Criticism Of The End Of History

At the end of 20 century, the world pattern greatly changed along with the Eastern Europe drastic change and Soviet Union disintegration. Japanese American scholar Fukuyama proposed the theory of the end of history which aroused widespread dispute. Fukuyama thought that the history of the development of human society is that"take the system of liberty and freedom as the direction of human universal history", the system of liberty and freedom represented the direction of human society development. The failure of socialism in Soviet and Eastern Europe confirmed that the system of liberty and freedom is"the last kind of rule form in human society". Fukuyama's discussion about the theory of the end of history provided a chance for the people to appreciate the capitalism and socialism and their future develop after the cold war. Either the support or criticizing about Fukuyama's discussion of the theory of the end of history have dawn the widespread interest and attention from the theoretical circle in eastern and western world.Up to this date, the heat discussion of the end of history at the end of 20th century has settled down, and the social historical reality has incontrovertibly refuted Fukuyama's theory of the end of history. First, the failure of Soviet Union socialism reform is not the failure of socialism itself and the Marxism, but the failure of the rigid traditional system of planned economy in socialism, the achievement which China socialism reform obtained has demonstrated the formidable vitality of socialism. Second, after the cold war had ended, the entire world has been shadowed by the threat of terrorism and religious extremists, the local war and the unceasing conflict. Third, as globalization deepens, the frequent economical and cultural exchange brings the confusion as well; the multiplex choices also mean a difficult choice. Therefore, we have not seen universal victory of liberal-democracy system; our time is not the so-called the end of history of Fukuyama. Fukuyama's conclusion is the wrong, but his discussion is significant, which is also exactly the significance why we think over the question of the theory of the end of history today: on the basis of a new understanding about the theory of the end of history, reconsider the problems of our time, think these great principles which are related with human life all over again.The theory of the end of history was not originated from Fukuyama, but has a long history. If we trace back along the line of Fukuyama's theory of the end of history, we can find that it is a frequently discussed topic in modern times. The theory of the end of history stems from the religious ideas of judgment day. Hegel is the first philosopher who had systematically discussed this theory; he thought that the philosophy is the representation of time in thoughts; history is the externalization of the absolute spirit, a place where absolute spirit turns into realistic existence; history is the progress of free consciousness. After Hegel, many scholars have explained Hegel's thought from different angles; the most prominent one is Russian French scholar Kejeve. Kejeve had made a fruitful explanation of Hegel's dialectic of master-slave. He thought that the end of history is secularization and politicization of Christianity; he took this kind of Christianity as the victory of slave's ethical principle. After Kejeve, Fukuyama is another prominent figure. We may see a path of the development in terms of the theory of the end of history: Hegel- Kejeve -Fukuyama, which is the clue and for us to understand the theory of the end of history. The critique upon the theory of the end of history is not simply the critique and refutation upon its views, but a new understanding and definition about it, clarifies the different concept, denotation and significance of the theory of the end of history through Marx's Drury's and Drida's different understanding about the theory of the end of history. On the basis of these discussions, we clearly see that the history has not ended, and human society is in a continuously increasing process.This thesis is divided into five parts, the first part is about the discussion on history and its concept, which is mainly to clarify the contents of historical concepts, its origin and influence; the understanding about historical concepts is the key for our discussion on the theory of the end of history. The second part is the summary of the theory of the end of history, which mainly introduced Hegel, Kejeve and Fukuyama's thoughts about the theory of the end of history in terms of its origin, momentum of the development of history and the end of history. Through this part, we can have a general understanding about the theory of the end of history. The third part is about the critique on the theory of the end of history, which discusses firstly the definition of the concept of critique, and then the critique of Marx, Drury and Drida on the theory of the end of history. The fourth part is mainly the discussion about the problems that the theory of the end of history is currently facing through the description of the problems in modern times. The final part is about the enlightment and modern significance of the critique upon the theory of the end of history.