•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This paper analyzes the historiography of a scholarly debate on democratic ideology. Using the end of the Cold War as its epoch, it details the debate on the subject of “Whig history”, an interpretation of the past that argues that Western liberal democracy is the inevitable conclusion of world history. Analysis demonstrates that the end of the Cold War solidified two intellectual camps—one that believed in the interpretations and predictions of Whig history, and one that believed this ideology was incorrect and had potentially dangerous consequences. The end of the Cold War revitalized the dormant Whig interpretation of history within academic circles. The following decades were characterized by the analysis of world events to either defend or refute Whig history. While focusing on the effects of 1989-1991, this paper analyzes roughly a century of historiography, from 1931 to 2022. Although non-exhaustive, specific historians and political scientists were chosen based on the impact and prominence of their arguments to construct a basic timeline of this scholarly debate. This paper is not meant to express support for either argument, but to catalog and understand a debate that is becoming increasingly relevant in the twenty-first century, an era that has seen a trend of global democratic backsliding.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.25035/irj.09.01.03

Download

Share

COinS