HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899.jpg
2.4 MB
Extraction Summary
3
People
5
Organizations
4
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Interview transcript / house oversight document
File Size:
2.4 MB
Summary
This document is a page from a transcript (likely House Oversight material) featuring an interview between an individual named Shaffer and political scientist Francis Fukuyama. Fukuyama discusses his experiences with nation-building in Afghanistan and Iraq post-9/11, his time at Johns Hopkins SAIS, and his skepticism regarding the inevitability of democratic institutions, citing the accidental survival of the English Parliament as a key factor in European democracy. There is no direct mention of Jeffrey Epstein on this specific page.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Francis Fukuyama | Interviewee/Speaker |
Discussing political theory, nation-building, and his books.
|
| Shaffer | Interviewer |
Asking Fukuyama about historical theory and moral progress.
|
| Hegel | Philosopher |
Mentioned by Shaffer regarding theories of history and moral progress.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Johns Hopkins |
University where Fukuyama worked.
|
|
| SAIS (School of Advanced International Studies) |
Specific school within Johns Hopkins where Fukuyama ran a program.
|
|
| English Parliament |
Cited as an example of a feudal institution surviving into the modern period.
|
|
| United States |
Mentioned regarding its understanding of nation-building difficulties.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'.
|
Timeline (1 events)
September 11, 2001
Terrorist attacks mentioned as a catalyst for Fukuyama's concern with failed states.
USA
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the context of nation-building efforts.
|
|
|
Mentioned in the context of nation-building efforts.
|
|
|
Country mentioned regarding foreign policy.
|
|
|
Region mentioned regarding the development of democracy.
|
Relationships (2)
Transcript showing dialogue between the two.
Fukuyama states: 'When I was at Johns Hopkins at SAIS...'
Key Quotes (4)
"This really started with a practical concern I had after dealing with failed states and nation-building issues in the wake of September 11"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899.jpg
Quote #1
"It seemed to me that the United States in particular didn’t appreciate the difficulty of this kind of activity, because we didn’t adequately understand how hard it was to establish institutions."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899.jpg
Quote #2
"Fundamentally, I believe in liberal democracy, that it’s the best form of government, and that the world has made moral progress."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899.jpg
Quote #3
"The reason we got to democracy in Europe is the almost accidental survival of a feudal institution — the English parliament — into the modern period."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,883 characters)
24
FRANCIS FUKUYAMA: This really started with a practical concern
I had after dealing with failed states and nation-building issues in the
wake of September 11 and our nation-building efforts in Afghanistan
and Iraq. It seemed to me that the United States in particular didn’t
appreciate the difficulty of this kind of activity, because we didn’t
adequately understand how hard it was to establish institutions. When
I was at Johns Hopkins at SAIS [School of Advanced International
Studies] I ran an international-development program, focusing on
issues of anti-corruption and improving governance. And a lot of it
seemed premised on an overly optimistic faith in the ability of
outsiders to effect desired outcomes. So I decided to write a book
about where institutions came from in countries that had them and
could take them for granted. We’ve forgotten a lot of that history and
how we’ve gotten to the present. Along the way it was also a means
of revisiting a lot of The End of History 20 years later.
I had after dealing with failed states and nation-building issues in the
wake of September 11 and our nation-building efforts in Afghanistan
and Iraq. It seemed to me that the United States in particular didn’t
appreciate the difficulty of this kind of activity, because we didn’t
adequately understand how hard it was to establish institutions. When
I was at Johns Hopkins at SAIS [School of Advanced International
Studies] I ran an international-development program, focusing on
issues of anti-corruption and improving governance. And a lot of it
seemed premised on an overly optimistic faith in the ability of
outsiders to effect desired outcomes. So I decided to write a book
about where institutions came from in countries that had them and
could take them for granted. We’ve forgotten a lot of that history and
how we’ve gotten to the present. Along the way it was also a means
of revisiting a lot of The End of History 20 years later.
SHAFFER: Some theorists, like Hegel, think that history doesn’t just
tell us what is stable, or what works, but actually points us toward
moral progress. Do you believe that?
tell us what is stable, or what works, but actually points us toward
moral progress. Do you believe that?
FUKUYAMA: Fundamentally, I believe in liberal democracy, that
it’s the best form of government, and that the world has made moral
progress. But that’s a separate question from whether the
development of democratic institutions is inevitable and driven by an
underlying historical force. I’ve become more skeptical of that latter
belief over the years as I’ve become more attentive to the role of
accident and contingency. And my current book is about a lot of that.
For example: The reason we got to democracy in Europe is the almost
accidental survival of a feudal institution — the English parliament —
into the modern period. That’s something that didn’t happen in other
it’s the best form of government, and that the world has made moral
progress. But that’s a separate question from whether the
development of democratic institutions is inevitable and driven by an
underlying historical force. I’ve become more skeptical of that latter
belief over the years as I’ve become more attentive to the role of
accident and contingency. And my current book is about a lot of that.
For example: The reason we got to democracy in Europe is the almost
accidental survival of a feudal institution — the English parliament —
into the modern period. That’s something that didn’t happen in other
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031899
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document