从提出历史的终结到政治秩序的再探讨,福山的确发生了比较大的转变。其主要原因在于,观察到美国治理的病症与“第三波民主化”后一些非西方地区的治理失败,促使他强调亨廷顿早期的观点,认识到以普遍关系为基础的国家能力的重要性。但这种能力只有与法治和政治负责制一起,才能形成政治秩序的稳固支柱。福山将中国自春秋战国之后形成的国家视为现代国家的起点,因其建立起了脱离家族等特殊利益关系的理性官僚体系,法治则在印度和西方出现,而政治负责制完全是西方的发明,三个要素的妥善结合是一件不容易的事。福山早期的论证方式与历史终结论之间存在逻辑缺点,他后来对个人主义自由观的批评值得肯定,然而这种批评没有很好地融入三要素的理论构建。要克服这个困境,有必要进一步深入研究中国的传统政治智慧,在“仁义”之光的照耀下,被夸张了的“自由”才会找到合适的位置,人们会越来越多地发现,历史正在亚洲这块土地上重新开始。 Fukuyama did change quite a bit from the end of history to the political order. The main reason for this is that the observed failure of governance in the United States and the failure of governance in a number of non-western areas after the “third wave of democratization” prompted him to emphasize Huntington’s earlier view and recognize the importance of national capacity based on universal relations Sex. However, this ability can only form a firm pillar of the political order if it is accompanied by the rule of law and political accountability. Fukuyama considered the country that China formed since the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period as the starting point of the modern state because it established a rational bureaucratic system that departed from the special interests of the family and the like. The rule of law appeared in India and the West, while the political responsibility system was completely invented by the West The proper combination of the three elements is not easy. There was a logical flaw between Fukuyama’s early argumentation and the end of history, and his later criticism of individualist freedom was worthy of recognition. However, this criticism did not integrate well into the theoretical construction of the three elements. To overcome this predicament, it is necessary to further study China’s traditional political wisdom. Under the light of “benevolence ”, exaggerated “freedom ” will find a suitable place, people will be more and more Discovering that history is beginning over in this land of Asia.