Ukrainian war, multipolar world theory, Aleksandr Dugin: “Understanding the profound and philosophical reasons (certainly not the only ones)”

PANDEMIC WRITINGS
Multipolar World Theory – Aleksandr Dugin

In 2013, the Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin wrote Theory of the multipolar world. Published in Italy by Aga Editrice in 2019, Dugin’s essay is (among other things, because it is much more) the Russian answer to Francis Fujuyama. The theory of the multipolar world starts from an accurate historical analysis and reaches conclusions, summarized in some appendices (speeches, short articles) written by Dugin in the years 2017 and 2018.
“The current world order is unipolar, with the globalized West at its center and the United States at its heart” (omitted). “When you let one authority decide what is right, and who should be punished, you have a global dictatorship. I am convinced that this situation is unacceptable and must be countered. If someone deprives us of our freedom, we must react. And we will. The American empire must be destroyed, and sooner or later it will be ”. (Against the postmodern world, 2017).
A reference to the writings of René Guenon and Julius Evola follows, then – again – a tranchant judgment: “Spiritually, globalization is the manifestation of the Great Parody: the kingdom of the Antichrist”.
When Aleksandr Dugin uses the expression “the kingdom of the Antichrist”, he does so in the proper sense, not figuratively: he is an “Old Believer”. That of the Old Believers (in Russian: “старовеяры” or “старообряядцы” is an Orthodox religious movement that in 1666-1667 opposed the choices of the Orthodox hierarchy of their country, going so far as to separate from it in protest against the ecclesiastical reforms introduced by the Patriarch Nikon: The Old Believers in fact continued to practice the ancient practices of the Russian Church prior to the entry into force of the reforms.
For an Old Believer, the ongoing clash between the American Empire and Vladimir Putin’s Russia is not just a clash of civilizations, but a struggle between good and evil. Incidentally, a similar view is being expressed today by some traditionalist Catholics.
This eschatological interpretation finds precise historical reasons: Moscow has also been called the “Third Rome”, since the sixteenth century. Between 1523 and 1524, the Orthodox monk Filofej wrote a letter to the Grand Prince of Moscow: “Two Rome have fallen (note, Rome and Constantinople) but the third resists and there will not be a fourth”. In summary, Moscow (Russia) as the last bastion of Christianity.
The connection with the third secret of Fatima is curious. According to the will of the Mother of God as revealed to Lucia Dos Santos, one of the three little shepherds, to save the world the Holy Father should have consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. On the contrary, Pope Francis – in the consecration of last March 25 – consecrated the Russian Federation, Ukraine and the whole of humanity to the Immaculate Heart of Mary: as an agnostic, I pray that he is not the true pope (as someone begins to support with excellent arguments, a theme on which I have already written) and that the true and only holder of the apostolic munus, Pope Benedict XVI, followed the Marian will. Moreover, one of the two: either the Pope is Catholic, and as such he believes in the third secret of Fatima and respects its precepts to the letter, or he is not, he is a syncretist heretic and as such he does not care: tertium non datur!
The anti-imperialist and anti-globalist front, according to Dugin, should include all humanity which still has solid religious and cultural foundations and the clash should be that between Tradition and “present decadence”.
We need to take a step back. Modernization (or Westernization, since for us the terms are synonymous) arrived in the USSR exogenously, it was not an endogenous, progressive process as in the West. Russia considers itself an independent civilization, with specific characteristics that distinguish it from all other nations, like (for example) China, India and Japan. The globalist attack on Russia is nothing more than the attempt to create a homogeneous humanity, deprived of its historical and cultural roots, flattened on the values ​​of American society. This standardized humanity “deprived forever of those cultural differences that had been the driving force, the real engine of history” (according to Francis Fukuyama’s theory), will meekly submit to the supranational structure – American-led – which will govern the entire world. This process is already at an advanced stage: think of the WHO, a supranational body financed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to which the nation states have recently delegated part of their sovereignty in health matters.
Postmodernity is a complex phenomenon that must be studied and understood, first and foremost by our politicians. Texts such as The Fourth Industrial Revolution and COVID-19 The Great Reset by Professor Klaus Schwab should be on the nightstand of those who govern us …
The importance of Dugin’s thought is fully appreciated precisely considering the objectives of globalism announced by the Davos Forum. The Russian philosopher proposes an antithetical model of development: instead of an American-led world government, the birth of a multipolar world, capable of protecting religious and cultural differences and rejecting cancel culture, gender culture and all Western tendencies. I open a very brief parenthesis: the USSR was a model of multiethnic society antithetical to that of American society: instead of pursuing the path of integration, that of peaceful coexistence was pursued in the maintenance of religious and cultural differences. I suggest reading Joseph Roth’s extraordinary reportage for the Frankfurter Zeitung (Journey to Russia, Adelphi).
The view of the West as decadent postmodernity is not new. From Oswald Spengler (The sunset of the West) to the aforementioned René Guenon and Julius Evola, he arrives in Russia with unsuspected and authoritative critics of the Western model. On June 8, 1978, Nobel Laureate Alexander Solgenitsin delivered a memorable speech at Harvard University. Here are some passages: “If they ask me if I propose the West, as it is today, as a model for my country, frankly I answer in the negative. Some features of Western life that I have considered are extremely sad. A fact that cannot be disputed is the weakening of the human personality in the West, while in the East it has become firmer and stronger. Over many decades we have gone through spiritual formation, far in advance of the Western experience. Contrasts and often deadly conflicts have produced stronger, deeper and more interesting personalities than those generated by Western welfare standards. Therefore, if our society could transform into yours, this would mean an improvement in certain aspects, but also a change for the worse in some particularly significant points. After suffering decades of violence and oppression, the human soul craves higher, warmer, and more transparent things than those afforded by the mass habits of life today, introduced by a revolting invasion of commercial advertising, stupid TV shows. and from intolerable music. There are symptoms from which one can see how a society is in decline, such as, for example, the decline of the arts or the lack of great statesmen. The material and spiritual conflict on our planet is a conflict of cosmic proportions, and not a vague question in the future; it has already begun. The forces of evil have begun their decisive offensive. You can feel their pressure, yet the shows on the screens and publications are full of constructed smiles and people have taken off their glasses. Where is the happiness?
How was it possible to create this unfavorable balance of forces? How was it possible for the West to move from its triumphal march to its present state of debility? Were the changes and the loss of objectives in its development fatal? It doesn’t seem like that. The West has steadily advanced in accordance with its proclaimed social intentions, and with a progressive brilliant advancement in technology. And suddenly he found himself in his current state of weakness.
This means that the error must be at the root, the foundation of his thinking in modern times.
In young democracies, as in American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted considering that man is a creature of God. Freedom was given for the individual conditionally on the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. . This was the heritage of the previous thousand years.
In the West, there has been a total emancipation from the moral heritage of the Christian centuries with their great reserves of mercy and sacrifice. State systems have become increasingly materialistic and the world has found itself in a severe spiritual crisis and political impasse. All the technological achievements celebrated by progress, including the conquest of outer space, did not redeem the moral poverty of the twentieth century, as no one in the nineteenth century could have imagined.
It is man who decides the measure of all things on earth – the imperfect man, who is never without pride, selfishness, envy, vanity and dozens of other defects.
If, as humanism maintains, man was born only to be happy, he was not born to die. Since his body is condemned to death, his task on earth must evidently be more spiritual: not a total hoarding of goods in daily life, not the search for better ways to obtain material goods and therefore not carelessness with their consumption. Life must instead be the fulfillment of constant and serious reflection so that our journey through time can be above all an experience of moral growth, to become better human beings “.
Solgenitsin, like Dugin, laments the loss of the spiritual values ​​that already pervaded Western society in the 1970s.
The question is therefore: we Italians, heirs of a religious and cultural tradition unparalleled in the whole West, which side do we want to be on? From that of Atlanticist globalism, of the American-led world government or from the other, multipolar?
Nobody asked us. In the silence of the philosophers, in the crass and guilty ignorance of the journalists, in the idiotic belief that what is trendy is better than tradition, we wallow in the summer mud like pigs destined to be slaughtered as early as next autumn by a decision taken in Washington and ratified by the servants of our Republic of bananas (the palm trees in Piazza del Duomo in Milan are emblematic and prophetic).
We have been deprived of the right to make our choice and, even before that, to understand the real extent of the clash of civilizations taking place in the east of our Europe, blinded by mystification and propaganda, victims of our own ignorance.

By Alfredo Tocchi

Ukrainian war, multipolar world theory, Aleksandr Dugin: “Understanding the profound and philosophical reasons (certainly not the only ones)”