The Return of History

Abstract

THE RETURN OF HISTORY. Flora Lewis T,he recent collapse of the communist monopolies in Eastern Europe and the attempt to reform communism's operations in the Soviet Union have been so dramatic that one is tempted to suppose there is nothing more to argue about. It only takes a second look to see this is not so. Soviet Foreign Minster Edward Shevardnadze, in his December 19, 1989 speech to the political commission of the European Parliament warned against "hasty statements about the end ofhistory and ofsocialism." And Francis Fukuyama, who launched the whole debate about history's completion, has now explained he didn't mean that nothing more would happen, but that liberal democracy has won in the historic battle of ideas over the "first principles" governing politics and society. The very idea ofpluralism means recognizing that among societies there will be inevitable disputes involving not only class interests but national interests, ethnic and religious affiliations, professional concerns, and even less traditional social issues such as aesthetics and ecology. In his narrow definition ofhistory, Mr. Fukuyama overlooks the permanent tension which always has and always will exist between the claims of society and the claims of the individual. In arguing that liberal democracy is the best structure to relieve this tension, Mr. Fukuyama overlooks the fact that man is a social animal with a highly developed individual self-consciousness. Flora Lewis is the foreign affairs columnist of the New York Times. Her most recent book, Europe: A Tapestry ofNations, was published in 1987 by Simon and Schuster. Miss Lewis has been following the European scene, on both sides of the divide, since World War II. 2 SAIS REVIEW I suggest it depends on circumstances. In certain situations—war, natural disaster, and widespread chaos—many people feel that society's claims must be given the highest priority. Of course, these are bad situations, to be considered exceptional and to be avoided when possible. But they do happen. And it is a matter of balance. Extreme individualism means hermitage, utter isolation, or unrestrained greed and the practice of "might makes right," none of which are tolerable. Extreme collectivism, on the other hand, leads to repression, dictatorship and stifled individualism, all in the name of society. Social evolution of all kinds, be it technological, economic, or religious, merely shifts the global balance, which in turn will need realignment. What is happening in the world is not a final synthesis, therefore, but a case of history bringing another correction. What happened in the totalitarian period ofLeninism-Stalinism (not yet really over) clearly was not the last gasp in the endless tug-of-war between individuals and society, but simply a suppression of the struggle's natural continuity. That is what the Czech dissident playwright , now president, Vaclav Havel meant when he wrote: "The totalitarian power brought a bureaucratic Order' in the living disorder of history, as a result of which it was mummified as history. The Government has, so to speak, nationalized time, and so time has been struck by the sad fate of so much that was nationalized. It began to perish."1 Now it is being revived. Even ifmost Eastern Europeans agree on the need for some form of liberal democracy (and this has by no means been demonstrated) the disputes about which form are only beginning. According to Mr. Shevardnadze, relations among states in the Warsaw Pact are to be "de-ideologized" with "full respect" for national sovereignty, leaving free play to domestic politics. But these politics revolve around previously unresolved national and ethnic conflicts. Repressed under Soviet dominion, when all roads had to lead to Moscow, these conflicts are once again boiling to the surface. The history of the West's post-World War II evolution skipped by the artificially compressed East. The East, consequently, will have to catch up if it is not to fall back into the quarreling, destructive fragments created by the break-up ofempires after World War I. National and Ethnic Conflicts The prosperity and social comforts achieved by Western Europe since World War II have been the most visible and magnetic attractions of the 1. Havel, Essais Politiques (Paris: Calmann-Levy, 1989), 167. THE...