.png)
In the 21st century, the global political landscape has become complex due to factors ranging from the rise of illiberal democracies to the resurgence of authoritarianism and the growing polarization within established democracies. Therefore, it is significant to revisit Francis Fukuyama’s thesis about the “end of history” in light of contemporary developments to examine whether history has truly ended or is repeating itself.
Illustration by The Geostrata
To contextualize the “end of history” thesis, Fukuyama in his work The End of History and the Last Man, which was published in 1992, argued that post the end of the Cold War in 1991, Western liberal democracy emerged as the ultimate and “most successful form of government”, which marked an end of humanity’s “ideological evolution”.
Fukuyama argued that after the Cold War ended, history also came to an end. However, “history” in this case referred not to ongoing events, but to the end of historical evolution. This perspective resembles a linear, secular form of theology, which is concerned with the final judgment and the afterlife. Fukuyama suggested that this endpoint represented the global shift towards liberal democracies and capitalism as the dominant political and economic systems.
While different nations may retain unique characteristics, their internal structures would share common features including material prosperity, free and fair elections, and equality under the law.
Fukuyama also opined that the universal adoption of this political model could lead to the end of military conflicts, as liberal democracies historically maintained peaceful relations with one another during the Cold War.
Edward Said, a renowned literary critic who is known for his famous work Orientalism, represents a school of thought which was vehemently opposed to western-centric theories, such as that of Fukuyama. Said coined the term “Orientalism”, which he argued was a western style for dominating and exercising superiority over the east (orient). Fukuyama’s work is a deliberate attempt to justify western hegemonic ideals by universalising liberal democracy.
RISE OF ILLIBERAL DEMOCRACIES
In 1997, CNN political commentator Fareed Zakaria published an essay in the Foreign Affairs titled “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy”. In this essay, he argued that democracies worldwide were increasingly giving in to illiberal reforms, and that the foundations of democracy and liberalism were quickly weakening.
He noted, “From Peru to the Palestinian Authority, from Sierra Leone to Slovakia, from Pakistan to the Philippines, we are witnessing the emergence of a troubling trend in global politics ie., illiberal democracy.”
Illiberalism refers to a type of governance or political movement that weakens liberal democratic principles, even though it functions within a formally democratic system. While democratic structures such as elections and legislatures may still be in place, illiberal regimes tend to undermine checks and balances, diminish judicial independence, and restrict media freedoms and civil rights. Illiberalism is often linked with nationalist and populist rhetoric, where leaders position themselves as defenders of the “true” people against elites, minorities, or foreign threats.
The term “illiberal democracy” was coined in 2014 by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who expressed his intention to establish a system which was distinct from conventional Western liberal democracy. The illiberal trend Zakaria observed in 1997 has only intensified. While the Western world may not be becoming less democratic, it is certainly becoming less liberal. Even more concerning, what was once a trend has now become a more practical reality.
CLASH BETWEEN "FREEDOM" AND "LESS FREEDOM"
The ideological battle between Soviet socialism and Western liberalism which existed during the Cold War and was predicted to come to an end by Fukuyama in 1992, may have resurfaced in a different sense.
The rise of illiberalism has arguably divided Western liberal democracies into two ideological categories: one which espouses absolute freedom and another which restricts existing freedom.
Wherever illiberalism emerges, it takes a familiar shape: increased corruption, stricter limitations on free speech and assembly, press restrictions, retaliation against political rivals, and the oppression of minorities.
Image Credits: Rightful Owner
For instance, in Hungary, the Orban administration has consistently eroded judicial independence, curtailed media freedoms, and implemented laws that restrict the activities of civil society groups. The ousting of Central European University in 2019 from Budapest is one of the recent examples of Orban’s attack on liberal institutions.
Similarly, in Poland, the PiS government has introduced reforms that undermine judicial independence and limit press freedoms, sparking worries that Poland is moving towards authoritarianism. The erosion of democratic checks and balances in both countries has sparked fears about the future of democracy in Europe.
The illiberal challenge extends beyond Hungary and Poland. Examples of illiberal movements which have gained momentum include Marine Le Pen’s National Rally in France, AfD (Alternative for Germany) in Germany and Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy in Italy.
The picture also looks grim for the world’s leading torchbearer of liberal democracy i.e., the United States. The overturning of Roe vs Wade has taken away fundamental reproductive freedoms from the women of America. Abortion is now illegal in several states of the US, with Texas not making exception even for rape and incest. Moreover, under the second Trump administration, the US is less likely to set democracy promotion as its foreign policy agenda.
Finally, in the Middle East, despite attempts at establishing democracy after the Arab Spring, there has been a shift towards authoritarianism and religious and sectarian polarisation. For instance, in Bahrain, the process of democratization has been influenced by the religious expectations of the Shia community. Similarly in Yemen, although the democratization process included Presidential elections, the transfer of power was hindered by sectarian tensions between the government and the Houthis, leading to Shia dominance in the north and east, and Sunni control in the south and west.
According to a report by the Freedom House, global freedom experienced its 17th consecutive year of decline in 2022, with 35 nations facing setbacks in political rights and civil liberties. The report emphasizes the growing attacks on freedom of expression as the driving factor behind the ongoing democratic decline. The number of countries and territories receiving a score of 0 out of 4 on the report's media freedom scale has risen from 14 to 33 since 2005.
It appears that history is not so much at the end, as Fukuyama suggested, but instead repeating itself.
It becomes relevant to analyse this through the lens of Karl Marx’s “Dialectical Materialism” i.e., in order to understand why societies change, grow or fail, it is important to take the material reality and circumstances into consideration.
The liberal international order which has supported global peace and prosperity for the past seventy years is now being questioned. This uncertainty threatens to create a scenario where the powerful exploit threats and intimidation to secure better deals from the vulnerable. Such a scenario brings to mind the dark times of the past and could signal the return of history.
BY RIYAN BURAGOHAIN
TEAM GEOSTRATA