At Last, 'The End Of History'
14 March, 2009, 19:51
The world is experiencing a paradigm shift that will
fundamentally change how we think and live. Conventional wisdoms,
some held in the West since the end of World War II and others
dating from the end of the Cold War, are not only being challenged,
but swept into the dustbin of history.
In 1992, Francis Fukuyama published his book ‘The End of History
and the Last Man’. At the time, Fukuyama's thesis seemed obvious
for the Western world: "What we may be witnessing is not just the
end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of
postwar history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end
point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization
of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human
government."
Today these words appear out of place, if not simply gibberish.
With the exception of a few neoconservatives, a growing number of
people in the West and the vast majority of the world are
questioning what was unquestionable in the Western mainstream, for
example: the role of the state in the economy, how the global
economy should be run, and whether there should be engagement with
groups now labeled as ‘terrorists’.
The global financial slump is destroying not only economies, but
also the foundations of the West's worldview. Examples abound. Over
the last 20 years, the Western world dangerously deregulated
sectors of the economy to the point of privatizing what have been
traditionally state services, including the military. Those who
questioned the wisdom of doing so were called ‘socialist’, a word
that in American political discourse is akin to an expletive. The
hard reality today is that the state must also be an active
economic player to ensure we don't repeat the follies that have
brought the world to its knees.
To date, the world's economy has been dominated by a small group
of Western countries, a legacy of the post-World War II era called
the Bretton Woods arrangement. However, the global economic order
has not kept up with the times. What are known as the BRIC
countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) remain almost
invisible when it comes to the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. When the G20 countries, which includes the BRIC,
meet in London next month, this grouping should replace the Group
of Eight and meet twice a year until the worst of the slump has
been overcome, when it should become institutionalized.
The issue of ‘Western liberal democracy’ has been monopolized by
the West, particularly the United States. The idea of democracy has
been so badly abused over the past 20 years that it has been
rendered almost useless and nothing more than an ideological weapon
of mass destruction by the West.
Since the end of the Cold War, democracy has come to mean one
thing: the promotion of Washington's foreign-policy agenda. Rarely
do we hear anything about the democratization of the global
economic order. Russia and China continue to be viewed with
suspicion, and the concept of ‘fair trade’ with the rest of the
world has been superceded by one-sided policies under the rubric of
‘free trade’ that only and always favor Western economies.
In the area of international security the same applies. Where is
"Western liberal democracy" in this sphere? NATO claims that Russia
has no right to dictate which country can enter the alliance. Fair
enough. However, what right does NATO have to threaten a country,
specifically Russia, with its continued expansion? What is
democratic about that?
Then there is the issue of democratic elections. The West
wholeheartedly supported elections in Ukraine and Georgia (the
so-called ‘Orange’ and ‘Rose’ revolutions respectively). Washington
gloated, but longer-term results in these so-called democracies
have created many doubts about the continued political development
of Ukraine and Georgia. Nonetheless, Washington congratulated
itself on its ability to fast-forward history: ending history all
together, as Fukuyama prophesied.
What is the result? Both Ukraine and Georgia are becoming, or
have already become, failed states, and the security consequences
for Russia of that collapse are profound. Washington's misguided
and ideologically driven hubris has resulted in Russia being left
to pick up the pieces – being branded an authoritarian and a
regional hegemon in the process. And lest we forget, Hamas was
democratically elected, but ‘Western liberal democracy’ continues
to reject election results elsewhere in the world it does not like.
This is simply hypocrisy.
We all face new vistas. For the majority of the world it won't
be easy, but the changes we face will be very hard for the West so
accustomed to its ‘special place in history’. That place in history
is changing, and in the most dramatic way. The rest of the world
has funded Western prosperity for decades, making the United States
the greatest debtor state in history. As we can see today, this was
a failed model and ideology. Now everyone must pay and be rewarded
equally an idea the West abandoned long ago.
In a strange way, Fukuyama was right in his ‘The End of History
and the Last Man’. History never ends, but bankrupt ideologies do.
The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was buried two decades ago.
In light of recent history, Fukuyama's ‘Western liberal democracy’
should now be preparing for its own burial ceremony. I won't weep
at the funeral - nor will most of the world.