Francis Fukuyama's 1989 essay, "The End of History," is often misconstrued as a triumphalist declaration of liberal democracy's permanent victory. However, a closer examination of the essay and its subsequent book, "The End of History and the Last Man," reveals a more nuanced and critical argument about the potential limitations of liberal democracy and the complexities of human nature. Fukuyama posits that while liberal democracy may prevail as a political system, it might do so by satisfying only a partial vision of the human soul, neglecting fundamental desires for recognition, greatness, and daring. This oversight, he suggests, could undermine the long-term stability of such a system.

Fukuyama, a political scientist at Stanford University, has authored numerous works since his seminal essay, including a two-volume series on political order and critiques of neoconservatism. His recent memoir, "The End of History and the Last Man," revisits these foundational ideas, offering insights into contemporary political challenges, the rise of figures like Donald Trump, and the perceived weaknesses of opposition movements.

The Concept of "The End of History"

The phrase "The End of History" originates from the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Fukuyama clarifies that Hegel's concept refers not to the cessation of events, but to the culmination of a progressive historical development driven by human reason. For Marxists, this historical endpoint was a communist utopia. Fukuyama's observation in the late 1980s, coinciding with Mikhail Gorbachev's leadership in the Soviet Union, was that the world was likely to settle on liberal democracy and capitalism as the penultimate stage of historical development. He defines "the end of history" as the end of the process of determining the optimal political and social organization for humanity.

Fukuyama's reasoning for this conclusion stemmed from the self-destruction or rejection of major ideological competitors. He challenged readers to identify a superior alternative that would lead to more fulfilled lives. While acknowledging that liberal democracy is not perfect, he has yet to see a compelling alternative posited.

The Contradiction of Class and the Role of Recognition

The Marxist critique of capitalism centers on inherent class conflict, where a small elite exploits the majority. Fukuyama addresses this by noting that post-1945 advanced economies largely adopted social democracy, incorporating social protections and redistribution to mitigate inequality. This approach, coupled with rising real incomes for working people, fostered political stability. However, Fukuyama acknowledges that technological advancements and globalization have exacerbated inequality, posing a threat to democratic stability unless moderated by political means.

Moving beyond traditional liberal philosophers like Hobbes and Locke, Fukuyama grounds liberalism in Hegel's understanding of the human soul, which desires more than mere self-preservation and material well-being. He introduces the Hegelian concept of thumos, often translated as "spiritedness" or "pride," which represents a non-material drive for recognition and acknowledgment of one's humanity.

Fukuyama distinguishes between two forms of this desire:

• Isothymia: The desire for equal recognition, forming the basis of liberal society. This is manifested through the granting of rights, affirming each individual's inherent dignity and share in societal power. Resentment arises when this recognition is perceived as unequally distributed. Examples include the gay marriage movement, where civil unions were insufficient without the acknowledgment of equal dignity, and the Civil Rights Movement, addressing the "invisibility" of African Americans as fellow human beings, as depicted in Ralph Ellison's "Invisible Man."
• Megalothymia: The desire to be recognized as superior to others. While a threat to democratic equality, this drive is also essential for human excellence, motivating individuals to excel as artists, athletes, or thinkers. Fukuyama argues that a dynamic society requires both the foundation of equal recognition and the outlet for the desire for greater achievement.

Fukuyama notes that even in societies with material wealth, a lack of recognition can lead to profound injury. Adam Smith observed that much of the desire for wealth stems from the wish to be seen and acknowledged. This "never-enoughness" of recognition contributes to the inherent instability of societies where inequality in recognition persists. Populist movements, he suggests, are often fueled by individuals who feel invisible and unrecognized by educated elites.

The "Last Man" and the Blunting of Ambition

Nietzsche's concept of the "Last Man" represents the product of a history's end—a creature satisfied with peace and prosperity but devoid of further aspirations or a willingness to risk their lives for a cause. Fukuyama sees this as a potential consequence of liberal societies, which, in their pursuit of tolerance and equality, may flatten human experience and blunt ambition.

Critics on the right argue that the lie of equality in liberalism blunts ambition and suppresses excellence. Fukuyama defends the concept of universal equality, rooted in Christian interpretations of human dignity, while acknowledging that liberalism's pluralism and focus on survival can lead to a lowering of human horizons. He posits that modern citizens are not asked to make significant sacrifices, leading some to invent causes, as seen in the January 6th Capitol riot, where individuals sought a sense of struggle and sacrifice.

Fukuyama's original essay concluded that the end of history would be a "sad time" due to this lack of risk and noble aspiration. He observed that generations benefiting from the struggles of their predecessors might rebel against peace and democracy, seeking struggle for its own sake, which can fuel extremist politics. He also notes a generational cycle where those without liberalism yearn for it, while those who possess it may take it for granted and seek more, potentially leading to a rise and fall in its support.

9/11 and the Resumption of Recognition Politics

The September 11th attacks, Fukuyama argues, forced a recognition that political motivations are often non-economic and driven by religion, recognition, and humiliation. He contends that radical Islamism, while a significant event, was not a viable global alternative to liberalism, unlike Marxism-Leninism. Instead, the Western reaction to 9/11, particularly the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, led to the militarization of foreign policy, the beginnings of a surveillance state, and cynicism about American power, ultimately contributing to the rise of figures like Donald Trump.

Fukuyama's break with neoconservatism, despite signing early letters supporting the Iraq War, stemmed from his skepticism about the U.S.'s ability to transform culturally different societies. He observed historical patterns of American public fatigue with long-term interventions, leaving societies worse off. The Bush administration's perceived lack of preparedness for nation-building in Iraq proved his concerns prescient.

The Influence of Social Circles and the Nature of Political Change

Fukuyama reflects on how his own thinking was shaped by his social circles, particularly within the neoconservative movement. He cites psychologist Jonathan Haidt's concept of "motivated reasoning," where individuals marshal evidence to support pre-existing conclusions. This realization made it difficult to break from his intellectual community, as it involved not just policy shifts but also personal relationships.

He also notes the neoconservative embrace of a "thumotic" politics following 9/11, viewing it as a necessary struggle against perceived Western decadence. However, he argues that the aggressive reaction to 9/11, including the Iraq War, has damaged American politics, contributing to the rise of Trump and demonstrating the dangers of a polity oriented around violence and reprisal. Fukuyama suggests that while some thinkers believed war could recharge societies, modern technology makes such conflicts too devastating, necessitating peaceful outlets for megalothymia.

Obama, Trump, and the Challenge to Liberal Institutions

Fukuyama views the Obama presidency as well-intentioned but not ambitious enough, failing to address underlying social and economic inequalities driving racial divides. He criticizes Obama's adherence to neoliberalism and the "vetocracy" of the American system, where complex checks and balances hinder decisive action. He argues that institutional problems, such as the filibuster, were not addressed, leading to the flourishing of identity politics in civil society.

Fukuyama posits that liberalism has become captured by its own institutions, leading to a lack of ambition and an inability to achieve significant change. He agrees that the government needs greater capacity to act, but warns against the proceduralism that can hobble progress. He sees Donald Trump as a response to this institutional constraint, seeking to bypass rules to achieve goals.

Fukuyama describes Trump's approach as "repatrimonializing" the government, reverting to a system where rulers benefit friends and family. He expresses astonishment at the public's apparent indifference to this trend, which undermines the meritocratic and impersonal nature of modern state institutions. He believes that while American institutions may ultimately hold, the current period represents a dangerous ride.

The Future of State Formation and the Role of Technology

Fukuyama's work on the origins of modern political states, exemplified by Denmark's competent administration, is re-examined in light of current global trends. He maintains that competence in state administration remains a virtue, regardless of political goals. However, he acknowledges that Europe's excessive proceduralism hinders its economic productivity and innovation.

He contrasts the American model, which he sees as deteriorating due to capricious policy and attacks on its scientific establishment, with China's competent, albeit authoritarian, state. While acknowledging China's economic success, Fukuyama views its sustainability as an open question due to economic challenges.

Fukuyama emphasizes that liberal democracy's success is contingent on technological context. He foresees artificial intelligence (AI) as a significant threat to democratic systems, potentially creating new classes of humans through biotechnology and AI, exacerbating wealth concentration, and challenging egalitarian principles. He views AI as a powerful tool for processing information but warns of the dangers of delegating autonomous power to machines, whose values may not align with human ones.

He suggests that the geopolitical race for AI dominance, particularly between the U.S. and China, complicates regulation. While China's authoritarian system may exert more control over AI development, Fukuyama believes international cooperation will be necessary to establish ground rules, even if trust between nations is limited.

Towards a Renewed Liberalism

Fukuyama advocates for a renewed liberalism focused on state capacity, enabling governments to set and achieve ambitious, yet not radical, goals such as universal healthcare and infrastructure development. He contrasts the eight-year timeline for the moon landing under Kennedy with the protracted delays in modern projects like NASA's Artemis program.

He argues that liberalism needs a vision of the "good life" beyond mere material accumulation, encompassing public infrastructure, medical breakthroughs, and a sense of moral ambition. He believes that politics should be driven by energy and enthusiasm, but also capable of delivering tangible results.

Fukuyama recommends three books:

1. "Recoding America" by Jennifer Pahlka: An insightful critique of American bureaucracy from a sympathetic standpoint, offering reform proposals.
2. "Why Nothing Works" by Mark Dunkelman: Places current challenges in historical context, arguing for a shift from Jeffersonian decentralization to Hamiltonian government as an engine of change.
3. "The God Test" by Bob Wright: Provides an accessible explanation of Large Language Models (LLMs) and argues for AI's positive role in human progress.