The End of History and the Last Man Summary

Francis Fukuyama’s book does not claim that wars, political events or social change will literally stop. By the “end of history,” he means the possible end of humanity’s long search for the most legitimate form of political organization. Writing after the decline of fascism and the collapse of Soviet communism, Fukuyama argues that liberal democracy had defeated its major ideological rivals and might represent the final general model of government. However, he also asks whether prosperous and secure democratic societies can fully satisfy human beings. People desire not only comfort and material security but also recognition, honour, identity, struggle and a sense of purpose. The “last man” is therefore a warning about a comfortable person who lacks ambition, courage or higher goals. The book combines political history with the ideas of Hegel, Marx and classical philosophy.

1. “History” in the title means the historical struggle among rival political ideologies.

1. Fukuyama argues that fascism was discredited by the Second World War.

1. Soviet-style communism later lost legitimacy because of political repression and economic weakness.

1. Liberal democracy combines representative government, political rights and legal equality.

1. A market economy is not identical to democracy, although the two have often developed together.

1. Fukuyama uses the Greek idea of thymos, meaning the human desire for recognition, dignity and respect.

1. Isothymia is the desire to be recognized as equal to others.

1. Megalothymia is the desire to be recognized as superior to others.

1. The “last man” represents the danger that comfortable societies may produce citizens without courage, excellence or meaningful ambition.

1. Important quotation: Liberal democracy is presented as “the end-point of mankind’s ideological evolution.” The phrase means that Fukuyama considered it the strongest surviving claim to universal political legitimacy, not the end of everyday historical events.