Fukuyama vs. Taki on WWI

Texto indicado por AAA em Fukuyama no Blasfémias, de Daniel McCarthy

Without World War I there would have been no socialism. As Taki puts it, "socialism, the great cancer that has befallen us, would have remained a dream among hirsute intellectuals on the Left Bank of Paris."

Note that Taki and Fukuyama agree on the details. Had the Germans won World War I there would have been no Russian Revolution, no World War II, no Hitler, no Holocaust, no Cold War. Instead of all that, a mild form of 19-century imperialism would have persisted and Germany would have been a cultural and military world power. Taki likes the idea; Fukuyama doesn't."

"Neoconservatives profess allegiance to "democractic capitalism," but the "democracy" matters much more to them than the "capitalism," as Fukuyama's piece suggests.

Even socialism aside, what kind of case can anyone even nominally on the right make for democracy? Fukuyama doesn't make a case, he simply assumes that his readers (Wall Street Journal readers) take the worth of democracy for granted. In explicitly left-wing circles this would not be controversial, but the traditions of the right have always been critical of democracy."

Nota: a questão principal nem é se os Alemães tivessem ganho, mas se a paz se tivesse feito com concessões mútuas, ainda antes da intervenção americana e da queda do Czar (e consequente tomada do poder pelo comunismo). Mas ainda que a tivessem ganho, todas as guerras entre monarquias na Europa, não foram de conquistas "per si" mas por concessões estratégicas, posicionamentos de alianças, regras nas colónias, etc. Nem o combate e derrota de Napoleão beliscou a preservação e soberania francesa, e assum sucedeu nas restantes guerras "civilizadas" intra-europeias (iso é, descontando a guerra que inaugurou a mobilização geral, feita para uma Nova Ordem mais iluminada e racional por Napoleão) até à Grande Guerra.