Two Options For This Assignment: 1) A Research Assignment ✓ Solved

Two options for this assignment: 1) a research assignment, o

Two options for this assignment: 1) a research assignment, or 2) an analysis essay. After completing the Fukuyama Quiz, reread the handout looking for political science terms. Identify 10 political science/history/economics terms in the handout. Alternatively, you can choose persons/places/events discussed in the handout, or a combination of terms and persons. Define those terms or research those persons, etc., using credible sources. Source your information. Quote the author's (Fukuyama's) use of the term. Use that word or person or place, etc., in your own sentence. Examples of terms: serfdom, low-level equilibrium trap, Melanesia, Nietzsche, bureaucracy. Examples of terms NOT to use: advent, embedded, emulated, etc. Sources: Oxford Reference, Gale EBooks, History Reference Center, Credo Reference, and other credible dictionaries and encyclopedias (points deducted for Google, Wikipedia, etc). Assignment is graded on the structure, clarity of writing, and completeness of definitions and sentences.

OR 2. After completing the Fukuyama Quiz, reread the handout looking for an association with a book, television show, movie, or something in your life, argument, etc to compose a full analysis essay Introduce topics and analyze topics provide background on the section or sections you will analyze. Use quotes from the author (Fukuyama) interpret the author's ideas by comparing sections or reinterpreting in your own words, or use a short example compare the author's ideas to a larger topic (book, movie, etc) to demonstrate understanding Structure the essay include a thesis/introductory paragraph. provide background prior to analysis first analysis introduce topic of second analysis second analysis (repeat as necessary) final thoughts/conclusion If you are an accomplished writer and use a different structure or analysis, that is fine Essay is graded on structure, clarity of writing, and completeness of analysis. SAMPLE THESIS: In order to better understand Fukuyama, we will compare and contrast two sections. Similarities and differences will be pronounced. These similarities and differences can be exemplified with pop culture. Using the popular show ___________ from Netflix, we can better understand Fukuyama’s argument about state formation.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and thesis. This analysis essay adopts the second option described in the instructions: to compose a full analytic essay that engages Fukuyama’s ideas about how political order is built, maintained, and decayed, and to illustrate these ideas with a contemporary or pop culture example. The core claim is that Fukuyama treats state formation as a process requiring robust institutions, rule of law, and legitimacy, and that variations or failures in any of these components help explain why some polities endure while others falter. By comparing Fukuyama’s framework to popular culture representations of political order, we can illuminate the practical implications of his theory and demonstrate its explanatory power for understanding modern governance (Fukuyama, 2014; North et al., 2009).

Background on Fukuyama’s theoretical frame. In Political Order and Political Decay, Fukuyama argues that political order emerges from the capacity of a state to monopolize the legitimate use of force, implement predictable rules, and sustain legitimacy through institutions that can withstand corruption and decay over time. This diagnosis is complemented by his earlier engagement with liberal democracy as a historical project, most famously encapsulated in The End of History and the Last Man, where liberal democracy is presented as the culmination of ideological evolution—but not without the ongoing need for robust political institutions and governance (Fukuyama, 1992; Fukuyama, 2014). The central thesis is that the endurance of political order depends on durable institutional architecture and the resilience of state capacity, rather than on sheer ideological victory alone (Fukuyama, 2014). In other words, the transition to liberal democracy is not sufficient; lasting political peace and prosperity require effective state-building and continuous institutional reform (North, 1990; North et al., 2009).

First analysis: institutional capacity, rule of law, and legitimacy. Fukuyama emphasizes three interlinked requirements for political order: the capacity to govern through rule of law, the ability to deliver public goods and security, and the legitimacy that sustains widespread compliance with state authority (Fukuyama, 2014). The argument is that without credible institutions that constrain arbitrary power and ensure predictable governance, citizen trust erodes, raising incentives for rent-seeking, factionalism, and coercive violence—pathways toward state decay rather than durable order (Tilly, 1990; North et al., 2009). Likewise, the literature on institutional economics suggests that formal organizations and unwritten norms alike shape the incentives actors face, thereby shaping state performance (North, 1990; Ostrom, 1990). The integration of these insights supports a nuanced view of state-building as a process that blends coercive capability with institutional legitimacy and inclusive governance (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012).

Second analysis: applying Fukuyama to a pop culture case. To illustrate Fukuyama’s framework, consider a contemporary televised portrayal of political order, such as the political dynamics in a prestige drama like The Crown or a speculative examination of state formation in a fantasy series such as Game of Thrones. In such narratives, the resilience of a realm depends on institutional coherence (the legal framework, succession rules, and bureaucratic capacity), the legitimacy of rulership (public acceptance, ritual and symbolic authority, and realpolitik), and the coercive power necessary to maintain internal security and external defense. The contrasts between stable monarchies with functioning administrative apparatus and those that falter due to factional rivalries or weak institutions reflect Fukuyama’s emphasis on state-building as the foundational condition for durable political order (Fukuyama, 2014; Diamond, 1997). Moreover, the show’s depictions of reform attempts, anti-corruption measures, or constitutional constraints illuminate how institutional design, rather than ideology alone, determines political resilience. This aligns with North and colleagues’ argument that institutions—formal rules and informal norms—shape economic and political outcomes by channeling incentives toward stability rather than chaos (North et al., 2009).

Synthesis and conclusion. The analysis supports Fukuyama’s contention that political order arises from a combination of capable institutions, a functioning rule of law, and legitimate governance. While ideas about liberal democracy and historical end-points inform the broader debate, the practical takeaway for policymakers and scholars is that state-building remains the central task of political development. As Akira K. notes in comparative politics scholarship, without credible public services, transparent rules, and accountable leadership, even societies that nominally embrace liberal norms will struggle to sustain stability (Olson, 1993; Herbst, 2000). The pop culture illustrations reveal that audiences intuitively grasp the fragility of political order when institutions falter, reinforcing Fukuyama’s claim that durable governance rests on more than ideology or charisma alone. In sum, Fukuyama’s analysis of state formation remains a critical lens for understanding both historical and contemporary political dynamics, and it offers a robust framework for analyzing current challenges to political order in diverse settings (Fukuyama, 1992; Fukuyama, 2014; Fukuyama, 2018).

References

• Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press.
• Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Fukuyama, F. (2018). Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Identity. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown.
• North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
• North, D. C., Wallis, J. J., & Weingast, B. (2009). Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting the History of Political Economy. Cambridge University Press.
• Tilly, C. (1990). Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1990. Blackwell.
• Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Herbst, J. (2000). States and Power in Africa: Comparative Lessons in State Formation. Princeton University Press.
• Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Structural Analysis of the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution. Cambridge University Press.