His 'Invictus' movie example regarding creating a positive nationalism falls very flat when you take into account what South Africa has become subsequently..
Liberalism came from certain nation-states. Can global governance and liberalism coexist? Can failure to enforce the law of the border and democracy coexist?
Liberalism came from sections of the rising bourgeoisie fighting the remnants of feudalism. The owners of the economy don't need it any more and turn to globalism as part of the development of monopoly capitalism.
Ohhhhh I like the fact that Winston is pushing back against Francis, he’s really leaning into stereotypes and being vague. It’s so sweeping it’s almost like “twitter politics” naive and ultimately redundant.
His downplaying the significance of the woke movement means he has a very limited understanding of the world outside his viewpoint. The end of history turned out to be nothing of the sort & surely that failure to understand world events means he is not a credible voice on the future of global politics.
Wow, he was so wrong about the "End of History" and now he demonstrates he has no understanding of working class conservative voters either in the UK or the US. "People voting against their own interests". How massively ignorant and condescending can you get? I suspect he never talks to a working class people other than to instruct them on how he wants done the service they are providing.
@@mspacific1550 Really? You can't disagree with woke dogma without losing your job if you're in academia, the entertainemnt industry, tech... basically any industry, but there's no woke tyranny because you can criticize the president 😂 Damn, so free America is!
@@dimitrikorsakov2570 did you lose your job? how many are losing their jobs? 100 people? 10K? 100K? love how a few people who lost their jobs...for bad behavior is now a country wide problem lol
@@martinvanburen4578 Ok, let me walk you through this via the Socratic method: Why are more people not losing their jobs? Because they're cowed into silence and know they'd lose their jobs if they spoke freely, you moron! You think that's a bit of a problem? And even then, it's not like it's an insignificant number. Look through the Quillette archive. Those are just the people we know of because they or a journalist wrote about it.
I think mr. Fukuyama is sincere, but people need more than the promise of 'freedom' in a neoliberal global community for a sense of meaning and identity.
Well, I think that's why the whole transgender issue has resonated so much. In a world full of thousands of ethnic groups, hundreds of religious denominations that splinter people up. The one thing that is unifying is being a man as opposed to a woman or a woman as opposed to a man. After all, half the population are women and half are men. People can privately identify however they want amongst their friends. But the public sector must cater only towards the two biological sexes. Being a man or a woman provides certain norms, traditions, and expectations in various societies. Most of those are based on biology, hence women's maternal instinct and men tending to have more of a provider attitude. Sure some women lack a maternal instinct and some men are happy being a stay at home dad. But our norms are based on the vast majority. Now, we have a group demanding after thousands of years that what makes men and women biologically unique isn't actually all that important. Rather it's how you identify. People scientifically understand the concept of sex at 4 years old on average. You are taking what are among most people's first formative independent thoughts and throwing them in the trash. No wonder people are so resentful.
Fukuyama is totally deluded and generally wrong. Along with all his type, he does nothing but sneer at the 'uneducated', when they are generally far more useful to society that the supposedly 'educated'. It's hard to know where to start, it really is. But particularly disgusting is his singling out of India for some kind of Hindu supremacy but not mentioned various Islamic states where there is no tolerance of other religions whatsoever. What a pointless person he is I did learn quite a lot from one of this books, but even he acknowledged that this particular book merely brought together the work of others.
his main point, a liberal society can only exist if all groups share similar values. How does a liberal secular Western population share the same values with very conservative, tribally loyal, very religious people from say Pakistan. Where's the common ground on say Gay rights, freedom of speech, blasphemy, trans rights you can have a multicultural society where certain norms are common, the UK has had Italians let's say for over 100 years, but Italians are Western, liberal, and Christian, we have to face it a society to function needs a dominant culture, you cannot have 2 mutually opposed cultures that can coexist in harmony. 1 needs to win out. It's a remarkable simplification of culture, history and human psychology to say well we all want the same things, yet but that's not the point, it's how we achieve that, and some cultures simply cannot exist in the West or they will have to consume the West and it's values.
Yes But Francis kind of people work and get paid for an agenda . They have no logic . Neither do they debate with people like you and act as elites whose statements are printed all over on top newspapers like Gospels.
exactly, in 50 years time we are just as likely to be in a fascist state, as anything. Liberalism is a product of it's time that by it's very nature will cause it to end. How can you have a liberal society that survives mass immigration from people who will never on the whole share those values. so 2 things will happen, either their values will reign supreme or the west will defend itself and have to become illiberal in the process. We saw in France right now, it's a conflict between Liberal France and nonliberal immigrants, mainly Muslims who want to end Liberal France. So only 1 can prevail and in the process it will end it no matter the victor.
The cause of the financial crisis of 2008 was the bust of the housing bubble. A bubble that was made possible by the state because it wanted cheap housing for everyone even if they cant afford it. So the state did open the door for shady bank deals that caused normal people to take loans they cant afford. He really takes the easy way out by just blaming "the deregulation of markets".
I find his views quite naive; that an old liberal kind of status quo will win through in the end, as if neo-liberalism and it's nationalistic reaction will fade and become some kind of homologous state again. Personally I think we're on the edge of something far more serious and divisive.
i studied Philosophy back in the 90's and it suffered the same type of arrogance as this person, we know everything there is to know, and there is nothing new. We have worked it out, I told my tutor who was very influential in the field and me as a 17 year old , he was full of crap, of course in a polite way. i added so it's a dead subject in your view , so what's the point of it.
@@chrisohanlon69 Fake exasperation suggests a lack of argument. Guy claims his 'end of history' thesis has been interrupted by totalitarians, but that the end state will be the same. Is it you just don't like him so you're gonna strawman him?
@@AbAb-th5qe he sounded like any other disgruntled commentator we have seen in the last 7 years. His end of history schtick has now been widely discredited but he's clearly still in love with it and does not want to let it go. It would have been more interesting to see him respond to the intellectual ideas of the new right. I expected better from an academic of his standing.. it was disappointing.
Fukuyama thinks the right is more tribal than the left. Then proceeds to give perfect example of the left's view that used to be extreme but is now mainstream. Interesting. Glad Marshall is so evenhanded.
Hello Winston- I’m quite sure you’ll never read this but on the off chance this enters your ethos, I wanted to tell you how much I’ve enjoyed your interviews and you have a true gift for asking questions and letting the interviewees answer, without interfering or interrupting unless it’s truly necessary. That being said, I honestly had no fathomable idea who you ‘are’, per say. I knew there was controversy a while back, and it involved a fellow who played the banjo with a group called ‘Mumford and Sons’, but only having a passing interest in all genres of music, hadn’t really known what was occurring, and what transpired following. I’ve long been a fan of Andy’s work, and as I was watching a discussion with Peter Boghassian and Michael Shellenberger, they happened to discuss you and the friendship both had developed with many new people and your name came up. While discussing your name, they also discussed the issues mentioned heretofore, and that’s when I did research and discovered what had happened, and who you are. I’d like to convey to you my sincere apologies for what you’ve suffered, but to also say that from adversity, we have two choices; one is to wallow in self pity, allow unbelievably painful situations to define us or two, to learn from the experience, find a way to put one foot in front of the other, and go forward with a chance to begin anew. It’s heartbreaking to find that people you’ve relied upon and grown to love were never truly worthy of a relationship with us, but I think in these circumstances, that of difficulty and turmoil, we find who really is worthy of our friendship and love. You’ve found a true gift within yourself that I don’t know if you ever realized was there, but the world is a better place for having you in this position. I will go forward as a fan of Winston Marshall the journalist, who happens to play one hell of a banjo, and very much look forward to what life has in store for your future. Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create hard times. You have proven yourself to be a strong man, best wishes, Winston.
I really like Fukuyama and have read most of his work. I’m inclined to suspect that he may have slight biases and that’s not helped because he hasn’t presented evidence for several claims. I’m love to see him and Victor Davis Hanson push back on each other.
Hinduism is not a religion like the Abrahamic religions that essentially demand strict allegiance to a single God and to the tenets of religion and consider outsiders as barbarians or infidels. Hinduism, on the contrary, is an all encompassing and all accepting way of life where one sees the presence of the divine energy in every form of life. If at all, we resist something, we will only resist attempts to thwart free thinking in the name of religion. So don’t worry. India is safe as long as Hinduism is around. We will never invade or convert or treat people as infidels. We accept everyone as they are and we expect you to do the same.
Fukuyama seems to make A LOT of sense, but a lot of it seems like wishful thinking. It almost seems like he makes the most charitable case for issues that arise from leftism and becomes excited when discussing issues that can be used to critique right wingers. He also seems to flow with the narratives of the corporate media. I’ve yet to do a deep dive on him, but I’d like to know his thoughts on the idea that “people are naturally racist,” therefore pitting them together will never work in the long run, the average IQ of nations and its affects on how well they perform and lastly, liberalism being subverted by Marxism, which seems to have an injection of narcissism or resentment that inevitably seems to devolve societies. Also, him citing a movie to bolster his stance of a nation being capable of centering itself around sports wasn’t a good look. I need to see if he’s debated people on the far sides of the political spectrum.
I read some of Fukuyama's books with great benefit. He is a very intelligent and learned man. But he is also a little bit of a tragic figure who desperately holds on to the believe that liberalism will prevail, while it becomes more and more evident that it is in decline. And I'm sorry to say but the Ukraine conflict is somehow the paradigm of the overstrech of liberal ideas. The ex soviet countries have a rather authoritarian mindset, that the EU is struggeling with in Poland and Hungary. To believe that we can turn Ukraine, one of the most corrupt states in Europe with russian oligarchic structures, in a liberal western country is sheer hubris.
@@robertcook2572 no it's more akin if the Wright brothers trying to fly by flapping their arms. Do you think say Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran will ever be liberal democracies, if they are , it cannot be forced and will take probably hundreds of years
@@robertcook2572 There is a huge difference between Science , Technology and Culture, human behavior, instincts and genetics that mold and form a particular race or cultural identity for 100s or 1000s of years.
I think the title of this video may be misleading. The focus of the interview was more on the right wing threat to liberalism, which is much more dangerous.
While this may ultimately be true, I find that most of society has a pretty clear idea of how the right can be dangerous and where the line may be. It seems most people have little to no idea of when and how the left can go too far.
The man is a good businessman. He had the idea of writing a book with a provoking title. And for many years now is living well. The problem is with Stanford University. How they choose their professors.
Right so is that why Hindu terrorism is nearly a daily occurrence in India and even now abroad (Leicester riots?). Are you that ignorant about what is happening there? The nearly daily lynching of minorities and dalits? The Indian government is literally changing their text books to present a completely different version of history of India, ignore basic evolution and science, and even Hitler and Nazism is being spoken of in a more empathetic tone. The government of India, the BJP are the political arm of the RSS, which is a militant group that inspired Nazism in the first place hence the Swastika symbol. It really boggles my mind that that Indian Hindus still get offended when people speak out about what is happening there. Maybe don't support the BJP if you want people to see the eh.. liberal side of Hinduism?
Hindu and Brahmin terrorism is a serious issue now with daily lynchings of minorities and dalits. The BJP government is the political arm of the fascist group RSS which inspired the Nazi party. School Text books in India have been updated to spread false history of India and empathy for Nazism & Hitler. Hindu terrorism and extremism has also spread across the world too (Leicester riots?)? Stop supporting the BJP if you want to show the liberal side of Hinduism.
There are NO ISSUES in Modi's India regarding people of different religions. Everyone is free to practice his / her religion, whether Christian, Muslim or Jew. Unlike certain countries in the middle east which do not tolerate different religions. Btw, "Hindu" is more a culture or race than a religion. It also refers to geographic location (River Sindh). There are many atheist Hindus, similar to atheist Jews. India is thriving under Modi and people hate it .....
I do appreciate him and can even understand where he’s coming from. He explains his ideas very well and he’s the type of calm liberal I wouldn’t mind living next to in a society despite fundamental differences. The fundamental differences are still irreconcilable. - The arrogance of liberal idealists have brought about this time in society and civilization. Fukuyama can barely even bring himself to firmly admit that past liberal immigration policies and arguments concerning the universality of mankind and cultures evidently being proven as garbage self-destructive nonsense. Some of the worst deviations of Christian Church Civilizational thought and pre-suppositions of the Enlightenment crashing into a wall of abandoned but ever present reality. That’s not even getting into the effects of putting the TOOL of Liberalism at the core of culture and society as the “supreme moral good.” Logically leading to “ultimate material liberation” and equity viewing all morality, standards, family structures, traditions, homes, and even human biological nature as evil and oppressive obstacles to be torn down.
At around the 16th minute Fukuyama spreads the now commonly touted canard about Modi disenfranchising Muslims. Incredible how he gets away with with no pushback.
Hmmm is he a moderate, or a moderate Left winger - I think he listens too much to the what the extreme right say and not what ordinary people who lost jobs as a result of globalization. I find it interesting he considers the 'woke' movement to be unimportant.
Of course that's what you hear, he subscribes to the same club as Stalin ... All of societies ills stem from the ignorance of the human spirit and therefore it makes sense to restrict freedom and control only to the few individuals who are better than humans are. Lol.
The identity politics threat if you are talking about cultural groups is really not a left wing threat is it? There's a difference between promoting cultural 'patriotism' and chauvinism. In terms of whether or not liberalism is compatible with criticising cultural and lifestyle practices such as, say, transgender, that is a problem maybe with liberalism or perhaps specifically social liberalism where we are encouraged to say we detest, say, transgender but we'll fight to the death, etc, which may however undermine those lifestyles, although no discussion where it's a choice rather than an immutable characteristic is worse?
I have also wondered whether a threat from the left is the need for social cohesion based on something stronger than libetal values if socialism is to work, although the conservative requirement to maintain order is a bigger threat?
I'm always amused by fukuyamas phlegmatic pose as he's predicably hit with the "but you said history was over. Defend yourself!" Question. He never said things would stop happening. All you have to do is read his very short and accessible essay on the topic. Incredible.
Did Patrick Deneen ever actually say there's no difference between the US and Russia or China? For some reason, i seriously doubt it. On the subject of things like populist right voters being in favor of things line Obamacare, I think that's kind of been bore out, at least in part by Trump ultimately doing nothing to get rid of it. Also, have to keep in mind that for middle class people, Obamacare has, in some cases caused people to lose their Doctors and, in most cases, made their healthcare more expensive. The story of Obamacare is a lot more than just poor or lower class people getting healthcare coverage from Obamacare where they didn't previously have it.
He is brilliant when describing macro-level political developments and historical phenomenon. He is an idiot when he talks current events and advises others on liberalism. Just the typical ambiguous nonsense about how liberal societies are inherently superior and how all contradictions will eventually be resolved despite never explaining how. He said almost nothing of substance here.
President Harris: "Ah, good. The Air Force is here with those new round planes!" - This is a quote from a comedy film, President Harris in "Scary Movie 3" (2003)
Glad he called out the rise of Hindutva and Brahmin terrorism in India. It's a serious issue as it will trickle into the West. Leicester riots proved that already.
What have you been smoking or drinking lately? Direct your concerns at India's neighborhood. Pakistan has seen a phenomenal rise in Sunni Ashrafi radicalism (also a similar increase in Sunni extremism in Bangladesh and Maldives). China has undergoing a military expansionsist spree under the CPC and Xinping, and Burmese junta which kicks out Rohingya refugees every passing day to Bangladesh and India. A so called 'left liberal' (basically incompetent) regime on coalition politics that turns a blind eye to radical Muslim terrorism (due to vote bank political considerations), without any vision for the economy is hardly what India needs. Also, for your kind information, there is no such thing as 'Brahmin terrorism'. Unlike all Abrahamic religions, which have practised violence in one form or the other against non believers to their respective faiths, Hinduism has traditionally been one of the most accomodative belief systems. No one disenfranchised Muslims under the current regime. Under the citizenship amendment act, non Muslim (Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists, and Hindus) refugees who had escaped Islamist persecution in their home countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan), and had come to India before 2014, would have their applications to Indian citizenship fast tracked. These are the facts.
@@MigDataNo one really cares whether you are sleeping or awake. Radical Islamic fundamentalism and Pakistan sponsored cross border terrorism are real, however much the facts are sugarcoated to suit the media agenda.
Fukuyama has his definitions confused. He says he's arguing for classical liberalism when in fact he's arguing for social democracy. A reasonable criticism of neoliberalism is not that it was too suspicious of the state, but rather it wasn't suspicious enough. In particular the role of Keynesian monetary policy. "Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; and civil liberties under the rule of law, with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech. Classical liberalism, contrary to liberal branches like social liberalism, looks more negatively on social policies, taxation and the state involvement in the lives of individuals, and it advocates deregulation.[1] Until the Great Depression and the rise of social liberalism, classical liberalism was called economic liberalism. Later, the term, was applied as a retronym, to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from social liberalism.[2] By modern standards, in the United States, simple liberalism often means social liberalism, but in Europe and Australia, simple liberalism often means classical liberalism.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Oslo Freedom Forum is the training ground for colour revolutions. No problem in particular except those revolutions almost always cause more problems than they solve.
Of course :) becouse they coexisted for a long time. And what we now are sold by globalists medias as "nationalism" realy is patriotism. Becouse globalism wants to label all things patriotic as nationalism, becouse patriotism is a foe for globalism, so globalism have to label it as something wrong - as nationalism. And patriotism and liberalism can co-work nicely :) It means that liberal structures and liberal laws are main achievement and main award for those who like to be patriotic and that way they like to make solidarity of this national group and so only under the requirement of this solidarity we can be awarded by liberalism awards and goals and structures. I mean only in national, patriotic group who likes the solidarity the liberal way of life can work nicely becouse of this group natural solidarity. Becouse patriotic solidarity can maintain society despite all the freedoms of liberalism - that way those freedoms are realy freedoms and not a path to chaos and atomisation :)
"Moviemakers are thought leaders"?? Seriously? They are in the entertainment business. Since ehen the circus is a place for ideas? Who is listening to this guy? Just because he can write???
Is it absurd to suggest that you live in a tyranny when your government monitors all your communication and can jail you for opinions? That's the case in the USA, in fact such policies were passed by the senate, so Fukuyama is a hypocrite. Not only is he a hypocrite in referring to others as absurd, but he contradicts himself. In his work he admits that the belief in the superiority of Liberal Democracy cannot be justified rationally, it is justified in a myth, a belief (not unlike the myth that they criticize "neo-Fascist" restorationists for having) that they need to convince people of in order for it to be affirmed by the public. It is thus an irrational, thus a rationally absurd position to hold in the first place, what a hypocrite, I can't believe this guy is considered a great intellectual. Cherry picking debates must serve him well. And yes anybody that reads this may forward this to Fukuyama since I'm open to debating his ideas.
'The most intriguing aspect of this best seller is that its author is a former official of the State Department's policy planning staff, a RAND Corporation analyst and a Harvard Ph.D. in Soviet foreign policy. The causal relationship is not clear between this experience and the controversial thesis that liberal democracy as a system of government has emerged fully victorious over other philosophies such as fascism, communism and socialism. The notion that "history" has reached its end with the emergence of liberal democracy owes much to the ideas of Hegel and, more particularly, an obscure French interpreter of his named Alexandre Kojeve. But one wonders how this "feel good" thesis is viewed in Asia, Africa and Latin America, where liberal democracies are often fragile at best and where basic human needs are not being met. Even in Western terms this provocative tract seems more attuned to the self-congratulatory 1980s than the problematic years ahead. ...' Reviewed by Andrew J. Pierre Spring 1992 Published on March 1, 1992 www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/1992-03-01/end-history-and-last-man?gad=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw-7OlBhB8EiwAnoOEk5DGqedQT7pdMvLoUFNW1gegfUpRSKry8uT8Obc4xaK8EpRPu8lBjRoCsL4QAvD_BwE Hegel by way of Kojeve, is a heady mixture, but trades on the ignorance of a readership that is ensorcelled by a heady and rarified atmosphere, produced by the Hegel/Kojeve philosophical prestidigitations... Yours, StephenKMackSD
His 'Invictus' movie example regarding creating a positive nationalism falls very flat when you take into account what South Africa has become subsequently..
Yes, a risible example. For a start, the Roughly Words Cup of which he speaks was in 1995, not '96. And since then, SA has more or less fallen apart.
Huh. He's got a fascinating knack for getting things exactly backwards.
Liberalism came from certain nation-states. Can global governance and liberalism coexist? Can failure to enforce the law of the border and democracy coexist?
Liberalism came from sections of the rising bourgeoisie fighting the remnants of feudalism. The owners of the economy don't need it any more and turn to globalism as part of the development of monopoly capitalism.
Great interview! Really shows how Winston has read up in advance, well done!
Ohhhhh I like the fact that Winston is pushing back against Francis, he’s really leaning into stereotypes and being vague. It’s so sweeping it’s almost like “twitter politics” naive and ultimately redundant.
His downplaying the significance of the woke movement means he has a very limited understanding of the world outside his viewpoint. The end of history turned out to be nothing of the sort & surely that failure to understand world events means he is not a credible voice on the future of global politics.
So glad I heard this man speak at last. He talks nonsense.
Agreed
Wow, he was so wrong about the "End of History" and now he demonstrates he has no understanding of working class conservative voters either in the UK or the US. "People voting against their own interests". How massively ignorant and condescending can you get? I suspect he never talks to a working class people other than to instruct them on how he wants done the service they are providing.
His dismissal of woke tyranny is comical.
No he seems to have his finger on the pulse where clearly you live in a echo chamber.
@@mspacific1550 Really? You can't disagree with woke dogma without losing your job if you're in academia, the entertainemnt industry, tech... basically any industry, but there's no woke tyranny because you can criticize the president 😂 Damn, so free America is!
@@mspacific1550 but you don't lol...people who claim echo chamber, don't hear anything but their echo
@@dimitrikorsakov2570 did you lose your job? how many are losing their jobs? 100 people? 10K? 100K? love how a few people who lost their jobs...for bad behavior is now a country wide problem lol
@@martinvanburen4578 Ok, let me walk you through this via the Socratic method: Why are more people not losing their jobs? Because they're cowed into silence and know they'd lose their jobs if they spoke freely, you moron! You think that's a bit of a problem? And even then, it's not like it's an insignificant number. Look through the Quillette archive. Those are just the people we know of because they or a journalist wrote about it.
I think mr. Fukuyama is sincere, but people need more than the promise of 'freedom' in a neoliberal global community for a sense of meaning and identity.
Sincerity is greatly over-rated. Many monsters were sincere.
Well, I think that's why the whole transgender issue has resonated so much. In a world full of thousands of ethnic groups, hundreds of religious denominations that splinter people up. The one thing that is unifying is being a man as opposed to a woman or a woman as opposed to a man. After all, half the population are women and half are men. People can privately identify however they want amongst their friends. But the public sector must cater only towards the two biological sexes. Being a man or a woman provides certain norms, traditions, and expectations in various societies. Most of those are based on biology, hence women's maternal instinct and men tending to have more of a provider attitude. Sure some women lack a maternal instinct and some men are happy being a stay at home dad. But our norms are based on the vast majority. Now, we have a group demanding after thousands of years that what makes men and women biologically unique isn't actually all that important. Rather it's how you identify. People scientifically understand the concept of sex at 4 years old on average. You are taking what are among most people's first formative independent thoughts and throwing them in the trash.
No wonder people are so resentful.
Fukuyama is totally deluded and generally wrong. Along with all his type, he does nothing but sneer at the 'uneducated', when they are generally far more useful to society that the supposedly 'educated'. It's hard to know where to start, it really is. But particularly disgusting is his singling out of India for some kind of Hindu supremacy but not mentioned various Islamic states where there is no tolerance of other religions whatsoever. What a pointless person he is I did learn quite a lot from one of this books, but even he acknowledged that this particular book merely brought together the work of others.
Spin spin spin. This guy knows he's losing!! 🎉
We are in late stage Liberalism. He is one cope after cope.
WHAT? people in the UK a more in favour of immigration since Brexit, utter nonsense
Another fantastic interview. They seem to get better every week!
his main point, a liberal society can only exist if all groups share similar values. How does a liberal secular Western population share the same values with very conservative, tribally loyal, very religious people from say Pakistan. Where's the common ground on say Gay rights, freedom of speech, blasphemy, trans rights
you can have a multicultural society where certain norms are common, the UK has had Italians let's say for over 100 years, but Italians are Western, liberal, and Christian, we have to face it a society to function needs a dominant culture, you cannot have 2 mutually opposed cultures that can coexist in harmony. 1 needs to win out.
It's a remarkable simplification of culture, history and human psychology to say well we all want the same things, yet but that's not the point, it's how we achieve that, and some cultures simply cannot exist in the West or they will have to consume the West and it's values.
Yes But Francis kind of people work and get paid for an agenda .
They have no logic .
Neither do they debate with people like you and act as elites whose statements are printed all over on top newspapers like Gospels.
I really think he’s understating the pervasiveness of “woke” culture.
Hegel was wrong, Marx was wrong, Fukuyama was wrong. There is no destination 'History' is heading towards.
exactly, in 50 years time we are just as likely to be in a fascist state, as anything. Liberalism is a product of it's time that by it's very nature will cause it to end. How can you have a liberal society that survives mass immigration from people who will never on the whole share those values.
so 2 things will happen, either their values will reign supreme or the west will defend itself and have to become illiberal in the process. We saw in France right now, it's a conflict between Liberal France and nonliberal immigrants, mainly Muslims who want to end Liberal France. So only 1 can prevail and in the process it will end it no matter the victor.
The cause of the financial crisis of 2008 was the bust of the housing bubble. A bubble that was made possible by the state because it wanted cheap housing for everyone even if they cant afford it. So the state did open the door for shady bank deals that caused normal people to take loans they cant afford.
He really takes the easy way out by just blaming "the deregulation of markets".
I find his views quite naive; that an old liberal kind of status quo will win through in the end, as if neo-liberalism and it's nationalistic reaction will
fade and become some kind of homologous state again.
Personally I think we're on the edge of something far more serious and divisive.
Decades of open borders Globalisation has hollowed out the West. Immigration particularly has been a disaster. There will be no good ending now.
Shame ‘The End of History’ wasn’t the end of his career. How many times can this guy be wrong before people stop listening to him.
The very same thought crossed my mind!
Well, Professor Neil Ferguson is the current world record holder, so this chap still has some way to go...
i studied Philosophy back in the 90's and it suffered the same type of arrogance as this person, we know everything there is to know, and there is nothing new. We have worked it out, I told my tutor who was very influential in the field and me as a 17 year old , he was full of crap, of course in a polite way. i added so it's a dead subject in your view , so what's the point of it.
Francis Fukuyama’s powers of understanding the world around him hasn’t improved much in 34 years 🤣🤣🤣
What makes you say that?
@@AbAb-th5qe wow
@@chrisohanlon69 Fake exasperation suggests a lack of argument. Guy claims his 'end of history' thesis has been interrupted by totalitarians, but that the end state will be the same. Is it you just don't like him so you're gonna strawman him?
@@AbAb-th5qe he sounded like any other disgruntled commentator we have seen in the last 7 years. His end of history schtick has now been widely discredited but he's clearly still in love with it and does not want to let it go. It would have been more interesting to see him respond to the intellectual ideas of the new right. I expected better from an academic of his standing.. it was disappointing.
@@chrisohanlon69 It doesn't yet seem discredited to me. But to sum up you think he's a hack and like a one trick pony?
I found his response to whether liberalism and nationalism can coexist extremely vague and even contradictory.
He's a sophist
Fukuyama thinks the right is more tribal than the left. Then proceeds to give perfect example of the left's view that used to be extreme but is now mainstream. Interesting. Glad Marshall is so evenhanded.
'Liberalism is humanist totalitarianism' - Henry Sire.
🎯
Liberalism dont exist,it is false...West have double standard and beyond everything west is totalitarism.on finest way...
Ironic that this man's fame flows from making a spectacularly inaccurate prediction.
Hello Winston- I’m quite sure you’ll never read this but on the off chance this enters your ethos, I wanted to tell you how much I’ve enjoyed your interviews and you have a true gift for asking questions and letting the interviewees answer, without interfering or interrupting unless it’s truly necessary.
That being said, I honestly had no fathomable idea who you ‘are’, per say. I knew there was controversy a while back, and it involved a fellow who played the banjo with a group called ‘Mumford and Sons’, but only having a passing interest in all genres of music, hadn’t really known what was occurring, and what transpired following. I’ve long been a fan of Andy’s work, and as I was watching a discussion with Peter Boghassian and Michael Shellenberger, they happened to discuss you and the friendship both had developed with many new people and your name came up. While discussing your name, they also discussed the issues mentioned heretofore, and that’s when I did research and discovered what had happened, and who you are.
I’d like to convey to you my sincere apologies for what you’ve suffered, but to also say that from adversity, we have two choices; one is to wallow in self pity, allow unbelievably painful situations to define us or two, to learn from the experience, find a way to put one foot in front of the other, and go forward with a chance to begin anew. It’s heartbreaking to find that people you’ve relied upon and grown to love were never truly worthy of a relationship with us, but I think in these circumstances, that of difficulty and turmoil, we find who really is worthy of our friendship and love.
You’ve found a true gift within yourself that I don’t know if you ever realized was there, but the world is a better place for having you in this position.
I will go forward as a fan of Winston Marshall the journalist, who happens to play one hell of a banjo, and very much look forward to what life has in store for your future.
Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create hard times.
You have proven yourself to be a strong man, best wishes, Winston.
I really like Fukuyama and have read most of his work. I’m inclined to suspect that he may have slight biases and that’s not helped because he hasn’t presented evidence for several claims.
I’m love to see him and Victor Davis Hanson push back on each other.
He is uncurable communist
It is End of History, and the Last Man.
Hinduism is not a religion like the Abrahamic religions that essentially demand strict allegiance to a single God and to the tenets of religion and consider outsiders as barbarians or infidels. Hinduism, on the contrary, is an all encompassing and all accepting way of life where one sees the presence of the divine energy in every form of life. If at all, we resist something, we will only resist attempts to thwart free thinking in the name of religion. So don’t worry. India is safe as long as Hinduism is around. We will never invade or convert or treat people as infidels. We accept everyone as they are and we expect you to do the same.
Fukuyama seems to make A LOT of sense, but a lot of it seems like wishful thinking. It almost seems like he makes the most charitable case for issues that arise from leftism and becomes excited when discussing issues that can be used to critique right wingers. He also seems to flow with the narratives of the corporate media.
I’ve yet to do a deep dive on him, but I’d like to know his thoughts on the idea that “people are naturally racist,” therefore pitting them together will never work in the long run, the average IQ of nations and its affects on how well they perform and lastly, liberalism being subverted by Marxism, which seems to have an injection of narcissism or resentment that inevitably seems to devolve societies.
Also, him citing a movie to bolster his stance of a nation being capable of centering itself around sports wasn’t a good look.
I need to see if he’s debated people on the far sides of the political spectrum.
Good the see Winstom push back back. Francis might have some knowledge of the world. But Francis holds old stereotype views.
Name one tangible way in which Modi has disenfranchised Indian Muslims. Or any other community for that matter.
"End of History"?... 🤣
Fukuyama has no credibility. At all.
It's good he lived long enough to see he was completely wrong.
I read some of Fukuyama's books with great benefit. He is a very intelligent and learned man. But he is also a little bit of a tragic figure who desperately holds on to the believe that liberalism will prevail, while it becomes more and more evident that it is in decline. And I'm sorry to say but the Ukraine conflict is somehow the paradigm of the overstrech of liberal ideas. The ex soviet countries have a rather authoritarian mindset, that the EU is struggeling with in Poland and Hungary. To believe that we can turn Ukraine, one of the most corrupt states in Europe with russian oligarchic structures, in a liberal western country is sheer hubris.
Many people were similarly dismissive of the Wright brothers' early experiments
@@robertcook2572 no it's more akin if the Wright brothers trying to fly by flapping their arms. Do you think say Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran will ever be liberal democracies, if they are , it cannot be forced and will take probably hundreds of years
@@robertcook2572 There is a huge difference between Science , Technology and Culture, human behavior, instincts and genetics that mold and form a particular race or cultural identity for 100s or 1000s of years.
I think the title of this video may be misleading. The focus of the interview was more on the right wing threat to liberalism, which is much more dangerous.
While this may ultimately be true, I find that most of society has a pretty clear idea of how the right can be dangerous and where the line may be. It seems most people have little to no idea of when and how the left can go too far.
That Invictus ramble. Jesus I struggled on after that incoherent statement. We’ll done Winston for sticking with this nonsense
It is End of History, and the Last Man Standing. RSP.
The man is a good businessman. He had the idea of writing a book with a provoking title. And for many years now is living well. The problem is with Stanford University. How they choose their professors.
I think capitalism and socialism combined is a workable model for successfully running a country.
Wife was quick to notice that Marshall is wearing a T--shirt this week. Progress in sartorial matters...
He struggled with buttons
I'm surprised at his lack of understanding of India and Hindus. Hindus are out and out Liberals.
Modi and his gang are definitely NOT Liberals.
Right so is that why Hindu terrorism is nearly a daily occurrence in India and even now abroad (Leicester riots?). Are you that ignorant about what is happening there? The nearly daily lynching of minorities and dalits? The Indian government is literally changing their text books to present a completely different version of history of India, ignore basic evolution and science, and even Hitler and Nazism is being spoken of in a more empathetic tone. The government of India, the BJP are the political arm of the RSS, which is a militant group that inspired Nazism in the first place hence the Swastika symbol. It really boggles my mind that that Indian Hindus still get offended when people speak out about what is happening there. Maybe don't support the BJP if you want people to see the eh.. liberal side of Hinduism?
Hindu and Brahmin terrorism is a serious issue now with daily lynchings of minorities and dalits. The BJP government is the political arm of the fascist group RSS which inspired the Nazi party. School Text books in India have been updated to spread false history of India and empathy for Nazism & Hitler. Hindu terrorism and extremism has also spread across the world too (Leicester riots?)? Stop supporting the BJP if you want to show the liberal side of Hinduism.
It has and will always be a privilege to read or hear Francis Fukuyama.
Great interview good questions and excellent from Francis Fukuyama
There are NO ISSUES in Modi's India regarding people of different religions. Everyone is free to practice his / her religion, whether Christian, Muslim or Jew. Unlike certain countries in the middle east which do not tolerate different religions. Btw, "Hindu" is more a culture or race than a religion. It also refers to geographic location (River Sindh). There are many atheist Hindus, similar to atheist Jews. India is thriving under Modi and people hate it .....
That may be in true in some areas but to hand wave away the atrocities and crimes elsewhere is ignorant and show bias.
@DailyCorvid putting down insurrections to protect a democracy is not an "atrocity"....Modi has the duty to defend the sovereignty of India
I do appreciate him and can even understand where he’s coming from. He explains his ideas very well and he’s the type of calm liberal I wouldn’t mind living next to in a society despite fundamental differences. The fundamental differences are still irreconcilable.
- The arrogance of liberal idealists have brought about this time in society and civilization. Fukuyama can barely even bring himself to firmly admit that past liberal immigration policies and arguments concerning the universality of mankind and cultures evidently being proven as garbage self-destructive nonsense. Some of the worst deviations of Christian Church Civilizational thought and pre-suppositions of the Enlightenment crashing into a wall of abandoned but ever present reality. That’s not even getting into the effects of putting the TOOL of Liberalism at the core of culture and society as the “supreme moral good.” Logically leading to “ultimate material liberation” and equity viewing all morality, standards, family structures, traditions, homes, and even human biological nature as evil and oppressive obstacles to be torn down.
I’ve read most of Deneen’s work, not once does he mention Joe Biden 19:16
At around the 16th minute Fukuyama spreads the now commonly touted canard about Modi disenfranchising Muslims. Incredible how he gets away with with no pushback.
Hmmm is he a moderate, or a moderate Left winger - I think he listens too much to the what the extreme right say and not what ordinary people who lost jobs as a result of globalization. I find it interesting he considers the 'woke' movement to be unimportant.
How is a left winger? He advocates for liberalism.
Old Left - the definitions have changed with the arrival of 'wokeism' which is Left now @@epicphailure88
What I hear Francis saying is that it's all my fault.
Of course that's what you hear, he subscribes to the same club as Stalin ... All of societies ills stem from the ignorance of the human spirit and therefore it makes sense to restrict freedom and control only to the few individuals who are better than humans are. Lol.
Superb interview. The young chap knows his stuff😅
The identity politics threat if you are talking about cultural groups is really not a left wing threat is it? There's a difference between promoting cultural 'patriotism' and chauvinism. In terms of whether or not liberalism is compatible with criticising cultural and lifestyle practices such as, say, transgender, that is a problem maybe with liberalism or perhaps specifically social liberalism where we are encouraged to say we detest, say, transgender but we'll fight to the death, etc, which may however undermine those lifestyles, although no discussion where it's a choice rather than an immutable characteristic is worse?
I have also wondered whether a threat from the left is the need for social cohesion based on something stronger than libetal values if socialism is to work, although the conservative requirement to maintain order is a bigger threat?
soul is the unity of blood & spirit
I'm always amused by fukuyamas phlegmatic pose as he's predicably hit with the "but you said history was over. Defend yourself!" Question. He never said things would stop happening. All you have to do is read his very short and accessible essay on the topic. Incredible.
Did Patrick Deneen ever actually say there's no difference between the US and Russia or China? For some reason, i seriously doubt it.
On the subject of things like populist right voters being in favor of things line Obamacare, I think that's kind of been bore out, at least in part by Trump ultimately doing nothing to get rid of it.
Also, have to keep in mind that for middle class people, Obamacare has, in some cases caused people to lose their Doctors and, in most cases, made their healthcare more expensive. The story of Obamacare is a lot more than just poor or lower class people getting healthcare coverage from Obamacare where they didn't previously have it.
He is brilliant when describing macro-level political developments and historical phenomenon. He is an idiot when he talks current events and advises others on liberalism. Just the typical ambiguous nonsense about how liberal societies are inherently superior and how all contradictions will eventually be resolved despite never explaining how. He said almost nothing of substance here.
President Harris: "Ah, good. The Air Force is here with those new round planes!" - This is a quote from a comedy film, President Harris in "Scary Movie 3" (2003)
Glad he called out the rise of Hindutva and Brahmin terrorism in India. It's a serious issue as it will trickle into the West. Leicester riots proved that already.
What have you been smoking or drinking lately? Direct your concerns at India's neighborhood. Pakistan
has seen a phenomenal rise in Sunni Ashrafi radicalism (also a similar increase in Sunni extremism in Bangladesh and Maldives). China has undergoing a military expansionsist spree under the CPC and Xinping, and Burmese junta which kicks out Rohingya refugees every passing day to Bangladesh and India. A so called 'left liberal' (basically incompetent) regime on coalition politics that turns a blind eye to radical Muslim terrorism (due to vote bank political considerations), without any vision for the economy is hardly what India needs.
Also, for your kind information, there is no such thing as 'Brahmin terrorism'. Unlike all Abrahamic religions, which have practised violence in one form or the other against non believers to their respective faiths, Hinduism has traditionally been one of the most accomodative belief systems.
No one disenfranchised Muslims under the current regime. Under the citizenship amendment act, non Muslim (Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists, and Hindus) refugees who had escaped Islamist persecution in their home countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan), and had come to India before 2014, would have their applications to Indian citizenship fast tracked. These are the facts.
@@ubi_dubium_ibi_libertas lol, there's no Brahmin terrorism? I stopped reading at that point. Go back to sleep.
#HinduExtremism
@@MigDataNo one really cares whether you are sleeping or awake. Radical Islamic fundamentalism and Pakistan sponsored cross border terrorism are real, however much the facts are sugarcoated to suit the media agenda.
um...ya know....umm
Fukuyama has his definitions confused. He says he's arguing for classical liberalism when in fact he's arguing for social democracy. A reasonable criticism of neoliberalism is not that it was too suspicious of the state, but rather it wasn't suspicious enough. In particular the role of Keynesian monetary policy.
"Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; and civil liberties under the rule of law, with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech. Classical liberalism, contrary to liberal branches like social liberalism, looks more negatively on social policies, taxation and the state involvement in the lives of individuals, and it advocates deregulation.[1]
Until the Great Depression and the rise of social liberalism, classical liberalism was called economic liberalism. Later, the term, was applied as a retronym, to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from social liberalism.[2] By modern standards, in the United States, simple liberalism often means social liberalism, but in Europe and Australia, simple liberalism often means classical liberalism.[3][4]"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
👏
All forms of liberalism are full of contradictions.
@@epicphailure88 meaningless statement
I can save you the time of watching this. In a nutshell: tribalism and dogma are dangerous.
Samuel Huntington was right. Francis not so...
I've heard him in many interviews and he's always wrong about whatever he's discussing. Totally disconnected from reality
Oslo Freedom Forum is the training ground for colour revolutions. No problem in particular except those revolutions almost always cause more problems than they solve.
Of course :) becouse they coexisted for a long time. And what we now are sold by globalists medias as "nationalism" realy is patriotism. Becouse globalism wants to label all things patriotic as nationalism, becouse patriotism is a foe for globalism, so globalism have to label it as something wrong - as nationalism. And patriotism and liberalism can co-work nicely :) It means that liberal structures and liberal laws are main achievement and main award for those who like to be patriotic and that way they like to make solidarity of this national group and so only under the requirement of this solidarity we can be awarded by liberalism awards and goals and structures. I mean only in national, patriotic group who likes the solidarity the liberal way of life can work nicely becouse of this group natural solidarity. Becouse patriotic solidarity can maintain society despite all the freedoms of liberalism - that way those freedoms are realy freedoms and not a path to chaos and atomisation :)
I thought that history was dead!
"Moviemakers are thought leaders"?? Seriously? They are in the entertainment business. Since ehen the circus is a place for ideas? Who is listening to this guy? Just because he can write???
How can there be any threads anymore to anything?
Doesn't he realize that we've reached 'the end of history'?
I disagree with everything Fukuyama says. My only question is: is he a CIA asset?
Marshall tried. The other person is incipiently blah , blah, blah 😑
Is it absurd to suggest that you live in a tyranny when your government monitors all your communication and can jail you for opinions? That's the case in the USA, in fact such policies were passed by the senate, so Fukuyama is a hypocrite. Not only is he a hypocrite in referring to others as absurd, but he contradicts himself. In his work he admits that the belief in the superiority of Liberal Democracy cannot be justified rationally, it is justified in a myth, a belief (not unlike the myth that they criticize "neo-Fascist" restorationists for having) that they need to convince people of in order for it to be affirmed by the public. It is thus an irrational, thus a rationally absurd position to hold in the first place, what a hypocrite, I can't believe this guy is considered a great intellectual. Cherry picking debates must serve him well. And yes anybody that reads this may forward this to Fukuyama since I'm open to debating his ideas.
Ironically, various Western countries are only worse in how they can silence or jail you for opinion.
🙄
Uhhh, no.
ending redlining caused 2008
Underwhelming .
'The most intriguing aspect of this best seller is that its author is a former official of the State Department's policy planning staff, a RAND Corporation analyst and a Harvard Ph.D. in Soviet foreign policy. The causal relationship is not clear between this experience and the controversial thesis that liberal democracy as a system of government has emerged fully victorious over other philosophies such as fascism, communism and socialism. The notion that "history" has reached its end with the emergence of liberal democracy owes much to the ideas of Hegel and, more particularly, an obscure French interpreter of his named Alexandre Kojeve. But one wonders how this "feel good" thesis is viewed in Asia, Africa and Latin America, where liberal democracies are often fragile at best and where basic human needs are not being met. Even in Western terms this provocative tract seems more attuned to the self-congratulatory 1980s than the problematic years ahead.
...'
Reviewed by Andrew J. Pierre
Spring 1992
Published on March 1, 1992
www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/1992-03-01/end-history-and-last-man?gad=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw-7OlBhB8EiwAnoOEk5DGqedQT7pdMvLoUFNW1gegfUpRSKry8uT8Obc4xaK8EpRPu8lBjRoCsL4QAvD_BwE
Hegel by way of Kojeve, is a heady mixture, but trades on the ignorance of a readership that is ensorcelled by a heady and rarified atmosphere, produced by the Hegel/Kojeve philosophical prestidigitations...
Yours,
StephenKMackSD
How I got everything wrong and still had a job by Fukuyama