In fact, the origins of this expression can be traced back beyond Fukuyama to the French Hegelian philosopher Alexandre Kojève. Kojève provided a variety of interpretations of Hegel’s view of “the end of history.”1 But Fukuyama used the concept to signify the collapse of the communist order and the ultimate victory of America. He maintained that history had ended because the 1989 East European revolutions signaled the final victory of liberal democracy, after which there could be no subsequent fundamental revolutions. (Location 276)
This is a mutually complementary apparatus. For example, a capitalist economy allowed to take its own course will inevitably result in economic inequality and conflict. But the nation, as something that intends communality and equality, will seek to resolve the various contradictions and inequalities introduced by the capitalist system. The state in turn realizes this intention through such measures as taxation, redistribution, and various regulations. Capital, (Location 288)
For example, a capitalist economy allowed to take its own course will inevitably result in economic inequality and conflict. But the nation, as something that intends communality and equality, will seek to resolve the various contradictions and inequalities introduced by the capitalist system. The state in turn realizes this intention through such measures as taxation, redistribution, and various regulations. (Location 289)
In my view, the situation that Fukuyama called “the end of history” means that once this Capital-Nation-State form is realized, any subsequent fundamental revolution is impossible. (Location 293)
Note: wtf
they mistakenly believe that they are making historical progress (Location 296)
Note: srsly
When individual national economies are threatened by the global market (neoliberalism), they demand the protection (redistribution) of the state and / or bloc economy, at the same time as appealing to national cultural identity. (Location 301)
Note: semiroffles
Marx’s critique of Hegel was a materialist inverting or turning on its head of Hegel’s idealist speculations, which is commonly imagined as an up-down inversion (between the sensible or material and the ideal). (Location 355)
According to Hegel, the essence of something only becomes apparent in its effects. That is, he viewed things ex post facto, “after the fact.” Kant, on the other hand, viewed things ex ante facto, “before the fact.” With regard to the future, we can only make predictions, not draw positive conclusions. For this reason, Kant held that ideas are illusions. But they are transcendental illusions. This means that, unlike illusions that arise from our sense perception, we cannot eliminate them by way of reason, because they are illusions that are necessary to reason itself. In plain language, without these illusions we would lapse into schizophrenia. (Location 357)
Note: the first bit of this i get . noumena etc
For example, with regard to world history, Kant says that looking at developments up until now, we can regard them as gradually progressing toward the “kingdom of ends” (a world in which moral law is realized). (Location 362)
Note: millenarian - check
capital. I realized then that Kant too had been thinking about simultaneous world revolution. He supported a Rousseau-style bourgeois revolution, but he also saw that it could not succeed if it took place in only one country—other countries would inevitably interfere or invade. This is why Kant conceptualized a world federation of nations even before the French Revolution. This was not for the sake of abolishing war; it was for making the bourgeois revolution into a simultaneous world revolution. (Location 423)
Note: neolib eu
The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. (Location 457)
It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. (Location 458)
Far from being a primitive society, the Kingdom of Dahomey took form within the modern global market. Here is how Hegel describes Dahomey in his The Philosophy of History: “In Dahomey, when they are thus displeased, the custom is to send parrots’ eggs to the King, as a sign of dissatisfaction with his government. Sometimes also a deputation is sent, which intimates to him, that the burden of government must have been very troublesome to him, and that he had better rest a little. The King then thanks his subjects, goes into his apartments, and has himself strangled by the women.” G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree (New York: Dover, 1956), (Location 6157)
