With Brexit/Trump and god knows what else, will there ever be a more incorrect theorist than ol' Frankie Fukuyama?

With Brexit/Trump and god knows what else, will there ever be a more incorrect theorist than ol' Frankie Fukuyama?

In his last book he literally apologizes, analyzes his errors, points out that he was being influenced by neo-conservative ideology, and attempts to create an updated world view.

Also Trump and Brexit less so than the failure of Iceland's financial institutions illustrate the failures of that book.

Tribalism and failures of elite institutions will always trump good intentions

The spoilered part is his thesis btw, not my opinion. badly put.

>Tribalism and failures of elite institutions will always trump good intentions

Thank fuck.

>attempts to create an updated world view

What's his updated world view then?

Or is it the spoilered part?

>Thank fuck.

Unless you are in sicily or nigeria, which are two great chapters in the book.

He leans heavily on human agency and tendencies towards group behaviors in the long term, and posits as his enemy Jared Diamond, and himself circa "Last Man"

One of his case studies are Costa Rica. As opposed to its neighbors, like Nicaragua, El Salvador, Colombia, Peru, Mexico, it was generally spared from the ecomienda system and its institutions were never plantation based. As the liberation happened, the elites made consistantly wise decisions regarding foreign investment, inclusive institutions, and generally anti-nepotistic behavior. As such it was spared the shitshow of the 20th century for south america, and though there is certainly wealth inequality, it has a robust and safe democracy with a strong manufacturing and tourist center. He gives credit to enlightened elites, and makes similar comparisons with Botswana and its dealings with DeBeers.

On the other hand, he points out that if Diamond was correct, Argentina would be a world power lol but their elites have fucked up every point. Finally he talks about Iceland, and how their elites failed them in the runup to 2006-8, and that overcame even their tendency for a secure well established society.

I am not doing the book justice though, read it and huntington and diamond for a real ride.

Note: I am another user.
>huntington
Sounds like shit judging by the reviews.
>Jared Diamond
He went full environmental determinism, but made some good points.

Not that interested in Fukuyama, mainly because I know him for his failed prophecy.

Am currently reading books from the emerging field of cultural evolution which combines environmental, genetic and cultural factors. Seems more honest than anything focusing on one of those factors alone.

Anyway, that aside, what do you (or maybe another user) think of this:

- Prisoners of geography by Tim Marshall

Considering reading it.

>Sounds like shit judging by the reviews.
Clash of Civilizations is incredibly influential

>>
>Not that interested in Fukuyama, mainly because I know him for his failed prophecy.

Why do people think this? It's like dismissing Marx's thought entirely because so many of the communist regimes and revolutions around the world in the past century have failed to take root or collapsed, or that Hegel is worthless because the Prussian state as it existed in 1820 was not the final form of government in Central Europe. I read End of History and take issues with some of his contentions (he bound neoliberal capitalism to democracy far too tightly), but if you think the thesis of the book is "liberal democracy and capitalism win guys, time for other competing systems to pack it in and go home", then you should actually read the book. He literally says that Islamism and Chinese authoritarian capitalism, part of the burgeoning "Asian values" movement championed by Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew, present significant potential challenges to Western-style liberal democracy, but that for the time being (the book was published in 1992), liberal democracy seems like the strongest system for human advancement, absent some unforeseen developments or the very rare but particularly ambitious people who are able to subvert the system for their own ends.

Just because events happen doesnt mean history hasnt ended

Trump is a typical populist and will disappoint his voters and everything will be the same

>It's like dismissing Marx's thought entirely because so many of the communist regimes and revolutions around the world in the past century have failed to take root or collapsed, or that Hegel is worthless because the Prussian state as it existed in 1820 was not the final form of government in Central Europe.

It's entirely justified to do both of those things.

>Clash of Civilizations is incredibly influential
Doesn't mean it is good. There could be motivations to read that book that have little to do with its quality. I don't think the Bible is such a masterpiece (though some of the stories are kind of nice), but it is still highly influential.
I am not saying I am dismissing all of what he is saying, but not that interested in reading him directly.
If it makes you feel better, I am left-leading and have become anti-communistic, but that doesn't mean I think Marx's critique of capitalism is invalid.

Also note I am skeptical of prophecies in general.

Francis: Do better

IN THE WARRIOR'S CODE THERE'S NO SURRENDER

>people associate a rejection of liberalism by the masses as some sort of decline in human progress
isn't whig history supposed to be mocked in this era?

>rejection of liberalism to an extent by a slight majority in two votes where a large part of the sample population didn't turn out to vote because they thought liberalism winning was a foregone conclusion

We'll see how permanent this rejection is in four years.

>Tribalism and failures of elite institutions will always trump good intentions

Sounds like human nature to me. Conservatives have always been more realistic about that sort of thing. Libs have watched too much Star Trek, they think that science and social "progress" will solve everything, but they don't recognize the evil within themselves that makes every utopia impossible.

The Christian ideas of original sin and "nihil novi sub sole" are pessimistic but accurate, and they've been accurate for ~2000 years. How long did Fukuyama's book last?

It's also incredibly flawed. And dangerous. It created a false meme that has a great impact on how the West sees other countries and regions.

That book is the true redpill

>dangerous
not an argument. One that I hear very often. Usually combined with "not interesting".

Swedes will know what I mean.

pretty poor argument considering the other posts in this thread desu. Plz explain

>human nature
spooked.

On my experience it's the exact opposite. Conservatives lack an understanding of human nature and think we'd all be fine with nearly nonexistent government running off our basic human decency and traditions.
Liberals know that's fucking horseshit and know that our institutions and government are all that protect us and make modern life possible.

The thing is we don't know what Brexit/Trump actually means yet, so don't jump the gun just yet. Tories are in control in Britain and Republicans control all branches of US government... we could still be heading in an ultra-liberal direction with just different rhetoric since the old wasn't working. An actual real alternative to neoliberalism would have to emerge but that doesn't exist today. Unless Trump is going to try to impose some form of neo-bonapartism onto America the general course isn't going to be that different.

Nick Land, when it turns out technology won't really go to the depth of plugging your brain into a computer