Liberal Democracy and Francis Fukuyama Essay

1002 Words 5 Pages
Francis Fukuyama argued that liberal democracy was deemed to be the final viable form for political institutions. This implies that liberal democracy will become the last form of regime for states. Fukuyama’s argument was reasonable at the time he created it because it was created after the cold war and the power state was The United States, and they implemented democracy to states surrounding them and states that were influenced by the U.S. However, during the 1990’s there started to become more authoritarian type regimes arising. I argue that Fukuyama was wrong that democracy would not be the final viable form for political institutions. A way that states will be able to survive democracy is because states and incumbents want power, and …show more content…
Way (pg. 309) argued that states turned away from full authoritarian regimes because of international and domestic influence. However, because states were influenced by the image of the U.S. that states can be as prosperous created disguise to seem as more democratic to gain the benefits of democratic states. States were able to implement open borders and hold elections to be seen as more democratic regimes (Ivan Krastev pg. 504 & Levitsky and Way pg. 310), this added to the creation of competitive authoritarianism. If states were able to successfully disguise how they manipulated votes they were more seen as democracies than authoritarian regimes. Because states such as Russia implemented open borders, Russia was able to grow their competitive and capitalistic authoritarian regimes. This is because open borders allowed people who did not want to stay in Russia and had the income to were able to, mostly the middle class. And the middle class is very important to states because they are the ones voicing their opinion to the government or revolt (Krastev pg. 507). This displays how Russia was able to keep their authoritarian regime and not turn into a democracy over time. States that do not have much western influence are also able to be successful in applying an authoritarian rule (Krastev pg. 506). Not only that if a state is able to overthrow their authoritarian regime it does not always mean the state will become a democracy (Levitsky and Way pg. 309). These both

Related Documents