Though Fukuyama reportedly distanced himself from this later, I appreciate your answer. But don&#x27;t you think it&#x27;s redundantly tautological and circular&#x2F;self-referential to approach it like &quot;Fukuyama himself considered capitalist democracy to be the End of History, so it is the supreme progress&#x2F;triumph (end of history?) to have that&quot;.<p>Besides, I was coming from a philosophical perspective to the point where the basis of the things transcend the transient notions; that is, from a materialistic viewpoint (which I presume is Fukuyama&#x27;s and many of the fellows&#x27; here), how&#x2F;why does having an oligarchy or a corporate tyranny or a state with social welfare somewhere at some point in time is any more significant than some predator somewhere making some species extinct or some big wave scattering across in the ocean a million year ago or after (or any other event, such as a massacre by some of the humans, in the universe, for that matter).