Menu Expand

Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History

  1. Journals
  2. Economics, Finance, Business & Management
  3. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch
  4. Vol. 139, Issue 2–4
  5. pp. 285–304

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style
McCloskey, D. Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, 139(2–4), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.2-4.285
McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen "Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History" Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch 139.2–4, 2019, 285-304. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.2-4.285
McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen (2019): Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History, in: Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, vol. 139, iss. 2–4, 285-304, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.2-4.285
Format
Download

Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History

McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen

Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 139 (2019), Iss. 2–4 : pp. 285–304

3 Citations (CrossRef)

Read Now Download (PDF)

Additional Information

Article Details

Publisher Name
Duncker & Humblot
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.2-4.285
Language
English
Pages
20
Keywords

Author Details

McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen, Department of Economics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 601 S. Morgan Street, Chicago, IL 60607, USA.

Cited By

  1. Awaiting the demise of the liberal order: Historicising the crisis of liberalism

    Markovic, Vukan

    Filozofija i drustvo, Vol. 34 (2023), Iss. 3 P.495

    https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2303495M [Citations: 0]

  2. Science, Technology and Innovation in the History of Economic Thought

    Invention, Institutional Change, and Economic Development: From Scottish Enlightenment to the IPE

    Trincado Aznar, Estrella | López Castellano, Fernando

    2023

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40139-8_3 [Citations: 0]

  3. Why Are So Many Western Intellectuals Abandoning Liberalism and What Can We Do About It?

    Craiutu, Aurelian

    Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 142 (2022), Iss. 1 P.1

    https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.142.1.1 [Citations: 1]

References

  1. Acemoglu, D. and J. A. Robinson. 2006. Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Google Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D. and J. A. Robinson. 2012. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York: Crown Business.  Google Scholar
  3. Adhia, N. 2013. “The Role of Ideological Change in India’s Economic Liberalization.” Journal of Socio-Economics 44: 103 – 11.  Google Scholar
  4. Boaz, D. 2015. The Libertarian Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.  Google Scholar
  5. Boudreaux, D. 2017. “Bonus Quotation of the Day…” Cafe Hayek, November 25, 2017. https://cafehayek.com/2017/11/bonus-quotation-day-86.html/.  Google Scholar
  6. Caplan. B. 2019. “Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies.” EconLib, December 23, 2019. https://www.econlib.org/socialism-the-failed-idea-that-never-dies/.  Google Scholar
  7. Cicero, M. T. 1923 [44 BCE]. Laelius De Amicitia. Edited by W. A. Falconer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Google Scholar
  8. Das, G. 2009. The Difficulty of Being Good: On the Subtle Art of Dharma. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
  9. Deneen, P. J. 2018. Why Liberalism Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.  Google Scholar
  10. Derrida, J. 1994. Specters of Marx: State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International. London: Routledge.  Google Scholar
  11. Fukuyama, F. 1989. “The End of History?” The National Interest 16: 3 – 18.  Google Scholar
  12. Fukuyama, F. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.  Google Scholar
  13. Gaus, G. 2016. “The Open Society as a Rule-Based Order.” Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 9 (2): 1 – 13.  Google Scholar
  14. Gilligan, C. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Google Scholar
  15. Goldstone, J. A. 2002. “Efflorescences and Economic Growth in World History: Rethinking the ‘Rise of the West’ and the Industrial Revolution.” Journal of World History 13 (2): 323 – 89.  Google Scholar
  16. Iannaccone, L. 2018. Personal Correspondence.  Google Scholar
  17. Lincoln, A. 1894 [1858]. “First of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates. Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858.” In Abraham Lincoln: Complete Works, Comprising His Speeches, Letters, State Papers, and Miscellaneous Writings, Vol. 1. Edited by J. G. Nicolay and J. Hay. New York: Century.  Google Scholar
  18. McCloskey, D. N. 2000. “Post-Modern Free-Market Feminism: A Conversation with Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak.” Rethinking Marxism 12 (4): 23 – 37.  Google Scholar
  19. McCloskey, D. N. 2006a. The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Google Scholar
  20. McCloskey, D. N. 2006b. “Hobbes, Rawls, Buchanan, Nussbaum, and All the Virtue.” Unpublished Manuscript.  Google Scholar
  21. McCloskey, D. N. 2010. Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can’t Explain the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Google Scholar
  22. McCloskey, D. N. 2011. “The Rhetoric of the Economy and the Polity.” Annual Review of Political Science 14 (1): 181 – 99.  Google Scholar
  23. McCloskey, D. N. 2012. “What Michael Sandel Can’t Buy: Review of Sandel’s ‘What Money Can’t Buy.’” Claremont Review of Books 12 (Fall): 57 – 9.  Google Scholar
  24. McCloskey, D. N. 2016. Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Google Scholar
  25. McCloskey, D. N. 2017. “Neo-Institutionalism is Not Yet a Scientific Success: A Reply to Barry Weingast.” Scandinavian Economic History Review 65 (2): 116 – 23.  Google Scholar
  26. McCloskey, D. N. 2018. “Why Liberalism’s Critics Fail: Review of ‘Why Liberalism Failed,’ by Patrick Deneen.” Modern Age 60 (3): 13 – 22.  Google Scholar
  27. McCloskey, D. N. 2019. Why Liberalism Works: How True Liberal Values Produce a Freer, More Equal, Prosperous World for All. New Haven: Yale University Press  Google Scholar
  28. McCloskey, D. N. 2020. Bettering Humanomics: Beyond Behaviorism and Neo-Institutionalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Google Scholar
  29. McCloskey, D. N. and S. Hejeebu. 2004. “Polanyi and the History of Capitalism: Rejoinder to Blyth.” Critical Review 16 (1): 135 – 42.  Google Scholar
  30. Mill, J. S. 1879 [1859]. On Liberty and the Subjection of Women. New York: Henry Holt.  Google Scholar
  31. Niemietz, K. 2019. Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.  Google Scholar
  32. Nordhaus, W. D. 1996. “Do Real Output and Real Wage Measures Capture Reality? The History of Lighting Suggests Not.” In The Economics of New Goods, edited by T. F. Breshnahan and R. Gordon, 29 – 70. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Google Scholar
  33. North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Google Scholar
  34. North, D. C. 2005. Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton: Princeton University.  Google Scholar
  35. Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.  Google Scholar
  36. Nussbaum, M. C. 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Google Scholar
  37. Nussbaum, M. C. and A. Sen. 1993. The Quality of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
  38. Ó Gráda, C. 2009. Famine: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.  Google Scholar
  39. Orwell, G. 1949. Nineteen Eighty-Four. London: Secker and Warburg.  Google Scholar
  40. Peart, S. J. and D. M. Levy. 2005. The “Vanity of the Philosopher”: From Equality to Hierarchy in Postclassical Economics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.  Google Scholar
  41. Polanyi, K. 1944. The Great Transformation. Boston: Beacon Press.  Google Scholar
  42. Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Google Scholar
  43. Sandel, M. 2012. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.  Google Scholar
  44. Schumpeter, J. A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. Edited by E. Boody Schumpeter. New York: Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
  45. Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
  46. Shultziner, D., T. Stevens, M. Stevens, B. A. Stewart, R. J. Hannagan, and G. Saltini-Semerari. 2010. “Causes and Scope of Political Egalitarianism during the Last Glacial: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective.” Biology and Philosophy 25 (3): 319 – 46.  Google Scholar
  47. Smith, A. 1976 [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Glasgow Edition, Vol. 1: 1976, Vol. 2: 1981. Edited by R. H. Campbell, A. S. Skinner, and W. B. Todd. Indianapolis: Liberty Classics.  Google Scholar
  48. Smith, A. 1976 [1790]. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Glasgow Edition. Edited by D. D. Raphael and A. L. Macfie. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.  Google Scholar
  49. Trilling, L. 1948. “Introduction.” In The Princess Casamassima, by H. James. New York: Macmillan.  Google Scholar
  50. Tucker, J. A. 2017. Right-Wing Collectivism: The Other Threat to Liberty. Atlanta: Foundation for Economic Education.  Google Scholar
  51. Weber, M. 1958 [1904/1905]. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by T. Parsons. New York: Scribner’s.  Google Scholar
  52. Wilson, B. J. 2020. The Property Species: Mine, Yours, and the Human Mind. New York: Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
  53. World Bank. 2020. “GDP per capita growth (annual %) – India.” https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG?locations=IN.  Google Scholar

Abstract

Liberalism, as Fukuyama assured in 1989, is the end the telos of history. “Liberalism” is to be understood as a society of adult non-slaves, liberi in Latin. It arose for sufficient reasons in northwestern Europe in the 18th century, and uniquely denied the hierarchy of agricultural societies hitherto. It inspired ordinary people to extraordinary acts of innovation, called the Great Enrichment. How “great:” a stunning 3,000 percent increase in real GDP for the poorest people, from 1800 to the present, and now spreading to China, India and the rest of the world. It was equalizing. For it to happen, there had to be an ideological liberalization à la Walter Lippmann. And yet it was opposed by a rising ideology of statism, from the New Liberals in Britain to the right and left populists today. We need to defend a liberalism that causes humans to flourish, and resist its proliferating enemies on the left, right, and center.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Deirdre Nansen McCloskey: Fukuyama Was Correct: Liberalism Is the Telos of History 1
Abstract 1
References 1

Contact

Duncker & Humblot GmbH Carl-Heinrich-Becker-Weg 9 12165 Berlin, Deutschland T: +49 30 790006-0

Quick Navigation

2024 Duncker & Humblot GmbH

Powered by CloudPublish

We use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website. Learn more about how we use cookies.