"The End of History and the Last Man" by Francis Fukuyama
(1992) and "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of
World Order" by Samuel Huntington (1996) famously differ not only
in their interpretation of the historical event of the end of the Cold-War, but
also in their interpretation of history itself.
Following the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union Fukuyama
claimed that the "end of history" has arrived not in the sense of no
more events but in the sense of no more opposing historical forces which drive
history forward through conflict. Fukuyama utilizes Hegel's philosophy which saw human progress
as driven my its internal ideological contradictions. Following Kojeve's interpretation
of Hegel, Fukuyama thought that the final victory of the West in the Cold-War
marks the final victory of liberal democracy which will remain as the one
universal ideology.
Shortly after Fukuyama published his "The End of History and the Last Man" he was criticized by Samuel Huntington who argued that the
ideological conflicts which characterized the 20th Century will be replaced by
cultural ones. In "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order" Huntington held that culture in its broad sense of religion,
language, heritage and tradition is becoming the most important factor in human
identity. He therefore offered an analysis of global politics as comprised by
several civilizations (like the Western, Islamic, Latin American, Orthodox, Eastern
Asian and the Sub-Saharan civilization) which clash between one another.
The theoretical debate between "The End of History" and
"The Clash of Civilization" was eventually decided by history itself
which shows no intention of ending in the near future. Fukuyama was definitely
over-optimistic in thinking that the end of the Cold-War marks the end of human
conflict. Huntington on the other hand has been so far proved correct in his
prediction of the next big battle being fought between the Muslim and
non-Muslim worlds.
But there is still a deeper philosophical sense to the Huntington/Fukuyama
debate since it demonstrates the problematic nature of our understanding of
historical dialectics. Fukuyama proclaimed "The End of History"
since, like many before him, he was unable to see past the constrains of his
own position in History, unable to imagine a different meaning to politics. Huntington,
very much within the lines of the Hegelian thesis, was only able to see a different
current directing history by means of his critique on Fukuyama. In that sense
"The Clash of Civilizations" is born out of "The End of
History" in perfect line with Hegelian dialectics.
See also: Jihad vs. McWorld / Benjamin Barber
Some related books to consider:
