There are several groups out and about actively proclaiming the “end of history.” A few sects of Christianity are claiming an imminent religious apocalypse, while the recently famous 2012 prediction looms over society’s collective head. End of the world predictions come and go, usually without too much attention. Francis Fukuyama uses the “end of history” phrase much differently. His prediction following the collapse of the Cold War was that the world would move towards liberal democracy, which would eventually be adopted by all States. He saw authoritarian regimes weakening in their ability to rule over their citizens, which would eventually rise up in democratic revolt. This didn’t mean the end of the world in an apocalyptic sense, but that the world would never be the same once all countries adopted democracy as their form of government.
With the (presumably) successful revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, as well as ongoing democratic protests in Libya, Bahrain, and other Middle Eastern countries, I couldn’t help but be reminded of Fukuyama’s theory. Reports are that even one of the more stable authoritarian regimes, China, had to call on the military to squelch protestors. Indeed, people around the world are clamoring for the rights that a democratic government can offer them, and some governments are being forced to respond with new reforms. News reports of the latest revolutions are increasing by the day, and people around the world are embracing recent successes as a model for their own protests and revolutions.
Fukuyama’s theory is not without criticism however, including rival theories like (most notably) Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” theory. The world has a long way to go before hard-line dictators will relinquish their control over their people, and an even longer time before democracy could be the commonly accepted approach. If critics of this theory are right, some places simply do not have it in their blood to want a democracy, and are actually better suited with a more centralized government like a monarchy. Fukuyama’s theory also faces increased criticism once you regard the implications of an all-democratic world.
Perhaps more profound than Fukuyama’s international political theory is the statement we see about natural rights in the Middle Eastern revolutions. Whether or not the “end of history” theory is correct, we are certainly seeing the end of history as we know it. People around the world are being inspired to fight for the rights that they deserve, among them a government that will represent the will of the people. They refuse to be subject to oppressive and corrupt regimes, and seek the protection of basic necessities that they need to live.
Watching from the United States, one cannot help but be inspired and grateful for the liberties and freedoms we have. Though we too are not a perfect country, we are blessed with guarantees of natural rights and freedoms that are limited in places around the world. For many of us, history has already “ended” and democracy has prevailed. These recent protests by the people remind us however that there is still work to be done in protecting the rights of others, and that we must stand in solidarity with them and support the reforms that will bring them freedoms they too deserve. Whether this results in an all-democratic world, a clash of civilizations, or some entirely different theory of international relations, history is changing before us, and people around the world are no longer content to live with history “as usual.”
