THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE POLITICAL VIEWS OF FRANCIS FUKUYAMA

American political scientist, philosopher, political economist Francis Fukuyama became known in the late twentieth century for his geopolitical theory of the end of history. Fukuyama still adheres to the «end of history» concept. However, some of his political views have undergone significant changes.
The main purpose is to analyze what led to the formation of geopolitical views of Francis Fukuyama, to trace the content of his geopolitical concept, to find out the theoretical component of this concept. The goal is also to track the change in Francis Fukuyama’s views, namely his departure from neo-conservatism, which has resonated in political circles in recent years.
The following methods were used in the article: structural-functional method, institutional method, comparative method and system method.
The article shed light on the concept that sought to envision the development of the post-World War II world, which recognized the West’s superiority to other countries and the total spread of liberal democracy, its essence and basic tenets.
It has also been found that Francis Fukuyama’s geopolitical views have evolved and changed over the course of twenty years. In the course of the evolution of his views, Fukuyama abandoned the idea of the spread of democracy and state-building, of Western unilateralism; changed the emphasis on the causes of the inevitability of the «end of history»; reviewed the interconnection of economics, politics and culture.


Introduction
Geopolitics is a conceptual view of the policy of a state or group of states, based on the justification of their foreign and domestic political actions, the state and evolution of economic, political and social systems of society by the influence of geographical factors. Geopolitics is interdisciplinary in nature and serves as one of the theoretical underpinnings of state policy both within society and in the international arena.
The civilization of the 21st century is characterized by a high dynamic of political, economic, global, social, and cultural processes, which have caused fundamental geopolitical changes on the political map of the world and that has contributed to the formation of new tendencies and prospects of social development.

Політологічний вісник, 82 (2019)
The relevance of this article is that the political processes taking place in the modern world require detailed study and description to further predict the development of the vector of international sociopolitical relations. The choice of this research topic is due to the considerable interest in a possible future world order.
Among Western scholars who interpret the geopolitical transformational features of the world and use them as a methodology, one should distinguish L. Aron, Z. Brzezinski, G. Kissinger, D. Methods The following research methods were used in the work: structural and functional method (in the analysis of features of Frances Fukuyama's political concept); the institutional method (in identifying the peculiarities of Fukuyama's views on the public administration system); comparative method (in analyzing differences in Fukuyama's views on the future of liberal democracy); systematic method (when explaining the role and place of Francis Fukuyama in modern political science).

Results
Changing times brings with it a new outlook, forcing us to take a fresh look at things that have recently seemed to be constants. The postulates that seemed to be unshakable truths are rewritten and re-interpreted by their own creators, who are as zealously defending their newborn thoughts as they once confidently defended their almost opposite in content to their predecessors. It is quite natural, because modern society does not stand still and, being in constant motion, transforms the picture of the world faster than, sometimes, it is ready to perceive it. The birth of Fukuyama's geopolitical conception is caused by the tremendous upheavals of the late 20th century. At the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, the socialist system in the USSR and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe collapsed, and with it the world order, which was opposed by the socialist and capitalist systems. Although many prophets proclaimed the result in the West, it became a clear surprise to analysts. After the collapse of the socialist camp and the USSR, a number of political scientists, analysts, and experts have the impression that this event puts an end to the complex dialectics of the stages of globalization, and from now on the world becomes fully integrated, and. nothing can prevent the development of a liberal-capitalist paradigm that has prevailed on a planetary scale. There is an urgent need to reflect not only on why this has happened, but also on the new prospects for world development that the new challenges of the Cold War winners will have to face. The hyperglobalists were optimistic about these changes and believed that the «point of no return» had already passed and the world had become global, unified and planetary in general, and the residual conflicts and contradictions were gradually smoothed out by themselves. Francis Fukuyama held the same view.
Francis Fukuyama is of Japanese descent. He was born October 27, 1952 in Chicago. He graduated from Cornell University in 1974 and received a PhD in Harvard in 1977. Francis Fukuyama is considered one of the most famous political scientists in the United States.
In 1989, F. Fukuyama published an article with the intriguing title, The End of History, in the National Interest magazine. It has been reprinted in more than thirty countries. Considering the author's status, considering the date of writing and publishing the article «The End of History?», finally, to refer to the content of the article itself, we can say that Fukuyama's concept of the end of history captured and shaped the euphoria of the West over the end of the Cold War and tried to emerge as a scientific comprehension of the new geopolitical reality that was born in this connection. Such an understanding of the new political reality on a global scale is carried out by Fukuyama in the context of analyzing new trends in international relations. The horizon of Fukuyama's analysis and the horizon of its conception encompasses all of humanity and claims to be scientific, in other words, of fundamental importance.
The overall idea behind Fukuyama's concept is that with the end of the Cold War, fundamental changes have taken place in the world: the undisputed victory of economic and political liberalism has brought the entire Western world to a state of nirvana, in which Western societies have to wait for the moment (or approximately). in the same) state after some conceptual wanderings one after another plunged China, the USSR and other society of «second world», and maybe even some society of «third world» [1, p. 145]. Although it is likely that the nirvana of China and the USSR will be different from the nirvana of the western world, nevertheless, nirvana itself still serves as the final point of their social transformation. Liberalism is not obliged to be equally embodied in any society, and after all, it is a misfortune of society itself, if liberalism is not fully implemented in politics and economy. First of all, Fukuyama separates himself from those political commentators who tend to fall into scientifically unfounded euphoria over the end of the Cold War; Fukuyama proposes to bring this scientific foundation to this euphoria. There have been deep structural changes in the world, and obviously these changes are irreversible. The triumph of the West is obvious: there are no viable alternatives to liberalism. In the 1980s, major reforms began in the major communist countries, and most importantly, in these countries, the intellectual atmosphere changed: this applies not only to politics, but also to the widespread use of Western consumer culture in its various forms. These and other circumstances are not just the end of the Cold War: it is «the end of history as such, the completion of the ideological evolution of mankind and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the ultimate form of government. » It is not important that the principles of liberalism and democracy have not yet been fully implemented in the politics and economy of the largest Communist countries; it is important that the principles of liberalism and democracy are fully established in the minds of the people; this also means that the victory of liberalism in the material world after its victory in the world is ideal is a question of a foreseeable future.
The very idea of the end of the story is not original, Fukuyama continues. Hegel is probably a thinker closest to us in the Western tradition, who scientifically substantiated the idea of the end of history from those positions that we can share today. Much of Hegel's spiritual heritage inherited the West's interpretations of Marx, and this fact greatly diminished the attention of some Western political scholars to Hegel himself and his ideas, as he was often viewed through the prism of Marxism as the forerunner of Marx. It is important to understand, Fukuyama argues, that for Hegel, the contradictions that move through history exist, above all, in the sphere of human consciousness, and in this sense it is ideology that is understood not as a political doctrine but as a sphere containing religion, culture and moral values, defines the material world. Are there any fundamental challenges in history that modern liberalism is powerless to address but which would be addressed within the context of some alternative political and economic system? Fukuyama further argues that in the 20th century, liberalism faced two major challenges -fascism and communism. As a viable ideology, fascism was overcome by World War II, and it was not only a material defeat: the very idea of fascism failed, and this closed the way for fascism to be reborn. Communism is a much more serious ideological challenge and is a «great alternative to liberalism» [1, p. 137].
However, the class issue has been successfully resolved by the West and has faded into the Western world, and today the appeal of communism in Western society has been at its lowest level since the end of World War I. Nowadays, in the UK, in continental Europe and in Japan, the success of the elections has conservative parties, which stand for the market and against statism. The North Atlantic world -you can safely say -is guaranteed by communism. Turning to the non-European world, grandiose ideological transformations are striking here, especially in Asia. Japan is a prime example of a country that has embarked on the path of industrialization, where, like in Asia as a whole, political liberalism follows economic liberalism -slower than many had hoped, but perhaps inevitably. The power of a liberal idea would not be so impressive if it did not touch the largest and oldest culture in Asia -China. «You will not call China a liberal democracy today. No more than 20 percent of the economy is transferred to the market rails, and, more importantly, the Communist Party, which has appointed itself, continues to refuel itself, which does not allow a shadow to hint at the transfer of power. Everyone who is familiar with the outlook and behavior of the new technocratic elite ruling in China today knows that Marxism and ideological dictate no longer have any political significance and that for the first time since the revolution, the bourgeois consumption culture has acquired the real sense of the world» [1, p. 142].
The end of history, ends Fukuyama, means for the sphere of international relations that «much of the third world will remain in the courtyards of history and serve as the arena of conflict for many years», while China and the USSR, though not joining the Western nations in the near future, will forced to realize in one way or another the idea of a human state, and the world as a whole will develop on the model of deideologization.
The collapse of the Soviet Union caused a tremendous geopolitical shock. For America, the new geopolitical situation is a serious challenge. The United States is in a unique position -they are the first and only world power. «America holds a dominant position in four areas of global power: in the military, it has unique global deployment capabilities; in the field of economy, it remains the main driving force of world development; technologically, it retains absolute leadership in advanced science and technology; in the field of culture, despite its primitiveness, America has an appeal, especially among young people around the world, all of which provide the United States with political influence that no other state in the world has. It is the combination of all these factors that makes America the only superpower in the world in the full sense of the word. » In his book The End of History and the Last Man (1992), Francis Fukuyama argued that «in recent years, there has been an unprecedented consensus in the world about the legitimacy of liberal democracy as a system of government» [2, p. 134], which was exacerbated by the gradual defeat of competing ideologies, fascism, by fascism. etc. ).
In an effort to predict the nature and direction of development of the modern world political process, F. Fukuyama argues that the spread of Western (democratic) values and liberal principles of functioning of the economy inevitably will lead to the formation of liberal democracy, which is the «ultimate point of ideology. » The history of mankind, according to Fukuyama, ends with the political confrontation of the Cold War, which gave the greatest impetus to the development of civilization. The scientist puts forward a model of complete dominance of liberal values, the implementation of which will lead to the «end of history» -the end of a period of political and ideological confrontation, the creation of a global liberal-democratic civilization.
In his work America at the Crossroads (2006), Fukuyama emphasizes that the «end of history» does not mean an inevitable transnational movement to liberal democracy. The end of history, according to Fukuyama, is merely a «talk of modernization» (where liberal democracy is one of the «by-products» of the process of modernizing political systems).
Although endorsed by the neo-conservative movement in the world, it has long been accustomed to Fukuyama's «America at the Crossroads» as bold, sensational, and outrageous as the author goes on without limiting criticism of J. Bush's foreign policy. Analyzing the origins of neo-conservatism, he proposes a new version of US foreign policy, «realistic wilsonism».
Fukuyama, in essence, dissociated itself from the American neoconservative camp, which joined the crusade with a missionary idea to make the world more liberal and democratic. The apotheosis of the «project of the century» neocons was the war in Iraq. Francis Fukuyama, who yesterday maintained close contacts with the leading ideologues of neo-conservatism and even partly was himself, became their staunch opponent.
Apparently, it is precisely the crisis in neo-conservatism's theoretical approaches that makes Francis Fukuyama resort to Welshism, the purpose of which is to spread democracy through the creation of new international institutions. F. Fukuyama stresses that the ideology of neo-conservatives is, first and foremost, lacking in reliance on international institutions and the internationally recognized legal order. Hegemony as such should be forgotten as the world never recognizes it. And about freedom, it is universal only in historical perspective. Its acquisition by different peoples depends on many factors, including people's willingness to accept it. Noting such a readiness is not easy, it is a true art, which is, in fact, politics. The author of «Realistic Welshism» does not deny the need to use American power to support the liberation movement, but calls for avoiding ambitious projects that have no historical or cultural basis. He deems worthy of imitation the operation in Kosovo, which became an example of wise diplomacy and received NATO sanction. As for the situation in Iraq, Fukuyama cannot share the indifference of its former associates on the position of other democratic states. He refuses to consider Islamic radicalism as America's main enemy. Unlike the neo-conservatives, he is more interested in the thought of Europe than, for example, the fate of Israel, which, being surrounded by hostile neighbors, relies entirely on America's support.
Francis Fukuyama proposes to completely demilitarize the so-called global war on terror. Indeed, its essence is, in fact, the victory of democratic values and ideas in the hearts of Muslims. However, the author does not specify what ideas to oppose terrorist jihadism. First of all, one must think why, in fact, a huge number of people are ready to join the jihad elite? It is precisely in ideology, as in the case of fascism or other totalitarian regimes of the past. It is possible to defeat such people only when their ideology is exhausted. In this battle of ideas, it is necessary to persuade the masses of people around the world to abandon their beliefs in favor of the more liberal. Practical validation of such approaches is taking place today in many countries of the Middle and Middle East. They are fighting tyranny. But for freedom? Shows the future.
«Liberal democracy can represent the «final point of the ideological revolution of mankind» and «the final form of government in human society», thus being «the end of history» [3, p. 88]. This means that while earlier forms of government were characterized by irreparable defects and irrationalities that eventually led to their catastrophe, liberal democracy is said to be devoid of such fundamental internal contradictions. Although some modern countries may fail to achieve a stable liberal democracy and others may return to more primitive forms of government, such as a theocracy or a military dictatorship, but the ideal of liberal democracy cannot be improved... Which, in my opinion, has come to an end «It is not a sequence of events, even events of serious and great ones, but the History of the capital letter is that of history, understood as a single, logically consistent evolutionary process, considered in the light of the experience of times and peoples» [3, p. 95].
Finally, I would like to point out that Fukuyama's views are likely to evolve. It all depends on the future. In October 2018, Fukuyama states that «socialism must be returned» and acknowledges Marx's correctness in some matters: «At this stage, it seems to me that some of the things Karl Marx spoke about are true. He spoke about the crisis of overproduction... about the fact that workers are impoverished and demand will be insufficient». Still, the only state system capable of equal competition with liberal democracy, Fukuyama considers not capitalism as the type of modern China [4].

Conclusions
Summarizing the work done, we can come to the following conclusions. F. Fukuyama's geopolitical concept used the concept of «end of history» to denote the final victory of one of the ideologies, the system of liberal democracy.
As of the beginning of the twentieth century. no country in the world has ever considered what is now considered a democracy, that is, a government formed by the will of any adult citizen who can participate. Today, this system operates in 119 countries, more than 60% of all countries in the world. The monarchical form of government in the absolutist version is outdated, fascism and communism are completely discredited. In most states, democracy has become the sole source of political legitimacy. Democracy opponents now resort to its rhetoric and rituals.
At the «end of history»? the triumph of «liberal democracy» is Hegelian. It is this system that marks a long struggle of man for «recognition», and in liberal democracy freedom is equally distributed among all members of society. In America at the Crossroads, Hegelian reasoning disappears completely. Fukuyama no longer speaks of any «struggle for recognition»; the appeal of liberal democracy is now justified by his appeal to the «modernization theory».
Thus, Fukuyama is the first to apply the modernization theory in explaining the grand events of the 1980s and 1990s. He not only uses the material he has produced, but also adapts it to the trends of world development. This process has been going on for two decades. It can be said that the concept of the «end of history» is the most striking manifestation of the modernization approach, and its «fate» is indicative of the «fate» of modernization theory since the late 1980s.
Fukuyama's theory came at a time when authoritarian regimes were collapsing and democratic ones were established. It was inevitably seen as a victory for a market economy, a triumph for modernization theory. Thus, the relevance of the concept of the «end of history» was an attempt to form a new political and philosophical paradigm of the world.
The Fukuyama concept seeks to explain the course, results and perspectives of world history, especially the recent past and the immediate future. It examines the development of liberalism (conservatism, neoliberalism) as the only «viable ideology that has world-historical significance», on the basis of which universal western liberal democracy emerges as the ultimate form of government.
Fukuyama argued that the historical development of mankind had come to its logical end, after which the posthistoric day would begin. F. Fukuyama's story is, first and foremost, the struggle of ideologies, the winner of which is the ideology of liberal democracy. In particular, in the twentieth century. she was challenged by fascism and communism, but she successfully overcame them. Further events, according to the scientist, only confirmed his hypotheses.
However, twenty years after the publication of the article, F. Fukuyama still assumed the possibility of his own mistake. In the course of the evolution of his views, Fukuyama abandoned the idea of the spread of democracy and state-building, of Western unilateralism; changed the emphasis on the causes of the inevitability of the «end of history»; reviewed the interconnection of economics, politics and culture.
The study concludes that the concept of the «end of history» has the right to life and is not hasty or careless enough. Democratic values that most countries in the world have recognized as dominant in building their countries are a confirmation of this. The events of the «dignity revolution» in Ukraine add points and arguments in favor of the theoretical developments of Francis Fukuyama. Fukuyama was right in saying that the ideal of liberal democracy had prevailed. But this does not mean that the path to this ideal is completely passed and completed. Each new generation will have to go back to it, be aware of the problems of democracy and think about how to keep the progress that has already been made and where to go next.