feeling that Fukuyama respects what this guy has to say more than you do. The biggest problem is that people like you can't tell who are the ones with valid opinions.

[@canteluna]

Yes, but at least he knows what he's talking about.

[@kynismos]

Fukuyama is right about the gender aspect.

[@subcitizen2012]

That it's medical and not political and therefore non of the governments business or yours?

[@nathanngumi8467]

Great discussion!

[@ibbajibbaduay]

Why is it always the people who assure us that economics is not a political motivator that get the promotions? 🤔

[@ai._m]

Peter Thiel is right - political science isn’t a real discipline. I am astonished about the degree of cluelessness of both the interviews and Fukuyama. No wonder he got end of history wrong, he has zero idea about things he said. The world is a complex system. Either adopt them for your “discipline” or become even less relevant, which let’s be honest, wouldn’t be much of a fall.

[@ritornelloandrefrain]

Thiel is an anti-democratic freak. You acting like both Mounk & Fukuyama don't understand that "the world is a complex system" is absurd. And define what constitutes a "real discipline" in the human sciences, if you can.

[@Pinkdam]

@@ritornelloandrefrain I think the point was that political philosophy is the proper term for the study of a field which cannot be rendered a science. Mathematical techniques can of course be used to measure political behaviour after the event, but this is no 'science of politics', and the value of any such analysis is dependent on there being political philosophy behind it.

[@canteluna]

Peter Thiel is a moron and so are you. PROVE anything you've ASSerted. You can't because you - like Thiel - don't know what you're talking about. Thiel is good at capitalism. He ought to stay in his lane.

[@subcitizen2012]

And that's the irony. You're getting your political science from people that don't believe in political science. You're making fun of the title of a book you've never read. And you think being relevant has anything to do with being factual.

[@notalefty999]

Sorry, but a lot of this is just nonsense. No, most people do not prefer to increase diversity. Maybe they answer poll questions to that effect out of social desirability bias, but actions speak louder than words and people quite consistently self segregate by race, religion and class. Any person living in an affluent neighbourhood could almost certainly make their lives much more full of diversity and yet they never do. And aside from how people live their lives, how the hell else do you explain Trump's popularity and the recent success of the right throughout the West if not a reaction against mass immigration, which is quite specifically a reaction against third world immigration ie. increased "diversity". Maybe they don't like the low human capital rather than the diversity per se (though Robert Putnam's study demonstrates diversity is highly corrosive to social health independent of other socioeconomic variables), but as different races and nationalities vary starkly in their levels of human capital, in the context of the West, the two are basically inseparable. There is no realistic prospect of Western nations becoming both more diverse and seeing increases in human capital, as populations with high human capital generally already have nice societies and therefore less reason to move. If you ask someone if they want more diversity, a minority may just view the question in terms of more people like them, in which case, its just an expression of ethnocentrism, which is the opposite of a desire for diversity. A white person if they express this wish will very often be just wishing to avoid sounding racist, not actually being truthful. The proportion of people who actually have a genuine desire for diversity is small.

[@amorfati6728]

Well put.

[@giorfi-n7v]

immigration also is bad for developing countries as it is a brain drain leaving them devoid of their best people. The US greedily sucks up all the doctors, scientists etc.

[@CurtOntheRadio]

Projection.

[@notalefty999]

@@CurtOntheRadio Well thanks for that detailed explanation. I am not altogether clear what projection is even supposed to mean in this context.

[@CurtOntheRadio]

@@notalefty999 You don't know how other people feel. You're projecting (your own views onto others).

[@helodea]

In politics, no political party can cover all different demographics priorities. And I insist in the word priority. Because the tenants from which Presidential elections should be related is to subjects of governance, economy and international relations. These tenants affect all citizens regardless if these are a priority or not for certain groups, and the judgement of those by the electorate will ultimately determine elections. BUT.., if your public policy is grounded on identity politics and wokism, BY DEFAULT you're eliminating major sectors of the population in which not only you're not addressing in your political platform, but what's worst, you're labeling them as a problem for society. You will never be able to win an election by marginalizing main demographics like Men and Whites. It's simply impossible.

[@TheGoodShepherd117]

You are right and both of these academics rail against identity politics and wokeism. There are so many videos and writings where they do this yet they are tarred with these labels.

[@subcitizen2012]

Then why did has the Republican party focused so strongly on eliminating the rights of minorities of its unpopular?

[@helodea]

@subcitizen2012 I suspect the answer to your question is because minorities ended up not believing the narrative that Trump was going after their rights. On the same fashion that they probably don't believe in same sex marriage, transitioning children, feminism and critical race theory. I'm almost positive that this unbelief is way more predominant on Hispanics segment of the population which is the largest minority in the United States. And it's because Hispanics hold a more conservative cultural frame versus all other minorities with the exception of asiatic ones. And right know I would take the risk that probably more than anglo americans.

[@aungkyawmoe8023]

the person who was wrong is still making authoritative predictions. I learned the more knowledge you have, the more humble you become. How wrong?!

[@katong1953]

Fukuyama was wrong in his view of the end of history, but he was logical. Had America been led by good, competent, wise people, allowing the world to enjoy the peace dividend, Fukuyama would have been right. Instead, the US was led by stupid, greedy, evil people at that pivotal point. They looted Russia and tried to dismantle that country, and went about as the newly crowned emperor ruling the world.

[@katong1953]

My earlier post stated that although Fukuyama was wrong, he was logical, and that he could have been right had America not been led by greedy, evil people without wisdom at that pivotal point. The post was promptly blocked by empire censors. Pathetic.

[@katong1953]

My 2 earlier posts stated that had American been led by good, wise people at that pivotal point, Fukuyama could have been right (I elaborated on it). The posts were swiftly deleted by empire censors. The truth hurts. Freedom of speech my foot

[@katong1953]

My 3 earlier posts stated that Fukuyama could have been right had the US been led by good, wise people at the pivotal point in history. The posts were immediately blocked by empire censors. Shameful.

[@katong1953]

@aungkyawmoe. My 4 earlier posts said that Fukuyama could have bee rigjt had good, wise people were in charge in America. The posts were all swiftly deleted by empire censors. Pathetic.

[@ultraparadoxical7610]

Good discussion. Interesting to hear FF’s initial reactions.

[@Soliaipix]

The problem with Fukuyama’s end of history is that even that history comes to an end. I’m operationally defining history as democratic hegemony, neoliberalism fits, too. It’s the end of Western hegemony.

[@subcitizen2012]

Don't judge a bikini by its cover, actually read it.

[@Soliaipix]

@@subcitizen2012 Ok.

[@piusxiv]

Shorten your questions

[@carneilhanjde]

This is nuts. Culture more important than economy? People care more about what TV they are watching vs their health care ? This is why the left lost.

[@barumbadum]

Francis please read John Mearsheimer so you can learn something. This is the end of “the end of history”.

[@louise_rose]

Agree, since around 2014 we have been slipping towards the Second Cold War, which can be said to have set on at full scale around 2021/22. One of the many differences to the First Cold War is that both the trust of the public for current political leaders and the quality, of said leaders, in the Western world, is now far lower than it was in the 1950s and 60s, or even the 1980s.

[@dlee732ad]

@@barumbadum mearsheimer is a mixed bag. He's very correct on some things a very wrong on others- like NATO expansion caused the war in Ukraine. In this he sides with neoliberal capetbagger Jeffrey Sachs.

[@MindbodyMedic]

That's up for debate given history isn't written and history hasn't ended...

[@canteluna]

Hahahahahaha!!!! One needs to spend about 2 or 3 minutes wtih the clown Mearsheimer to know he is an idiot. If we listened to Mearsheimer, Russia would have taken Ukraine and much of the former soviet satellite states by now. Disagree? Debate me.

[@subcitizen2012]

Go read Fukayamas book. You're saying exactly what he was saying. Y'all have been misinformed with a meme for 40 years and it's pathetic.

[@conbrio27]

You are way too wordy with your questions. That's not the way to conduct an interview, cuz no one is here to hear your long questions. Just honest advice.

[@ohdude6643]

Jesus christ how you're right!

[@slimjimnyc270]

The poor guy got like an hour of sleep, for Pete Sakes!

[@motivationishere3483]

At least he's not gibbering nonsense, instead adding some value into the discussion in Fukuyama's level (sometimes i even feel he's more articulate)

[@lukestables708]

There's a forward button for a reason.

[@tb8865]

Fukuyama BTFO yet again.

[@ravishingravi]

This is good video to understand why Fukuyama proclamations have been so wrong and so often. And the other guy is living in a pond and thinks its the ocean. No wonder Europe is collapsing.

[@canteluna]

hahahaha! Don't just ASSert it, let's here you support your BULLSHIT and prove where Fukuyama is wrong.

[@dweller6065]

Regarding discussion 31-33min mark about Romney's proposal in 2012 to impose an obligation on employers to ensure that the workers they employ are legally allowed to reside in the country - Francis responded by saying Americans would never agree to a national ID card. Yes IMO he is right and I am personally against national ID cards, but there are less intrusive alternatives that Francis should consider. Why not require disclosure of a person's social security number and or their drivers license number? The Australians had a similar debate in the 1980s where they rejected the national ID card. The context of the Australian debate was different - illegal immigration was minimal, rather the proponents wanted a national ID to assist the rollout of digitization of public services (which was still in its infancy at that time) and crack down on the cash economy and hence tax avoidance. After the public rejected the proposal, the "work around" the government adopted was to adopt a criteria system with points attached to different pieces of ID so as to correctly identify an individual should they seek to open a bank account, or get hired. The onus was put on the bank or the employers to ensure compliance.

[@canteluna]

The entire point about ANY kind of ID card, whether ss, dl or national ID is what information the government - or others - would have access to and in what scenario.

[@billc2147]

Each generation repeats its leaders. Each sees men endowed with superior inventiveness, energy, and genius for business, inspired by love of power and possession, launch selfish schemes-Carnegies, Rockefellers, Goulds…Each generation has had its Henry George, its Bellamy, its Bryan, intent on persuading mankind that he had found the way, could lead men to the good life. In each generation employer and employee have faced the decision-war or cooperation. Ida Tarbell, All in the Day's Work (1939)

[@dongye3645]

The economy is one thing, but another thing is that "reality tv" and social media" have sunk the standards to a new low, and those political non-participants (poorly educated, religious fanatics and new immigrants) all came out to vote for trump this time

[@claudedietrich-m9m]

let your guest speak please. This is unbearable

[@thomasbenjamin8337]

This sort of confirms my thought that people have chosen a path that might damage them more than what they hoped for. On the whole I feel this was a regressive step but such things do happen. I hope I am wrong. If it goes like his first term my hope may be futile. However unlike first term if the congress and senate balance his impulse with better judgement my hope may be justified.

[@motivationishere3483]

20:54 Hold on Fukuyama, you're now talking about traditional Democratic party policy line. But that's different from now. - How come millions of mass immigration benefit blue collar worker, be intellectually honest, it's competing force! - why DNC messaging was never addressing about working class without slandering them as guilty (Kamala's word salad, mid class background, aspiration inspiration speech won't count). They never addressed these people's issue, if worse look down on them. - How Biden admin (Left for poor as you said) benefited working class for the last 4 years? Real wage declined! His admin squeezed supply side with wars & direct energy policies, and printed out trillions into the circulation. - Where those trillions go, we still wonder 😂

[@g0679]

It’s enlightening to watch Sean Hannity. Especially when he chats with Ted Koppel.

[@subcitizen2012]

Let's be intellectually honest. 1) Real immigration advocates advocate to make immigrants permanent residents and for them to have equal working rights. That would be edit everyone. The right doesn't let Democrats, or anyone else, talk about immigration tolerance or workers rights. 2) if you let the left talk about workers rights, then blue collar workers would have workers rights. But workers are right wing and don't want workers rights, and are therefore guilty and should be looked down on. 3) real wages are up. 4) what trillions and trillions? Because of you're worried about trillions and trillions, you aren't worried enough about the trillions and trillions and trillions Trump and Republicans have cost you for decades. If you want all your wishes granted, you will need to vote left of the Dems. If you want to destroy your own existence, keep voting for the destroy your existence party.

[@amant7963]

I don’t think 10million people in the last 4 years have familes .. so stop acting like whole families r being deported.

[@lukestables708]

He's obviously not saying they all have families. He's saying some of them will, and the children of those people will be US citizens.

[@Atreid3s]

​@@lukestables708 birthright citizenship must be ended.

[@lukestables708]

@@Atreid3s Many countries don't have it. I don't have a view either way. If enough people want it to end then end it. That's the magic of democracy. I personally taught students in China who's parents had deliberately gone to the US to have their child. It does seem kinda crazy to me. But on the other hand they aren't going to Mexico to do it, so it also shows that America is still the most powerful country in the world.

[@Atreid3s]

​@@lukestables708 it won't be for long if we let the entire rest of the world in. This country doesn't mean anything to them outside if being a place to make money and get nice things.

[@lukestables708]

​@@Atreid3s Well maybe, but that's pretty much how it's always been done. Just the people aren't coming mainly from Europe but from other places.

[@eleanordoran4576]

Ho hum! Here we go again with more from Mr. Fukuyama. But he just keeps getting it wrong!!!

[@canteluna]

Oh, really? Pray tell, where is he wrong? And why are you here if you think he is always wrong? Maybe it's you.

[@subcitizen2012]

His predictions have all been right. Liberal democratic history ended because we weren't careful about that.

[@whippingstar7475]

It's painfully obvious Francis does nothing outside of pontificating to a captive audience all day. Academia is a fucking joke.

[@ritornelloandrefrain]

Yeah, I'm sure you're head and shoulders above these silly academics. You rock!

[@TheGoodShepherd117]

I agree most of the critiques of these two academics are shallow and basically insults. They wouldn’t stand up to real discussion in real life.

[@canteluna]

You're the fucking joke, MORON. Or prove me wrong. Let's here your debunking of anything Fukuyama said. You can't. You're a pretentious, know-nothing clown.

[@subcitizen2012]

Which is the equivalent of what you, and intentionally as a joke. But we should take you seriously because you're ignorant and angry.

[@hamidhamidi3134]

Questions were too long. No point to Interview people if you do most of the talking yourself.

[@georgemartin1383]

Could this be "the end of history"?

[@canteluna]

Far from it. Not even the end of shit-for-brains platitudes from clowns who aren't fit to lick Fukuyama's shoes.

[@subcitizen2012]

Just like he warned.

[@gabrielgrekko6716]

Well, at least neoliberalism was mentioned once in the beginning

[@dlee732ad]

Is history over. 😂

[@redcatofdeath]

History being over has a specific philosophical meaning derived from Hegel. It does not and was never intended at all to mean that events would stop occurring. You probably don't know that, which means you don't even know what you are disagreeing with.

[@zoehardee8636]

HELL no!

[@dlee732ad]

@@redcatofdeath The very idea that liberal democracy would be a sustained and ongoing superior form a government was completely undermined by neo-liberal economic policies. you cant have a democratic republic and at the same time create an oligarchy.

[@redcatofdeath]

@@dlee732ad The idea is that there is no better form of government beyond liberal democracy. What you are saying doesn't contradict the thesis at all.

[@dlee732ad]

@@redcatofdeath so no where and never was Fukuyama on board with neo-liberal policies? If he was then he was grossly disingenuous. Thx for the convesation.

[@oraz.]

It makes the rejoinder you hear that woke has no meaning more annoying when Francis Fukuyama is fine using it. I think he stops short on the gender thing because it seems there's directly derisive signals being sent, or suggestions about being disfavored in job markets coming from many directions. Since the talk about correcting this from the left is all premised on modeling internal psychological syndromes in men I don't see any of those attempts to correct working.

[@subcitizen2012]

Then the constitution is wrong because it was based on equality. This the death of liberalism.

[@Boy90547]

Fukuyama is not relevant again. Those so called Harvard Ivy League profs have their brains to be democrats whatever happens.

[@canteluna]

Alright genius. instead of sounding like you're even dumber than Trump, let's hear your criticism of Fukuyama's theses. I haven't had a good laugh yet today.

[@AdamGoldberg-s8c]

I guess he forgot about Lois Lerner.

[@hafidlalaoui9798]

The Democrats had badly lost .

[@g0679]

Now that the campaign is over, Donald can lighten up on his reading material.

[@subcitizen2012]

Actually the popular vote was only lost by about 2.5 million. It was a coin toss election. Not that much of a loss at all.

[@ymamdani]

There is no difference in any party in America so far foreign policy is concerned. There is only one party or one coin with 2 sides. Some domestic issues may be slightly different But eventually there are all same. Killing innocent in other countries is hobby of both parties and both houses and senators give permission to presidents. Where is humanity??

[@edwardliu2980]

Fukuyama had his days after the Cold War, he was descending to irrelevance those days...

[@Eduardo-jj9bi]

fukuyama is a liberal bot just like all of them

[@RD-sk8cx]

Thank you commenters for saving me an hour of having to listen to this.

[@posthocprior]

This was disappointing. Was hoping for a more analytical and scientific discussion. There’s a large literature on forecasting presidential elections (eg, “Forecasting Presidential Elections” by Rosenstone). These models use a few economic, crime, and presidential approval rating variables to accurately forecast close to 100% of elections. (It happened this year too. If you’d like, I can tell you what to google to find the prediction and the model.) My point: was hoping for a discussion about not the appeal of Trump but about why voters, consistently throughout generations, vote against economic pain and the incumbent party. In this election, Trump can be thought of as a control. His campaign was disastrous, his cabinet members said he’s dangerous, as did many members of his own party. Then, there’s that the fact that Harris spent $1 billion on ads. Finally, I should note, am an applied mathematician. Winning two elections doesn’t mean that you aren’t lucky. There seemed to be no consideration from either of the participants to distinguish between circumstances that could have led to both victories as opposed to how much Trump is responsible. Any applied mathematician would try to quantify what chance played.

[@faustoferrari4303]

I may have misunderstood your second paragraph, but can you clarify what you mean by 'voters, consistently throughout generations, vote against economic pain and the incumbent party'. Isn't it just common sense self-interest to vote against economic pain? Also, if you're talking about American presidential elections the incumbent president has almost always won for the last 100 years (Carter, Bush snr., and Trump in 2020 go against the trend). Perhaps you meant the incumbent party, but the presidential race is very much about the individual candidates involved, unlike the parliamentary system in the UK. Also, why would an applied mathematician want to quantify how much of a factor chance played? I'm genuinely interested.

[@posthocprior]

@@faustoferrari4303 Right. Good correction: incumbent president. There are many other variables in a voter's life, other than economics. There are crime and security concerns. There's the likelihood of an autocrat dismantling the free press and independent judiciary. So, if one models (based on the literture) based on only economic variables, a predictor is right within one standard deviation. It is necessary, therefore, to include other variables, such as the president's approval rating. If, however, you don't include economic variables than you consistently get results that are as predictive as the polls. So, was hoping for a discussion why economic factors mattered more than the threat of Trump. (Btw, this was answered when I looked at how the CPI is calculated for food inflation. It gives a misleading food inflation rate.) Applied mathematician is a vague term. I use the chi-square test, student's t-test, etc., as a statistician would in understanding the difference between control and treatment groups.

[@canteluna]

You came to the wrong discussion. If you knew anything about Mounk or Fukuyama you would not have had the expectations you did.

[@subcitizen2012]

If nothing matters then flip a coin and that's your answer.

[@posthocprior]

@@subcitizen2012 Yeah, I've reached a somewhat similar conclusion. Have looked at a lot of data on irrational voters and looked at the median voter theorem in rational choice theory. Most voters are irrational.

[@vincentnguyen7385]

Former President Clinton said "It is the economy, stupid" Clinton helps Trump get elected.

[@raminsafizadeh]

Why waste time listening when you begin as such?

[@udz39]

Fukuyama 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️😂🤣😂🤣

[@subcitizen2012]

Still laughing at Fukayama because you don't know how to read?

[@Jeangogos]

They sound like they are totally missing the point to me but maybe that’s just me. But then again I am only living this shit so what do I know.

[@canteluna]

Exactly. What do you know?

[@subcitizen2012]

Most people are too dumb to get the point. No offense. It's just how it is. 50% of people are stupider than the other 50%.

[@stimublu8570]

This is so daydreaming, and with Fukuyama too... What a cope session.

[@subcitizen2012]

They wouldn't have to cope if you weren't such a stupid piece of shit. Not only are you destroying your own mind, you're destroying society too, all because you can't listen to something for an hour or read a book. Jokes on you. You're the irrelevant dumbass that's wrong about everything and Fukayama is your butt sex daddy.

[@TheKqkk]

these guys are just sociopaths

[@subcitizen2012]

Is that true or is that just what you've been conditioned to believe by the real sociopaths?

[@TheKqkk]

@@subcitizen2012 that is true

[@shamik0608]

Cry baby cry. Time for idiots like Fukuyama has gone. He will soon be a relic and people will baulk as to how his ideas were ever taken seriously

[@subcitizen2012]

The same thing is going to happen to you.

[@Asakusa771]

As a rule of thumb (not LAW), it's always wise not to make predictions.

[@subcitizen2012]

He was right though. The history of liberal democracy and neoliberal capitalism ended.

[@keli4068]

So professor will trump be in history？

[@Tulsi1958]

Beyond despair... How Trump as president may not be able to harm beyond a point: 1) Falling out with supposedly friends, associates, like Musk, Kennedy etc 2) Putin not stopping war in 1-day 3) Prices of groceries & medicines not falling 4) Rural guys not finding better economy 5) His own superficiality creating "cross-purposes" for his own team members

[@quentinnewark2745]

You speculate. Lets look at actual concrete Dem administration: 1) paying for "friends" - Beyonce cost $10m 2) enabling Putin's invasion, begins with Obama ignoring Crimea 3) prices through the roof - basket of essentials up 30% 4) fentanyl epidemic, try going downtown in SF 5) Biden's handlers and The Squad driving Democratic Party to the extreme left No wonder the alternative to this unmitigated disaster just won everything; the popular vote, every swing state, electoral college, house, senate.

[@motivationishere3483]

- Putin is an uncertain variable, nevertheless Trump is a deal maker unlike Biden who refused every deal, try not to show his dementia. - Inflation will improve, unlike Democrats who squeezed supply side, and print money at the same time. But clever usage of tariff will determine effectiveness. - Don't know why people dislike Kennedy, he's the only person in politics talking about health issues. His created team might feel superficial to you but objectively speaking, what DNC is offering as an alternative? Only a fool would be convinced by Kamala's word salad. I am even surprised she's managed to pull 200 electorates.

[@t.c.s.7724]

Isn't Fukuyama the guy who believed in the " End of History?" Hahaha. Why is he still relevant? He's been wrong on everything. My mother was a child in Imperial Japan, circa WWII I'm half Japanese, half German. Fukuyama is such an embarrassment.

[@subcitizen2012]

History did end. Exactly the way he said it would too. You know he's a conservative right?