São Paulo - The controversy surrounding the philosopher and sociologist Francis Fukuyama comes largely from the wrong interpretation of the thesis is based on his article "The End of History", 1989, later expanded and made into a book with the title " end of history and the last man. "
The literal interpretation of the title, there would be no more significant events that abalassem human social organization, earned him many critics.
However, the idea defended by Fukuyama is that, with the end of communism and the Cold War, liberal democracy as a form of government would have no alternative, putting an end to the historical process of the material development of mankind.
Fukuyama came to recant this thesis, showing that the economic dynamics had not come to an end with the collapse of communist regimes.
27 years after the publication of the original article, he went back on retraction. Currently, we believe that the greatest threat to the supremacy of broad liberal democracy is China.
"They have an authoritarian and strong government, and yet show an enviable capitalist development. If in the long run, in 50 years, we realize that the world followed the liberal model of democracy, or the Chinese view prevailed, it is still to come. "
Populism and Democracy
Francis Fukuyama, in a lecture Thought Border cycle, held on the evening of Wednesday (29), explained his view of the pillars for the formation of a modern state, truly impersonal and democratic, that would mark the end of polarizations between forms government and would, once and for all, the "end of history".
For him, this state is based on three pillars: efficient government (ensuring basic services such as security, health and education); application of laws (which must also apply to all, including the powerful); and democratic credibility (people need to believe that the government works for their well-being).
A fourth aspect, however, is the great challenge today's global, for him, the transition from a patrimonial state to a modern state. The patrimonial model of monarchical character, accept the use of public property for the benefit of individual power holders, and is the origin of corruption in countries with young democracies, such as Brazil.
The real challenge for Brazil and Latin America, therefore, is to make the transition from patrimonial state to the modern state. From this perspective, Brazil is currently experiencing a similar scenario to the US in the late 19th century, as Fukuyama was quoted in an interview EXAME in January this year.
"To achieve this transition, there must be popular indignation - and this happened in the US of the 19th century, most educated people in social organizations. Entrepreneurs also need to want to modernize their operations - in the US, the entrepreneurs wanted to play the patronage of the rules, but there was a considerable number who wanted a new way of doing business, "he said.
"In addition, you must have a strong political actor who can implement these changes," said Fukuyama and in this case, the Judiciary of Brazil deserved praise. "This is a strong institution that does its job," he said.
What is missing, however, is a clear idea about the country of project you want. "It is not clear what the Brazilians want instead of this form of government," he said. "This is a long and painful process, and reform relates to politics and power. And here are lacking leaders for change, "he said.
Inequality and populism
The ascendancy of populist governments has been identified by some sectors, such as the cause of a clash between social classes in Latin America, but Donald Trump phenomenon in the United States puts the universality of this thesis into question.
Fukuyama explained that, in fact, this analysis confuses cause and effect: in fact, is the social inequality that gives room for the emergence of populist leaders, and not the opposite.
This is visible when analyzing the US case: the Democratic Party has a historical rejection by the working class and adopted in recent years, policies that Fukuyama ranks as identity, or expropriating feminist struggles, LGBT, anti-racist .
In turn, the Republicans, to adopt a political model that only favors the elite, also lost the confidence of the working class, which opened the field for a populist leader proclaimed: "I'm so rich I do not need to be corrupt" and sounded honest the ears of voters, in assessing the sociologist.
Brexit, terrorism and other threats
Regarding the UK out of the European Union, Fukuyama was reticent to point out the possibilities of the future of the bloc, but said it was not built on solid foundations.
"European leaders had this naive view that economic integration would lead to cultural and social integration. But the Germans remained loyal to Germany above all things, the Dutch remained loyal to the Netherlands, and so on, "he said.
Fear of immigration, he said, is directed to the wrong question. "It is not the immigrants who are stealing the jobs of the working middle class, are the technologies. If autonomous cars revenge, this means that a lot of people will stop driving taxis and working as drivers, this is the great challenge that we will face. "
Regarding terrorism, Fukuyama said that it is not a short-term threat. "Terrorism kills a tiny number of people. Change the traffic laws may be more effective to save lives than to end attacks in the United States, for example. The threat of terrorism is the reaction that takes against him, "he said.
For fear of attacks, governments adopt measures restricting individual freedoms and threaten democracy, according to the sociologist.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário