From a larger Bloomberg article (this will draw out Fukuyama's just detractors -- why didn't he go public with his objections before the war, and before the war became such a complete mess? -- but it's an interesting read nonetheless):
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000088&sid=aAJEL3fbQNcw&refer=cultureNeocons in the Bush administration bent his theories to their own purposes, embarking on what political scientist Ken Jowitt calls a ``Leninist'' foreign policy designed to drive history in a certain direction.
``I did not like the original version of Leninism,'' Fukuyama notes acidly, ``and was skeptical when the Bush administration turned Leninist.''
You don't win friends in the Republican Party by comparing President George W. Bush to the Bolshevik with the pointy beard. Yet the comparison is valid. Unlike Marx, who believed that the global adoption of communism was inevitable, Lenin insisted on helping it along, with massive violence if necessary. Similarly, Fukuyama believes liberal democracy is inevitable, while Bush's neocons seek to promote it with tanks.
The difference between the two positions may sound academic. Far from it. A gulf separates them, with important consequences. . . .