244
PARTISAN REVIEW
tional evidence of the root causes of the Great Disruption. Fukuyama
argues that this is not an American phenomenon related to a permissive
era in political attitudes and judicial practice, but one that reflects deeper
issues of changing social structure in a postindustrial economy.
Fukuyama's account presses even further. The change in family struc–
ture is part of a great loss of "social capital," that is, of the body of
inherited norms which characterizes a stable society. The depletion of
social capital signals a fundamental crisis of moral authority and polit–
ical legitimacy. The religious beliefs that accompanied moral norms in
all Western societies were weakened-a weakness which was strongly
evident in the Woodstock or "Dionysian" aspects of Sixtyism. Similarly,
the consensus on political authority, which emerged with the birth of the
modern state and the doctrines of the Enlightenment, were challenged
in the 1960s.
In
sum, Fukuyama considers the fundamental definition of
Sixtyism to be a crisis of societal order-both moral and political.
Consequently, the significance of the 1960s is not to be caught in the
graphic television images of Vietnam protests or urban riots in the
United States. As he writes,
"If
the same phenomena occur in a broad
range of countries, then we can rule out explanations specific to one sin–
gle country." Fukuyama argues that the lack of social capital, demon–
strated in the social pathology of family breakdown, crime rates, and
personal anomie, is common to all developed countries of the West.
According to Fukuyama, this deep, pervasive crisis probes the foun–
dational bases of the capacity of human beings in technologically
advanced cultures to achieve norms of social order. Therefore, he under–
takes an extensive theoretical analysis of the sources for societal norms
and political authority. These include a discussion of the basis in the
neurobiology of the human species for moral and social norms, as well
as an analysis of the functional utility of norms in the process of human
evolution. These investigations lead Fukuyama to conclude that human
beings are very successful at creating norms and adapting to diverse
societal challenges. Accordingly, unless the Great Disruption is an
eschatological event, it is most likely that some remedy will be found for
the restructuring of human family, political authority, and moral norms.
Yet in terms of a historical narrative of the recent past, Fukuyama
provides little empirical basis for his optimistic projections. On the con–
trary, the empirical studies he cites provide graphic details of the bank–
ruptcy of "social capital." The theoretical inquiries he reviews suggest
the possibility of a "Great Reconstruction." Yet Fukuyama's argument
demonstrates only the theoretical possibility of a reconstruction while
tracking the realities of the Great Disruption.
