Is History Over?

[Threlizdun]

My ideal communist state is this.

1. No dictators
2.Tough immigration rules
3.total equality
4.only benefits for people who need them not because of themselves
5.Civil rights for all

1. You're not a communist.
2. You don't have the slightest idea what communism is
3. "Communist state is an oxymoron"
4. Civil rights for all and equality for all canny exist with your absurd racism
5. Nationalism does not fit with communism

[Soldati Senza Confini]

My ideal communist state is this.

1. No dictators
2.Tough immigration rules
3.total equality
4.only benefits for people who need them not because of themselves
5.Civil rights for all

1. You're not a communist.
2. You don't have the slightest idea what communism is
3. "Communist state is an oxymoron"
4. Civil rights for all and equality for all canny exist with your absurd racism
5. Nationalism does not fit with communism

^ this

[Azurand]

The Global Caliphate is already. Islam will dominate the World and you all shall bow down to us! Ein Ummah, Ein Caliphate, Ein Caliph!
For those who are wondered, this is not serious.

[Azurand]

My ideal communist state is this.

Communist state does not exist. The closest one is a Socialist state. But Communist State - nay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Communism (from Latin communis - common, universal) is a revolutionary socialist movement to create a classless, moneyless and stateless social order

[Niriburu]

Would you agree?

No.

Do you think that Capitalism has established itself as the final economic model of humanity?

No.

Are there going to be any more significant political and social changes in the Western world? Or is this it?

Expect some changes.

If so, what specific type of Western model will the world mold into? Social democratic welfare states? State capitalism?

Doubtful.

If not, what lies ahead for Humanity?

A new Dark Age.

[Sailsia]

In 1989, Francis Fukuyama wrote an essay speculating that the Western model of society, that is, a representative capitalist democracy, was the ending point of humanity's ideological evolution, nothing would ever surpass it. The rest of the world just has to catch up.

Of course I disagree with it. The world of 1989 is very different from the world of today, which should be proof in and of its self that his theory is false.

[The Nationalist Republic of America]

Yes and no. I think that a more eco-friendly version of liberal capitalism combined with Western democracy can last us another few centuries.


Our changes will be cultural. Let's speed up the process through increased secularization, shall we?

[Communist republic of altorus]

I am a communist I believe everyone is equal according to their ability

[Libertarian California]

Yes and no. I think that a more eco-friendly version of liberal capitalism combined with Western democracy can last us another few centuries.


Our changes will be cultural. Let's speed up the process through increased secularization, shall we?

What he said.

[Caninope]

In 1989, Francis Fukuyama wrote an essay speculating that the Western model of society, that is, a representative capitalist democracy, was the ending point of humanity's ideological evolution, nothing would ever surpass it. The rest of the world just has to catch up.

Of course I disagree with it. The world of 1989 is very different from the world of today, which should be proof in and of its self that his theory is false.

How so?

His fundamental premise is that liberal democracy isn't going away and will only spread; he is saying that a capitalist liberal democracy will be the final form of economic and political development. So far, he's been fairly right. Granted, there's only been 24 years, and no viable alternative to a capitalist liberal democracy has evolved yet. However, I don't think using the world of early 2013 and it's differences from the world of 1989 disproves Fukuyama's arguments; in fact, I think it might strengthen it.

[Cameroi]

Of course I disagree with it. The world of 1989 is very different from the world of today, which should be proof in and of its self that his theory is false.

How so?

His fundamental premise is that liberal democracy isn't going away and will only spread; he is saying that a capitalist liberal democracy will be the final form of economic and political development. So far, he's been fairly right. Granted, there's only been 24 years, and no viable alternative to a capitalist liberal democracy has evolved yet. However, I don't think using the world of early 2013 and it's differences from the world of 1989 disproves Fukuyama's arguments; in fact, I think it might strengthen it.

there is NO "final form" which he contradicts himself by both agreeing and disagreeing this to be the case.

[Caninope]

How so?

His fundamental premise is that liberal democracy isn't going away and will only spread; he is saying that a capitalist liberal democracy will be the final form of economic and political development. So far, he's been fairly right. Granted, there's only been 24 years, and no viable alternative to a capitalist liberal democracy has evolved yet. However, I don't think using the world of early 2013 and it's differences from the world of 1989 disproves Fukuyama's arguments; in fact, I think it might strengthen it.

there is NO "final form" which he contradicts himself by both agreeing and disagreeing this to be the case.

Well, I do agree with you Cameroi, but the changes between 2013 and 1989 do not disprove his theory, no matter how much Sailsia wants it to.

[Daynor]

there is NO "final form" which he contradicts himself by both agreeing and disagreeing this to be the case.

Well, I do agree with you Cameroi, but the changes between 2013 and 1989 do not disprove his theory, no matter how much Sailsia wants it to.

On a highly hypothetical note, as I said in a thread not so long ago, it is entirely possible that in our future we actually create androids with at least somewhat human intelligence. That would destroy labour as something of value in the marketplace which is a fundamental part of capitalism. Capitalism will do just fine at the point that robots make all/most of the goods, because we'll just have a massive service industry. But at the point the robots could be our doctor, if we ever get there, something new will necessarily have to come, most likely some form of communism since the catastrophic free-rider problem would be solved.

Not saying I know it to be possible, making human-like intelligence is, at least from my understanding, still quite possibly impossible. But just one example of how I think this theory is probably wrong. Stuff can happen. A meteor could put us back under god-kings, even. I don't think we know.

[Cameroi]

Well, I do agree with you Cameroi, but the changes between 2013 and 1989 do not disprove his theory, no matter how much Sailsia wants it to.

On a highly hypothetical note, as I said in a thread not so long ago, it is entirely possible that in our future we actually create androids with at least somewhat human intelligence. That would destroy labour as something of value in the marketplace which is a fundamental part of capitalism. Capitalism will do just fine at the point that robots make all/most of the goods, because we'll just have a massive service industry. But at the point the robots could be our doctor, if we ever get there, something new will necessarily have to come, most likely some form of communism since the catastrophic free-rider problem would be solved.

Not saying I know it to be possible, making human-like intelligence is, at least from my understanding, still quite possibly impossible. But just one example of how I think this theory is probably wrong. Stuff can happen. A meteor could put us back under god-kings, even. I don't think we know.

well communism and capitolism are just words we use to create this idea of a dichotomy, in a poltico-economic space that is really infinite and infinitely diverse in all directions. there is nothing particularly magic about anything we attach to either of them.

when the last human is dying, i doubt very much there will be still existing, a can't see quite how there can, any politico-social-economc "form" to have been "final". i also rather suspect, that as a species we will have many NEAR extinctions and overpopulation crisis between now and then, that any and all speculation as to final forms, can only logically encompass forms we have yet to even imagine possible to imagine.

[Samuraikoku]

At one point people in the past have asked the same question, don't you think?

[Maurepas]

I think we're coming into many of the shortcomings of traditional capitalism. Things like education, health care, etc., are things we're starting to realize aren't necessarily best governed by the profit motive.

I think the "final" innovation, if you can call it such, will be sort of a hyrbid, where we decide what benefits from being left to the private sector and what doesn't.

[Soviet Kogarah]

I'd say progress is more like a spider web than a line.

[Trotskylvania]

Given the Fukuyama himself has pretty much abandoned the "end of history" meme, I'm pretty sure the hypothesis is dead.

[Trotskylvania]

Though, we are approaching a fundamental possible "end of history" in our current epoch. We are possibly living in the terminal stage of human civilization, and it is far from guaranteed that we will be able to overcome the ever growing threat of catastrophic, runaway climate change, to say nothing of the devastation of the natural dynamic equilibrium of the biosphere and the natural biological diversity which it depends upon, and the exhaustion of fossil fuel resources.

[L Ron Cupboard]

It is a very interesting book, I would suggest people actually read it before debating the sound bite.

If the current Chinese model, where the state is above the law, fails in the next few decades, then perhaps his idea that a capitalist democracy is the most stable and successful way of organising ourselves we have come up with so far will seem more plausible.

[Norstal]

In 1989, Francis Fukuyama wrote an essay speculating that the Western model of society, that is, a representative capitalist democracy, was the ending point of humanity's ideological evolution, nothing would ever surpass it. The rest of the world just has to catch up.

Would you agree? Do you think that Capitalism has established itself as the final economic model of humanity? Are there going to be any more significant political and social changes in the Western world? Or is this it?

If so, what specific type of Western model will the world mold into? Social democratic welfare states? State capitalism?
If not, what lies ahead for Humanity?

I don't think so. For one, whether or not there are any ideological uprisings, the world is going to have to adjust to a world with limited natural resources at some point or another. This by itself doesn't threaten the Western system, but I personally believe that, even if the system is left unchallenged, it will eventually consume itself.

It costs $100k for an appendicitis in the U.S.

This is not gonna work.

[Donald Draper]

My ideal communist state is this.
1. No dictators
2.Tough immigration rules
3.total equality
4.only benefits for people who need them not because of themselves
5.Civil rights for all

There ya go, ya 'lil revolutionary you.

[Ostroeuropa]

Nah, firstly we got the clash between Islamo fascism and Democracy, then the clash between Capitalist Authoritarianism VS Liberal Democracy, and finally in my opinion, The clash between Syndicalism and Capitalism, then probably some future reforms.
Then theres the colonial period where we take to the stars.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

I think Capitalism will remain in the Western world.

If The EU can't solve it's debt problem i think all European countries would have to lend from China or the Euro currency would break up.

[Napkiraly]

No, it isn't. I'm not sure what the future will look like, but it won't be the same system. The idea that capitalism, particularly this form of it, and democracy with western values will a) Spread across the entire globe and b) Never change, is laughable.