What I love about Fukuyama is his erudition, I am not sure if I agree with all he says and his ultimate view on many matters. But I don't care because his insight is so deep and and knowledge and wisdom so great that he is always teaching and informing you even if you disagree on fundamental issues.
I know all this, but to deliver it with such clarity, such force, such persuasion. I can't! I am incorrigibly for Dictatorships, but Professor Francis Fukuyama has made me think Democracy is the better form: now that's persuasion!
No. You need also political institutions that protect those activities: You need a legal institution that deal with disputes among them. You need a police force to protect them from lawless gangs. You need a military force to protect them from invasion from outside. You need the rule of laws that limit power of the rulers. You need the accountability (democratic process) so that the rulers can be replaced orderly without civil wars.
I wish he had made a comment regarding the nature of Rule of Law. Many get the idea that if a law is passed by some legislative body, then that law can claim respect that Rule of Law commands. The big question is, is the law as passed a good law, how does the legislature decide that, is it universal in its nature so that it doesn’t favor one set of the electorate over other sets.
Fukuyama talks about the rule of law and its definition. He said if the head of state is in a position to change, or make up the laws as it go along, then its not a rule of law but rule by law. That sounds exactly like the rogue US regime. The president has been making laws and legislations as he go along to impose his state terrorism in the political, economic, military and even social fields, against independent and sovereign countries as the biggest part of his foreign policy.
That's not exactly what was said, really not at all. Fukuyama did say "rule by law" to distinguish from "rule of law", but it was not framed as you have it, and it wasn't really well defined either. He means that authorities are subject to the same general rules as everyone else. That's too weak a claim to hold any merrit. And in the context that it fits in, it is only really defining the absence of a "rule of law" under the assumption that everyone knew what that is -- which is a funny assumption to make since he introduced the entire topic quoting a related term that has at least as many definitions as there are profs in the field.
"The fix is complicated", said the politicians and elites of late roman empire. I have some respect for fukuyama, his analysis is devoid of any esoterism and word salads. But his messianic ideas about liberal democracies and end of history are so pedantic on their face. Human creativity and complexity is always unpredictable, humans will keep making history and come up with new ideas and political systems and problems, don't sell human imagination and will so short.
Show us a parliamentary system that works better than the United States on scale. I love these people who talk about Denmark and Sweden yes they have as much population as the state of Georgia.
Why no questioning og how democracy is not even working in America where all of the issues used criticise it's effectiveness in other places can be found in spades.....the fact that people see that it is not working there is the most critical factor in the lack of belief in democracy itself.
Brilliant man. I admire his work. For some reason, maybe temperament or status-seeking or TDS, he won't (seriously) discuss the topic of HBD (let alone satisfactorily refute its importance). E.g., he thinks the Mezzogiorno problem (the so-called southern problem) is culture and history based. But where does culture spring from? Northern and Southern Italy have surprisingly different genetic makeup. But he doesn't take this into account. Great scholar nonetheless. And totally unfairly treated with regard to the end of history thesis (which is still largely correct or at least persuasive).
I really love his books...But I wish he would acknowledge that Democracy is only One of the Good forms of Government. The other 2 are Aristocracy and Monarchy we in the USA understand that all 3 forms are present in our Constitution. Which forms the bed rock of our Republic (which means the public thing i.e., Government) Also, a Constitution limits what can be voted on....so no majority can do whatever they want...
@@AtlasandLiberty Aristocracy and Monarchy inevitably leads to patriarchy or oligarchy. Neither are good forms of government outside of theory and even if the practitioners were perfectly moral and brilliant in practice, it would still take away the freedom of the governed to choose their governors.
@@boblochen The main idea is a balanced government where all 3 forms hold the other 2's power in check. All 3 Forms of Good Government turn into tyranny every time, over decades of time. That includes Democracy just to be clear...especially now with the Far left thinking everything is free....Limited Government is the answer
Why would anyone want to read anything this guy had to say? Did he not write The End of History and the Last Man? The book describing the greatness of Western democracies? Guess he did not know what he was talking about!!
Imagine having Fukuyama as a teacher in university. Such a privilege
An absolute BEAST!
Fukuyama's works are gold.
I loved both volumes of his book!
Me too, he is a great scholar and writer.
What I love about Fukuyama is his erudition, I am not sure if I agree with all he says and his ultimate view on many matters. But I don't care because his insight is so deep and and knowledge and wisdom so great that he is always teaching and informing you even if you disagree on fundamental issues.
I know all this, but to deliver it with such clarity, such force, such persuasion. I can't!
I am incorrigibly for Dictatorships, but Professor Francis Fukuyama has made me think Democracy is the better form: now that's persuasion!
Our world is governed by economy, resources, market and know how. That is it.
No. You need also political institutions that protect those activities:
You need a legal institution that deal with disputes among them.
You need a police force to protect them from lawless gangs.
You need a military force to protect them from invasion from outside.
You need the rule of laws that limit power of the rulers.
You need the accountability (democratic process) so that the rulers can be replaced orderly without civil wars.
excellent analysis 👍
I wish he had made a comment regarding the nature of Rule of Law. Many get the idea that if a law is passed by some legislative body, then that law can claim respect that Rule of Law commands.
The big question is, is the law as passed a good law, how does the legislature decide that, is it universal in its nature so that it doesn’t favor one set of the electorate over other sets.
It's how energy works because mankind is not selfless enough to balance the power of distribution and transformation
Great book...
Very similar to the thinking of Mr Antonio García Trevijano who died recently
when can the u.s. start overhauling their dysfunctional system? the time when the people have the incentive to learn from outside.
Fukuyama talks about the rule of law and its definition. He said if the head of state is in a position to change, or make up the laws as it go along, then its not a rule of law but rule by law. That sounds exactly like the rogue US regime. The president has been making laws and legislations as he go along to impose his state terrorism in the political, economic, military and even social fields, against independent and sovereign countries as the biggest part of his foreign policy.
That's not exactly what was said, really not at all. Fukuyama did say "rule by law" to distinguish from "rule of law", but it was not framed as you have it, and it wasn't really well defined either.
He means that authorities are subject to the same general rules as everyone else. That's too weak a claim to hold any merrit. And in the context that it fits in, it is only really defining the absence of a "rule of law" under the assumption that everyone knew what that is -- which is a funny assumption to make since he introduced the entire topic quoting a related term that has at least as many definitions as there are profs in the field.
How ever I find the state formation and structure useful.thx
Not quite the end of history!!!
"The fix is complicated", said the politicians and elites of late roman empire. I have some respect for fukuyama, his analysis is devoid of any esoterism and word salads. But his messianic ideas about liberal democracies and end of history are so pedantic on their face. Human creativity and complexity is always unpredictable, humans will keep making history and come up with new ideas and political systems and problems, don't sell human imagination and will so short.
9:40 Admiral General Aladeen, the dictator of the Republic of Wadiya comes to mind... 🥸
Show us a parliamentary system that works better than the United States on scale. I love these people who talk about Denmark and Sweden yes they have as much population as the state of Georgia.
Great Britain.
@@socrateos I do not see that, sorry.
@@stevebrown1461
Too bad
YUP!
You figured it out.
In present day India, still at various degrees and levels, some of the most powerful states of freedom in regards to being human still exist, this is leaving aside any other parts of the world. This is also despite of the misrepresentation, being it either as an admired fascination or repelling disgust in regards to attire, costumes, skin colour, but more specifically cast level. It is precisely this level of freedom which still stands uniterrpted, the part that will within most cases not, or worst never be understood, consequently and eventually leading to serious problems as a finality manifestation in regards to humanity.
First a riddle which will shed light upon my statement. (As far away possible from what is causing the suffering, and as close as possible from what is enduring the suffering. What and where, is the what where?)
The heirarchical structure of being as ascending and descending levels and degrees of a, any and all possible combinations in regards to order does not make use of the concept of purity other than in regards to the ascending and descending order of levels and degrees of, meaning the very state. Once a, any and all possible combinations of particular chosen or enforced orders is undertaken, and the concept of purity is applied in regards to cleaner than the other possible undertaken orders... Such...Will automatically trigger that very representation of purity to be manifested in a direct and indirect opposition of exactly what it states in being. Meaning one, anyone cannot copyright consciousness, Dao, or God etc etc, only available physical matter which can be overpowered through force can go through such a process, and it is precisely that which in turn triggers the manifestation of purity in a direct or indirect opposition through all that which remains as not pure.
In doing so, and having triggered such a functioning in regards to being, than truth which is of up most importance in regards to achieving the closest possible states which bring one within consciousness, Dao or God etc etc is, and becomes harder and harder to make use of, as a consequence of a direct and indirect opposition to a, any and all possible combinations of pure states of being, meaning one state is always clean and the other is always not. I chose the example of present day India because within beliefs in and around such a territory, to this very day this structure is within applied existence as the most understandable example I have come across, known as ....(Puranic Shaivisim) And (None Puranic Shaivisim). It is very safe to say at minimum in my regards as I understand it, one form has triggered the other, by imposing a heirarchical ascending and descending order of different degrees and levels which has and is undermining freedom of a, any and all possible combinations of human beings, especially in regards to consciousness, Dao or God etc etc, as it is the undermining of such ways of being which ultimately undermines physical freedom eventually.
What is more important, regards to historical fact of similar structures taking form in different subtle or less subtle ways throughout the world in and around the same historical period.
Now as a consequence, be the puranic or the none puranic order of ascending and descending degrees and levels of anything including anyone is completely out of reality as it's natural standing, meaning the direct and the indirect opposition is, as a has, and will, only build up within higher and higher complex intricacy until.
©
March 27/2024
Why no questioning og how democracy is not even working in America where all of the issues used criticise it's effectiveness in other places can be found in spades.....the fact that people see that it is not working there is the most critical factor in the lack of belief in democracy itself.
I really like LAW. GOTO BLONDEST HUSBAND IN LAW SCHOOL IN NEW YORK CITY WHERE SHE LIVES TOGETHER WITH HER HUSBAND IN OUR SOCIETY.
Please explain in more detail.
@@davidtrindle6473 I have invented a ethnic genocide bioweapon DNA Bomb for the CIA!
We may election Donald Trump. Oh, Francis!
Why
As long as detatched and unaware humans like this are allowed to peddle their appeals to authority, the world will never get anywhere good.
Among the other nonsense you say Mr Fukuyama, Greece is not another example "closer to Europe". It is the true Europe.
Eccl 12:2
Religious garbage.
Pikachu
This is where history began "In the beginning (time)God created (energy)the heavens (space)and the earth(matter).the Bible
Brilliant man. I admire his work. For some reason, maybe temperament or status-seeking or TDS, he won't (seriously) discuss the topic of HBD (let alone satisfactorily refute its importance). E.g., he thinks the Mezzogiorno problem (the so-called southern problem) is culture and history based. But where does culture spring from? Northern and Southern Italy have surprisingly different genetic makeup. But he doesn't take this into account. Great scholar nonetheless. And totally unfairly treated with regard to the end of history thesis (which is still largely correct or at least persuasive).
48:00 We may elect Donald Trump
What a prediction
Trump's tax cut: Cuts corporate income tax rate permanently to 21 percent from 35 percent, as of Jan. 1, 2018.
they still have deductions. so they will pay even less.
I really love his books...But I wish he would acknowledge that Democracy is only One of the Good forms of Government. The other 2 are Aristocracy and Monarchy we in the USA understand that all 3 forms are present in our Constitution. Which forms the bed rock of our Republic (which means the public thing i.e., Government) Also, a Constitution limits what can be voted on....so no majority can do whatever they want...
Supreme Court is Aristocracy serve for life or voluntary retirement. President/executive is Monarchy but limited by the other two branches.
@@AtlasandLiberty Aristocracy and Monarchy inevitably leads to patriarchy or oligarchy. Neither are good forms of government outside of theory and even if the practitioners were perfectly moral and brilliant in practice, it would still take away the freedom of the governed to choose their governors.
@@boblochen The main idea is a balanced government where all 3 forms hold the other 2's power in check. All 3 Forms of Good Government turn into tyranny every time, over decades of time. That includes Democracy just to be clear...especially now with the Far left thinking everything is free....Limited Government is the answer
Check out Gordon s woods friends divided: Adams and Jefferson chapters 6 to 8. Woods explains adams perspective where he says this
The state: a monopoly on power / violence. The USA features the balance of power, ergo, the 2nd Amendment.
Why would anyone want to read anything this guy had to say? Did he not write The End of History and the Last Man? The book describing the greatness of Western democracies? Guess he did not know what he was talking about!!
joke