The idea that liberal democracy is in decline reflects a basic truth. Liberal societies don’t exist for very long. The U.S. was a stable democracy for a long time because it was not liberal. It was in fact, deeply conservative (socially conservative, not politically conservative). Something called the “American Code” governed (severely restricted) personal behavior. Now it doesn’t and quite predictably political democracy is in decline. The US (much less the world) is not Sweden and pretending it is doesn’t change that fact. Sweden’s laws and system of government don’t work in other places. Increasingly, Sweden is not Sweden either. For example, two very different countries with no liberalism have systems that work. China has not abandoned liberalism. China never had it. Does China’s combination of authoritarian government and a (mostly) market economy work? You bet it does. China has 25,000+ miles of HSR. California has zero miles of HSR (but plenty of liberalism). Of course, California does have men with dresses. El Salvador was once ‘liberal’. Now it is not. The current president (Nayib Bukele) has cracked down on the gangs plaguing his country. He has achieved a remarkable reduction in crime (murder). Like it not, but mass immigration means the end of liberalism and probably democracy throughout Europe. A quote from Helmut Schmidt should make this clear “Multicultural societies have only … functioned peacefully in authoritarian states. To that extent it was a mistake for us to bring guest workers from foreign cultures into the country at the beginning of the 1960s.” Of course, mass immigration can not be stopped by liberal means. Either Europe (and the USA) will adopt illiberal policies to stop mass immigration or will adopt illiberal policies to deal with the consequences of mass immigration. Either way, illiberalism is the future (if there is any future). The world (really the US and Europe) were lulled into temporary tranquility by the post-war (WWII) economic boom. The boom is over (and has been since the 1970s). Now we have an era of conflict.
Democracy is born under duress (external threat). An example being the 13 colonies that had to find a way of binding together in order to face down the British.
Under peacetime it tends to decline.
The long peace after WW2 was not a peace at all (cold war) and this war kept democracy going, the end of the Soviet Union removed this threat triggering democratic decline in the US.
Fukuyama's (in)famous book "The end of history and the last man" outlines this problem, it seems that most "readers" have only read the first part of the title.
Bukele only enjoys a 91% approval rating. Did I mention that the murder rate has only gone down by 98%? The practical choice is CECOT or MS-13. The people of El Salvador have picked CECOT.
As a parent of a graduate, I was present for the speech. What greater manifestation of democratic backsliding can there be than the severe squelching of freedom of speech taking place in Great Britain and, to a lesser extent, Germany? Yet Dr. Fukuyama made no mention of these. Under U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, according to police data analyzed by the Daily Mail, in 2024 (the latest year for which figures were available), 9,700 people were arrested (though the vast majority not imprisoned) simply for expressing their opinions on social media and elsewhere. And there have been recent high-profile arrests. Why would Dr. Fukuyama only focus on Hungary and make no mention of Great Britain or Germany? Dr. Fukuyama, would you kindly respond?
Not surprisingly, no response. (See above.) Why would Dr. Fukuyama leave out Great Britain? Could it be because he presumably disagrees with the ideas and opinions of those being arrested, and that what’s happening there doesn’t fit his narrative? If one is to be a credible champion of democracy, one must fight for the freedom of speech of those with whom one both agrees, and disagrees.
There’s clear evidence of the Biden administration colluding with big tech to suppress the opinions of conservatives. Correct me if I’m wrong but something tells me Dr. Fukuyama was mum on that as well. (Imagine if Trump did that – the good doctor would be all over it!)
Is democratic backsliding perpetrated by the left exempt from his criticism? Why?
The idea that liberal democracy is in decline reflects a basic truth. Liberal societies don’t exist for very long. The U.S. was a stable democracy for a long time because it was not liberal. It was in fact, deeply conservative (socially conservative, not politically conservative). Something called the “American Code” governed (severely restricted) personal behavior. Now it doesn’t and quite predictably political democracy is in decline. The US (much less the world) is not Sweden and pretending it is doesn’t change that fact. Sweden’s laws and system of government don’t work in other places. Increasingly, Sweden is not Sweden either. For example, two very different countries with no liberalism have systems that work. China has not abandoned liberalism. China never had it. Does China’s combination of authoritarian government and a (mostly) market economy work? You bet it does. China has 25,000+ miles of HSR. California has zero miles of HSR (but plenty of liberalism). Of course, California does have men with dresses. El Salvador was once ‘liberal’. Now it is not. The current president (Nayib Bukele) has cracked down on the gangs plaguing his country. He has achieved a remarkable reduction in crime (murder). Like it not, but mass immigration means the end of liberalism and probably democracy throughout Europe. A quote from Helmut Schmidt should make this clear “Multicultural societies have only … functioned peacefully in authoritarian states. To that extent it was a mistake for us to bring guest workers from foreign cultures into the country at the beginning of the 1960s.” Of course, mass immigration can not be stopped by liberal means. Either Europe (and the USA) will adopt illiberal policies to stop mass immigration or will adopt illiberal policies to deal with the consequences of mass immigration. Either way, illiberalism is the future (if there is any future). The world (really the US and Europe) were lulled into temporary tranquility by the post-war (WWII) economic boom. The boom is over (and has been since the 1970s). Now we have an era of conflict.
Democracy is born under duress (external threat). An example being the 13 colonies that had to find a way of binding together in order to face down the British.
Under peacetime it tends to decline.
The long peace after WW2 was not a peace at all (cold war) and this war kept democracy going, the end of the Soviet Union removed this threat triggering democratic decline in the US.
Fukuyama's (in)famous book "The end of history and the last man" outlines this problem, it seems that most "readers" have only read the first part of the title.
Bukele only enjoys a 91% approval rating. Did I mention that the murder rate has only gone down by 98%? The practical choice is CECOT or MS-13. The people of El Salvador have picked CECOT.
As a parent of a graduate, I was present for the speech. What greater manifestation of democratic backsliding can there be than the severe squelching of freedom of speech taking place in Great Britain and, to a lesser extent, Germany? Yet Dr. Fukuyama made no mention of these. Under U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, according to police data analyzed by the Daily Mail, in 2024 (the latest year for which figures were available), 9,700 people were arrested (though the vast majority not imprisoned) simply for expressing their opinions on social media and elsewhere. And there have been recent high-profile arrests. Why would Dr. Fukuyama only focus on Hungary and make no mention of Great Britain or Germany? Dr. Fukuyama, would you kindly respond?
Not surprisingly, no response. (See above.) Why would Dr. Fukuyama leave out Great Britain? Could it be because he presumably disagrees with the ideas and opinions of those being arrested, and that what’s happening there doesn’t fit his narrative? If one is to be a credible champion of democracy, one must fight for the freedom of speech of those with whom one both agrees, and disagrees.
There’s clear evidence of the Biden administration colluding with big tech to suppress the opinions of conservatives. Correct me if I’m wrong but something tells me Dr. Fukuyama was mum on that as well. (Imagine if Trump did that – the good doctor would be all over it!)
Is democratic backsliding perpetrated by the left exempt from his criticism? Why?