Eschatologies of a Multipolar World

BRICS: The Creation of Multipolarity

XV BRICS Summit: The Multipolar World is Established

The XV BRICS summit made a historic decision to admit six more countries to the organization—Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Thus, in fact, the formation of the core of the multipolar world was completed.

Although BRICS, formerly BRIC, was a conditional association of semi-peripheral (according to Wallerstein) or “second world” countries, the dialogue between these countries, which are not part of the structure of the collective West (NATO and other rigidly unipolar organizations dominated by the United States), gradually outlined the contours of an alternative world order. If the Western civilization considers itself to be the only one, and this is the essence of globalism and unipolarity, the BRICS countries represented sovereign and independent civilizations, different from the Western one, with a long history and a completely original system of traditional values.

Initially, the BRIC association, created in 2006 at the initiative of Russian President Vladimir Putin, included four countries—Brazil, Russia, India and China. Brazil, the largest power in South America, represented the Latin American continent. Russia, China and India are of sufficient scale on their own to be considered civilizations. But they also represent more than nation-states. Russia is the vanguard of Eurasia, the Eurasian “Greater Space.” China is responsible for a significant area of the contiguous powers of Indochina. India also extends its influence beyond its borders—at least to Bangladesh and Nepal.

When South Africa joined the BRIC countries in 2011 (hence the acronym BRICS—the “S” at the end of South Africa), the continent was symbolically represented as the largest African country.

7 Civilizations (1 vs. 6)

At the XV summit, held from August 22 to 24, 2023 in Johannesburg, the final formation of the multipolar club took place. The entry of three Islamic powers—Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia and the UAE—was fundamental. Thus, the direct participation in the multipolar world of the entire Islamic civilization, represented by both branches—Sunnism and Shiism—was secured. In addition, along with Portuguese-speaking Brazil, Spanish-speaking Argentina, another strong and independent power, joined BRICS. Back in the mid-twentieth century, theorists of South American unification into a consolidated large space—above all Argentine general Juan Perón and Brazilian president Getúlio Vargas—considered a decisive rapprochement between Brazil and Argentina to be the first step in this process. If this were achieved, the process of integration of the Latin American ecumene would be irreversible. And this is exactly what has happened now in the context of the accession of the two major powers of South America, Brazil and Argentina, to the multipolar club.

Ethiopia’s acceptance is also highly symbolic. It is the only African country that has remained independent throughout the colonial era, preserving its sovereignty, its independence and its unique culture (Ethiopians are the oldest Christian people). Combined with South Africa, Ethiopia is strengthening its presence in the multipolar club of the African continent.

In fact, in the new composition of BRICS, we get a complete model of unification of all poles—civilizations, large spaces, except for the West, which is desperate to preserve its hegemony and unipolar structure. But now it faces not disparate and fragmented countries full of internal and external contradictions, but a united force of the majority of humanity, determined to build a multipolar world.

This multipolar world consists of the following civilizations:

  1. The West (USA+EU and their vassals, which includes, alas, the once proud and distinctive Japan);
  2. China (+Taiwan) with its satellites;
  3. Russia (as an integrator of the entire Eurasian space);
  4. India and its zone of influence;
  5. Latin America (with Brazil + Argentina at its core);
  6. Africa (South Africa + Ethiopia, with Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, etc., emerging from French colonial influence).
  7. Islamic world (in both versions—Shiite Iran, and Sunni Saudi Arabia and UAE).

At the same time, one civilization—the Western one—claims hegemony, while the six others deny it this right, accepting only a multipolar system and recognizing the West only as one of the civilizations, along with others.

Thus, the rightness of Samuel Huntington, who saw the future in the return of civilizations, was confirmed in practice, while the fallacy of Fukuyama’s thesis, who believed that the global hegemony of the liberal West (the end of history) has already been achieved, became obvious. Therefore, Fukuyama can only doomedly lecture Ukrainian neo-Nazis, the last hope of globalists to stop the onset of multipolarity, for which Russia, in Ukraine, is fighting today.

August 2023 can be considered the birthday of the multipolar world.

Having outlined multipolarity, it is time to take a closer look at how the civilizational poles themselves interpret the situation in which they find themselves. And here we should take into account that virtually every sovereign civilization has its own idea of the structure of history, the nature of historical time, its direction and the end of history. Contrary to Fukuyama, who ambitiously proclaimed a single end of history (in his liberal version), each sovereign civilization operates with its own understanding, interpretation and description of the end of history. Let us briefly review this situation.

Each Civilization has its own Idea of the End of the World

Each pole of the multipolar world, that is, each civilization, has its own version of eschatology, somewhere more and somewhere less explicit.

“Eschatology” is the doctrine of the end of the world or the end of history. Eschatologies form a significant part of religious doctrines, but have secular versions as well. Any idea of the linear direction of the historical process and its supposed finale can be considered an “eschatology.”

The multipolar world consists of several civilizations or “big spaces” with a completely unique and original system of traditional values. This is the pole (not the individual state). A pole is precisely a civilization. Each civilization has its own idea of the nature of the historical process, its direction and its goal, and thus its own eschatology.

In some “large spaces” there are even several versions of eschatology, and a number of relatively small political formations, which cannot claim the pole in any way, nevertheless sometimes have a special and even developed eschatology.

Let us outline the different types in the most general terms.

Eschatologies of the West

Eschatology in Western Christianity

Western Christianity originally had the same eschatological doctrine as Eastern Christianity, being one. In Christianity—in both Catholicism and Orthodoxy (and even Protestantism)—the end of the world is considered inevitable, since the world and its history are finite and God is infinite. After the coming of Christ, the world moves toward its end, and the return of Christ itself is seen as taking place “in the last days.” The entire history of the Christian Church is a preparation for the end times, the Last Judgment, and the Second Coming of Christ. Christianity teaches that before the Second Coming there will be a general apostasy in mankind, nations will turn away from Christ and His Church, and will rely only on their own strength (humanism). Later, mankind will degenerate completely and the Antichrist, the messenger of the Devil, the “son of perdition” will seize power.

The Antichrist will rule for a short time—3.5 years, “a time, two times and half a time”), the saints and the prophets Elijah and Enoch, who will have returned to earth, will denounce him, and then the Second Coming, the resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgment will take place. This is what every Christian is obliged to believe.

At the same time, Catholicism, which gradually separated from the united Orthodox trunk, believed that the stronghold of Christians should be the Catholic Church under the Pope, the “City of God,” and the retreat would affect only earthly political entities, the “City of Earth.” There is a spiritual battle between the heavenly politics of the Vatican and the earthly politics of secular monarchs. In Orthodoxy, unlike Catholicism, the main obstacle in the way of the Antichrist is the Holy Empire, eternal Rome.

Traditional Christian eschatology and exactly this—partly pessimistic—view of the vector of history prevailed in Europe until the beginning of the New Age. And this is how traditional Catholics, unaffected by the spirit of modernity, who are becoming fewer and fewer in the West, continue to think about the end of the world.

Protestant eschatologies are more bizarre. In the Anabaptists of Münster or the Czech Hussites, the Second Coming was preceded by the establishment of universal equality (eschatological communism), the abolition of class hierarchies and private property.

Recently, under the influence of modernization and political correctness, many Protestant denominations and the Anglican Church have revised their view of eschatology, finally breaking with the ancient Christian tradition.
Masonic Eschatology: The Theory of Progress

At the origins of the Western European civilization of Modernity is European Freemasonry, in the midst of which the idea of “social progress” was born. The idea of progress is a direct antithesis of the Christian understanding of history; it rejects apostasy, the Antichrist, the Last Judgment, the resurrection of the dead and the very existence of the soul.

Masons believed that humanity develops progressively: in the beginning savagery (not earthly paradise), then barbarism (not traditional society), then civilization (culminating in the European New Age and the Enlightenment, i.e., secular atheistic societies, based on a materialistic scientific worldview). Civilization in its formation passes a number of stages from traditional confessions to the humanistic cult of the Great Architect of the Universe and further to liberal democracy, where science, atheism and materialism will fully triumph. And conservative Freemasonry (Scottish Rite) stopped usually with the cult of the Great Architect of the Universe (that is, with deism—the recognition of an undefined non-denominational “god”), and the more revolutionary, the Grand Orient rite was called to go further—to the complete abolition of religion and social hierarchy. The Scottish Rite stands for classical liberalism (big capital), the Grand Orient and other revolutionary lodges stand for liberal democracy (intensive growth of the middle class and redistribution of capital from the big bourgeoisie to the middle and small bourgeoisie).

But in Freemasonry, in both versions, we see a clearly directed vector to the end of history; that is, to the construction of modern progressive global civilization. This is the ideology of globalism in two versions—conservative (gradual) and offensive (revolutionary-democratic).

England: The Fifth Monarchy

During Cromwell’s English Revolution, the theory of the Fifth Monarchy developed in Protestant circles under the influence of Jewish circles and Sabbataism (notably the Dutch Rabbi Manasseh ben-Israel). The traditional Christian doctrine of the Four World Kingdoms (Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman) was declared insufficient, and after the fall of Rome (which for Protestants meant the refusal to recognize the authority of the Pope and the overthrow of the monarchy, regicide) the Fifth Kingdom was to come. Earlier, a similar idea had arisen in Portugal in relation to the maritime Portuguese Empire and the special mission of the “vanished King” Sebastian. The Portuguese and Portuguese-centered (mystical-monarchical) version was passed on to the Portuguese Jewish converts (Marranos) and Jews exiled to Holland and Brazil. One of them was Manasseh ben-Israel, from whom this theory passed on to English Protestants and Cromwell’s inner circle (Thomas Harrison).

Proponents of this theory considered Cromwell himself to be the future world Monarch of the Fifth Monarchy. The Fifth Monarchy was to be distinguished by the abolition of Catholicism, hereditary monarchical power, estates and to represent the triumph of bourgeois democracy and capitalism.

This was continued by the current of “British Israelism,” which declared the English to be the “ten lost tribes of Israel” and spread the belief in the coming world domination of England and the Anglo-Saxon race. The world rule of the “New Israelites” (Anglo-Saxons) was seen beyond the Four Kingdoms and broke with traditional Christian eschatology, as the Fifth Monarchy meant the destruction of traditional Christian kingdoms and the rule of the “chosen people” (not Jews, but the English).

From England, extreme Protestant sects transferred these ideas to the USA, which was created as a historical embodiment of the Fifth Monarchy. Hence the American eschatology in the mythologies of William Blake (in America a Prophecy the USA is represented by the giant Orcus freeing himself from the chains of the old god), who was also an adherent of the theory of “British Israelism.” Blake embodied these ideas in his poem “Jerusalem,” which became the unofficial anthem of England.

USA: Dispensationalism

In the United States, the ideas of “British Israelism” and the Fifth Monarchy were developed in some Protestant denominations and became the basis for a special current of dispensationalism based on the ideas of the Plymouth Brethren (preacher John Darby) and the Scofield edition of the Bible, where the eschatological interpretation in a dispensationalist way is incorporated into the biblical text in such a way that to ordinary people it seems to be a single narrative.

Dispensationalism considers Anglo-Saxons and Protestants (“twice born”) to be the chosen people, and applies to them all the prophecies about the Jews. According to this doctrine, mankind lives at the end of the last “dispensation” of the cycle, and the Second Coming of Christ will soon take place, and all the faithful will be raptured into heaven (the Rapture). But this will be preceded by a final battle (Armageddon) with the “king of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal,” which from the 19th century to the present day has meant Russia. Before this Russia would invade Palestine and, there, fight with the “twice-born” (Anglo-Saxons), and then be defeated by them. After that, there would be a mass conversion of Jews to Protestantism and an ascent to heaven (by means of miracles or spacecraft).

In recent decades, this current has merged with political Zionism and has become the basis of the ideology and geopolitics of the American neocons.

France: The Great Monarch

In France, as early as the late Middle Ages and the dawn of the Modern Age, an eschatological theory of the Great Monarch developed, which claimed that a secret French king, chosen by God, would appear at the end of time and save humanity—from decadence, Protestantism, and materialism. This version of eschatology is Francocentric and conservative, and circulated in mystically oriented circles of the aristocracy. The difference from traditional Catholic eschatology is that the French king, rather than the Vatican See, is the barrier to the Antichrist.

Some researchers consider Gaullism to be a secular and simplified geopolitical version of the Great Monarch’s eschatology. General De Gaulle advocated the unification of the peoples of Europe (primarily the French, Germans and Russians) and against NATO and Anglo-Saxon hegemony. The French writer Jean Parvulesco (following Raymond Abellio) called it “the mystical dimension of Gaullism.”

But the vast majority of the French ruling class is dominated by Masonic eschatology—with the exact opposite understanding.

Italy: The Ghibellines and the Greyhound

In the Middle Ages, the confrontation between the Roman throne and imperial power—after Charlemagne proclaimed himself “Emperor”—at times became extremely acute. This led to the creation of two parties—the Guelphs, supporters of the Pope, and the Ghibellines, supporters of the Emperor. They were most widespread in Italy, the possession of which was the basis for German kings to be recognized as Emperors of the (Western) Roman Empire after coronation in Rome.

The poet Dante was a supporter of the Ghibellines and encoded in his poem, Divine Comedy, eschatological teaching of the Ghibellines that after the temporary rule of the Ghibellines and the complete degradation of the Catholic Church, a true Ghibelline monarch would come to Europe, who would revive the morals and spirituality of Western civilization. He is symbolically represented in the figure of the greyhound (veltro) and the mystical number DXV (515), which yields, after rearrangement of letters/digits the word, DVX, “leader.” Dante expounded the ideas of the World Monarchy in a separate treatise. Here again the eschatological theme is connected with monarchical power—and to a greater extent than with the Catholic Church. For Dante, the French monarchy was seen as being on the side of the Antichrist, as was the Roman throne that had risen against the Emperor.

Germany: Hegel and the End of History

The original version of eschatology is given in Hegel’s philosophy. He sees history as a dialectical process of the scattering of the Spirit through Nature, and then a new gathering of the particles of the Spirit in an enlightened society. The culmination of this process according to Hegel would be the creation of a unified German state on the basis of the Prussian monarchy (during his lifetime it did not exist). In this enlightened monarchy, the cycle of the history of the Spirit would be completed. These ideas influenced the Second Reich and Bismarck, and later in a distorted form Hitler’s Third Reich. It was Hegel who put forward the thesis of the “end of history” in a philosophical context, combining in a peculiar combination Christian eschatology (including the figure of the Christian ruler) and a special mystical-monarchical interpretation of social progress (as a preliminary stage before the creation of the world empire of philosophers).

The German philosopher (Catholic) Carl Schmitt correlated the idea of the Reich with the function of the Katechon, the restainer, which was the meaning of imperial power in Byzantium and which was usurped (according to the Orthodox) in the ninth century by the Frankish Emperor Charlemagne. This line was partly in line with the Ghibelline tradition.

The German Jew, Karl Marx, built a theory of communism (the end of history) on an inverted materialist version of Hegelianism, and the Russian philosopher Alexandre Kojève tried to identify the end of history with globalism and the planetary triumph of liberalism. But it is important that Hegel himself, unlike his sectarian interpreters, was an eschatological, Germano-centered monarchist.

Iberia: The Habsburgs and Planetary Evangelization

Eschatology in the Spanish version was linked to the colonization of the Americas and the mission of Charles V Habsburg and his dynastic successors. Since in the prophecies about the end of the world (Pseudo-Methodius of Patara), the sign of the end of the world was the spread of the Gospel to all mankind and the establishment of a worldwide Christian empire under a Catholic world king. The geographical discoveries and the establishment of vast colonies by Spain gave reason to consider the Spanish Habsburgs—above all Charles V and Philip II—as contenders for the role of world monarch. This Catholic-monarchical version, partly consonant with the French version, but in contrast focused on the Austrian Emperors, the traditional opponents of the French dynasty. Christopher Columbus was a proponent of an eschatological world empire during the reigns of the Catholic kings Isabella and Ferdinand, and reflected his eschatological views in The Book of Prophecies, compiled on the eve of his fourth voyage to the Americas and completed immediately after his return.

After the Bourbon reign in Spain, this eschatological line disappeared. Its echoes, partly, can be found in Catholic circles in Latin America and especially in the Jesuits.

The Fifth Empire in the Portuguese version and its Brazilian offshoot are generally close in type to this version of eschatology.

Israel: The Territory of Mashiach

The State of Israel was established in 1948 in Palestine, as a realization of the eschatological aspirations of the Jewish Diaspora, who had been waiting for two millennia for a return to the Promised Land. Jewish eschatology is based on the belief in the chosenness of the Jews and their special role in the end times, when the Jewish Mashiach will come and Jews will rule the world. It is the best studied. In many ways, it is Jewish eschatology that has determined the main scenarios of end-of-the-world visions in monotheistic traditions.

Modern Israel was created as a state prepared for the coming of Mashiach, and if this function is taken out of the picture, its very existence loses its meaning—first of all, in the eyes of the Jews themselves.

Geopolitically, Israel cannot claim to be an independent civilization, an empire, whose scale is necessary for full participation in global eschatological processes. However, if we take into account the rapprochement of political Zionists in the United States with neocons and Protestant dispensationalists, the role of Jews in the last century in the Masonic lodges, the influence of the Diaspora in the ruling and especially economic elites of the West, then the whole picture changes, and the basis for serious eschatological events turns out to be significant.

The Kabbalistic interpretation of the migration route of the bulk of the Jewish Diaspora describes it as following the Shekhinah (God’s Presence) in exile (according to Rabbi Alon Anava). At the beginning of the Galut (dispersion), the bulk of the Jews were concentrated in the Middle East (Mizrahi). Then the Shekhinah began to rise to the north and the Caucasus (Khazar Kaganate). From there, the path of the Shekhinah led to Western Russia, to the Baltics and to Eastern Europe (Ashkenazi). Then its movement led the Ashkenazi to go deeper into Western Europe, and made the Sephardim move from the Iberian Peninsula to Holland and the American colonies. Finally, the bulk of the Jews concentrated in the United States, where they still represent a majority compared to Jewish communities in other countries. Thus, the Shekhinah remains in the United States. The second largest community of Jews is in Israel. When the proportions shift in Israel’s favor, it will mean that the Shekhinah, after a two-thousand-year circle, has returned to Palestine.

Then we should expect the building of the Third Temple and the coming of the Mashiach. This is the logic of Jewish eschatology, clearly visible in the political processes unfolding around Israel. This idea is adhered to by the majority of religious Zionists, who make up a significant percentage of Jews both in Israel and in the Diaspora. But any Jew, wherever he or she may be and whatever ideology he or she may share, cannot fail to recognize the eschatological nature of the modern state of Israel and, consequently, the far-reaching goals of its government.

Orthodox Eschatology

Greeks: The Marble Emperor

In the Orthodox population of Greece, after the fall of Byzantium and the seizure of power by the Ottomans, an eschatological theory developed about the coming of an Orthodox liberator-king—the Marble Emperor. His figure was sometimes interpreted as the return of Constantine XII Paleologos, who, according to legend, did not die when the Turks took Constantinople, but was carried away by an angel to the Marble Gate and there awaits his hour to free the Orthodox (Greeks) from the oppression of foreigners.

In some versions of the eschatological legend this mission was entrusted to the “red-haired king of the north,” by whom in the 18th century many Athonite monks understood the Russian Emperor.

These are echoes of the classical Byzantine doctrine of the Katechon, the “restainer” who is destined to become the main obstacle in the way of the “son of perdition” (Second Epistle of Saint Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians) and of the Tsar-Savior from the book of Pseudo-Methodius of Patara. Greek political-religious thought retained this eschatological component during the Ottoman period, although after the liberation from the Turks, Greek statehood began to be built on Masonic liberal-democratic models (despite the brief period of rule by a number of European dynasties), completely breaking with the Byzantine heritage.

Russia: The King of the Third Rome, the Savior of the Sects, and Communism

In Russia, eschatology took a stable form by the end of the fifteenth century, which was reflected in the theory of Moscow as the Third Rome. It asserted that the mission of the Katechon, the restainer, after the fall of Constantinople passed to Muscovite Russia, which became the nucleus of the only Orthodox Empire—that is, Rome. The Grand Duke Moscow changed the status and became Tsar, Vasilevs, Emperor, restraining.

Henceforth, the mission of Russia and the Russian people was to slow down the coming of the “son of perdition,” the Antichrist, and to resist him in every possible way. This formed the core of Russian eschatology, and formalized the status of the Russian people as “God-bearers.”

Forgotten in the era of the Western reforms of Peter and his followers, the idea of Moscow as the Third Rome revived again in the 19th century, under the influence of the Slavophiles, and then became a central theme in the Russian Orthodox Church beyond the Frontier.

After the schism, eschatology became widespread among the Old Believers and sectarians. The Old Believers generally believed that the fall of the Third Rome had already irreversibly taken place, while the sectarians (Khlysty, Skoptsy), on the contrary, believed in the imminent coming of the “Russian Christ.”

The secular version of sectarian “optimistic” eschatology was taken up by the Bolsheviks, hiding it under the Marxist version of Hegel’s end of history. In the last period of the USSR, the eschatological belief in communism faded, and the regime and the country collapsed.

The theme of Russian eschatology became relevant again in Russia after the beginning of the Special Military Operation, when the confrontation (with the Masonic-liberal and materialistic-atheistic) civilization of the West became extremely acute. Logically, as Russia establishes itself as a separate civilization, the role of eschatology and the central importance of the function of the Katechon will only increase.

The Islamic World

Sunnism: The Sunni Mahdi

In Sunnism, the end of the world is not described in detail, and the visions of the coming leader of the Islamic community, the Mahdi, pale before the description of the Last Judgment that God (Allah) will administer at the end of time. Nevertheless, this figure is there and is described in some detail in the hadiths. It is about the emergence of a military and political leader of the Islamic world who will restore justice, order and piety, which has fallen into decay by the end of time.

The authoritative Sufi, Ibn Arabi, specifies that the Mahdi will be assisted in ruling by “viziers,” forming the basis of the eschatological government; and according to him, all the viziers of this “metaphysical government,” as assistants and projections of the unified pole (kutbah) will come from non-Arabic Islamic communities.

The Mahdi will defeat al-Dajjal (the Liar) and establish Islamic rule. A peculiar version of Islamic eschatology is also professed by supporters of the Islamic State (banned in Russia). Various figures in Islam claimed for the role of Mahdi. Most recently, the head of the Turkish PMC SADAT Adnan Tanriverdi proclaimed Erdogan as the Mahdi.

Iran: The Twelfth Imam

In Shi’ism, the Mahdi theme is much more fully developed, and eschatology underlies the very political-religious teachings of the Shi’ites. Shi’ites consider only the followers of Ali, the Imams, to be the legitimate rulers of the Islamic community. They believe that the last, Twelth, Imam did not die, but withdrew into concealment. He will appear to people again at the end of time. This will be the beginning of the rise of the Shia world.

Then there will be the appearance of Christ, who together with the Mahdi will fight with al-Dajjal and defeat him, establishing for a short period—just before the end of the world—a just, spiritual order.

Such views are espoused by the majority of Shiites, and in Iran it is the official ideology, largely determining the entire political strategy of this country.

Shiite eschatology in many respects continues the Iranian pre-Islamic tradition of Zoroastrianism, which had a developed theory of the change of cycles and their culmination in the Great Restoration (frashokart). There the image of the coming King-Savior, Saoshyant, who is destined to be born magically from a pure Virgin and defeat the army of the dark beginning (Ahriman) in the last battle, also plays an important role.

Probably, it was the ancient Iranian doctrine about the struggle of light (Ormuzd) and dark (Ahriman) began through history, as a key to its meaning and about the final victory of the warriors of light, became the basis for the eschatological part of monotheistic teachings. But in any case, the influence of Zoroastrianism on Shi’ism is obvious, and this is what gives Iranian eschatology such a sharp and vivid political expression.

Southeast Asia

India: Kalki

In Hinduism, the end of the world has little significance, although a number of sacred texts associated with the Kalachakra cycle tell of kings of the mystical land of Shambhala, where the conditions of the golden age reign. At the ultimate moment in history, one of these kings, Kalki, believed to be the tenth avatar of Vishnu, will appear in the human world and fight the demon Kali. Kalki’s victory will end the dark age and signify a new beginning (satya-yuga).

Kali-yuga (the age of darkness) is described as an era of the decline of mores, traditional values and the spiritual foundations of Indian civilization. Although Indian tradition is quite detached from history and its cycles, believing that spiritual realization can be achieved under any conditions, eschatological motifs are quite present in culture and politics.

In contemporary India, the popular conservative politician and Prime Minister Narendra Modi is recognized by some traditionalist circles as a divine avatar, either of Kalki himself or his harbinger.

Buddhism: The Buddha of Times to Come

Eschatological motifs are also developed in the Buddhist tradition. The end of time is seen in it as the coming of the future buddha, Maitreya. His mission is to renew the spiritual life of the sangha, the Buddhist community, and to turn humanity to the salvific path of awakening.

On Buddhism were based some political systems of the countries of southeast Asia—Japan, combined with the autochthonous cult of Shinto, centered on the figure of the divine Emperor, and a number of states of Indo-China. In some cases, the appeal to the figure of the coming Buddha Maitreya became the basis for political movements and popular uprisings.

Sometimes eschatological Buddhism found support in communist ideology, giving rise to syncretic forms—Cambodia, Vietnam, etc.

China: The Heavenly Mandate

Eschatology is virtually absent in Confucianism, which is the dominant political-ethical mainstream of Chinese tradition. But at the same time, it is developed in some detail in the religion of the Chinese Taoists and in Taoist-Buddhist syncretistic currents. According to Taoist ideas about cycles, the history of the world is reflected in the change of ruling dynasties in China. This change is the result of the loss of what the Taoists call the “heavenly mandate,” which every legitimate ruler of China is obliged to obtain and retain. When this mandate runs out, China is in turmoil, with civil war and unrest. The situation is saved only by obtaining a new heavenly mandate and enthronement of a new dynasty.

The Chinese Middle Empire is perceived by the Chinese themselves as an image of cosmic hierarchy, as the Universe. In the Empire, culture and nature merge to the point of indistinguishability. Therefore, dynastic cycles are cosmic cycles by which epochs are measured.

The Chinese tradition does not know the absolute end of the world, but believes that any deviation of the world order, in any direction, requires symmetrical restoration. This theory implicitly contributed to the Chinese revolution and retains its significance to the present day.

In fact, the figure of the current chairman of the CPC Central Committee, Xi Jinping, is seen as a new appearance of a legitimate Emperor who has received a heavenly mandate.


Garvey: Black Freemasonry

One of the founders of the movement to restore dignity to African peoples was Jamaican-born Freemason, Marcus Garvey, who applied Masonic progressivism to blacks and called for rebellion against whites.

Garvey took a series of actions to bring American blacks back to the African continent, continuing a process that began in 1820 with the creation of an artificial state on the west coast of Africa, Liberia. Liberia’s government copied the U.S. and so too was composed predominantly of Freemasons.

Garvey interpreted the struggle for the rights of blacks not just as a means to gain equality, but actively promoted the theory of the chosenness of Africans as a special people, which after centuries of slavery was called to establish its dominance—at least in the space of the African continent, but also to claim and assert the rights to power in the U.S. and other colonial countries. And in the center of this world movement should stand the Masonic lodges, where only black people are allowed.

The extreme representatives of this current were the organizations Black Power, Black Panthers and later BLM.

Great Ethiopia

In Africa, among the melanodermatic (black) population, their own original versions of eschatology have developed. All of them (as in Garvey’s eschatology) regard African peoples as endowed with a special historical mission (blacks = New Israel) and foretell the rebirth of themselves and the African continent as a whole. The general scheme of African eschatology considers the era of colonization and slavery as a great spiritual trial for the black race, to be followed by a period of reward, a new golden age.

In one version of this eschatology, the core of African identity is Ethiopia. Its population (Kushites and Semites with dark skin) is seen as the paradigm of African civilization, as Ethiopia is the only African political entity in Africa that has not been colonized, either by European powers or by Muslims.

In this version, all African peoples are considered to be related to Ethiopians, and the Ethiopian monarch, the Negus, is perceived as a prototype of the ruler of the great African Empire. This line was the basis of Rastafarianism, which became popular among the blacks of Jamaica and further spread among the black population of Africa and America.

This version is prevalent among Christian and Christianized peoples. Christian eschatology of Ethiopians (Monophysites) acquires original features connected with the special mission of Ethiopia, which is considered to be the chosen country and the chosen people (hence the legend that the ancestor of Ethiopians was Melchizedek, the King of Peace). In Rastafarianism, this Ethiopian eschatology acquires additional—sometimes quite grotesque—features.

Black Islam

Another version of African eschatology is the Nation of Islam, which emerged in the United States. This doctrine claims that both Moses and Muhammad were black, and that God incarnates in black politico-religious leaders from cycle to cycle. The founder of this current, Wali Fard Muhammad, considered himself to be such an incarnation (this is consonant with the Russian Khlysty). After the death of Wali Fard Mohammed believers expect his return on a spaceship.

Parallel to this is the proclamation of the need for black struggle in the United States and around the world—and not just for their rights, but for recognition of their spiritual and racial leadership in civilization.

Under the contemporary leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, this current has achieved great influence in the United States and has had a significant impact on the ideological formation of black Muslims in Africa.

Black Egypt

Another version of African political eschatology is the KMT current (from the ancient Egyptian name of Egypt itself), which develops the ideas of the African philosopher Sheikh Anta Diop. He and his followers developed the theory that ancient Egypt was a state of black people, which is evident from its name “KMT,” in the Egyptian language meaning “Black Land” or “Land of Blacks.” Anta Diop believed that all African religious systems are echoes of Egyptian religion, which must be restored in its entirety.

His follower Kemi Seba developed the thesis of African monotheism, which is the basis of a religio-political system where power should be vested in a Metaphysical Government expressing the will of God (like the Mahdi viziers in Ibn Arabi’s version). Life should be based on the principle of closed black communities—kilombo.

At the same time, Africans should return to the traditions of their peoples, fully control the African continent, restore as dark a skin color as possible (through melano-oriented marriages) and carry out a spiritual revolution in the world.

The single, sacred Pan-African language should be the restored ancient Egyptian language (medu neter), and Swahili should be used for practical needs. According to the proponents of KMT theory, black people are the bearers of sacredness, Tradition and the people of the golden age. White civilization, on the other hand, represents perversion, pathology, and anti-civilization, where matter, money, and capital stand above spirit.

The main enemy of Africans and blacks around the world is whites, who are considered the bearers of modernization, colonialism, materialism and spiritual degeneration. Victory over whites is the guarantee of blacks’ fulfillment of their world mission and the crowning achievement of the decolonization process.

Latin America

Ethno-eschatology: Indigenism

In Latin American countries, a number of aboriginal Amerindian peoples see the logical end of colonization as the restoration of ethnic societies (indigenism). These tendencies are developed to varying degrees depending on the country.

Many consider the rebellion of Tupac Amaru II, a descendant of the last Inca ruler, who led an Indian revolt against the Spanish presence in Peru in 1780, as the symbolic beginning of Indian resistance to colonizers.

In Bolivia in 2006, Evo Morales, the first-ever representative of the Aymara Indian people, was elected president. Increasingly, voices are being heard—primarily in Peru and Bolivia—in favor of declaring the ancient Indian cult of the earth goddess Pachamama an official religion.

As a rule, the ethnic eschatology of Latin American Indians is combined with leftist socialist or anarchist currents to create syncretic teachings.

Brazilian Sebastianism

A particular version of eschatology, linked to Portuguese ideas about the Fifth Empire, developed in Brazil. After the capital of the Portuguese Empire was moved to Brazil because of a republican coup d’état in Portugal, the doctrine arose that this transfer of the capital was not accidental and that Brazil itself had a special political-religious mission. If European Portugal lost the doctrine of King Sebastian and followed the path of European bourgeois democracy, then Brazil must now assume this mission and become the territory where, in the critical conditions of the historical cycle, the missing but not dead King Sebastian would be found.

Under the banner of such a doctrine the conservative Catholic-eschatological and imperial revolts against the Masonic liberal government—Canudos, Contestado, etc.—took place in Brazil.

Eschatological Map of Civilizations

Thus, in a multipolar world, different eschatologies clash or enter into an alliance with each other.

In the West, the secular model (progressivism and liberalism) clearly prevails, with a significant addition in the form of extreme Protestant dispensationalism. This is the “end of history,” according to Fukuyama. If we take into account the liberal elite of European countries under full American control, we can speak of a special eschatology that unites almost all NATO countries. We should also add the theory of radical individualism, common to liberals, which demands to free people from all forms of collective identity—up to freedom from sex (gender politics) and even from belonging to the human species (transhumanism, AI). Thus, the new elements of Masonic progressive eschatology, along with the “open society,” are the imperatives of gender reassignment, support for LGBTQ principles, posthumanism, and deep ecology (which rejects the centrality of the human being in the world that all traditional religions and philosophical systems have insisted on).

Although Zionism is not a direct continuation of this version of eschatology, in some of its forms—primarily through its alliance with the American neocons—it partly fits into this strategy; and given the influence of Jews on the ruling elites of the West, these proportions may even be reversed.

Russia and its Katechonic function, which combines the eschatology of the Third Rome and the communist horizon as a legacy of the USSR, stands most blatantly in the way of this end of history.

In China, Western Marxism, already substantially reworked in Maoism, increasingly openly displays Confucian culture, and the head of the CCP, as traditional Emperor, is given a heavenly mandate to rule “All that is under Heaven” (tianxia—天下).

Eschatological sentiments are constantly growing in the Islamic world—both in the Sunni zone and especially in Shiism (primarily in Iran), and it is modern Western civilization—the same one that is now fighting Russia—that is almost unanimously presented as al-Dajjal for all Muslims.

In India, Hindutva-inspired sentiments (the doctrine of the independent identity of Hindus as a special and unique civilization) are gradually growing, proclaiming a return to the roots of the Hindu tradition and its values (which do not coincide at all with Western values), and hence outlining the contours of a special eschatology associated with the phenomenon of Kalka and the overcoming of the Kali-yuga.

Pan-Africanism is developing towards the strengthening of radical teachings about the return of Africans to their identity and a new round of anti-colonial struggle against the white world (understood primarily as colonial countries belonging to the civilization of the West). This describes a new vector of black eschatology.

In Latin America, the desire to strengthen its geopolitical sovereignty is based on both leftist (socialist) eschatology and the defense of Catholic identity, which is particularly evident in Brazil, where both leftists and rightists are increasingly distancing themselves from globalism and U.S. policy (hence Brazil’s participation in the BRICS bloc). The ethno-eschatologies of indigenism, though relatively weak, generally add an important additional dimension to the whole eschatological project.

At the same time, the French aristocratic eschatology (and its secular projection in Gaullism), the German version of the end of history in the form of the German Empire, as well as the Buddhist and Shinto line of the special mission of Japan and the Japanese Emperors—(for now, at least) do not play any noticeable role, being completely bought by the dominant progressive globalist elite and the strategies of the Anglo-Saxons.

Thus, we have a world map of eschatology, corresponding to the contours of a multipolar world.

From this we can now draw whatever conclusions we want.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: Multipolarity I, by Roodslav.

Apotheosis of the Warrior Yevgeny

Dasha, back at the very beginning of the Special Military Operation, once told me: “Prigozhin is so strong and confident, bold, sharp, that probably no one prays for him. It doesn’t even cross anyone’s mind. Let’s at least start praying for him.”

Today we commemorate (not according to the calendar, but according to the meaning) Moses of Murin, Barbara of Loukan, the seven martyrs of Kerkyra: Iakiskholos, Faustianus, Ianuarius, Marsalius, Euphrasius and Mammius, St. Anthony of Karea. And of course the one who was the first to be in paradise.

We did not notice how we moved from a giggling society to a people deeply immersed in the element of tragedy. Some had already, piercingly realized it in themselves. Some are on the way. Pain, sorrow, grief, anguish, suffering, deafening rage—this is the register of states of a normal person who has entered the structures of war. But also strong faith, quiet hope, a maturing will, a growing mind, a hardened spirit.

The very fact of the death of the heroes of “Wagner” is much more fundamental than the reasons, manipulations and speculations around it. There is no need to get bogged down in details and versions. We are at war, and war means death. And Prigozhin entered the war wholeheartedly, gave himself to it. No one can escape war. Prigozhin realized it before anyone else and did not resist. He acted like a man. And died like a man.

In general, the Wagner group had a special attitude towards death—just face it.

At some point, everyone’s death will come to them. And there is no use squealing about what I am in for. There is always a reason. Prigozhin knew exactly why. God rest the soul of your slain servant, the warrior Eugene.

You know best what to do with him. We only pray that Thy will be done. But still, if it is possible, forgive him. For the sake of Russia, Your country, Your people, forgive him. And forgive us.

If the diabolical enemy is targeting our heroes, it means that we have heroes.

Life, like death, can only be random in random people. There, perhaps, it is mechanical millstones and the sporadic intrusion of randomness. Real people have a destiny, which means a higher meaning, a deeper significance and a great logic—both in life and death. Meaninglessness is far worse than death. Prigozhin, Utkin and the other “Wagner” people were anything but random people.

The power of the people is that thousands take the place of one fallen hero. This is how the people testify that they are alive. Yesterday was the end of the age of technology. The era of ontologies—Russian existence and its laws—is beginning. From now on, it is necessary to speak responsibly and seriously about everything. As if in the presence of people, the tribunal, conscience, death.

The relation of Russians to each other goes not from person to person, but somehow otherwise. Maybe through the land. And, so, through the Russian land we understand, pity and feel each other. Both the living and the dead.

In our hell they were, indeed, the best.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: Apotheosis of a Warrior, by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, ca. 1696–1770.

Making Russian Children

Since we have established ourselves as a sovereign civilization, we need to change the dominant discourse. What everyone was afraid or embarrassed to say before (what the West will think about us, the world community…) must now be stated clearly and openly.

So, let’s say: we need to urgently begin the revival of the Russian people.

That’s exactly how it is. Otherwise, any manipulations with labor migrants – even the friendliest ones – will only inflame the situation and increase instability. Migrants are not the solution to the demographic problem of the disappearance of the Russian people. This is an axiom. Therefore, the solution lies elsewhere.

The main points are as follows:

  1. Give birth to Russians. Any form of restriction on abortion is good here. But the issue is not biological, but social, cultural, ideological. For birth we need a man and a woman, even more precisely (according to Aristotle) a father and a mother (the father gives the creature a form, and the mother supplies matter, nurturing the form). This means that a family is needed. Russians give birth to Russians in Russian families. Russian father, Russian mother, Russian children. And in the background as a foundation—Russian ancestors. This is not a biological production; it is a spiritual sacrament—the creation of the people. Therefore, the birth of a Russian child should receive a special status of a national feat. From the fact of Russian birth, we pass to the Russian family.
  2. Russian family and Russian upbringing. It’s not about ethnic identity; it’s about cultural code. A family is Russian when it thinks of itself as part of the Russian people, shares its traditional values, considers Russian history as its history, accepts Russian life and its conditions. The status of a Russian family is not about blood and phenotype, but about self-consciousness. The Russian family means many things at the same time. This notion has yet to be revealed more fully. Russians brought up only in a Russian family. The family forms the structure of personality. It is not enough to give birth to a Russian, it is necessary to bring up a Russian Russian. Russian upbringing is the business of Russian families.
  3. Russian society. If a Russian child is to be born and brought up, it is necessary to provide a suitable society for him—such a society must be Russian. In it everything is Russian—education, professions, way of life, social structure, patriotic spirit—Russian attitude to sex, to work, to old age and to death. Russian society should be built on Russian traditional values. If a Russian is born and brought up in a Russophobic liberal-cosmopolitan society, it will lead to tragedy—both for him and for society. For a Russian to feel natural in the world, this world must be a Russian world.
  4. Settlement of cities. There is an iron sociological law in the sphere of demography: in big cities people give birth less than in small cities, and in small cities less than in the suburbs, in the countryside or in villages. That is why we want more Russians; we need to move from cities to villages. Everyone should be given land on the most favorable terms, the opportunity to build houses (preferably one-story houses—so closer to the Russian land!—but they can be large, for more children), loans (can be irrevocable, if there are a lot of children, or people have accomplished feats, or are just talented), gas and light. Russian demography will jump.
  5. Russian culture. In order for Russians to create Russian families, give birth to Russian children, bring them up as Russians and send them to live in a beautiful and just (because justice is our most important traditional value!) society, the culture of our society must be Russian (and not whatever and certainly not as it is now). Culture is the most important, even the main factor that defines society. It is the air and it is the meaning.
  6. Russian economy. Russians need a Russian economy—e.g., there is Islamic banking, interest-free credit. Russian economy willingly accepts society with market, but categorically denies market society, where everything is sold and bought (a carrot is sold; the rest is obtained by honest labor or by merit). The basis should be rural labor (it created the Russian people); and along with it, separate zones of high-tech development, where will be concentrated passionaries who are tired of living in the countryside (it is always the same there, because it is eternity; most Russians will prefer eternity, but some will rush into time with its dynamics and dissimilarity). Russian passionaries will engage in areas of scientific and technological breakthrough and will invent everything. Russian inventors are the most inventive in the world. There is nothing to worry about; but if you leave them in the countryside, they can bring not only a lot of good, but also a lot of bad. That’s who will live in cities and work in manufacturing. The cities will be small, compact and stuffed with the highest scientific inventions. Russians will be able to fly all over them.
  7. Russian faith. Russians need Russian faith; that is Russian Orthodoxy. In every settlement, construction should begin with the erection of a church. Russian passionaries (engineers, designers, commanders, defense, warriors) from the cities must also be Orthodox (and who else?). If Russians will not believe in the Lord God, in Jesus Christ, they will believe in some devilish things, little understood and only confusing everyone. And the Russian faith says everything about what a person should be. A saint. An ordinary Russian saint. It’s difficult, of course, but you have to try. And there are examples— what wonderful inspiring and enlightening examples. A whole host of Russian saints. A Heavenly host.
  8. And what to do with non-Russians? First, the Russian people are open. Whoever wants to become Russian, welcome. Secondly, Russians love non-Russians; they are interested to communicate with them, to study, to be friends. So it was always, and will always be so. Thirdly, Russians are the people of the Empire. And are ready to build it together with those with whom fate has united them. And in the great continental Empire of the Russians, there will be a place for all peoples who honestly and with an open heart are ready to share existence with the Russians.
  9. Let’s put the question more acutely: What to do with liberals? There is a bifurcation: some will realize themselves as Russians and repent of past delusions (this process in our society is in full swing), some will disperse on their own.
  10. And finally, even more acutely: What to do with those who hate Russians? And this is already a red line. If they simply hate, but do no evil to us and our friends, we will take this into account, but we will be restrained, trying to explain how wrong they are. If their hatred spills over into vicious crimes against Russians—we will be forced to restrain them through force (because Russians hate war, we are a people of peace).

Here is such a program of Russian demography, and all points in it, in my opinion, are of fundamental importance. It is possible, of course, to add something else that I have missed. But not much. The Russian program of demography should be simple.

Understood. Accepted. Done.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: Children Singing, Mikhail Samkov; painted ca. 1971-1972.

The Principles of Victory and Justice

Absolutely necessary changes are urgently needed in our society. Only they can lead us to Victory. And without Victory, there will be no Russia. Everyone understands this today. To save the people and the state, we must change. And radically and urgently.

Our society fatally lacks justice. Let us give a clear answer—what is justice and how to achieve it.

The Russian Idea

We need a patriotic ideology that is clear and accessible to everyone. The whole society must distinctly understand who we are as a people, where we came from and where we are going. Stop being afraid of being Russian. We should be proud of the fact that we are Russian. Love for the Motherland should not be a thing of shame. We must raise the Russian Idea to the top of the pedestal and put it in the center of politics, culture, industry—in the center of social existence.

On the basis of the Russian Idea the educational, social, cultural policy, upbringing, code of conduct of all strata of society, should be built, starting with the top leadership of the country.

There is no higher value than to give your life in the name of the homeland. There is no more terrible sin and more heinous crime than the betrayal of the Motherland, Russia.

The Russian Idea must completely replace the egoistic and, in fact, Russophobic liberalism imported from the West, which is subversive to our value system. It must be done away with once and for all. It automatically leads to atomization, alienation and destruction of national unity. Moreover, under the slogan of “freedom,” liberals generate new models of enslavement and universal control. This is the culture of abolition.

Either we immediately, with the whole world—from officials to ordinary citizens—swear an oath to the Russian Idea, or a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced awaits us.


By turning away from God, humanity has abandoned itself. The modern West demonstrates it with all frankness. Faith is defeated; there are no shrines left. But it is with this that we are in mortal conflict. Atheistic materialistic civilization is fighting against us, perfectly aware that Russia, even in its current weakened and diminished form, remains the last island of traditional society, a stronghold of spiritual values and, indeed, Faith, which could not be uprooted from our people during the last century by various political ideologies—from communism to liberalism. The Russian person remains a person of faith, even if he does not yet fully realize it.

But God is not in the church hierarchy, not in an institution. He is in Faith, in tradition, in church sacraments. And the Church is not a room; it is our heart, given in the rite of Holy Baptism to the bright and good Godhead, who in turn gave His life for our salvation. Religion is a gift for the Gift. And if there is a Gift, there is also the One who gives.

God is the foundation of everything, the beginning and the end. He creates the world, and He also brings judgment upon it at its end. If man turns away from God, God may also turn away from him. And then nothing can save us. And we are standing on the edge of the abyss. It is not without reason that the threatening words “Apocalypse,” “Armageddon,” etc. are heard more and more often.

Enough of half-measures. Russians must return to their heavenly Father. After all, we are waging His war, in His name and for His glory.

Either we immediately return to our Mother Church, or a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced awaits us.


The most just and harmonious type of political government is the Empire. A significant part of our history we lived in the Empire, and it was to the Russian tsars that the imperial crown passed from Byzantium. Empire is more than just a state, it is a great power endowed with a sacred mission. An empire does not simply rule vast territories and numerous peoples. Empire leads mankind to the highest destination, to salvation and unity.

Russia as an Empire includes different peoples, cultures and confessions, while the Russians, the Orthodox, were and remain its core. This does not mean that other peoples are subordinated. The empire opens the way to rule to all those who have proven by deeds, feats, skills and loyalty that they are its worthy son.

Liberal democracy, imposed on us by the West, is disastrous for the country, as it atomizes society, smashes it, undermines solidarity and unity.

We need an Empire that will ensure social justice. A people’s empire, free from the omnipotence of oligarchs and upstarts profiting from the people’s misery. Maybe there have never been such ideal empires in history. So, let’s build one! Empire is not about the past, but about the future.

Only an open appeal to the Empire and its heritage will give us the ultimate right to fight and win the war we are waging. No petty aggressive nationalism can stand up to imperial might. Moreover, for those in Ukraine who have not yet completely lost their minds, a place in the Empire and loyalty to the Empire can be a serious reason to come over to our side.

Otherwise, it may seem that two liberal-democratic states are at war with each other. And both of them consider themselves part of the Western world and seek to integrate there as soon as possible, choosing different paths and road maps. This devalues the heroic deeds of our heroes and deprives war of its sacred dimension. In war, the strongest wins not just in technology and material strength, but the one whose ideal is larger, higher. After all, ideas are power. And there is no idea more powerful than that of Empire.

Either we immediately begin to build the Empire, or we will face a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced.

Stop the Extinction of the Russian People

We are dying out. There are fewer and fewer Russians every year. If we do not immediately reverse this catastrophic trend, we as a people will disappear from the face of the earth in this century or turn into a tiny minority. How do we save the nation?

Immediately restore traditional values—spirit, morality, strong family—as indispensable. Only traditional societies can boast of population growth. The more extensive modernization and deeper liberalism, the fewer people. Therefore, all those tendencies that go against Tradition, spiritual Russian religious culture, should be legislatively prohibited.

The practice of replacing disappearing Russians with imported migrants—with an alien identity and in no way intending to become part of our people—is criminal and must be stopped immediately.

It is an irrefutable sociological and statistical fact that demographic decline and degeneration always occurs in modern cities and in all countries and civilizations. Big cities are killers of strong families with many children, a source of moral impurity, depravity and perversion. It is urgent to start unbundling megacities, to provide all Russians with land and the opportunity to live on it, to take care of loved ones and to have an inalienable inheritance—a family nest.

It is necessary to finally give the Russian people land. At different stages of our history, one or another force put forward this just slogan, but every time Russians were ever deceived—landlords, and Bolsheviks, and the liberals of the 1990s. Only the land that gives birth to bread, the breadwinner, is able to give an impetus to the surge in the birth rate.

Either we will immediately reverse the demographic situation, or we will face a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced.

Ban Usury

High credit rates and full dependence of the Russian economy on the embeddedness in the system of world financial capitalism lead to super-rich financial elite and impossibility to get out of poverty for the main population. The financial oligarchy, which has enslaved almost the entire Russian society with loans, profits from charging high bank interest rates and mortgages.

This system must be radically restructured. Instead of commercial credit, it is necessary to switch to social credit—with zero or even negative interest rates, which will dramatically increase the total wealth of the people, expressed in built houses, created goods, established production, and not in abstract macroeconomic indicators.

The state should fairly distribute financial opportunities among the entire population, putting an end to the omnipotence of oligarchy and corrupt officialdom.

This economic, in fact, colonial model was formed in Russia in the 1990s, and today it prevents the harmonious and progressive development of the country’s creative potential. And it is huge and only artificially restrained by the monetarist policy of the authorities.

Either we immediately change the economic vector from liberal-oligarchic and monetarist to a socially oriented one, or we will face a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced.

Winning the War with the West

In Ukraine, we are engaged in a fierce war, not so much with the neo-Nazi and Russophobic regime in Kiev, but with the collective West. This is not just a regional conflict or the resolution of contentious issues in geopolitics, economics and military strategy. This is a war of civilizations. The modern West has thrown off its masks and openly appears in its true form—it has long ago declared war on God, the Church, and the political and cultural foundations of traditional society, and today it directly challenges man himself. Modern Western civilization destroys families, legalizes and even aggressively imposes perversions, sex changes, transgender operations, and even children become victims.

Environmental extremists demand to save the planet from humans. The pioneers of genetic engineering are already conducting experiments on crossing people with machines, with other animal species, experimenting with the genome, promising to give human organisms eternity or its semblance (in the form of memory and feelings stored on servers). Intrusion into the mystery of carrying a fetus threatens a new segregation, because a project has already been launched to breed a superior race, whose genotype will be artificially corrected and maximally improved.

The war with the West in Ukraine is a battle of the civilization of people, which is represented by Russia; in fact, leading the present confrontation of the world majority against the hegemony of the West, with a civilization that is on the path of destruction or irreversible mutation of man. Such a civilization is satanic.

To win the victory in this war of civilizations, it is necessary to awaken our entire society, to convey to every member of it—down to the children—the meaning, goals and objectives of this great and sacred people’s war. It is not just the defense of the homeland, it is a war for justice, which we are waging not for life, but for death. And since we stand on the side of Light, society must be purified, ennobled and elevated. Victory in such a decisive battle for all human history is a pledge of preservation of man as a species. Again, Russians have taken upon themselves the mission to save the world. And today everything depends on us.

In such a situation, we are obliged to convey the poignant truth about the meaning of this war to each and every one of us.

It was criminal to leave unchanged the entertainment culture that had developed over the past 30 years, based on vulgarity, cynicism, ridicule of everything high and pure, imitation of all the most repulsive aspects of the West. Moreover, many cultural figures have shown their traitorous guts in the conditions of the Special Military Operation, directly defecting to the side of Russia’s enemies. The shouting of demoniac jesters, blasphemers and perverts undermines faith in our victory, causes indignation of the heroes of the front and those who have already deeply realized how high the stakes are in the conflict of civilizations.

We need a completely different culture that meets the challenges of wartime. The existing culture is no culture at all. Not only must we not let back the traitors who have come to their senses, but we must also remove those who have stayed behind, retaining their style, their snobbery, their almost undisguised contempt for the Russian people and their ideals, their guidelines, their moral nature.

Either we immediately rebuild our entire society on a military basis, or we are in for a catastrophe even worse than the one we have recently faced.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: The Miracle of the Icon of the Mother of God of the Sign, ca. 1475.

After the Rebellion: The Bifurcation Point

I have noticed that the consciousness of many simply cannot cope with the events of June 24. Therefore, a trend appears: “It simply did not exist;” “nothing was real;” “it was all done on purpose.” Only in this way can the acute pain of what happened be dulled. And when it comes to the defensive reaction of society in general, not particularly immersed in the sphere of meaning—in this case, the meaning of political science, it is understandable and acceptable: people look for loopholes in the continuous routine flow of life, in which events are either microscopic or non-existent. But when the same is conveyed by those who consider themselves serious analysts, it only seems pathetic. In fact, the acute phase of the events of June 24 has been resolved, but still nothing is completely over: now it is necessary for the government to act concretely, which will clarify things and, even then can it be considered to be a minimum of clarity. For now, perhaps, it is too early to comment on the meaning; the whole process is not yet finished, so the outcome may be different. After all, what has begun and what continues will only make sense when it is finished—not before. You never know what else can happen during such a critical chain of events. A full analysis is yet to follow.

However, what happened on June 24, 2023, was the first note of a monstrous disaster. It was a disaster of Russian statehood, which, however, was avoided at the last moment, and the price was very high.

In the midst of these events, the problem of passion became crystal clear. When there is no trace of passion in the center of the system, it begins to spontaneously concentrate on the periphery. On one side, we clearly see an excess of passion. But, on the other side, its obvious disadvantage. What we see is that the main problem of the government is energy. And that problem must be solved. Without delay.

In terms of Pareto’s theory of elites, all this can be described as a conflict between elites and counter-elites.

If the elite, which is already in power, does not have enough qualities to exercise power, it will, sooner or later, be overthrown by the counter-elite, which is not in power, but has an excess of those qualities that are needed to exercise power.

And in the end, the question of legality and legitimacy remained. The rebels did significantly radicalize this problem, but they only posed it. No ultimate solution was reached. And now that problem is with us, and it won’t go away.

We have reached a turning point. To the point of bifurcation. Broadly speaking, there are two decision scenarios: Good and Terrible. In this complex situation, there is no only-good, just as there is no only-bad. A bad scenario immediately escalates into a terrible one.

1. Good scenario: Personnel solutions in a number of the most important administrations. Almost everything is obvious here. Some proved to be heroes, some traitors and cowards. Unconditional heroes are Putin and Lukashenko. It was they who saved the nation, which was hanging over the abyss. And, those who made something like this possible, who contributed to it and who could not prevent what started and were not able to react in an appropriate way—they should be let go immediately. Such a decision will strengthen the position of the supreme authority and restore the shaken trust and faith in the power of the true Sovereign.

Accordingly, attention should also be paid to the general program, which Prigozhin published from top to bottom: the social elites seriously lack fairness, honor, courage and intelligence. They are missing to the point that it literally leads to actual blow-ups. Why, then, would this idea not be used in the service of the authorities themselves? Putin is now (as always) in a position to do it, and he will certainly succeed. So:

  • elite rotation,
  • punish cowards and traitors,
  • encourage the faithful and brave,
  • correction of ideology towards patriotic self-awareness, social justice and immediate involvement of society in the war.

Less PR, more reality. And everything will fall into place.

In general, replacing reality with PR is absolutely evil. Sooner or later, such a bubble will burst. If instead of a political system we only have a grandiose media fiction, then disaster is inevitable. And, what is most important: the laws of lies make them, sooner or later, believe their own lies. That’s the last stage. After that, it’s the end.

2. Terrible scenario: Leave everything as it is. Do not change anything. Remove all mention of June 24 and all participants from the media and blogosphere. Criminalize any call to patriotism, call for rebellion. Blame the West and its machinations for everything. Draw a conclusion in favor of liberalism and flood everyone with PR technologies about victory.

I would not want to scare anyone, but I suggest that everyone soberly imagine the consequences of such a decision, which is, in fact, the absence of any solution. It is this (lack of resolution) that led to what happened. If nothing changes, the disaster will happen again, but then it will be fatal.

Those with more passion win. The spirit wins. There are soldiers and there are warriors. The task: to awaken the warriors in the soldiers.

Worse for us, if we learn the wrong lesson from this “master class.”

Now we have to pull ourselves together. The enemy begins the second most powerful wave of the offensive. The only way to defeat the rebellion of “Wagner” is to become “Wagner” ourselves.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: At the Edge of the Pine Forest, Ivan Shishkin; painted in 1897.

Ukraine as a Field of Armageddon

The Special Military Operation (SMO) as the Most Important Event in World History

Many are beginning to realize that what is happening is in no way explained by national interest analysis, by economic trends or energy policy, by territorial disputes, or by ethnic contradictions. Virtually any expert who tries to describe what is happening in the usual terms and concepts of pre-war times looks at the least unconvincing, and more often than not, simply stupid.

To make even a superficial understanding of the state of affairs, one must turn to much deeper and more fundamental categories, to the everyday analysis that is almost never involved.

The Need for a Global Context

What is still referred to in Russia as the SMO, but is in fact a full-fledged war with the collective West, can only be understood in the context of large-scale approaches such as:

  • Geopolitics, based on the consideration of the deadly duel between the civilization of the Sea and the civilization of the Land, identifying the ultimate aggravation of the great continental war;
  • Civilizational analysis—the clash of civilizations (modern Western civilization claiming hegemony against rising alternative non-Western civilizations);
  • Definition of the future architecture of the world order—the contradiction between a unipolar and a multipolar world;
  • The culmination of world history—the final stage in the formation of the Western model of global dominance, which faces a fundamental crisis;
  • a political economy macro-analysis built on the fixation of the collapse of world capitalism;
  • and finally, religious eschatology describing the “last times” and their inherent conflicts, confrontations and disasters, as well as the phenomenology of the coming of the Antichrist.

All other factors—political, national, energy, resource, ethnic, legal, diplomatic, etc., for all their importance, are secondary and subordinate. In effect, they do not explain or clarify anything in essence.

Let us place the SMO in the six theoretical contexts which we have identified, each of which represents entire disciplines. These disciplines have received little attention in the past, preferring more “positive” and “precise” fields of study, so they may seem “exotic” or “irrelevant” to many. But understanding truly global processes requires considerable distance from the private, the local, and the detailed.

The SMO in the Context of Geopolitics

All geopolitics is built on the consideration of the eternal opposition between the civilization of the Sea (thalassocracy) and the civilization of the Land (tellurocracy). Vivid expressions of these beginnings in antiquity were the confrontations between land-based Sparta and port-based Athens, land-based Rome and maritime Carthage.

The two civilizations differ not only strategically and geographically, but also in their main orientation: the land empire is based on sacred tradition, duty and the hierarchical vertical, headed by the sacred Emperor. It is a civilization of the spirit.

The maritime powers are oligarchies, a trading system dominated by material and technical development. They are essentially pirate states. Their values and traditions are contingent and constantly changing—like the element of the sea itself. Hence the progress peculiar to them, especially in the material sphere, and, on the contrary, the constancy of the way of life and the continuity of the civilization of the Land, the eternal Rome.

As politics became global and took over the entire globe, the two civilizations finally acquired spatial embodiment. Russia-Eurasia became the core of the Land civilization, and the pole of the Sea civilization became fixed in the zone of Anglo-Saxon influence: from the British Empire—to the US and the NATO bloc.

That is how geopolitics sees the history of recent centuries. The Russian Empire, the USSR and modern Russia inherited the baton of the civilization of the Land. In the context of geopolitics, Russia is the eternal Rome, the Third Rome. And the modern West is the classic Carthage.

The collapse of the USSR was a major victory for the civilization of the Sea (NATO, the Anglo-Saxons) and a terrible disaster for the civilization of the Land (Russia, the Third Rome).

Thalassocracy and Tellurocracy are like two communicating vessels, so those territories that went out of Moscow’s control began to go under the control of Washington and Brussels. First of all, this affected Eastern Europe and the Baltic republics that broke away from the Soviet Union. Then it was the turn of the post-Soviet states. The civilization of the Sea continued the great continental war with the main enemy—the civilization of the Land, which had survived the blow, but had not collapsed completely.

In this case, the defeat of Moscow led to the fact that in Russia itself, in the 1990s, was established a colonial system—the Atlantists flooded the state with their agents, put in the highest positions. This is how the modern Russian elite was formed—as an extension of the oligarchy, a system of external control by the civilization of the Sea.

A number of former Soviet republics began to prepare for full integration into the civilization of the Sea. Others followed a more cautious strategy and were in no hurry to break the historically established geopolitical ties with Moscow. Thus, two camps were formed: the Eurasian camp (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Armenia) and the Atlantic camp (Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and Azerbaijan). Azerbaijan, however, moved away from this extreme position and began to get closer to Moscow.

This led to the events of 2008 in Georgia, and then, after the pro-NATO coup in Ukraine in 2014, to the separation of Crimea and the uprising in Donbass. Some territories of the newly formed units did not want to join the civilization of the Sea and rebelled against such a policy, seeking support from Moscow.

This led to the beginning of the SMO in 2022. Moscow as a civilization of the Land had strengthened enough to enter into direct confrontation with the civilization of the Sea in Ukraine and reverse the trend of increasing Thalassocracy and NATO to the detriment of Tellurocracy and the Third Rome. This is how we came to the geopolitics of today’s conflict. Russia, like Rome, battles Carthage and its colonial satellites.

And what is new in geopolitics is that Russia-Eurasia cannot act today as the sole representative of the civilization of the land. Hence the concept of a “distributed Heartland.” Not only Russia, but also China, India, the Islamic world, Africa and Latin America become the poles of the land civilization in the new conditions.

Moreover, if we assume the collapse of the Sea civilization, then western “big spaces”—Europe and America itself—may turn into corresponding “Heartlands.” In the U.S., Trump and the Republicans, leaning precisely on the red, inner-continental States, are almost openly calling for this. In Europe, populists and supporters of the “Fortress Europe” concept intuitively gravitate toward this scenario.

The SMO in the Context of the Clash of Civilizations

A purely geopolitical approach corresponds to a civilizational approach. But, as we have seen, an adequate understanding of geopolitics itself already includes the civilizational dimension.

At the level of civilizations, two main vectors collide in the SMO:

  • Liberal-democratic individualism, atomism, the dominance of the material-technical approach to man and society, the abolition of the state, gender politics, essentially abolishing the family and gender itself, and finally a transition to the rule of Artificial Intelligence (all called “progressivism” or “the end of history”);
  • faithfulness to traditional values, the integrity of culture, the superiority of spirit over matter, the preservation of family, power, patriotism, the preservation of cultural diversity and, in the end, the salvation of man himself.

After the defeat of the USSR, Western civilization gave its strategy a particularly radical character, insisting on finalizing—and immediately!—its attitudes. Hence the forcible imposition of multiple genders, dehumanization (AI, genetic engineering, deep ecology), state-destroying “color revolutions,” etc. Moreover, Western civilization has openly identified itself with all of humanity, calling immediately for all cultures and peoples to follow it. And this is not a proposal, but an order, a kind of categorical imperative of globalization.

To some extent, the influence of modern Western civilization has affected all societies—including ours, where, since the 1990s, the Western liberal approach has been dominant. We have adopted liberalism and postmodernism as a kind of operating system and have not been able to free ourselves from it, despite 23 years of Putin’s sovereign course.

But today, the direct geopolitical conflict with NATO and the collective West has also aggravated this civilizational confrontation. Hence Putin’s appeal to traditional values, rejection of liberalism, gender politics, etc.

Although not yet fully realized by our society and our ruling elite, the SMO is a direct head-on collision between two civilizations:

  • The postmodern liberal-globalist West, and
  • traditional society, represented by Russia and those who keep at least a certain distance from the West.

Thus, the war has moved to the level of cultural identity and acquired a profound ideological character. It has become a war of cultures, a fierce confrontation of Tradition against Modern and Postmodern.

The SMO in the Context of the Confrontation between Unipolarity and Multipolarity

In terms of the architecture of world politics, the SMO is the point at which to determine whether the world will be unipolar or multi-polar. The victory of the West over the USSR ended the era of the bipolar organization of world politics. One of the two opposing camps disintegrated and disappeared from the scene, while the other remained and declared itself the main and the only one. This is when Fukuyama proclaimed “the end of history.”

At the level of geopolitics, as we have seen, this corresponded to a decisive victory of the civilization of the Sea over the civilization of the Land. More cautious specialists in international relations (Charles Krauthammer) called this situation a “unipolar moment,” thus emphasizing that the formed system has a chance to become stable, that is “unipolar world” itself, but may not hold and may give way to another configuration.

This is exactly what is being decided today in Ukraine: Russia’s victory will mean that the “unipolar moment” is irreversibly over and multipolarity has come as something irreversible. Otherwise, the supporters of the unipolar world will have a chance to delay their end at least at any cost.

Here we should again turn to the geopolitical concept of “distributed Heartland,” which brings an important correction to classical geopolitics: if the civilization of the Sea is consolidated today and represents something united, the planetary system of liberal globalism under the strategic leadership of Washington and NATO command, then, though the directly opposing civilization of the Land represents only Russia (which refers to classical geopolitics), Russia fights not only for itself, but for the principle of the Heartland itself, recognizing the rightfulness of the unipolar world.

For this reason, Russia embodies a multipolar world order, in which the West is given the role of only one of the regions, one of the poles, with no reason to impose its criteria and values as something universal.

The SMO in the Context of World History

But modern Western civilization is the result of the historical vector that has developed in Western Europe since the beginning of the New Age, the Age of Modernity. It is neither a deviation nor an excess. It is the logical end of a society that has become desacralized, de-Christianized, rejecting the spiritual vertical, on the path of atheistic man and material prosperity. This is what is called “progress,” and such “progress” includes the total rejection and destruction of the values, foundations and principles of traditional society.

The last five centuries of Western civilization are the history of the struggle of Modernity against Tradition, of man against God, of atomism against wholeness. In a sense, it is a history of the struggle between the West and the East, since the modern West has come to embody “progress,” while the rest of the world, especially the East, has been perceived as the territory of Tradition, the preserved sacral way of life.

Western-style modernization was inseparable from colonization, because those who imposed their rules of the game made sure that they worked only in their favor. So gradually the whole world came under the influence of Western Modernity, and from a certain point no one could afford to question the justification of such a “progressive” and deeply Western-centric picture of the world.

Modern Western liberal globalism, the Atlanticist civilization itself, its geopolitical and geostrategic platform in the form of NATO and, in the end, the unipolar world order itself is the culmination of the historical “progress,” as it is deciphered by Western civilization itself. It is precisely this kind of “progress” that is called into question by the conduct of the SMO.

If we are faced with the peak of the West’s historical movement toward the goal that was outlined 500 years ago and is almost achieved today, then our victory in the SMO will mean—no more and no less—a dramatic change in the entire course of world history. The West was on its way to its goal, and at the last stage Russia thwarted this historical mission, turned the universalism of the Western-understood “progress” into a local, private, regional phenomenon, and took away from the West the right to represent humanity and its destiny.

This is what is at stake and what is being decided today in the trenches of the SMO.

The SMO in the Context of the Global Crisis of Capitalism

Modern Western civilization is capitalist. It is based on the omnipotence of capital, the dominance of finance, and bank interest. Capitalism has been the fate of modern Western society since it broke with Tradition, which rejects obsession with the material aspects of existence and sometimes severely restricts certain economic practices (such as interest rates) as deeply ungodly, unjust and immoral.

Only by shedding religious taboos could the West fully embrace capitalism. Capitalism is inseparable neither historically nor doctrinally from atheism, materialism and individualism, which in a fully spiritual and religious tradition are not tolerated at all.

It is precisely the unrestrained development of capitalism that has led Western civilization to atomization, dissipation, the transformation of all values into commodities, and, in the end, the equating of man himself with a thing.

Philosophers critical of the modern West have unanimously identified this capitalist impulse of civilization as nihilism. First there was the “death of God” and then, quite logically, the “death of man,” who had lost any fixed content without God. Hence posthumanism, AI and human-machine splicing experiments. This is the culmination of “progress” in its liberal-capitalist interpretation.

The modern West is the triumph of capitalism at its historical peak. Again, the reference to geopolitics clarifies the whole picture: the civilization of the Sea, Carthage, and the oligarchic system were based on the omnipotence of money. Had Rome not won the Punic Wars, capitalism would have come a couple of millennia earlier. Only the valor, honor, hierarchy, service, spirit and sacredness of Rome could have stopped the Carthaginian oligarchy’s attempt to establish its world order then.

The successors of Carthage (the Anglo-Saxons) were more fortunate and over the past five centuries were finally able to accomplish what their spiritual ancestors had failed to do: impose capitalism on humanity.

Of course, Russia today does not even remotely imagine that the SMO is a revolt against global capital and its omnipotence.

And yet that is exactly what it is.

The SMO in the Context of the End Times

Usually, we look at history as progress. However, this view of the essence of historical time has taken root only recently, beginning with the Enlightenment. We can say that the first complete theory of progress was formulated in the middle of the 18th century by French liberal Ann Robert Jacques Thurgot (1727-1781). Since then, it has become dogma, although originally it was only a part of liberal ideology, which was not shared by everyone.

In terms of the theory of progress, modern Western civilization represents its highest point. It is a society in which the individual is practically freed from all forms of collective identity, that is, as free as possible. Free from religion, ethnos, state, race, class, even gender, and tomorrow from the human race. This is the final frontier that progress is meant to take.

Next, according to liberal futurologists, there will be a singularity moment, when humans will hand over the development initiative to Artificial Intelligence. Once upon a time (according to the same theory of progress) apes passed the baton to the human species. Today humanity, ascending to the next stage of evolution, is ready to pass the initiative to neural networks. This is what the modern globalist West is directly leading to.

But if we take away the liberal ideology of progress and turn to the religious worldview, we get a completely different picture. Christianity (as well as other religions) sees the history of the world as a regression, as a departure from paradise. And even after the coming of Christ and the triumph of the universal Church there must come a time of apostasy, severe trials and the coming of the Antichrist, the son of perdition.

This is destined to happen—but believers are called to stand their truth, to remain faithful to the Church and God and to resist the Antichrist even under such extremely difficult conditions. What to the liberal is “progress,” to the Christian is not merely “regress,” but a diabolical travesty.

The latest phase of progress—total digitalization, migration to the meta-universe, the abolition of gender and the overcoming of man with the transfer of the initiative to Artificial Intelligence—in the eyes of the believer of any traditional denomination is a direct confirmation that the Antichrist has come into the world. And this is his civilization.

Thus, we get another dimension of the SMO, which is increasingly being spoken of directly by the Russian President, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Secretary of the Security Council, the head of the SVR, and other high-ranking Russian officials, seemingly quite far from any mysticism or prophetism. But that is exactly what they are: they assert the pure truth, which corresponds to the traditional society’s view of the modern Western world.

And this time it is not a metaphor, with which the opposing sides of the conflict have sometimes rewarded each other before. Now it is more than that. Never has Western civilization, even in modern times, been so close to a direct and blatant embodiment of the kingdom of the Antichrist. Religion and its truths were abandoned by the West long ago, moving on to aggressive secularism and an atheistic materialistic worldview, taken henceforth as the absolute truth.

But it had never yet encroached on human nature itself, deprived it of sex, of family, and soon, of human nature itself. Five hundred years ago, Western Europe embarked on the path of building a society without God and against God, but this process has only now reached its climax. This is the religious and eschatological essence of the “end of history” thesis.

In essence, it is a declaration, expressed in the language of liberal philosophy about the arrival of the Antichrist. At least, this is how it looks in the eyes of people of religious denominations belonging to traditional society.

The SMO is the beginning of an eschatological battle between sacred Tradition and the modern world, which precisely in the form of liberal ideology and globalist politics has reached its most sinister, toxic, radical expression. This is why more and more often we speak of Armageddon, the last decisive battle between the armies of God and Satan.

The Role of Ukraine

At all levels of our analysis, it turns out that the role of Ukraine itself in this fundamental confrontation, no matter how we interpret it, is on the one hand key (it is the field of Armageddon). On the other hand, the Kiev regime is not even remotely an independent entity. It is only a space, a territory where two global, cosmic, absolute forces came together. What may appear to be a local conflict based on territorial claims is, in fact, something else entirely.

Neither side cares about Ukraine itself. The stakes are much higher. It so happens that Russia is destined for a special mission in the history of the world—to stand in the way of civilization of pure evil at a critical moment in world history. And by starting the SMO, the Russian leadership has undertaken this mission. The border between two ontological armies, between two basic vectors of human history is precisely on the territory of Ukraine.

Its authorities have sided with the devil—hence all the horror, terror, violence, hatred, ferocious repression of the Church, the degeneration and sadism of Kiev. But the evil is deeper than the excesses of Ukrainian Nazism—its center is outside Ukraine, and the forces of the Antichrist are simply using the Ukrainians to achieve their goals.

The people of Ukraine find themselves divided not only along political lines, but also in spirit. Some came to the side of the civilization of Dryland, Holy Russia, to the side of Christ. Others, on the opposite side. Thus, society split along the most fundamental—eschatological, civilizational and simultaneously geopolitical boundary. Thus, the very land that was the cradle of ancient Russia, our people, became the area of the great battle, even more significant and extensive than the mythical Kurukshetra, which is the subject of the Hindu tradition.

But the forces that have converged on this field of destiny are so fundamental that they transcend any inter-ethnic contradictions many times over. It is not just the split of Ukrainians into Russophobes and Russophiles; it is the split of humanity on much more fundamental grounds.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: Battle of Grochów, by Bogdan Willewalde; painted ca. 1850.

The Russian Subject of Victory

This is what I think is important.

No one knows the future for sure. No one knows for sure, however, even the present or the past. That’s why their interpretations vary so much. But the future is even more open. All the more unclear is the future in such a harsh and terrible war, which is going on now—with the collective West.

About the future we can only have hypotheses and plans. Both hypotheses and plans are closely related to each other. What the hypothesis, such the plan. And vice versa.

There are two main hypotheses:

1. Reconciliation is possible; and there are forces in the United States (in the West) that are ready to stop Zelensky.

2. Reconciliation is impossible until Russia achieves the complete surrender of Kiev and de facto control over the entire territory of Ukraine (that is, fulfills the goals of the Special Military Operation—demilitarization and denazification).

Hence the plans:

1. Based on the first hypothesis, we need to procrastinate and try to negotiate.

2. On the basis of the second hypothesis, we should prepare for an all-out war to the end, until total victory—as in the Great Patriotic War. Not necessarily to Berlin or the English Channel, but to Lvov for sure.

If we proceed from the first hypothesis, then we create preconditions for reconciliation. Of course, we are at war, but with a reference to the armistice.

If we proceed from the second hypothesis, then we forget about the possibility of an armistice in general. And we focus only and exclusively on the war. If we lack something for Victory, we correct the situation. If someone cannot or does not want to fight properly, we change personnel. If the mood of the elite and society prevents Victory, we change those moods—along with segments of the elite and even society. Because in war it is like what happens in war.

I am convinced that a truce is not possible at all. Or we will be offered such conditions that the whole political system of Russia will collapse if we accept them, because the people and especially those who have already entered deeply into the elements of war and have lost loved ones and relatives, who believed Putin and went to the front, will not be able to accommodate and accept it.

I would exclude the first hypothesis altogether. It is unlikely from the outside, and in any case will lead to the collapse of the system from the inside, even if someone from the outside—contrary to logic—will try to implement it.

It remains to act on the second hypothesis. But this is a completely different plan.

In 2014, the authorities managed to convince us of the existence of a “cunning plan.” There was no plan. There was faulty planning, based on false hypotheses. All we had to do then was bring in troops. And go as far as we could go. We hesitated; we believed in the armistice. We were deceived, and the President himself admitted it. And continued to be deceived. And there is no doubt that they will do it again. And someone on the inside was helping to deceive us. It would be interesting to know who exactly.

What we need now is not a “cunning plan,” but a sensible and well-tuned plan for victory. Everything that needs to be done to implement it, including any “unpopular measures,” should be engaged and as soon as possible (speed in modern wars decides almost everything). No one and nothing should be taken into account. Now, there is definitely no time for elections and no time for ratings.

Here’s what we have: a very unlikely armistice and a much more likely, almost guaranteed all-out war. Both of these hypotheses rule out the continuation of a peacetime policy. We have already passed this one. But we don’t seem to have really grasped it. 

And accordingly, we need a subject of victory. Rational, decisive, strong-willed, sensible, immune to disinformation and dubious influences. A Russian subject.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: Berlin: Victory! by Dmitri Shmarin; painted in 2005.

The Wagner Factor and the Fairness Principle

Experience of Political Analysis

Throughout the Special Military Operation (SMO), the PMC Wagner and Yevgeny Prigozhin have been the center of attention of Russian society and the world community. For Russians, he has become the main symbol of victory, determination, heroism, courage and resilience. For the enemy a source of hatred, but also of fear and terror. It is important that Prigozhin not only leads the most combat-ready, victorious and undefeated unit of the Russian armed forces, but also provides an outlet for those feelings, thoughts, demands and hopes that live in the hearts of the people of war, completely and to the end, irreversibly immersed in its elements.

Prigozhin took this war to the end, to the bottom, to the last depths. And that element is shared by the members of the PMC “Wagner,” all those who move in the same direction and towards the same goal—the difficult, bloody, almost unattainable, but so longed-for, desired victory. PMC “Wagner” is not a private military company. The money has nothing to do with it. This is a brotherhood of war, the Russian guard, which was assembled by Eugene Prigozhin from those who responded to the call of the Motherland in the most difficult time for her and went to defend her, being ready to pay any price.

You might legitimately ask, but what about our other warriors? What about the Donbass militia, fighting in inhumane conditions since 2014, forgotten by everyone, but firmly in their post? What about our volunteers, who willingly moved to the fronts of the new Patriotic War, which they identified under the inaccurate name of “Special Military Operation?” What, after all, are the regular troops of various units, smashing the enemy and losing their brothers in a brutal confrontation? What about Ramzan Kadyrov’s heroic Chechens? Yes, of course, they’re all heroes, and they all bear priceless portions of our common Victory, to which they gave themselves to the end.

But Evgeny Prigozhin and the Wagner PMC is also something else. They are not only ahead of the rest, in the most difficult sections of the front, storming with inhuman tenacity meter by meter, house by house, street by street, village by village, city by city, liberating the native land from a cruel and vile maniacal enemy. They gave this war a style, became its symbols, found the most precise and most sincere words to express what was happening. It is a rare case in which a military feat of incredible significance and scale is accompanied by equally piercing declarations of worldview—understandable to everyone in Russia. This war is a war for justice. It is waged against evil and violence, against lies and deceit, against cruelty and substitution. But if this is so, it is directed not only against the direct enemy—Ukrainian Nazism and the globalist liberal West that supports it, but also against the injustice that sometimes takes place within Russia itself. Wagner’s war is a people’s war, liberating, cleansing. Half-measures, agreements, compromises, and negotiations behind the backs of the fighting heroes are not acceptable. The Wagner PMC values life very highly, both their own and the enemy’s. And death, the price of which gives the victory, can be paid only for it, and for nothing else.

The aesthetic apotheosis is Prigozhin’s programmatic film, The Best in Hell. It is the new Hemingway, Ernst Jünger. A great film—about the elements of war, about the price of life and death, about the profound existential transformations that happen to a man when he finds himself immersed in the inexorable process of mortal confrontation with the enemy. And with one that is not something radically different, but the reverse side of himself. It is precisely because Prigozhin not only wages war, but also comprehends war, accepts its terrible logic and freely and sovereignly enters into its elements that he represents such a nightmare for the enemy.

It is obvious that for the Kiev Nazi regime, which has no such symbols and which truly fears and hates the Wagner PMC the most in this war, as well as for the real actor, pushing Ukraine to attack Russia and fully arming it, that is, for the West, Yevgeny Prigozhin personally is the main priority, concrete and symbolic target simultaneously. And there is no doubt that the enemy knows the value of symbols. It should not be surprising therefore that it is the Wagner PMC that arouses such frenzied hatred of the enemy; and the West has thrown all its forces to destroy this formation and Yevgeny Prigozhin personally.

Inside Russia, people accept Prigozhin unconditionally. He, without any doubts, is the first in this war. Whatever he says or does, it immediately resonates in the heart of the people, in society, in the broad Russian, Eurasian masses. It is one of the many paradoxes of our history—an ethnic Jew, an oligarch, and a man with a rather turbulent past is transformed into the archetype of a purely Russian hero, into a symbol of justice and honor for all people. This says a lot about Prigozhin himself and about our people. We believe deeds, eyes, and words when they come from the depths. And this dimension of depth in Yevgeny Prigozhin cannot be overlooked.

Russian elites are another matter. It is precisely because Prigozhin has made a pact with the Russian people, with the Russian majority, on the blood—his own and that of his heroes from Wagner—that he is most hated by that part of the elite that has not accepted the war as its fate, has not realized its true and fundamental motives, has not yet seen the mortal danger that hangs over the country. It seems to the elite that Prigozhin is simply rushing to power, and, relying on the people, is preparing a “black redistribution.” For this part of the Russian elite, the word “justice” itself is unbearable and burns with the fires of hell. After all, Prigozhin is himself from this elite, but he found the courage to renounce the class of the rich, exploiters, cynics, and cosmopolitans, who despise all those who are less successful, and to move to the side of the warring, country-saving people.

In such a situation, analysts who belong to these elites as a kind of domestics wonder: how can Prigozhin afford to behave with such a degree of determination, audacity, and autonomy? Isn’t he an experiment by much more influential—indeed, simply the highest—forces in Russian politics, who are testing, by his example, the readiness of society to introduce stricter rules and a more consistent patriotic, people-oriented policy?

In other words, are not Yevgeny Prigozhin and Wagner PMC the forerunners of a full-fledged oprichnina? After all, even in the era of Ivan the Terrible, the oprichnina army was formed precisely in battles and also, as in the case of Wagner, from among the most courageous, courageous, desperate, strong, reliable, active – regardless of pedigree, title, status, rank, position in society.

What Prigozhin gets away with in Russia’s customary political system, no one could get away with. So, the analysts conclude, either he will soon be punished for his impertinence, or this familiar political system no longer exists, and we are witnessing the emergence of some other, unusual, new system, where values will greatly shift in the direction of justice, honesty, courage, and true front-line brotherhood, exactly what the elites hate.

External observers, with all their desire, cannot reliably determine the relationship between Yevgeny Prigozhin personally and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. Whether or not he coordinates his hard line with the top leadership of the country. There are those who are convinced that Prigozhin’s oprichnina is sanctioned from above; but there are those who believe that it is an independent effort—a truth that surprisingly exactly coincides with the expectations of the majority. For the Russian government as a whole, uncertainty is a natural environment. When we are dealing with the personal will of the president, and when we are dealing with the initiative of his associates, who are trying to grasp in advance and anticipate “the commander’s intention” (the classic term from the theory of network-centric warfare), no one can fully understand. This is a rather pragmatic approach: in this case, the President is above any conflicts within the elites, and the transformation of the system (above all in a patriotic way) is left with complete freedom. If desired, it can be assumed that all the patriotic—and even the most avant-garde—initiatives (such as the PMC Wagner) are implemented with his tacit consent. But no one knows this for sure—just speculation. Prigozhin cultivates this uncertainty to the maximum extent and with maximum effect.

Meanwhile, love for and trust in Prigozhin and the Wagner PMC are growing, and at the same time, anxiety is growing among the elites.

In Prigozhin, society has begun to see something more than a successful and desperate field commander, a warlord. The configuration in the elites that prevailed in Russia before the SMO allowed (with personal loyalty to the supreme power) for a certain oligarchic stratum the opportunity to remain part of the global liberal globalist system. The people grumbled, lamented and complained about this, but as long as Russia’s sovereignty was being strengthened and, as it seemed, nothing threatened the country, this could somehow be tolerated. After the beginning of the SMO, this contradiction was fully exposed. Russia faced a deadly battle with the entire West, which fell upon our country, a West with all its might; and the Russian elite, by inertia, continued to slavishly follow the land of the setting sun, copying its standards and methods, keeping their savings abroad, dreaming of Courchevel and the Bahamas. Part of the elite frankly fled, and part hid and waited for it all to end. And here the “Prigozhin factor” appeared, already as a politician who became the mouthpiece of popular anger towards the remaining oligarchic elites, stubbornly refusing to accept the new realities of the war and do as Yevgeny Prigozhin himself did, that is, go to the front or, at least, join in the cause of Victory entirely and without a trace. If the West is our enemy, then a supporter of the West, a Westerner is a traitor and a direct agent of the enemy. If you are not at war with the West, then you are on its side. This is the simple logic voiced by Prigozhin. And in his decisive battle with the external enemy, the masses of the people saw a second—future—act, the transfer of similar methods for the internal enemy. And this is “justice”—in its popular, even albeit common people—understanding.

Obviously, this kind of oprichnina would have had no effect on the people themselves, since the victims of “justice according to Wagner” would only be the class enemies of the common people, and today even their political enemies, who happen to side with the very force with which the people are at war.

And more and more strata of society are coming to the conclusion (perhaps too simplistic and linear) that it is the “internal enemies” who are responsible for the slippages and some of the failures at the fronts—that is, the same oligarchs and Westerners who are actively sabotaging the will of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief for Victory. And this is where the factor of “justice” comes in. We are ready to fight like Wagner, to die like Wagner, but not in order to return to Russia before February 24, 2022—to the previous conditions. We demand a purification, enlightenment and spiritualization of society and the entire ruling class. We are not just fighting against the enemy, but for justice.

There is a tremendous time delay, but it is the beginning of fundamental change in Russian society. Yevgeny Prigozhin represents one of the directions. This, above all, is war, where Wagner is the brightest illustration of what meritocracy is; that is, the power of the most distinguished, the most courageous, and the most deserving. The elites of war are those who perform the task best, and there are no other criteria at all. In essence, our armed forces—at least some of their most important—assault—components—clearly need to be rebuilt in a “Wagnerian” way. With one criterion for evaluation: effectiveness. In war, the old criterion—loyalty combined with czarist skills—is no longer sufficient. Loyalty in war is implied; otherwise, immediate execution. But now something more is needed: the ability to cope with the task at hand. At any cost. Even at the cost of one’s own and others’ lives. This alone brings out the best. And the worst. And all that remains is to put the best over the worst, and the whole thing will head to Victory.

But this does not only apply to war. In politics, economics, management, administration, even in education and culture, in fact, similar trends are gradually beginning to make themselves known. People of a special kind—Lev Gumilev called them “passionarians”—are able to act in conditions of emergency and achieve significant results. In more prosaic terms “crisis managers.” It is possible to speak about “Wagner-principles” in all fields—those, who cope with assigned—the most difficult, unrealizable—tasks most effectively, come to the forefront. Those who do not cope with the task are relegated to the back burner. In the political science of Wilfred Pareto this is called the “rotation of the elite.” In Russia, this process is extremely inert and sporadic, and most often it is not taking place at all. War, on the other hand, requires the “rotation of the elites” in an ultimatum manner. This is a real horror for the elites, who are old and incapacitated, moreover, cut off from their matrix in the West.

Eugene Prigozhin outlined the most important vector of the direction in which Russia will have to move under any conditions and in any circumstances. That is why the West wants to destroy it, and is counting on the old and no longer appropriate to the challenges of the moment Russian elites to help it in this. The stakes are constantly rising. Victory is at stake. And the way to it lies only through justice.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

On Post-Men and the Post-Human

When a man stops being a man, he does not become a woman. When a man ceases to be a man, he does not become a beast. Everything is more complicated here. He who betrays his gender falls below the critical line, below the boundary that includes both genders.

The post-man betrays both sexes at once. Then we are dealing with a monster, with a dangerous and unpredictable degenerate. And certainly not with a “woman.” It’s insulting to even think about it. With a woman, however, something is different. The true structure of her gender is original and poorly studied, and concepts such as loyalty/betrayal (which quite clearly describe the male attitude) do not correspond directly to her. There is (should be) a special language that should be used to describe women and their logic. It is a secret or as yet undiscovered language. Post-women do not exist. They were invented by post-men. There are no feminists either. There are victims of a dangerous and cynical experiment. They are simply to be pitied, like lame crows.

And, post-men do exist. And they are to blame for what they do and who they become. Everything around them begins to rot, decay, slip into dissolution. When there are critically few of them, they can somehow still have a place in culture—in exotic marginality, eccentricity, extravagant behavior. But as soon as post-men become a serious trend, they turn into a deadly, highly contagious virus. If you give them freedom, they will destroy everything around them.

Something similar is the case with those who lose their human form. There the matter is even more obvious. They do not turn into animals—animals, even if they are predatory or quite tiny, are organic, harmonious and never do what is not justified and not predetermined by their nature. They are beautiful in that, even when they carry the greatest danger or boredom. And we acknowledge this by treating animals, domestic and wild, with respect.

Post-humans are completely different. They break with our archetype, but they do not enter into an ontological contract with the beasts. Because man cannot become a beast. It is beyond his powers. And, most importantly: he does not and cannot have the innocence inherent in every beast. Thus, post-humans are also monsters, perverts and degenerates. In ancient times they were called “chimeras.” There is a version that they are ancestors of monkeys, but monkeys are harmonious, organic and charming. I think that version is fake. Monkeys should not be insulted.

Post-humans undermine the human being as post-men betray gender—gender as such. By demolishing man, post-men cause irreparable damage, including to animal nature.

Ecologists (primarily deep ecologists in the spirit of steam-punk or cyber-feminism) are one of the variants of post-humans. Unable to be human, they try to become mice or jackdaws; but by doing so they offend rodents and birds. Environmentalists are enemies of animals; under the guise of their protectors, they hide the faces of dehumanized maniacs.

Today’s liberals are predominantly post-men and post-human. Liberalism is a kind of post-ideology in which thought, idea, morality fall below the critical line. That is why modern liberals attach so much importance to gender politics and deep ecology. They are dragging humanity full speed into the ocean of degeneration. And, if they need nuclear war to bring into being monsters made of cellophane waste, algae and computer circuits, they will succeed at some point. What is in the head of a sodomite or an environmentalist-digitalizer functions outside the criteria of normality. Hence the mutations imposed by global elites—through the infosphere, comedians, virtuality, social networks, drugs, modern urban lifestyle (urbanism is one of the most important tools for forced mass degeneration).

Just take a look. In Georgia, the moderate government proposed the introduction of a law on foreign agents—as in the United States. Foreign agents immediately revolted. Because they were afraid that they would not be the only ones to decide who is an agent and who is not.

So it is with post-men and post-humans. Having taken over power, they themselves introduce the criteria of what is the norm, what is woke and what is not, what should be canceled. What was the norm in the field of gender until yesterday is now a crime in many European countries. Then, tomorrow, the violation of the rights of a computer or passer-by ant can become the basis for real punishment. And those who hate man cry the loudest about human rights. Exactly, feminism is just an aggressive, extremist version of radical misogyny.

The situation is complicated by the fact that at the next turn of history, in order to at least stay where we are, a complete apology for men (gender as a whole) and man as such is necessary. But today, this is precisely what the elites categorically prohibit—even in our society. So post-men and post-humans are already rooted there.

In Russia, contrary to the “traditional values” contained in Decree No. 809, in the field of legislative ruling paradigm, episteme, liberals still dominate. In essence, the Russian elite are directly sabotaging the President’s decisions to return to normalcy. And, without such a turn, there can be no full-fledged apology.

This is what we are facing right now. We are at war with the liberal globalist civilization; but we remain almost entirely under its ideological control. The second year of the war has begun; and here, contrary to what the President said and did, total sabotage reigns. That is the problem. And it’s not about how to win, it’s about how to start fighting for real.

War is men’s business. War is the business of humans. First of all, both must justify themselves. And put the opposite sex in places that are specially designated for that. Look for a man! You are looking for a man! It is something vitally important, which we absolutely must do.

But—do you feel how disturbing that sounds? Programs have already been inserted into us that do not even allow us to think in this direction. And, they do. We are actively and intensively demasculinizing and dehumanizing ourselves. And anyone who resists is declared a marginal, an obscurantist; they brand him with the most disgusting labels, and then they kill him.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: A Blind Singer and Two Dancers, by Odd Nerdrum, no date.

Liberalism is more Dangerous than Ukrainian Nazism

We are an empire, as the heirs of the monarchy and as the heirs of the Soviet Union.

There can be no neutral position in this war, because there are only two camps. And that is all. Anyone who hesitates or is indecisive, sooner or later (it seems to me much sooner than it seems), will be forced to take up arms and simply go to the front, and the front is everywhere today. It is impossible to return this long, difficult and terrible war to where it was before February 24, 2022; nor can it be stopped; it can only be won. Or it can still be left to human history. Then there will be no winner. Death will win.

For now, it’s war, which means we’re alive.

If you do not support the Special Military Operation, then you are not for Russia, you are not for the country, you are not for our people, and then the time will come when you will have to kill Russians, destroy Russia as a country, blow up cars, houses and railways, hide terrorists in your homes, shoot. There is no more security.

So, it is better to decide now, and this applies to all Russians; but it also applies to all other countries.

If you want to preserve sovereignty, it is clear that it is impossible under the auspices of the collective West, because liberalism in international relations cancels sovereignty and recognizes only the World Government, in other words, Western hegemony; and in the fight for a multipolar world in which sovereignty is possible, you have to fight with the West, and that is what Russia is doing now. And, it is doing that for everyone.

That’s what World War III is all about. Anyone who really cares about sovereignty will either have to side with us or willfully and forever give up and submit completely to the West—and the West is now at war with Russia and will force others to do the same.

This is what happened to Ukraine; this is what is happening to Georgia and Moldova and what is threatening Turkey and even China.

Us and them.

Ukrainians have been massively, actively, obsessively and constantly taught to hate Russians and everything Russian for the last thirty years. Entire generations were raised with Russophobia.

And since 2014, Ukrainians have been trained to kill, burn, dismember, fry, roast and remove Russians from the face of the earth. They were all trained—men, women and children. This is how the image of the enemy, “Moskal”, was created. He is presented as a cruel “lower being,” “a monster,” “stupid,” “merciless,” “crude,” an undefined mass who only wants to make fun of the peaceful Ukrainian paradise and turn it into rivers of blood; and in order to prevent that, the Ukrainian had to be ready to attack first, to bring war to enemy territory, to reduce it to a bloody mess, so that Ukraine would not turn into such a mess. And so it went on, for years, decades.

Many people wonder why Ukrainians resist so fiercely? Because they are not even at war with us, but with the image that lives in their heads. In the TV series Black Mirror, there was an episode where people fight scary monsters; but it turns out that they are monsters made with special optical devices, which people had to wear (to avoid being punished) and what appeared to them to be “monsters” were only people.

Ukrainians see us as monsters, as chimeras imposed on them. And those chimeras are creepy, but they can’t see anything else.

We did not prepare for this war. We didn’t understand what we were dealing with. We did not create such an image of the enemy. That’s why we don’t even understand what is happening. Perhaps it is right that it is so; but it is clear that we did not understand the full weight of what was happening.

The fiercer the battles, the greater the anger of our people. At the same time, on the front, in a certain sense, an image of the enemy was created. On the domestic front, we are still in doubt. How can they do things like that? At the front, this question no longer arises, but another: how to defeat the enemy and, frankly, how to destroy him. You can only destroy what you hate; and those who hate the most fight fiercely and achieve the most in this war.

I am convinced that Russia should not allow this process to develop. If we allow it, hatred will gradually spill over from the front to the rear and we will be more and more like the enemy. That is, hatred will also enter our hearts. It has been in the hearts of Ukrainians for a long time. Now it’s up to us. One cannot but notice that during the duration of the war we gradually adopted the characteristics of the enemy. Reluctantly and belatedly, but still.

The authorities are currently only trying to contain the events, but they are like a river. At some point, the “humanist dam” will burst and the whole society will remember Simonov’s words: “Whenever you meet him, kill him.” No one will care what the authorities allow or forbid.

We need a different way, a true ideologization of war, complete and systematic, not partial and patchy, as it is now.

First, we are at war with the West. The main enemy is the West. Ukrainians are not the main enemy. That is why the West is the one that really needs to be rejected. And this is where Simonov is important: he believes that we must banish the West from ourselves, otherwise we cultivate double standards: the West kills us and we bow to it. Liberalism is more dangerous than Ukrainian Nazism, because Western liberals are the ones who started, created and armed Ukrainian Nazism. Consistent de-liberalization is necessary (because it is more important than the ongoing denazification of the country).

Denazification is also necessary, but it is a consequence, not a cause; it is a symptom, not the essence of the disease.

Furthermore, we are fighting against nationalism, but we must not turn into nationalists ourselves. We are the Empire, as the heirs of the monarchy and as the heirs of the Soviet Union, we are more than a nation. Our ideology must be imperial, open, clear and aggressive. The empire must present itself charismatically. Our Empire, Rome, is fighting a deadly battle with the opposite “Empire,” and essentially the anti-Empire, Carthage.

Only when the army, people, state and society fight against Carthage—the liberal West—we will defeat Ukrainian Nazism. The only thing left for us is to trample the enemy. Before that formidable and serious enemy, this obsessive pettiness will be insignificant.

If you tell a Russian that Russia does not exist, he will shrug his shoulders. If you tell an American that America doesn’t exist, he’ll shrug his shoulders too. And, if you tell a Ukrainian that Ukraine doesn’t exist, he will get mad like a beast, because Ukraine doesn’t exist. But that is when we are an empire, and our consciousness is imperial. A firm, strong, self-confident, determined conscience.

The strong identity of the enemy can be overcome not by an equally strong identity (Russian nationalism), but by a stronger identity: the imperial identity.

This ideological transformation of society is inevitable. It can be delayed for some time, but it cannot be prevented.

I am convinced that our authorities did not want this war. They tried really hard to put it off. It was possible to postpone it, but also impossible to avoid it. And now it’s impossible to stop it. Either you win or you disappear. It is clear that part of the elite is in a panic. They are unable to accept the perniciousness of what is happening, hoping, despite all common sense, to somehow return to the state of the past. Not possible. It is possible to postpone and procrastinate, but it is impossible to stop and go back to the old way. All that awaits us is war and a difficult, incredibly arduous victory. Our country will be irrevocably changed along the way. The country will change, society will change.

No one is ever so desperate to change themselves, but anything else has become impossible. It’s about fate. Change will be imposed with iron necessity.

Alexander Dugin is a widely-known and influential Russian philosopher. His most famous work is The Fourth Political Theory (a book banned by major book retailers), in which he proposes a new polity, one that transcends liberal democracy, Marxism and fascism. He has also introduced and developed the idea of Eurasianism, rooted in traditionalism. This article appears through the kind courtesy of Geopolitica.

Featured: La esfinge (The Sphinx), by Davegore; painted in 1988.