Few people feel what is happening today more acutely than Alexander Dugin. Few people have been more deeply immersed in the events in Ukraine all these eight years. Some follow him, defending the Russian idea, others consider him almost the incarnation of evil. But no one is indifferent to his ideas.
The fate of the world order is being decided in Ukraine. This is not a local conflict between two powers that have not divided something between them. It is a fundamental watershed in history.
When trying to analyze the evils of the African continent, it is essential not to forget to address the ideologies on which Africa is aligned in an attempt to emerge on the geopolitical chessboard.
In the case of network technologies (technology) - Google, twitter, youtube, facebook, instagram, etc. - we see a very important phenomenon: they do oppose Russia not because they depend on the U.S. government. They do not depend on it. They are the tools of the globalists, of a supranational oligarchy that no one elected. And no one gave them the right to set their own rules on a global scale.
From an ideological point of view, the world is still living in the shadow of the controversy of the 1990s between Francis Fukuyama and Samuel Huntington. Whatever criticism may be levelled at the theses of both authors, their importance has not been diminished in any way, as the dilemma still remains and, moreover, is still the main content of world politics and ideology.
Thorough understanding of the special military operation in Ukraine requires a preliminary explanation: what, in the broadest sense of the word, are we dealing with? The concepts of “nation”, “nationality”, “people”, “ethnos” are totally confused, and hence those of “Russians”, “Ukrainians”, “Little Russians”, etc. We should first give an ethno-sociological map and distribute the concepts with which we operate in the analysis of this conflict.
The place of Ukraine in the geopolitical confrontation of Land and Sea has already been written about quite a lot and in some detail. Moreover, it is symbolic that the founder of geopolitics, Halford Mackinder, was the Entente high commissioner for Ukraine during the Civil War in Russia.
Probably only few people paid serious attention to the fact that the Fourth Political Theory, which I adhere to, pays the most serious attention to the criticism of nationalism. Most striking is the criticism of liberalism and the rejection of Marxist dogma. But equally necessary and fundamental is the radical rejection of not just nationalism, but even the nation.
I started to develop geopolitics 30 years ago. When Russia only started to feel itself the part of the Global Civilization, Global West, and everybody was optimistic becoming the part of this Humanity: Civil Rights Theory, Human Rights Theory, the Global World. We entered in this process we accepted the Western Identity, we have abandoned Soviet Identity, we have totally forgotten the Tzarist pre-Soviet identity and we try to be like everybody else. And in that moment not being too much engaged in this Soviet system, neither in Liberal System, I have discovered the geopolitics formulated by British authors like Halford Mackinder, who tried to explain the Great Game between British Empire and Russian Empire in the terms of Sea Power and Land Power.
Information and Reality
War is always a reality check. What precedes and accompanies it, as a rule, has a virtual character and is, if not pure disinformation (from all sides), then close to it. And it is almost impossible to catch those topics and theses which correspond to the real state of affairs. These are the laws of the correlation of the information sphere and reality.
Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2RxutaSGQU
Russell: My guest this week holds the distinction of being the only philosopher in the world to be officially sanctioned by the United States government. He is sanctioned because he is the leading intellectual behind the global nationalist populist movement that is threatening to take over governments across Europe and the United States, and he is known as Vladimir Putin`s mind. This is my interview with Alexander Dugin.
This short excerpt is from the book (Beginning with Heidegger: Strauss, Rorty, Derrida, Dugin and the Philosophical Constitution of the Political) by Philosopher Michael Millerman from the publisher Arktos.
Before starting to talk about counter-hegemony, we must turn to Antonio Gramsci, who introduced the concept of hegemony into the broad scientific discourse of political science. In his teachings, Gramsci says that within the Marxist-Leninist tradition, there are three zones of domination
This interview was conducted by Tsargrad TV.
Aleksander Dugin has acquired enormous scholarship in the history of world philosophy, mastering the depths of Guénon and Heidegger, Schelling and Brentano, Plato and Aristotle, Porphyry and Erigena. But all the grandiose apparatus of these great thinkers only allowed him to develop to the end the potential that Dugin possessed deep within himself already in his youth.
The seventh day of January is not only Orthodox Christmas according to the Julian calendar, but also the birthday of the Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin. This 7 January marks Dugin’s 60th birthday, on which occasion Continental-Conscious presents in translation an editorial by the Russian Islamic thinker and Dugin’s former Yuzhinsky Circle mentor, Geydar Dzhemal
Here we can draw a parallel with the biblical subject of the appearance of the snake in the earthly paradise. It would seem that heaven, Adam, and Eve abide in bliss and abundance; but even in this beautiful and fresh world, forces of coming misfortunes already make themselves known. And even before then, even at the dawn of Creation, when order is first being created and all creatures are close to God, the first of the Angels, of the entities of light, of the ministering spirits, rebels and is overthrown into the abyss with his supporters. From this abyss he later percolates into the earthly paradise. And at the end of times his power will be extended over the world, over the cosmos. But the devil, evil, the presage of the end, appears already in the first pages of the sacred history of the World. In a cloudless, happy heaven his supple body twines around the forbidden tree of the knowledge of good and evil and tempts Eve to try the fruits. Likewise, within the first Beginning, in the situation of the highest tension of spiritual forces and the "heavenly" primordial philosophizing, the great pre-Socratic jump, when philosophy, becoming ontology, still hesitates in indecision [over] how to interpret the being of beings, the end is already drawing near. This "first end" is an end within the first Beginning. Heidegger never regarded this end disdainfully, lightly, arrogantly, contemptuously. He honoured it and was delighted by it, because it was indeed something great. Even in error and delusion there is sometimes scale and scope worthy of veneration.
Eurasianism is interesting because it can be called the crown of Russian conservative political thought, that version of it that was maximally opposed to Modernity, which by that time had struck European civilization. Eurasianism in this degree is inherited by the Slavophils, Danilevsky, Leontiev.
However, an important distinction of Eurasianism is the comprehensive elaboration of the doctrine of the state and politics, the ideal principles of organizing political power, and the state in Russia.
Introduction to the fourth political theory
One might well consider the UN an institution that embodied a bipolar world order, in which the competition between the two world systems was seen as legitimate and limited by certain rules. The most influential body was the UN Security Council, in which the largest (later nuclear) powers were present - five of them permanent with veto power (USA, Russia, China, England, France). In fact, this composition of the UN Security Council is a vivid illustration of strategic parity.
In fact, as experience shows (using the example of two elderly relatives whom I recently lost), vaccination does not save either from contracting the coronavirus or from serving as a carrier and transmitter of coronavirus. In this sense, there is no difference at all between vaccinated and unvaccinated. And everyone (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) is sure that there is, and that the vaccine gives reliable protection against infection. It doesn’t.
After German philosophy, formalized by Nietzsche and interpreted by Heidegger, was recognized as the End of Western European metaphysics, the seynsgeschichtliche localization of the "great midnight" was theoretically fulfilled. But does this mean that it had been attained? This question, in which uncertainty and wavering knowingly show through, explains in many ways the paradoxes of the ties of the Conservative Revolution with the history of the Third Reich.
I have to admit that I haven’t interpreted speculative realism entirely correctly, starting with Quentin Meillassoux. It seemed to me as if in his defense of new materialism, his struggle of the subject against the subject, his apology of the eventuality, the proposal within the framework of the philosophy of the Copernican Revolution to displace the subject from its central position and to relocate it to the periphery, that there is something archaic in all of this, reminiscent of the materialism of the 19th century, of uncritical positivism, not least because of his criticism of Deleuze, whom he accused of his various “vitalisms”.
In our politics, the technical or political technology approach has reached a critical point. This began back in the 90s, but, interestingly, in parallel with the fundamental changes that have occurred in Russia since the Putin era, when almost everything has changed, and the liberal-Western course has been replaced by a sovereign-patriotic one, Russian politics has continued to be purely technological. Moreover, from the head of the political department of the AP to the head, it becomes no less, but more and more technological.