FrancisFukuyamaandtheendof

History
byRogerKimball

SH AR E

[T]hewhighistoriancandrawlinesthroughcertainevents,andifheis
notcarefulhebeginstoforgetthatthislineismerelyamentaltrickofhis
hecomestoimaginethatitrepresentssomethinglikealineofcausation.
Thetotalresultofthismethodistoimposeacertainformuponthewhole
historicalstory,andtoproduceaschemeofgeneralhistorywhichisbound
toconvergebeautifullyuponthepresentalldemonstratingthroughoutthe
agestheworkingsofanobviousprincipleofprogress.
HerbertButterfield,TheWhigInterpretationofHistory

Ifthisisthebestofallpossibleworlds,hesaidtohimself,whatcanthe
restbelike?
Voltaire,Candide

Itisdifficulttorememberanarticleinanintellectualpoliticalquarterlythat
madeasbigasplashasdidFrancisFukuyamasTheEndofHistory?
whenitappearedintheSummer1989issueofTheNationalInterest.While
theresponsewasfarfromunanimouslyfavorable,itwasextraordinarily
largeandpassionate.SuchprominentfiguresasAllanBloom,Irving
Kristol,GertrudeHimmelfarb,SamuelP.Huntington,andDanielPatrick
MoynihanwroteinthepagesofTheNationalInteresttocommentonthe
fifteenpagepiece.Thearticlebecamesomethingofacauseclbre,
attractingheatedcommentaryacrosstheU.S.aswellasinEurope,Asia,
andSouthAmerica.Itsmillennariantitle,sansquestionmark,soonbecame
aslogantobebruitedaboutinWashingtonthinktanks,thepress,andthe
academy.TheyoungFrancisFukuyama,thenadeputydirectoroftheU.S.
StateDepartmentsPolicyPlanningStaff,quicklyemergedasaminor
celebrity,repletewithapositionattheRANDcorporationandagenerous
bookcontractallowinghimtoexpandonhisideas.Eventhosewhotook
issuewiththearticleIdontbelieveawordofit,wasIrvingKristols
rejoindertoitsmainthesiswerecarefultopraisetheauthorsintellectual
sophistication.Rarelyhasthewordbrilliantbeenusedwithsuchcheery
abandon:perhapshere,intheresponsetoTheEndofHistory?,were
thosethousandpointsoflightwehadbeenhearingsomuchaboutatthe
time.

Whythefuss?WritingatamomentwhenCommunisimwaseverywherein
retreat,itwashardlysurprisingthatFrancisFukuyamashouldhave
proclaimedtheendoftheColdWarandunabashedvictoryofeconomic
andpoliticalliberalism.Suchproclamationswerealreadylegion.What
commandedattentionwassomethingfarmoreradical.Claimingto
distinguishbetweenwhatisessentialandwhatiscontingentoraccidental
inworldhistory,FrancisFukuyamawrotethat

WhatwearewitnessingisnotjusttheendoftheColdWar,ora
passingofaparticularperiodofpostwarhistory,buttheendof
historyassuch:thatis,theendpointofmankindsideological
evolutionandtheuniversalizationofWesternliberaldemocracy
asthefinalformofhumangovernment.

Theendofhistoryassuch,theevolutionandtheuniversalizationof
Westernliberaldemocracyasthefinalformofhumangovernment:these
werethesortsofstatementsalongwithFrancisFukuyamasprofessed
convictionthattheidealwillgovernthematerialworldinthelongrun
thatrangthealarm.

SomeofthenegativeresponsestoFrancisFukuyamasarticle,ashewas
quicktopointout,werebasedonasimplisticmisreadingofhisthesis.For
inproclaimingthattheendofhistoryhadarrivedintheformoftriumphant
liberaldemocracy,FrancisFukuyamadidnotmeanthattheworldwould
henceforthbefreefromtumult,politicalcontention,orintractablesocial
problems.Moreover,hewascarefultonotethatthevictoryofliberalism
hasoccurredprimarilyintherealmofideasorconsciousnessandisasyet
incompleteintherealormaterialworld.

Whathedidmaintain,however,wasthatliberaldemocracywasthebest
conceivablesocialpoliticalsystemforfosteringfreedomandtherefore
becausetheidealwillgovernthematerialworldinthelongrunhealso
claimedthatliberaldemocracywouldnotbesupersededbyabetteror
higherformofgovernment.AccordingtoFrancisFukuyama,otherforms
ofgovernment,frommonarchytocommunismtofascism,hadfailed
becausetheywereimperfectvehiclesforfreedomliberaldemocracy,
allowingmankindthegreatestfreedompossible,hadtriumphedbecauseit
bestinstantiatedtheideal.Inthissense,whatMr.Fukuyamaenvisagedwas
nottheendofhistoryunderstoodasthelowercaserealmofdaily
occasionsandeventsbuttheendofHistory:anevolutionaryprocessthat
representedfreedomsselfrealizationintheworld.Theendhehadin
mindwasinthenatureofatelos:morefulfillmentthancompletionor
finish.

True,onemightstillaskwhetherthecareerofHistorysounderstoodis
anythingmorethanaspeculativefancywhether,indeed,theambitionto
distinguishbetweenwhatisessentialandwhatiscontingentoraccidental
inworldhistoryisnotbootless,givenmanslimitedvisionandimperfect
knowledge.Inanyevent,theideaoftheendofHistoryishardlynovel.In
oneformoranother,itisacomponentofmanymythsandreligions
includingChristianity,withitsvisionoftheSecondComing.Andanyone
familiarwiththeintersticesofnineteenthcenturyGermanphilosophywill
rememberthattheendofHistoryalsofiguresprominentlyinthe
philosophiesofG.W.F.HegelandhisdisgruntledfollowerKarlMarx.Itis
perhapsworthnoting,too,thatoneimportantdifferencebetweenmost
religiousspeculationabouttheendofHistoryandversionspropagatedby
philosophersishubris:orthodoxChristianity,forexample,isgratifyingly
indefiniteaboutthedateofthiseventuality.Hegelharborednosuchdoubts
orhesitations.WhathecalledthelaststageofHistory,ourworld,ourown
timewasusheredinbyNapoleonsarmiesattheBattleofJenainOctober
1806.This,FrancisFukuyamawrites,Hegelsawthevictoryofthe
idealsoftheFrenchrevolution,andtheimminentuniversalizationofthe
stateincorporatingtheprinciplesofliberaldemocracy.ItisFrancis
Fukuyamasviewthatthepresentworldseemstoconfirmthatthe
fundamentalprinciplesofsociopoliticalorganizationhavenotadvanced
terriblyfarsince1806.

AsFrancisFukuyamaacknowledges,thephilosophyofHegel,especiallyas
interpretedbytheRussianbornMarxistphilosopherandFrenchbureaucrat
AlexandreKojve,wasthechieftheoreticalinspirationforTheEndof
History?WhateverelsecanbesaidofHegelsphilosophy,orits
interpretationbyKojve,therecanbenodoubtthatitdemandsan
extraordinarilycerebralviewoftheworld.Inthefamouslecturesthathe
gaveinthe1930sonHegelsfirstbook,ThePhenomenologyofSpirit,
KojvetellsusthatHistorycannotbetrulyunderstoodwithout
thePhenomenology,and,moreover,thatthereisHistorybecausethereis
philosophyandinorderthattheremaybePhilosophy.Forthoseless
persuadedofphilosophysdeterminativeimportanceinhumanaffairs,such
statementsmayhelpexplainwhyHegel,intheprefaceto
thePhenomenology,shouldhavedefinedthetrueasderbacchantische
Taumel,andemkeinGliednichttrunkenist:theBacchanalianwhirlin
whichnomemberisnotdrunk.Inebriationofsomesort,atanyrate,would
seemdesirablewhenenteringsuchheadywaters.

Curiously,FrancisFukuyamasattitudetowardtheendofHistoryisdeeply
ambivalent.Ontheonehand,faithfulHegelianthatheis,heregardsitas
thefinaltriumphoffreedom.Hespeaksofnationsorpartsoftheworldthat
arestillstuckinhistoryormiredinhistory,asifresidenceintherealm
ofhistoryweresomethingitbehoovedustochange.Ontheotherhand,he
foreseesthattheendofhistorywillbeaverysadtime,partlybecausehe
believesthatthethingsthatoncecalledforthdaring,courage,imagination,
andidealismwillbereplacedbyeconomiccalculation,andpartlybecause
intheposthistoricalperiodtherewillbeneitherartnorphilosophy,just
theperpetualcaretakingofthemuseumofhumanhistory.Thushe
acknowledgesapowerfulnostalgiaforthetimewhenhistoryexistedand
evensuggeststhattheprospectofperpetualennuithatawaitsmankind
afterHistorymayservetogethistorystartedonceagain.

WhenweturntoFrancisFukuyamasnewbookonthissubject, 1 wefind
thathehascollectedanumberofcarefulhedgesandqualificationstoplace
aroundtheideasheputforwardinTheEndofHistory?Forexample,he
continuestoinsistthattherehasbeenacommonevolutionarypattern
forallhumansocietiesinshort,somethinglikeaUniversalHistoryof
mankindinthedirectionofliberaldemocracy.Butinsteadofpresenting
thisUniversalHistoryastherecordofanineluctabledialectic,henow
admitsthatitissimplyanintellectualtool.EarlyoninTheEndof
HistoryandtheLastMan,FrancisFukuyamarepeatshisclaimthat

Wecannotpicturetoourselvesaworldthat
isessentiallydifferentfromthepresentone,andatthesametime
better.Other,lessreflectiveagesalsothoughtofthemselvesas
thebest,butwearriveatthisconclusionexhausted,asitwere,
fromthepursuitofalternativeswefelthadtobebetterthan
liberaldemocracy.

Butattheveryendofhisbookhehesitates,suggestingthattheevidencefor
necessaryprogressevidencethatthewagontrainofhistoryismoving
intherightdirection,thattheleadwagonshaveinfactreachedtheir
destinationisprovisionallyinconclusive.Thegenerousresponsetosuch
tensionsisthattheyrenderFrancisFukuyamasdiscussionricherandmore
nuancedtheskepticalresponseisthat,inanefforttoanswerhiscritics,he
hasopenedhimselftothechargeofinconsistencyonfundamentalissues.
FrancisFukuyamaclaimsattheoutsetthatTheEndofHistoryisnotsimply
arestatementofhisfamousarticle.Perhaps,then,weshouldcallitare
presentationandexpansionoftheideashearticulatedinTheEndof
History?Dividedintofourpartsandsomethirtychapters,thebook
painstakinglypresentsthecasethathistorypossessesastructureand
direction,thatthedirectionisup,andthatweintheliberalWestoccupythe
finalsummitofthehistoricaledifice.Whatsnewisalotofdetailed
philosophicaldiscussion.FrancisFukuyamaprovidesasummaryofPlatos
speculationsabouttheoriginofoursenseofhonorandshameaswellasa
longdiscussionofthefamousmaster/slavedialecticin
HegelsPhenomenology.FollowingHegel,hepresentsthestrugglefor
recognitionasthelongingthatdriveshistory,andconcludesthatliberal
democracyoffersthemostcompleteandrationalsatisfactionofthat
longingpossible.Thelastpartofthebookisessentiallyameditationonhis
claimthattheendofhistorywillbeaverysadtime.FrancisFukuyamais
particularlyworriedthatthesatisfactionsoflivingattheendofhistorywill
leavemankindsodullandcomplacentthathisspirituallifewillatrophyand
hewillfindhimselftransformedintothatflaccidcreature,Nietzscheslast
man,describedinThusSpokeZarathustraasthemostdespicableman
whoisnolongerabletodespisehimself.

Likethearticlethatoccasionedit,TheEndofHistoryalsoprovidestwo
quitedisparateviewsoftheworld.OnonesidewehaveFrancisFukuyama
theconservativepoliticalanalyst,commentinginlithe,wellinformedprose
onthestateoftheworld.Thisgentlemanishardheaded,wry,andfullof
quietlywittyobiterdicta.InAmericatoday,hewrites,wefeelentitledto
criticizeanotherpersonssmokinghabits,butnothisorherreligiousbeliefs
ormoralbehavior.Moreover,thisFrancisFukuyamarecognizesthat,
whetherornotweareattheendofHistory,nothinghashappenedtocancel
anationsneedforvigilance:nostatethatvaluesitsindependence,he
insists,canignoretheneedfordefensemodernization.Indeed,one
imaginesthathewouldaccedewholeheartedlytothewiseobservationof
theRomanmilitarycommentatorFlaviusVegetius:sivispacem,para
bellum(Ifyouwantpeace,prepareforwar).Oneisnotsurprisedtofind
endorsementsonthebookjacketfromsuchwellknownfiguresasCharles
Krauthammer,GeorgeF.Will,andEduardShevardnadze.

OntheothersidewehaveFrancisFukuyamathephilosopher,impressively
erudite,deeplycommittedtoaneoHegelianviewofthehistoricalprocess.
ThisFrancisFukuyamaseemstoputgreaterstockinideasthanfacts
(indeed,onesuspectsthathewouldscornthedistinctionbetweenideasand
factsasanartificialconstruct).Hespeaksoftenaboutthemotoror
andthecompleteabsenceofcoherenttheoreticalalternativestoliberal
democracy.Heevensuggeststhatthepresentformofsocialandpolitical
organizationiscompletelysatisfyingtohumanbeingsintheirmostessential
characteristics.ItisnotquiteclearwhattheMessrs.Fukuyamahavetosay
toeachother,thoughtheircohabitationclearlymakesforsensationalcopy.

WehavenothingbutgoodwishesforFukuyama1 aboutFukuyama2 ,
however,wehavegravereservations,notleastbecauseofthethreathis
ideasposetohismorecommonsensicaltwin.

Likemostworldexplainingconstructionsinventedbyhumanity,Hegels
dialecticactsascatniponsusceptiblesouls.Onceoneisseduced,
everythingseemsmarvelouslyclearand,aboveall,necessary:allimportant
questionshavebeenansweredbeforehandandtheonlyrealtaskistoapply
themethodtocleanuptheuntowardmessinessofreality.Itisvery
exiciting.Allofthereallybigquestions,asFrancisFukuyamaputsitin
hispreface,hadbeensettled.Buttheproblemwithsuchconstructsisthat
theyinsulatetheiradherentsfromempiricalreality:sinceeverything
unfoldsnecessarilyaccordingtoapreordainedplan,nothingthat
merelyhappensintheworldcanaltertheitinerary.Asthephilosopher
LeszekKolakowskiobservedinhisbookReligion,

Monisticreductionsingeneralanthropologyorhistoriosophy
arealwayssuccessfulandconvincingaHegelian,aFreudian,a
Marxist,andanAdlerianare,eachofthem,safefromrefutation
aslongasheisconsistentlyimmuredinhisdogmaanddoesnot
trytosoftenitormakeconcessionstocommonsensehis
explanatorydevicewillworkforever.

Whatonegainsisanexplanationwhatonelosesisthetruth.Thereare
goodreasonsfromtheriseofmulticulturalismtothestateonceknownas
Yugoslaviatobelievethatwhatwearewitnessingtodayisnotthefinal
consolidationofliberaldemocracybutthebirthofanewtribalism.For
thosecommittedtotheendofHistory,however,itssimplythatthevictory
ofliberalismhasoccurredprimarilyintherealmofideasorconsciousness
andisasyetincompleteintherealormaterialworld.

Amongtheunpleasantsideeffectsofadherencetosuchdoctrinesisthe
habitofintellectualarrogance.Hegeloffersthesupremecaseinpoint.
AbouthisfirmandinvinciblefaiththatthereisReasoninhistory,for
example,thephilosopherassuresusthathisfaithisnotapresuppositionof
studyitisaresultwhichhappenstobeknowntomyselfbecauseIalready
knowthewhole.Itischeeringtopossessknowledgeofthewhole,of
course,butabitdauntingfortherestofus.Notsurprisingly,such
arrogancealsoexpressesitselfaboutcompetingdoctrines.Thuswefind
FrancisFukuyama,supplementingHegelwithNietzsche,explainingthat
theproblemwithChristianityisthatitremainsjustanotherslave
ideology,thatis,itisuntrueincertaincrucialrespects.Howgratifyingto
beabletodocketthewholeofChristianityandfileitawayasanexampleof
mankindsspiritualimmaturity!

PerhapsthemostobviousproblemwithHegelsphilosophyofhistoryis
thatthenecessaryfreedomwhichhissystemmandatescanlookalotlike
unfreedomtoanyonewhohappenstodisagreewithitsdictates.Asthe
contemporaryGermanphilosopherHansBlumenbergobserves,Ifthere
wereanimmanentfinalgoalofhistory,thenthosewhobelievetheyknowit
andclaimtopromoteitsattainmentwouldbelegitimizedinusingallthe
otherswhodonotknowitasameremeans.Thetwentiethcenturyhas
acquaintedusinterrifyinglyexquisitedetailwithwhathappenswhen
peoplearetreatedasmomentsinanimpersonaldialectic.Wefind
ourselvesinasituationwhererealfreedom,asHegelputsit,demandsthe
subjugationofmerecontingentwill.ItishardlysurprsingthatLeszek
Kolakowski,writingaboutHegelinMainCurrentsofMarxism,should
concludethatintheHegeliansystemhumanitybecomeswhatitis,or
achievesunitywithitself,onlybyceasingtobehumanity.Onceagain,the
contrastwithChristianityisilluminating.ForwhilethegoodChristian,too,
believesthatfreedomconsistsinthesubjugationofmerecontingentwill,
heendeavorstoactnotinaccordancewiththeIdeaasformulatedbya
nineteenthcenturyGermanphilosopherbutwithGodswill.Moreover,
whileHegelinsiststhatwiththeformulationofhisphilosophythe
antithesisbetweentheuniversalandtheindividualwillhasbeenremoved,
Christianityhashadthegoodmannerstoattributealargedollopof
inscrutibilitytoGodswill.Byrefusingtosaddlemankindwithnecessary
freedom,Christianitypreservesalargedomainfortheexerciseof
individualfreedomineverydaylife.

Mr.FukuyamascommitmenttotheHegeliandialecticleadshimtosome
strangeinversions.Earlyoninhisbook,heremarksthatitispossibleto
speakofhistoricalprogressonlyifoneknowswheremankindisgoing.
Butisthisso?Isitnotratherthatwhatoneneedsinordertodiscern
progressisknowledgeofwheremankindhasbeen,notwhereitisgoing?
Andinanycase,whomshouldwetrusttofurnishuswithaccuratereports
aboutwheremankindisgoing?IsG.W.F.Hegel,forallhisgenius,reallya
reliableguide?IsFrancisFukuyama?No:history,ahumbleaccountofhow
manhaslivedandsuffered,iswhatwerequiretodeclareprogress,not
prophecy.

Itisimportanttostressthattheissueisnotwhethermankindhasmade
progressoverthemillennia.Surelyithas.Theexactnatureandextentof
theprogresscanbemeasuredinanynumberofways.Thematerialprogress
ofmankindhasbeenstaggering,especiallyinthelasttwohundredyears.
Dittoformankindspoliticalprogress,despitethetyranniesanddespotisms
thatremain.AsFrancisFukuyamapointsout,in1790therewereonlythree
liberaldemocraciesintheworld:theUnitedStates,France,and
Switzerland.Today,therearesixtyone.Thatisremarkableprogress.Butit
isalsocontingentprogress,reversiblebythesamemeansthataccomplished
itinthefirstplace:theeffortsofindividualmenandwomen.

Indeed,oneofthegreatcasualitiesofHegelssystemisthewholerealmof
individualinitiative.FrancisFukuyamahastoldusthatinthepost
historicalperiodtherewillbeneitherartnorphilosophy,preciselybecause
attheendofHistorynothingremainsforthosedisciplinestoaccomplish.
Buthowoften,evenbeforeHegel,hasthatendbeenproclaimed.Gilbert
Murray,inTheClassicalTraditioninPoetry,recalledbeingtoldthatone
oftheveryearliestpoemsunearthedinBabyloniacontainsalamentthatall
reasonablesubjectsforliteraturearealreadyexhausted.Andjustaboutthe
timeHegelwasproclaimingtheendofHistory,wefindtheFrenchpainter
EugneDelacroixobservingthatThoseveryoneswhobelievethat
everythinghasbeensaidanddone,willgreetyouasnewandyetwillclose
thedoorbehindyou.Andthentheywillsayagainthateverythinghasbeen
doneandsaid.

OneofthemostseriousmoralproblemswiththeideaoftheendofHistory
isthatitimplacablytransformseverythingoutsidethepurviewofthetheory
intoahistoricalaccidentorexception,drainingitofmoralsignificance.
Hegelssystemtellsuswhathastohappenwhatactuallydoeshappenturns
outnottomattermuch.FrancisFukuyamaadmitsthatwehaveno
guaranteesthatthefuturewillnotproducemoreHitlersorPolPots.Butin
hisview,evil,e.g.theevilwhichproducedtheHolocaust,canslowdown
butnotderailthelocomotiveofHistory.More:Attheendofthe
twentiethcentury,hewrites,HitlerandStalinappeartobebypathsof
historythatledtodeadends,ratherthanrealalternativesforhumansocial
organization.Butwhatcanthismean?TheLisbonearthquakeof1755was
thetragedythatsparkedCandide,VoltairesattackonLeibnizsdictumthat
ourswasnecessarilythebestofallpossibleworlds.Whatphilosophical
empyreanneedoneinhabitinordertoregardthecourseofhistorysince
UniversalHistorythatrelegatestheconflagrationsoftwoworldwarsand
theunspeakabletyrannyofHitlerandStalintoepiphenomenalbypaths?I
submitthatanytheorywhichregardsWorldWarIIasamomentarywrinkle
onthepathoffreedomisinneedofseriousrethinking.

IfFrancisFukuyamascommitmenttoHegelisitselfproblematic,soat
timesishisinterpretationofHegelsteaching.Foritisnotatallclearthat
Hegelhimselfwasachampionofanythinglikewhatwecallliberal
democracy.FrancisFukuyamacomplainsthatpeoplehavelabeledHegela
reactionaryapologistforthePrussianmonarchy,aforerunneroftwentieth
centurytotalitarianism,andadifficulttoreadmetaphysician.Lets
grantthatthebitabouttotalitarianismismoot.Whatabouttherest?Noone
isgoingtogiveHegelaprizeforlimpidprose.Perhaps,asFrancis
Fukuyamasays,Hegelwasparexcellencethephilosopheroffreedom.
Perhaps.Certainlyhetalkedaboutfreedomagreatdeal.Hewasfond,for
example,ofclaimingthattheHistoryoftheWorldisnothingotherthan
theprogressoftheconsciousnessofFreedom.Wemustofcoursehopethat
thatnotionisaconsolationtothemultitudeswhomthedialectichas
consignedtotheuncomfortable(but,alas,necessary)roleofunfreedomin
thelowercasedaytodayhistoryweallmerelylivethrough.

Butliberaldemocracy?Nodoubtitwasjustoneofthoseluckystrokesof
fortune,anexampleoflifeimitatingart:still,itisremarkablethatthe
Germanicworldofthenineteenthcenturyshouldemergeasthepolitical
zenithofHegelssystem,primusinterimparesofthosenationsonwhich
theworldspirithasconferreditstrueprinciple.Mirabilevisu,convenience
onceagainjibesseamlesslywithnecessity.Butquestion:wasHegels
Prussia,atthetimeofMetternich,ofFrederickWilliamIII,etal.,aliberal
democracy?DidHegelbelievethatitwas?FrancisFukuyamaissurely
correctthattohavealiberaldemocracy,thepeoplemustbesovereign.But
inThePhilosophyofRightHegelseemstothinkthatthesovereignshould
besovereign.Themonarch,hetellsus,istheabsoluteapexofan
organicallydevelopedstate,theungroundedselfdeterminationinwhich
finalityofdecisionisrooted,etc.Hesays,further,thatconstitutional
monarchysuchasweseeinoh,well,innineteenthcenturyPrussia,for
example,istheachievementofthemodernworld,aworldinwhichthe
substantialIdeahaswontheinfiniteform.Inotherwords,helikesit.

Oratleastheappearstolikeit.Inafootnote,FrancisFukuyama
acknowledgesthatHegelovertlysupportedthePrussianmonarchy.He
neverthelessmaintainsthat,farfromjustifyingthePrussianmonarchyof
hisday,HegelsdiscussioninThePhilosophyofRightcanbereadasan
suchesotericcritiquethatHegel,championofthePrussianstate,turns
outtruly,essentiallytobeanenthuasiastforKojvesuniversal
homogenousstate,a.k.a.liberaldemocracy.Itisniceworkifyoucanget
it.

ItmayalsobeworthpointingoutacuriousinconsistencyinFrancis
FukuyamasaccountoftheendofHistory.If,asHegelsfamoussloganhas
it,therealistherationalandtherationalisthereal,howareweto
understandFrancisFukuyamasprovisionalinconclusiveness?Indeed,
howarewetounderstandhissuggestionthatnostalgia,orboredom,orevil
mightrestarthistory?What,ismerenostalgiaamatchforthe
imperativesofHistory?CanboredomcontraveneGodswalkthroughthe
world,asHegeloncedescribedtheprocessofhistory?Iftheendof
Historyisalogicalandmetaphysicalnecessity,howarewetounderstand
FrancisFukuyamashesitations?Infact,hisambivalencecontributes
greatlytohisbooksvividness,foritprovidesalittlespaceforrealityto
enter.Butconsideredonhisowni.e.Hegelsterms,FrancisFukuyama
wouldseemtobeadisappointingdialectician.

Itshouldgowithoutsayingthatnoneofthesecriticismsismeanttodeny
thattheHegeliansystempossessestremendousaestheticappeal.The
panoramicdramaofabsolutebeingstrugglingtoachieveperfectself
knowledgeinhistory:itisanimposingtaleofathousandandonenightsfor
thephilosophicallyinclined.Theinconvenientquestionisonlywhetherthe
storyittellsistrue.Perhaps,asKierkegaardsuggested,Hegelwasaman
whohadbuiltapalacebutlivedintheguardhouse.

FrancisFukuyamasownaddictiontopalacebuildingshowsitselfina
responsetocriticsthathepublishedintheWinter1989/90issueofThe
NationalInterest.Inordertorefutemyhypothesis,hewritesitisnot
sufficienttosuggestthatthefutureholdsinstorelargeandmomentous
events.Onewouldhavetoshowthattheseeventsweredrivenbya
systematicideaofpoliticalandsocialjusticethatclaimedtosupersede
liberalism.ButthiswouldbethecaseonlyifonegrantsFrancis
Fukuyamaspremisethatweareinpossessionofasystematicideaof
politicalandsocialjustice.Infact,itmaybethatwhatweneedisnota
bettertheorybutlesstheory.

Inthisrespect,aspossiblyinothers,agoodantidotetotheHegelian
juggernautisthemilddoctrineoftheSpanishbornAmericanphilosopher
GeorgeSantayana.InCharacterandOpinionintheUnitedStates(1920),
SantayanadistinguishesbetweenEnglishliberty,whichisvague,
whichhedescribesasafoolishchallengethrownbyanewborninsect
buzzingagainsttheuniverse.Intheend,Santayanasuggests,
adaptationtotheworldatlarge,wheresomuchishiddenand
unintelligible,isonlypossiblepiecemeal,bygropingwithagenuine
indeterminationinonesaimsthatis,byrejectingtheinflatedpromises
ofabsolutelibertyforthemoremodestsatisfactionsoflocalfreedom.To
thepartisanoftheHegeliandialecticoranyotherfixedprogrammeor,as
heperhapscallsit,anideal,thiscapitulationtouncertaintywilldoubtless
seemstrange.ButtheDanishPrincewasright:Therearemorethingsin
heavenandearth,Horatio,thanaredreamtofinyourphilosophy.

1 TheEndofHistoryandtheLastMan,byFrancisFukuyamaFreePress,418

pages,$24.95.

RogerKimballisEditorandPublisherofTheNewCriterionandPresident
andPublisherofEncounterBooks.HislatestbookisTheFortunesof
Permanence:CultureandAnarchyinanAgeofAmnesia(St.Augustine's
Press).