Seminar 6: Conclusion and Feedback

Question 1

In “The Tragedy of Central Europe” what does Kundera define as being European?

Answer 1

As being Western -> he states the moment a nation (i.e. Hungary) is no longer European, it is no longer western, and therefore it loses their identity as the nation’s history is built around being European

Question 2

In what way did Kundera claim Europe is synonymous with the west?

Answer 2

In a spiritual and cultural sense i.e. Roman Christianity (commitment to intellectual freedom and human rights)

Question 3

What is the ‘Tragedy of Central Europe according to Milan Kundera”

Answer 3

Countries of Central Europe (Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia) have historically benefited from culturally western but were forcibly incorporated into the Eastern bloc after WWII

Question 4

What was the impact on countries in Central Europe after being incorporated in the Eastern bloc after WWII?

Answer 4

It meant they had a loss of identity as they were cut off from their historical and cultural roots in Europe as the west overlooked their plight by treating the, as part of the East rather than recognising their western heritage -> Central Europe became a cultural and political orphan (western in spirit, but under Eastern domination)

Question 5

How does Francis Fukuyama class “History” in the ‘The End of History?’?

Answer 5

Classes it as the ideological evolution of humanity toward the most rational and just form of government -> believed this progression reached its endpoint with the global spread of liberal democracy and free-market capitalism

Question 6

Accoridng to Fukuyama, what happened after the fall of communism?

Answer 6

It mean the end of all other ideological alternatives to liberal democracy had ceased to exist (i.e. facism, Marxism) -> therefore claimed “History” had ended in the sense that no further ideological evolutions as necessary (liberal democracy and “won”)

Question 7

What did Fukuyama get right about the 20th century?

Answer 7

That is filled with violent ideological conflict (first between liberalism and absolutism, then against fascism and communism and finally against nuclear-armed marxism) but liberal democracy triumphed

Question 8

What did Fukuyama miss or underestimate?

Answer 8

• The reliance and adaptability of authoritarian regimes (i.e. China, Russia) -> they resisted democratisation and developed ew models autocratic capitalism (e.g. China’s surveillance state)
• Ignored nationalism, ethnic conflict and religion as enduring forces -> event like the Rwandan genocide, Balkan wars and Islamist extremism show that ideological conflict didn’t end - it shift into new forms
• He frames his argument form a Euro-American perspective -> glosses over impact of colonialism, decolonisation and emergence of the Global South -> struggles = deeply ideological, tied to anti-imperialism and sovereignty