Russia Surrounded

[Slothrop]

seems a bit optimistic but who knows

Preparing for Defeat

I don't want to suggest that Francis Fukuyama is being overly optimistic in expecting an imminent end to all global conflict, but he does have form in that area....

 

[version]

on tv news shows, he's actually really smart and witty. he just holds different view than us.

It's not that he holds different views, it's the belligerence. He boils everything down to good and bad guys then says his side are the good guys and they will win because what they think and do is right and just. It's the rhetoric of a fanatic.

 

[...]

Bit simplistic, isn't it? This bloke sounds like a psycho.

What, have you read it?

 

[version]

What, have you read it?

Yes.

 

[...]

Are you a Commentary subscriber?

 

[version]

Are you a Commentary subscriber?

I've read some of their stuff before, but no.

 

[...]

Is it not behind their paywall?

 

[version]

I think my ad and script blockers perhaps skirted it. I didn't even realise their site was paywalled as I've never run into one on there before

 

[...]

You'd better not be lying to me Version.

 

[...]

If you're lying to me I'll feed you to Olga Skabeeva.

 

[version]

You can tell I'm not lying because I pulled his "right and just" phrasing from the final paragraph.

 

[version]

He's such a twat.

 

[Murphy]

It's not that he holds different views, it's the belligerence. He boils everything down to good and bad guys then says his side are the good guys and they will win because what they think and do is right and just. It's the rhetoric of a fanatic.

 

[IdleRich]

I don't want to suggest that Francis Fukuyama is being overly optimistic in expecting an imminent end to all global conflict, but he does have form in that area....

He did himself no favours by coming up with possibly the worst possible title ever. Well, it's a good title in that it's catchy and punchy and all that, easy to remember and so stridently confident that it seems wrong to call it a prediction, more a simple statement of facts, albeit ones that admittedly hadn't yet happened at the time of writing. A pronouncement on how things will be.

But the problem with that title was, it was utterly wrong. And there is no way out for him, he can't say "oh it was a bit more nuanced than that, actually it meant..." cos as soon as you're fiddling around like that you've already lost, it's a bit like people trying to debate Trump with facts and convoluted arguments and not realising that they had already lost cos he'd called them Fat Fred or something.

But here Fukuyama is being blasted off the battlefield by his own bombast. An irony there... it's definitely the, er, end of his story.

 

[...]

He did himself no favours by coming up with possibly the worst possible title ever. Well, it's a good title in that it's catchy and punchy and all that, easy to remember and so stridently confident that it seems wrong to call it a prediction, more a simple statement of facts, albeit ones that admittedly hadn't yet happened at the time of writing. A pronouncement on how things will be.

But the problem with that title was, it was utterly wrong. And there is no way out for him, he can't say "oh it was a bit more nuanced than that, actually it meant..." cos as soon as you're fiddling around like that you've already lost, it's a bit like people trying to debate Trump with facts and convoluted arguments and not realising that they had already lost cos he'd called them Fat Fred or something.

But here Fukuyama is being blasted off the battlefield by his own bombast. An irony there... it's definitely the, er, end of his story.

It's a brilliant title.

Also, the book is brilliant and it is much more nuanced.

Also, far from being blasted off the battlefield by his own bombast, Fukuyama has written a string of classics since.

 

[IdleRich]

I'm not sure if it was clear from what I said there but I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I've just become particularly struck by this (relatively recent?) phenomenon of how there is now no place for nuance in public debate. People win arguments by just steamrolling the other guy, not by being right and it's very sad... as soon as someone is in the position of saying "Well actually it's not quite like that because... " then they are already being beaten by someone going "It is called The End of History. End of."

And there is an irony surely in the sheer effectiveness of his title leading to it becoming a stick which anyone can pick up and beat the crap out of him with.

 

[Mr. Tea]

He's such a twat.

How dare you say that about a valued member of the for.. actually, it's fine, carry on.

 

[...]

I'm not sure if it was clear from what I said there but I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I've just become particularly struck by this (relatively recent?) phenomenon of how there is now no place for nuance in public debate. People win arguments by just steamrolling the other guy, not by being right and it's very sad... as soon as someone is in the position of saying "Well actually it's not quite like that because... " then they are already being beaten by someone going "It is called The End of History. End of."

And there is an irony surely in the sheer effectiveness of his title leading to it becoming a stick which anyone can pick up and beat the crap out of him with.

OK, sorry, I missed that.

It’s a book that has aged much better than people give it credit for, though, and that’s the last thing I’ll say on that.

 

[IdleRich]

I can well believe that, just observing that the title will haunt him even so. Just the other day discussing Ukraine and FF came up and people laughed and dismissed him without even considering his point or argument.
Edit; obviously I'm sure he'll be really hurt to hear how low he ranks in the backseat of Lisbon taxis...

 

[hmg]

This account is excellent, a sequence of coruscating threads on Russia's plight and recent history. The barons may be about to turn on the courtiers, as they did in the 90s.