The Shield of Achilles posits that the story of the 20th century was the struggle between fascism, communism, and parliamentarianism in a an epochal war that lasted from 1914 to 1990. [Full disclosure - I haven't made it all the way through the book yet, but what I've read so far is quite interesting if overlong.] It was the vanquishing of fascism and communism during this war that led to the famous claim by Francis Fukuyama that we had arrived at "The End of History". And yet, here we are, locked in another war that looks to be both long and epochal with fascists.
And the parliamentarian nations that triumphed have been thoroughly infected by communism - which is why it's perfectly acceptable to proclaim yourself as a communist at almost any university in the Western world (for instance, I was taught Econ 101 by prof Gurley who made no bones about being a communist), but not proclaim yourself a fascist. It is considered rude to mention the fact that communists are as deadly and inimical to individual liberty as fascists (the communists were able to kill more -- 100 million -- in the last century mainly because they lasted longer in power because the fascists attacked the parliamentarians first) in elite circles.
Rather than an end, we got a brief pause before once again the struggle between divergent societal organizational models resumed; but at least by winning the last war, parliamentarianism is in a far stronger position than the last time and can obtain victory mainly by summoning the will to win backed by the confidence in its own rightness. But our elites, wedded to communism, lack that will and confidence and are hurting, not helping, the war effort -- not by taking an active role against, but by sitting out -- pretending that there isn't a war on, or at least not a real one.
