Do you think Fukuyama's predictions and Huntington's Clash of Civilizations still hold water?

Just ruminating on the current conditions of the world. Things do not look pretty for democracy or liberalism, I can say that much with certainty.

At the sunset of the Cold War, Fukuyama argued that market economics and liberal democracy would permeate around the globe. On Markets, history has demonstrated his thesis to be correct. China, India, Yugoslavia , Cuba, Baathist Syria, Ex-Eastern Bloc and even North Korea have embraced privatization (supply-demand chains) to boost development even in the labor sector. Interconnection, in the domains of globalization, have indisputably been a hallmark of 21st Century.

Notwithstanding, his claim about the natural expansion of democracy has aged less gracefully. Hungary, the United States, Venezuela, Turkey, Serbia, India, Albania, Nicaragua, and Burkina Faso, have experienced noticeable erosion on the visibility of the press,. Their democratic guardrails, additionally, have either burnt down or remain flammable. I am not too optimistic about the future given that Far Right populism seems to be blossoming even in Europe and UK, even recently in Japan, there was a reversal on Gay rights. With all of that considered, I would like to think that this is only a brief episode, catalyzed by the economic, social, and cultural shock-waves of COVID, but I remain cynical.

Alternatively, I never really subscribed to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations Thesis, it always felt anachronistic. The Mullahs of Iran, for example, have displayed a stronger preference towards Armenians over Muslim-Majority Countries like Turkey and Azerbaijan. Assad and Saddam supported India's claims to Kashmir over Pakistan, while Arafat supported Greek Cypriots against Turkish Imperialism too.

When we run the clock even back further, you'll notice "inter-cultural" alliances being made everywhere. It wasn't too long ago when European Countries were at each others' necks, in spite of that, the Ottomans fostered an alliance with Hungarian and German Imperialists in the First World War. So his axiomatic pretext about "cultural" homogenization, in terms of interstate conflict, has resembled reality poorly. When you unblur the lines, you also recognize that culture is abstract and always changing. The concept of "nation state" is pretty novel. For the majority of history, the EU/West have been quarreling violently with one another. The Eastern Bloc had joined the EU less than 35 yrs ago too.

I struggle to predict how the world order will evolve from here or if we will see huge ramifications economically as Trump is blanketing tariffs like no tomorrow. In fact, a cascade of socialism/isolationist economic policy seems unlikely even if the US takes such a route because China has proven to be able to produce products and trade quite efficiently.

Eric Hobsbawm, the notorious Stalinist historian, has even remarked that state socialism had illuminated itself to be a failure. Zizek, likewise, has once stated that it is easier to imagine the world ending before capitalism as a construct. I am inclined to agree with both despite not being a communist.

What do yall think the future has in store for us? And to what capacity do you think Fukuyama's and Huntington's axioms remain accurate? I am willing to argue that Kissinger's realism stands to be more accurate than either of the two in predicting the outcomes of international relations and geopolitical conflict.