Posted by: bklunk | April 14, 2007

Fukuyama Used to Just Predict the End of History

Actually, I think that’s what he means here. It’s a Hegelian argument that basically says that the something like the EU is the direction historical processes are taking social, political, and economic life. Communism, Islam, Catholicism, or others may provide other visions but they will lose out to Airbus and Tuborg. For an alternative take on the EU and the future, listen to T.R. Reid’s lecture The United States of Europe: The New Superpower and the End of American Supremacy.

How do you spell EU? D-O-O-M « Gerry’s International Relations

This is what the Brussels Journal claims. It cites an article by Francis Fukuyama, the Dean of the School of Advanced International Studies as Johns Hopkins University. The article states that the world will end in a state like the European Union, and the Journal says that Dean Fukuyama claims that the European Union is going to lead to the demise of mankind. I am not sure that is what it says. When I read the article I read that the European Union was the wave of the future. Dean Fukuyama states that when the world ends it will have a governmental body similar to the European Union, meaning that humanity will move in that direction for the rest of history. That does not mean that the European Union will be our downfall. The Journal has a very strong bias towards individual state sovereignty and I feel that misinterpreted this article in order to fit their own needs. I would be interested to know what other think, and what they believe Dean Fukuyama means.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.


  1. I’m a little cautious about presenting this point because I’m going to refute some of Fukuyama’s points even though I am only a second-year undergrad and he’s a leading political theorist. However, I disagree with the idea that the world will end in a system like an European Union. I believe that Fukuyama sees the current proliferation of integration policies due to their obvious advantages (no protectionist policies that hurt the efficiency of the economy, ease of politics, travel, and business, and better cooperation for collective goods) and sees these trends continuing (NAFTA, ASEAN, African Union, NATO,CAFTA). I have a different view. Obviously the trend in world politics is towards integration due to complex interdependence, and I would argue that we will see more integration in the future, but not globally, rather regionally. I see the future of politics in the world as a patchwork of common markets and security communities that more or less interact peacefully with each other. Although conflict will remain and probably be more present in the global South. I believe states are still realist and will be concerned about sovereignty so they will still not give up power to a global body. Look at the UN, it is left powerless by the fact that it can’t disturb state sovereignty and it is not even trying to rewrite nations’ laws or establish a global currency. Yet, at the same time, states cannot pass up the economic advantages of integration, and they won’t if they feel they are part of a group with the same identity, beliefs, and objectives as a regional organization would have. There would be less of a threat there in changing who they are. I wouldn’t be surprised to see unions like the EU grow stronger in places like Southeast Asia, Latin America, Africa, and maybe someday North America (although it looks a little bleak at the moment).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: