Francis Fukuyama was a famous political scientist for his book known as the ‘End of History’ as well as his new book ‘The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman times to French Revolution.’ The book ‘Origins of Political Order’ focuses on political evolution by starting with the human evolution and how it has changed the political system to modernity. The author, Fukuyama appears to relate the two books in which the theme of political systems and evolution plays a major role. The societies and theories of leadership determine the type of leadership for many nations. According to the Fukuyama, the aspect of political institutions greatly affects the society in various ways such as through the economy. Fukuyama claims that “free market, vigorous civil societyare all important components of a working democracy, but none can ultimately replace a strong hierarchical government” (Fukuyama, 13). It explains that democracy may appear as the best form of government, but the most important factor should be a strong hierarchical institution. Most nations over the years have fought for democracy over other forms of leadership. Fukuyama refers to the modern political institution as “getting to Denmark”. Denmark appears to be a stable, democratic, prosperous and with very minimal cases of corruption. Therefore, many countries tend to emulate their political institutions to be like that of Denmark. Fukuyama believes that a stable government or political institution should balance the three categories which are “the state, the rule of law, and an accountable government” (Fukuyama, 15). The ability to balance the three sets of institutions in one country appears as a modern miracle in politics. The main counter argument was the desire for peaceful, stable, non-corrupt and prosperous political institutions for the failing nations. He also argues against the idea of personal leadership under the family and tribes while advocating for loyalty to functioning states. Therefore, Fukuyama appears interested in civilization while considering the progress over time instead of progress based on natural occurrences. Fukuyama explains that most of the stable political systems such as Denmark have faced a long struggle in the past to gain the political order in the modern day. He says that “it is not clear that Denmark’s political order can take root in very different cultural contexts” (Fukuyama, 14).
In the second chapter, Fukuyama considered human beings as chimpanzees and primates to elaborate the human evolution. He considers the state of human nature and how it biologically influenced the political system. The chapter also focuses on the countries that settled first according to biological foundations and talks about human evolution and its influence on politics. Fukuyama involves various philosophical leaders such as Plato and Aristotle who argued on the difference between nature and law or convention. They claimed that “a just city had to exist in conformity with man’s permanent nature and not what is changing” (Fukuyama, 26). Fukuyama also argues his belief of political systems with some other authors like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes. The three authors developed the distinction between human nature and the ground political rights in it. The counter argument in the second chapter is that political institutions developed from the conventional laws by using the human evolution from chimpanzee society to human as proof or evidence. He considers culture as the basis of most function political institutions in history and even in the modern day.
Work Cited
Fukuyama. Francis. The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman times to French Revolution.
New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. Print.
