in 2001 francis fukuyama suggested that maybe history wasn't quite done yet. and in 2016 he said and as many people said it seems the age of liberal hegemony is over. brexit was passed in donald trump was elected. having gone are my confidence about the end of history now we see a kind of them certainly a kind of nostalgia for history the kind of past that is history has gone on and when francis fukuyama wrote that part in the book he was in his hegelian stage, his high hegelian moment that history was a kind of unfolding and that unfolding as it took place in the modern world they unfolding until we reached the point that we discovered not because it was a theoretical matter but because it was a historical matter. there was an answer to the question which had riddles and puzzles political since socrates we have an answer in 1989 but that's the regime and the only regime in this big alien moment is liberal democracy. what i want to suggest today is docked or fukuyama wasn't hegelian enough because to claim that history was to ignore a basic insight that seems

one day i was talking to francis fukuyama on television and he said that democracy used to mean the rulethe majority, but now it means the rule of minorities over the majority. because the majority can choose hitler or putin, so we have to be very careful with the majority, so we need to take control of the majority, and minorities must rule the majority, and this is no longer democracy, this is totalitarianism, so now we are no longer about individual freedoms , but about instructions to be a wolf, to be modern, to be progressive. be progressive or not, it is no longer your right, to be progressive, to follow this agenda is your responsibility, you are free to be left-liberal, but you are no longer free to be right-liberal, you must be left-liberal, and this is now your responsibility, this is your attitude, the whole its history, liberalism fought against anyone. before the installations, and now, now it has become totalitarian, obligatory, and not free, as it was, as it was before, you think that this was all inevitable, that this was how it should have happened, i believe, i see in t

francis fukuyama. i think in many ways like the number of the speakers over the last couple of days, yesterday and today, something of a lost golden age of liberalism. for him, 1989. that was sort of the peak year of the liberalism that marked the end of history. notice that it didn't last very long. in 2001, francis fukuyama suggested that maybe history wasn't done yet. in 2016, and as maybe this month many people said, the age of liberal hegemony was over. having gone from a confidence about the end of history, now we see a kind of nostalgia for history that has been passed and is now history has gone on. when francis fukuyama wrote that article in the book, he was in his hegelian stage. history was an unfolding and the unfolding as it took place in the modern world was the unfolding of regimes until we finally reached the point that we discovered not because it was a theoretical matter, because it was historical. we discovered that there was an answer to the question, which riddled and puzzled polit

in 2001 francis fukuyama suggested that maybe history wasn't quite done yet. and in 2016 he said and as many people said it seems the age of liberal hegemony is over. brexit was passed in donald trump was elected. having gone are my confidence about the end of history now we see a kind of them certainly a kind of nostalgia for history the kind of past that is history has gone on and when francis fukuyama wrote that part in the book he was in his hegelian stage, his high hegelian moment that history was a kind of unfolding and that unfolding as it took place in the modern world they unfolding until we reached the point that we discovered not because it was a theoretical matter but because it was a historical matter. there was an answer to the question which had riddles and puzzles political since socrates we have an answer in 1989 but that's the regime and the only regime in this big alien moment is liberal democracy. what i want to suggest today is docked or fukuyama wasn't hegelian enough because to claim that history was to ignore a basic insight that seems

francis fukuyama received his va from cornell university and a ph.d. from harvard in political science but it's a great honor to welcome to annapolis francis fukuyama. [applause] i guess it's appropriate in the sense of liberalism, there he is okay. it will be an interesting counterpoint. i consider -- excuse me i had a little motorcycle accident on tuesday and still feeling the effects of out sofi stop and grimace a little bit you'll understand why. inin any event i consider mysela classical liberal. it's important adjective putting classical in front of liberal because i think there has been an evolution of liberalism in certain directions that are not necessarily implied in liberalism and i think most of the complaints about liberalism actually have to do with the extensions of liberalismhe rathr than a doctrine so let me begin with a definition of what i regard as liberalism. liberals believe in the universal a quality of human dignity. that is to say liberals do not believe that there's a certain group of human beings a certain class that has supe

francis fukuyama received his b.a. from cornell in classics and a ph.d. from harvard in political science, so it's a great i honor to welcome profesr francis fukuyama. [applause] >> i guess it's appropriate that i'm rising in defense of liberalism after patrick. is patrick still here? >> [inaudible] >> oh, there he is. okay. [laughter] well, it'll be, it'll be a, it'll be an interesting counterpoint. so i consider myself -- excuse me. i had a little motorcycle accident on tuesday, and i'm still feeling a little bit of the effects of that. so if i stop and grimace a little bit, you'll understand why. if in any vent, i want to, i consider myself a classical liberal. it's an important adjective, putting classical in front of liberal, because i think that there's been an evolution of liberalism in certain directions that are tar not necessarily -- that are not necessarily implied in classical liberalism. and i think that most of the complaints about liberalism actually have to do with those extensions in liberalism rather than the core doctrine. so let me jus

and francis fukuyama correctly noted that besides liberalism there are no more ideologies left. liberalism. was the liberation of all these individuals from any kind of collective belonging, there were only two collective identifiers left to be freed from, gender identification, since it is a collective identification, you belong to the collective of either men or women, yes, because you are not on their own. so, the liberation from gender, which led to transgender people, to lgbt people and... new forms of sexual individualism, gender became, it became optional, and this was not a deviation from liberalism, it was a necessary step in the further promotion of this liberal ideology, the final step, which still remains unfinished, is liberation from identifying oneself as a person, a person will become an option. while we are choosing, you in the west, choose gender as you wish, and the last step of liberalism, the manifestation of liberalism, will be that man will become an option, so that you can choose to express your individuality, to be human or not to be human, it has a name

liberalism won another victory, after the fall of the soviet union only liberalism remained, and francis fukuyamaeralism there were no more ideologies left, and liberalism was the liberation of all these individuals from any species. so, liberation from gender, which led to transgender people, to lgbt people and new forms of sexual individualism. became, it became optional, and this was not a deviation from liberalism, it was a necessary step in the further promotion of this liberal ideology, and the last step, which still remains incomplete, is the liberation from identifying oneself as a person, a person will become an option until we choose, you are in the west, choose your gender. at will, the last step of liberalism, the manifestation of liberalism will be that man will become an option, so that you can choose to express your individuality, to be human or not to be human, it has a name: transhumanism, posthumanism, singularity, artificial intelligence, swyly and harari openly declare that all this inevitably awaits humanity in the future, so we, in fact, arrived at the last stop of this hist

and you remember that an economist politician, a scientist francis fukuyama declared value since the end of history from known and forever, the liberal world or the will prevail, there would be no confrontation to that from any other policy. that means that they decided that they knew vasa, just like, or former soviet republics, just like o former members of the also fact they are only in the pockets of the united states and the collective west dodge was obvious. that was an obvious opinion that could fail, that the dominated for quite some time even know they owe or the events that who witness today police are happening july years because the united states wants at the helm of the collective west notes to lose its had so many in the international arena, where did they find is hard to, to do that, if not impossible, which one be strong, economic does realizing primarily on the reason continent, but also in africa in less than america and the struggle for hatcher many for presenting these hodge in many using sanctions, blackmail, threats, armed forces. because this is the struggle for

the fall of the berlin wall, people were proclaiming the end of you remember the the famous francis fukuyama article. but fukuyama was not the only one making that case, that liberal democracy was going to reign supreme, that china and russia each for very different reasons because they are such very different societies, was going to find it in their own national interest to rejoin or join for the first time western institutions, whether it was the world trade organization or whether it was joining up with the european union. in the case of russia, there was even discussion for a while that russia become a member of nato, the alliance that was was designed and built to contain the old soviet union, the predecessor state for russia. so the idea was that we were all going to live in this sort of peaceful harmony. and for the first ten years, it looked like that might happen because china was on a very slow road to but certainly was invest in its people and it turned china's growth turned into the world's greatest anti-poverty program. russia was in halting democratization and filled with corru

isn't that what they wante jusd >> francis fukuyama warned in the end of history that if men cannot struggle on behalf of a just causruggle oe, then they struggle for the sake of struggle out of boredom forgl they cannot imagine living in a world without struggle. >> and there's plenty of people willing to finance the struggle. pbd flagged the financialson wh reason why the ivies have gones so soft on arab spring break. >>have t they get half their moy from donations and gifts, and a lot of that money pours in from the mideast. dle eastwe saw how chinese monee massage universities posture mone couldy talks in many diffet languages. >> look around the campfire and see who's smiling. whil see e america burns. >> cornell law professor william jacobson joins me now. u >> so you went throught a little bit. wit what's going on with you, professor? >> yeah, well, when i spoke outl against black lives matterl whe i was targeted. but there's a much bigger problem nos w than the riotsot of 2020. we have on our campuses and inat our cities a marriage between the extrembetweee left. the extreme left tha

taken over all his affairs, there is even francis fokuyama, the author of the famous one. concepts about the end of history and the last man, but apparently fukuyamacalatory policy further and further, the russian president said quite rightly, in europe there are many countries densely populated with small... territories, and if these countries are so actively in favor of using high-precision weapons deep into the russian federation, they should probably think about what could be... accepted in the state department, or is it salivona, is it some kind of collective intelligence, i it seems that this is the main danger, in connection with the way they organize this escalation, because it is unclear who will ultimately be responsible for this if they press this or that button, evgeniy, thank you very much, exhaustive, brilliant as always, valentin bogdanov, head of our american bureau from new york, where. nuclear weapons, you can rob a bank with a knife, with a pistol, but you cannot roll out your nuclear weapons there, that is, these are the very hawks who are now pushing forward this escalation, here the question arises that you asked, evgeny, are