the nature of the Trinity. One is inclined to say that the revival of religion in some way attests to a broad unhappiness with the impersonality and spiritual vacuity of liberal consumerist societies. Modern liberalism itself was historically a consequence of the weakness of religiously-based societies which, failing to agree on the nature of the good life, could not provide even the minimal preconditions of peace and stability. Surely the most remarkable changes have occurred in Asia. One need look no further than the recent performance of Vietnamese immigrants in the.S. Such nostalgia, in fact, will continue to fuel competition and conflict even in the post-historical world for some time to come. There would still be a high and perhaps rising level of ethnic and nationalist violence, since those are impulses incompletely played out, even in parts of the post-historical world. Conflict between states still in history, and between those states and those at the end of history, would still be possible. 5, he did not believe that the real world conformed or could be made to conform to ideological preconceptions of philosophy professors in any simpleminded way, or that the "material" world could not impinge on the ideal. Certainly a great deal of the world's ethnic and nationalist tension can be explained in terms of peoples who are forced to live in unrepresentative political systems that they have not chosen. This led to a drive for pure territorial aggrandizement in the latter half of the century and played no small role in causing the Great War. Vestnik Ministerstva Inostrannikh Del sssr.
Video games for kids essay, James mill essay on government 1820, Gre issue essay exmapes,
But at the end of history it is not necessary that all societies become successful liberal societies, merely that they end their ideological pretensions of representing different and higher forms of human society. IV what ARE the implications of the end of history for international relations? Hegel's view of the relationship between the ideal and the real or material worlds was an extremely complicated one, beginning with the fact that for him the distinction between the two was only apparent. Gorbachev has spoken of democratization primarily in the sphere of internal party affairs, and has shown little intention of ending the Communist party's monopoly of power; indeed, the political reform seeks to legitimize and therefore strengthen the cpsu'S rule. More important is the contribution that Japan has made in turn to world history by following in the footsteps of the United States to create a truly universal consumer culture that has become both a symbol and an underpinning of the universal homogenous state. These are not definitive requirements, but rather standard practices. It is hard to believe that when they return home to run the country they will be content for China to be the only country in Asia unaffected by the larger democratizing trend.
I am thinking particularly of Rousseau and the Western philosophical tradition that flows from him that was highly critical of Lockean or Hobbesian liberalism, though one could criticize liberalism from the standpoint of classical political philosophy as well. You may also choose the wrong angle to look at the chosen historical event. There has always been a very strong current of great Russian chauvinism in the Soviet Union, which has found freer expression since the advent of glasnost. For one thing, most "liberal" European societies were illiberal insofar as they believed in the legitimacy of imperialism, that is, the right of one nation to rule over other nations without regard for the wishes of the ruled. It is certainly true that a very large degree of conflict since the Battle of Jena has had its roots in nationalism. See his article, "Beyond the Cold War New Republic, December 19, 1988.