Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 4 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Democracy | Fukuyama | Brocker I 806 Democracy/Fukuyama: is the model of order that relatively satisfies the human need for social recognition better than other systems. With the victory of this model, the battle for recognition ends and, according to Fukuyama, the driving force of history is stopped. However, this is a Pyrrhic victory, because the individual needs the fight. FukuyamaVsDemocracy: one of the shortcomings of the democratic model is social inequality. Fukuyama also does not predict a quick victory for democracy. The struggle for them continues between a so-called post-historical world (in the industrialized countries of the Global North) and a historical world (in the industrializing countries of the Global South). In relative terms, however, the democratic system produces the least inequality. The democratic system itself is a good to be aspired to. FukuyamaVsDoyle, Michael/FukuyamaVsRussett, Bruce: Fukuyama shares the thesis of Doyle (1986)(1) and Russett (1993) (2) that democracies are peaceful among themselves, but wars between democracies and non-democracies are likely. But he goes beyond that and sees a potential cause of war in the constant striving for recognition. Brocker I 808 Democratization/History/Fukuyama: For Fukuyama, the spread of democracy began in the mid-1970s with the - according to Huntington - so-called "Third Wave of Democratization". This began with the Clove Revolution in Portugal in 1974, then spread to Latin America, Eastern Europe and East Asia, and finally came to a temporary end in Africa. See History/Fukuyama, Universal History/Fukuyama. Brocker I 815 Democracies/MillerVsFukuyama/MaceyVsFukuyama: 1. Fukuyama overestimates the actual spread of democracies and their alleged consequences. He sees many states as liberal-democratic which do not deserve this name, e.g. Iran, Peru, Singapore. (4) (written 1992). 2. VsFukuyama: The interaction between capitalism and democracy does not even function smoothly in the USA. (1) 3.VsFukuyama: Fukuyama blurs the differences between democratic systems, especially between inclusive and exclusive democracies. (1) But it is precisely this blindness that leads to the misconception that an expansion of democracies leads to the end of history. Solution/Miller/Macey: Thesis: The story is just beginning! And in the sense of a struggle for the system that can best be connected to a capitalist economic system. Liberalism/MillerVsFukuyama/MaceyVsFukuyama: When Fukuyama speaks of liberal democracies, he makes no distinction between liberalism and democracy. In reality, however, there is a difference depending on whether rights take precedence or majority decisions. The wider the sphere of the Brocker I 816 individual rights, the more difficult it will be to organise majorities. Fukuyama's mistake is to describe democracies as liberal as soon as they recognize certain rights (property, free market economy). In reality, however, many of the states Fukuyama classifies as democracies are not liberal. 1. Michael W. Doyle, „Liberalism and World Politics“, in: American Political Science Review 80/4, 1986, p. 1151-1169. 2. Bruce M. Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace. Principles for a Post-Cold War World, Princeton 1993. 3. Jonathan R. Macey/Geoffrey P. Miller, “The End of History and the New World Order. The Triumph of Capitalism and the Competition between Liberalism and Democracy”, in: Cornell International Law Journal 25/2, 1992, p. 277-303. 4. Ebenda p. 281f. Anja Jetschke, „Francis Fukuyama, Das Ende der Geschichte“, in: Manfred Brocker (Ed.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
PolFuku I Francis Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man New York 1992 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| History | Fukuyama | Brocker I 805 History/Fukuyama: Fukuyama's thesis of the "end of history" refers to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the East-West conflict or the Cold War. This endpoint is due to the victory of a liberal-market economical Brocker I 806 and democratic system of western character through alternative models of order. The title refers to both Hegel's and Marx' thesis of the same name. History/Hegel: Hegel saw the end of history in the establishment of a liberal state. History/MarxVsHegel/Marx: the end of history is only reached with the worldwide implementation of communism. FukuyamaVsMarx: The enforcement of democracy and capitalism is at the end of history. Democracy/Capitalism/Fukuyama: both have prevailed because they best meet two basic human needs: Capitalism/Fukuyama: is the economic system that best achieves an efficient allocation of goods under conditions of scarcity. Democracy/Fukuyama: is the model of order that relatively satisfies the human need for social recognition better than other systems. Fukuyama does not predict a quick victory for democracy. The struggle for them continues between a so-called post-historical world (in the industrialized countries of the Global North) and a historical world (in the industrializing countries of the Global South). See Democracy/Fukuyama. Brocker I 811 VsFukuyama: His theses were received as not particularly independent. It was pointed out that they already came up under Alexandre Kojève. (1) See also Master-Slave Dialectic/Kojève. Fukuyama's book seemed too pessimistic to many critics. VsFukuyama: 1. The empirical validity of his presentation of history has been called into question. Brocker I 812 FukuyamaVsVs: His thesis is not to be understood descriptive but normative . 2. Fukuyama's interpretation of the historical process as progress was criticized. 3. The same empiricism can also be interpreted differently than it was done by Fukuyama. 1. Shadia B. Drury, „The End of History and the New World Order“, in: International Journal 48/1, 1992/93, p. 80-99. Anja Jetschke, „Francis Fukuyama, Das Ende der Geschichte“, in: Manfred Brocker (Ed.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
PolFuku I Francis Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man New York 1992 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Liberalism | Fukuyama | Brocker I 813 Liberalism/Fukuyama: it was objected against Fukuyama (BurnsVsFukuyama (1)) that he understood the spread of democracies with simultaneous regression of a struggle for recognition as modernization. Fukuyama is uncritical of capitalist development and the Western model of democracy. At the same time, the victims of capitalist development processes would also be marginalized. (2) FukuyamaVsVs: the real danger lies precisely in such a criticism that evokes the end of modernism. A de-ideologized form of liberalism, in which all ideologies occupy an equal place for the benefit of individual expressionism, is not possible without abolishing liberalism itself. (3) It would then no longer be possible to weigh up the various rights on the basis of a higher principle. VsFukuyama: See Democracy/Fukuyama. Cf. >End of history/Fukuyama, >History/Fukuyama, >Liberty/Fukuyama, >State/Fukuyama, >Universal History/Fukuyama, >Welfare State/Fukuyama. 1. Timothy Burns, After History? Francis Fukuyama And His Critics, Lanham 1994 2. Francis Fukuyama, „Reflections on the End of History, Five Years Later“, in: History and Theory 34/2, 1995, p. 34 3. Ibid. p. 36f. Anja Jetschke, „Francis Fukuyama, Das Ende der Geschichte“, in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
PolFuku I Francis Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man New York 1992 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Master-Slave Dialectic | Fukuyama | Brocker I 814 Governance/Slavehood/DruryVsFukuyama/Fukuyama: According to Drury (1), Fukuyama romanticizes the qualities of the Master and therefore negatively evaluates the consequences of the struggle for recognition (see Universal History/Fukuyama). She accuses Fukuyama of following Kojève's "fascist interpretation". See also Recognition/Fukuyama. DruryVsFukuyama: The struggle for recognition is ultimately presented as an end in itself and the rule of one individual as a better alternative to living in a homogenous mass. Solution/Drury: if Fukuyama had followed Hegel (see Master-Salve Dialectic/Kojève) his interpretation of the end of history would have been less pessimistic, for Hegel shows that the Master-Slave relationship can and must be transcended. 1. Shadia B. Drury, „The End of History and the New World Order“, in: International Journal 48/1, 1992/93, p. 80. Anja Jetschke, „Francis Fukuyama, Das Ende der Geschichte“, in: Manfred Brocker (Ed.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
PolFuku I Francis Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man New York 1992 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| |||
No results. Please choose an author or concept or try a different keyword-search.