The End of History and the Last Man

Published in 1992, political scientist Francis Fukuyama’s ‘End of History’ described a world in which he saw the 70+ year struggle between the authoritarian styles of government meeting an unequivocal end with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. What triumphed – principally the American system of ‘liberal democratic capitalism’ – was a model that in many ways proceeded to envelope the rest of the world in the coming years. For this, Fukuyama gets much right, but as the title of the book implies, the notion of an end to all other forms of civilization is questionable, and in the light of the rise of rival development models in Asia and a tentatively resurgent Russia, the thesis appears inaccurate at best, or grossly absurd at worst.

Myth of the 20th Century – Episode 237 – The End of History and the Last Man

— References —

– The Decline of the West, Spengler (1918)
– The End of History and the Last Man, Fukuyama (1992)
– Clash of Civilizations, Hungtington (1996)
– Homo Americanus, Sunic (2007)
– The Better Angels of our Nature – Why Violence has Declined, Pinker (2011)
– Tom Sunic – Homo Americanus, Myth of the 20th Century (2019) –
– Tiananmen – The Gate of Heavenly Peace, Myth of the 20th Century (2022) –
– Preparing for a Wake-Up Call, The Prudentialist (2022) –
– Russia Is Back, and So Is History, McCulloch (2022) –
– Democrats want the war to go on: Greenwald, Yahoo! News (2022) –


10 Comments Add yours

  1. Anon says:

    Good content boys. Fukuyama is often viewed as a punchline – appreciate the effort you put in to really understand and present the idea Nick. A name you guys briefly mentioned was Huntington. Afiak, he was a fairly boilerplate Cold War liberal internationalist before “clash of civilizations” – which everyone remembers. But in his last work (who are we) he more or less predicted the disintegration of the United States due to demographic and cultural factors. An interesting antidote to Fukuyama.

    I haven’t read the man but you presented a picture of overall sincerity. The degree of sincerity compared to cynicism pretty much correlates with levels of neoconservatism.

    Great discussion overall. Love your work.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Adam Smith says:

      Appreciate the kind words.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Franco says:

    Nick’s microphone worked. Wish that book did, kind of a dead end show when there are so many better topics to discuss.


  3. Earl Shetland says:

    Nick saying “Democracy? Uh, uh… euigh…” at around 61 minutes belongs on a Myth20C soundboard


  4. Anon says:

    Would be nice to hear what Nick has to say about Kojeve and the EU project as a whole. The Nick Griffin and euro crisis eps did give a taste but there’s a show there just talking about what place a thing that started out as a weird sorta HRE larp thing like the EU, has in the 21st century.


  5. RayAndBri says:

    Not to take anything away from how amazing this show is, but I would absolutely love a spin-off show where Nick just has no plan and vents about whatever is on his mind. Sort of like what all the YouTube comedians are doing. Nick is hilarious and I’d enjoy listening to him talk about anything. I love the structure and work that goes into this show, but a good version of this show with Nick by himself or with occasional guests where he just talks and talks would be equally satisfying. It wouldn’t take as much work to produce as this show does, but it would definitely be just as popular. I think a lot of listeners would enjoy a couple hours of Nick ranting about whatever he feels like.


  6. MasterBlaster says:

    Great job, Nick! Appreciate the societal Hegelian dialectic (thesis-antithesis-synthesis) that the book claims has now completed, reaching what may be called man’s omega point. I understand that Marx agreed with the Hegelian dialectic but applied it to material and goods. Lastly, I wonder if The Author was aware that capitalism tends towards oligarchy and if that would continue the Hegelian dialectic. Thanks again for posting.


  7. Pleb says:

    Treating Fukuyama’s work seriously and giving it a proper analysis and critique beyond just laughing at his in hindsight obvious mistakes made for a great listen and an outstanding episode. I hope to see more content in this vein in the future.


  8. muunyayo says:

    Reblogged this on muunyayo .


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 )

Connecting to %s