End of 20th Century CL

John Lukacs's book deserves a new look in the post-September 11 world. Written in response to Francis Fukayama's well-intentioned but misguided book on "The End of History" (a thesis that Fukayama was forced to revise recently), Lukacs shows that history, and human nature, are both alive and well. Written in a lively, readable style that is capable of true eloquence, this book dismisses the neo-Hegelian thesis that the triumph of democracy is inevitable. Instead, Lukacs points to the long experience, in Europe and elsewhere, of war, evil and the continued power of cultural and moral factors in driving human behavior. By reminding us of these truths, Lukacs demonstrates that history can not only revive the past, but enlighten the present. Particularly impressive is his emphasis on character, and the power of individuals to change history, in decisive ways, at critical moments. Great men -- Churchill in particular -- are given their just due, and determinists, economic or otherwise, are given short shrift. My only criticism of the book is Lukacs's sharp and unwarranted criticism of Ronald Reagan, whose boldness and persistence are dismissed with the usual stereotyped remarks about his lack of energy, intelligence and education. Lukacs overlooks the fact that Gorbachev, who gets the lion share's of the praise for the end of the Cold War, merely bowed to the superior force of the United States, which was marshalled with great skill by Reagan and his national defense team, particularly Caspar Weinberger and CIA Director William Casey. To paraphrase Mae West, Gorby's goodness had nothing to do with it. Despite this defect, however, Lukacs's book, while nearly ten years old, has aged well. I recommend it highly, especially for those seeking understanding and perspective on the fate and future of the West in this hostile and unstable world.

People who don't like this book have a fundamental misunderstanding of Lukacs' perspective and, I would bet, have not read his previous book of essays on this same topic "The Passing of the Modern Age." Lukacs is not a "conservative". He is a self-proclaimed "reactionary". His ideas, generally don't fall within the typecast categories of "liberal" or "conservative". Readers who appreciate clearly thought out and well written observations into the events of the last century and possible senarios in the future will greatly enjoy reading one of the more original thinkers of our time.