The End Of Communist Inevitability

---
In 1843 a book called the whig interpretation of history was published. It was very tapped into the zetigeist. The basic theme was the moral superiority of the English civilisation of the time. Not only was then-present society better than anything that had gone before, it was the best things could ever be. Nothing could improve on Anglicanism and constitutional monarchy. All that remained was for the rest of the world to catch up. This was what history had long been building towards.

Things had suffered a slight backwards step in the dark ages, but otherwise history had been a tale of progression from them to now. This is the Whig Interpretation of History: that history is going somewhere, and that somewhere is here.

This theory fell apart with the fall of the peaceful nineteenth century liberalism. But the core idea survived. History isn't just the tale of what was, but a process by which we approach a distinct goal. The early socialists, including Marx, believed their triumph was a historical inevitability. They had a better system and people would eventually wake up and embrace it.

The idea survives today, having outlived Liberalism and Communism. Another book has become its most famous expression, "The End of History" by Francis Fuck-ya-ma, State Department operative. Back to the nineteenth century liberalism. But this time there was a difference. There was no true belief behind Fukuyama. His book wasn't a statement of belief, but a statement of intent.

The intent was to eliminate all alternatives to the economic orthodoxy. The new interpretation of history was the old interpretation of history. The Whig interpretation. History was going somewhere again, but not into communism or Anglicanism. Now it was going, and had always been going, into capitalism and facade democracy.

But this isn't the way of history. History is not going anywhere. History is not a tale of progress but of conflict.