He would say that its not that liberal democracy is some teleological final state. But more like a local optimum that we can't hill climb out of. There simply aren't different ideas about how to organize states "beyond" democracy.
I think the shift is subtle but important. It implies a lack of ideas as opposed to a "prediction" about the consequences of 1991.
I'm going by his articulation on a recent podcast with Chris Hayes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY9yBZm_57w
He would say that its not that liberal democracy is some teleological final state. But more like a local optimum that we can't hill climb out of. There simply aren't different ideas about how to organize states "beyond" democracy.
I think the shift is subtle but important. It implies a lack of ideas as opposed to a "prediction" about the consequences of 1991.