Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory and His Allies in the Global Revolution

Moskova Büyükelçisi Kurtuluş Taşkent, Rusya ile vedalaştı

Fourth Political Theory Official Website

Counter Currents recently published an article compiling viewpoints from Alexander Dugin. Read the article here.

Alexander Dugin is the author of The Fourth Political Theory. It is a book that attempts to create a completely new political ideology. He outlines the 3 main political ideologies that have dominated the modern, industrial world thus far: Liberal Democracy, Marxism and Fascism. Fascism and Marxism were losers in the global game as Democracy made its ascent to power. We are now living in a post-political world where the Liberal Ideologies of Democracy are becoming the one political system for the entire world. This one system is erasing the traditions and cultures of the countries that it dominates.

Was the 3rd Political Theory Really a Failure ?

One of the largest criticisms against Dugin’s ideology is that the 3rd Political Theory isn’t really the failure that Dugin claims it to be. The third political theory is fascism. Fascism began to rise in prominence in the 1930’s, particularly in Germany and Italy. As the economies of these nations pulled themselves out of a Great Depression, engineered by Neo Liberal Capitalist Economics, many political thinkers began to see Fascism as the way of the future. After all, it was only when Germany abandoned the impotent Weimar Republic (a Democracy) that their economy really began to pick up steam. Yet these fascist governments were destroyed by World War II – not from economic defeat.

Today, many pseudo authoritarian states are actually starting to out-perform their Democratic counterparts. China and the Authoritarian Model: The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Economic Freedom (Academia.edu Report)

Too Much of a Defense, Not Enough Offense: 

My other criticism of Dugin’s theory is that it is defined too much by what it is against and not enough of what it is for. Yes, I get that he doesn’t like the current world order, but he needs to explain further what he wants to replace it with. His book offers a vague description of a multi-polar world order where Europe and Russia are allies in a fight against American cultural influences. But it needs more of a strategy guide and less of a philosophical dissertation.

I will delve more into his theory below.

Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory 

Dugin puts forth the parameters for a new Political System that is united against a Liberal Global Order, this new ideology would be an opposition to Democratic Liberalism – and thus value culture and tradition.

What are the meat and potatoes of Dugin’s text?

  • The Fourth Political Theory is a crusade against: Post Modernity, The Post Industrial Society, Liberal Thought realized in practice, and globalism itself. (Page 21, Kindle)
  • A denial of racism in the true sense, defining racism as the hierarchisation of society based on ethnic, religious, social, technological, economic and culture grounds. Dugin states that much of Democracy is a Western, Anglo-Saxon model of culture and government that has been enforced on the rest of the globe.  (Page 45, Kindle)
  • An emphasis on “multi-polarity,” i.e. the autonomy of multiple cultures having their own traditions and values.
  • A definition of “Liberalism” as the liberation from all forms of collective identity – which makes liberalism a kind of cultural genocide. (Page 47, Kindle)
  • An emphasis on the “village state” – or the Dorfstaat – as a political center of power. (Page 48, Kindle)
  • The disregard of unidirectional “progress,” meaning that societies shouldn’t always focus on “constantly moving forward.” (Page 48, Kindle)
  •   A rejection of “monotonic” processes, since monotonic processes are completely absent from nature. (Page 61, Kindle) Nature is a diverse place. A multipolar system is where diverse cultures,traditions and political ideologies co-exist in a cooperative landscape.
  • “Instead of modernisation and growth, we should instead orient ourselves in the direction of balance, adaptability, and harmony.” (Page 64, Kindle)

One of the ideas floating around from the Fourth Political Theory is an alliance between Russia and Europe. Yet another interesting thing about his ideology, is that he seeks to form a unified resistance – rather than excluding non-whites from the movement. Read the following quote:

I consider the “White nationalists” allies when they refuse modernity, the global oligarchy and liberal-capitalism, in other words everything that is killing all ethnic cultures and traditions. The modern political order is essentially globalist and based entirely on the primacy of individual identity in opposition to community. It is the worst order that has ever existed and it should be totally destroyed. When “White nationalists” reaffirm Tradition and the ancient culture of the European peoples, they are right. But when they attack immigrants, Muslims or the nationalists of other countries based on historical conflicts; or when they defend the United States, Atlanticism, liberalism or modernity; or when they consider the White race (the one which produced modernity in its essential features) as being the highest and other races as inferior, I disagree with them completely (Source).

An interesting quote on Muslims: 

Muslims form a part of the Russian population, and are an important minority. Therefore, Islamophobia implicitly calls for the break-up of Russia. The difference between Europe and Russia in our attitude toward Islam is that, for us, Muslims are an organic part of the whole, while for Europe they are a post-colonial wave of re-invaders from a different geopolitical and cultural space. But since we have a common enemy in the globalist elite.

This is an idea that I myself have often argued. Those on the Right actually have much more in common with the Traditionalist Muslims they fight, than they do with the Neo Liberal Capitalist Global order. There is that old clishe, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The Problem with The Left: 

The problem with the Left is different. It is good when it opposes the capitalist order, but it lacks a spiritual dimension. The Left usually represents itself as an alternative path to modernization, and in doing so it also opposes organic values, traditions and religion, just as liberalism does.

I would be happy to see Left-wing identitarians who defend social justice while attacking capitalism on one hand, and who embrace spiritual Tradition and attack modernity on the other. There is only one enemy: the global, liberal capitalist order supported by North American hegemony (which is also directed against the genuine American identity).(Source).

Dugin is spot on in his criticism on the Left. The Left has positive ideas to offer in terms of social justice, rhetoric against the ruthlessness of the Capitalist World order, and in its fight to save the environment. Yet as Dugin said, the problem with the Left is that they are spiritually bereft. They also don’t have any real, tangible alternatives to the ideologies they combat. In criticizing the Right, on the other hand, Dugin considers them allies – but disagrees with their fight against Muslims, Immigrants or Nationalists of other countries based on historical incidents.

And finally, Dugin makes the most important quote below: 

We need an open, undogmatic Front that is beyond Right and Left.

We have prepared for the coming moment of opportunity for too long. But now, finally, it is not so far in the future.

We will change the course of history. At present, it is on a very wrong course.

We can only win if we combine our efforts.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Home, Political Theory and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory and His Allies in the Global Revolution

  1. northernsea says:

    I guess he seduced you with his Christian rhetoric. You need to do a bit more deconstruction.

  2. Swarup says:

    The third political theory should include islam,political biblical christianity and zionism also.It is because like Fascism they believe in nationalism and global domination of their nation though their concept of nation is not based on ethnicity or geography but following a particualr faith.Zionism is slightly different form the other two

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s