The End of History and the Last Man

The End of History and the Last Man
Book by Francis Fukuyama

Has one person ever been so wrong?

literally everything he wrote was wrong

Attached: brainlet.png (1440x1557, 738K)

dumb nip should've stayed in da internment camp lmao

His actual treatises on political order and decay are pretty decent

>literally everything he wrote was wrong

Can tell you're a pseud because you take an author's main ideological work and pretend that it's his entire corpus and use it as a basis to negate his reputation entirely. Leave this board and actually read a book

everything he wrote in the essay, I haven't read the rest of his shit

The thing is, a serious scholar would never write a work that can be characterized as an "ideological" work.

Hindsight. It’s fair to make the assumption based on the climate.

>eastern bloc collapsed
>china was opening up
>US and UK prospering
>centrist parties dominating
>russia was a us puppet

It really seemed like the US had totally won and had reached global hegemony.

Historicism is poor practice in general.
Whig history, Marxism, Spengler's model, Evola's model, the whole weak-men-make-hard-times meme - they just don't up to close scrutinity. Facts are retrofited to the theory, instead of having the theory built off the facts.

Is clash of civilizations more accurate?

Because the need to theorize and need to build a historical continuum, are hard to over come. People need a narrative and those who can puzzle together a broader picture strive to find meaning in it.
The realities of power, unpredictability of events and overall increasing volume of events that are being reported simultaneously creates narrative chaos that ceases to fit into a narrative that can be spun.

Name a single 'serious scholar' who didn't write a single ideological work. Note that Fukuyama and many other serious scholars did repudiate what they wrote in their later, more analytical works.

Clash of civilisations is utter LARPy garbage