8

The resounding success of Francis Fukuyama’s 1989 paper on the "end of history" has not sufficiently captured the attention of historians. This attention is however deserved if one looks beyond the facile irony that a literal take on the paper’s title would merit. This is because it clarifies a period of American opinion, persuaded that capitalist democracy would be the definitive and stable end of humanity’s progress. Every empire at its height tends to believe itself immortal. However, the past decade which followed the publication of this famous text provides all the reasons for skepticism. In spite of new information technologies, the potential for tensions and even for deadly conflicts remains strong all over the planet due to development inequality, the wide gap between prosperity and misfortune, and violent reactions to the United States’ hegemony. In a nutshell, Fukuyama’s thesis is proven wrong by the naivety of his linear view of history whose varied rhythms, as always, form a highly complex mesh that exposes the boastfulness of the thesis.