Few essay titles have received as much attention, or as much ridicule, as “The End of History.” When Francis Fukuyama used it for his 1989 reflections on the end of the Cold War, he didn’t actually mean to say that historical change itself had ended; only ideological strife over the best means to organize societies.
At the risk of weighing in on territory claimed by historians, let me offer what I, as a political scientist, see transpiring. Countries, across the globe, many known for the relative vibrancy of their democracies--UK, USA,--are discovering that the institutions critical to the operations of state and society have lost legitimacy. They have lost legitimacy partly because they have been overwhelmed by the tasks they are mandated to discharge. Their funds are insufficient for the numbers they must serve-healthcare, policing, firefighting. An immigration that has grown needs and populations without carefully thought out policies to manage such outcomes is partly to blame. But there has also been an erosion of the notion of state sovereignty with the internet and globalization. The state, it seems to me, can still be the locus of managing this instability by focusing on rebuilding critical institutions. I think Max Weber had it right when it comes to understanding what politics can and cannot do.
Enjoyed the piece. Unfortunately, I think the rise of techno proto-fascism is endemic to all western style democracies. Private control of social media and its associated algorithms will deal the final blow to any restraining forces on capital. Regrettably, have come to believe that left-statism is the least bad option going forward.
Your piece offers an informative summary of the mess we're in, as far as it goes (which is not far from the ivory tower). How about less snark and more pluralist openness when it comes to those who are experimenting with how to combat the death of expertise and the collapse of the rule of law, etc? Calling Timothy Snyder's recent experiments with humor and mockery "puerile" is not helpful. Trump and Trumpism win when lefties squabble among themselves... which we often do, don't you agree Mr. Bell? There is room for all kinds of disaster nonfiction for those interested in engaging with it: Jamelle Bouie, Tom Nichols, Evan Osnos, Jeff Sharlet, and yes Timothy Snyder's provocative substack writings (that supplement hundreds of pages of thorough scholarship). These authors are not just riffing and snarking; they are doing their darndest to get the train of liberal, reality-based democracy back on track.
At the risk of weighing in on territory claimed by historians, let me offer what I, as a political scientist, see transpiring. Countries, across the globe, many known for the relative vibrancy of their democracies--UK, USA,--are discovering that the institutions critical to the operations of state and society have lost legitimacy. They have lost legitimacy partly because they have been overwhelmed by the tasks they are mandated to discharge. Their funds are insufficient for the numbers they must serve-healthcare, policing, firefighting. An immigration that has grown needs and populations without carefully thought out policies to manage such outcomes is partly to blame. But there has also been an erosion of the notion of state sovereignty with the internet and globalization. The state, it seems to me, can still be the locus of managing this instability by focusing on rebuilding critical institutions. I think Max Weber had it right when it comes to understanding what politics can and cannot do.
Thanks for the comment!
Enjoyed the piece. Unfortunately, I think the rise of techno proto-fascism is endemic to all western style democracies. Private control of social media and its associated algorithms will deal the final blow to any restraining forces on capital. Regrettably, have come to believe that left-statism is the least bad option going forward.
Your piece offers an informative summary of the mess we're in, as far as it goes (which is not far from the ivory tower). How about less snark and more pluralist openness when it comes to those who are experimenting with how to combat the death of expertise and the collapse of the rule of law, etc? Calling Timothy Snyder's recent experiments with humor and mockery "puerile" is not helpful. Trump and Trumpism win when lefties squabble among themselves... which we often do, don't you agree Mr. Bell? There is room for all kinds of disaster nonfiction for those interested in engaging with it: Jamelle Bouie, Tom Nichols, Evan Osnos, Jeff Sharlet, and yes Timothy Snyder's provocative substack writings (that supplement hundreds of pages of thorough scholarship). These authors are not just riffing and snarking; they are doing their darndest to get the train of liberal, reality-based democracy back on track.