Stefano Beccardi – Interview with Aleksandr Dugin: “we Need to explode the liberal system”
Interview of Stefano Beccardi for the magazine Il Primato Nazionale
Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (1962) is a political philosopher and Russian, whose fame is more widespread outside of the confines of the national than within them, where it remains circumscribed to the political circles and the military. This has contributed to distort, for good or for evil, its image, particularly on the part of the media of the western world that elevated him to “the ideologue of Putin” or even “the Rasputin of Putin”, in addition to any real influence in the decisions of the Russian president, among other things, never mentioned by the person concerned direct. Dugin also figure in the list of personalities of the Russian sanctioned by the u.s. government, regarded as a public enemy.Scholar of the tradition (among its references stand out Guénon and Evola, having overseen the translation into Russian of several volumes of them), and the Conservative Revolution, is the ideologue of eurasianism, that is, of the idea of a political integration, economic and cultural between the countries of the post-soviet space, and of a world order, a multipolar world that is not approved culturally liberal west, and of the Fourth Political Theory, which proposes the overcoming of the political schemes classic for that is the height of the challenges posed by post-modernity, that is,by the totalitarianism of the century XIX.
Driven by a desire to deepen these topics without the filter of the inclination, favorable or unfavorable other means, we wanted to discuss with Dugin in person, which had welcomed us a few days ago in his office muscovite in welcoming in a great Italian.
SB – Prof. Dugin, the 4TP enunciated by lord proposes today as a dike against the post-modernity in which are soaked in the thought and praxis, a political western, in an era in which the liberal model is to tax the world on the rubble of the doctrines marxists and fascists. In this context, as it proposes the QTP as an alternative to the political theories that have already been tested?
Dugin – THE 4TP considers himself as antiliberalismo because it identifies in liberalism the essence of modernity. Modernity was not politically defined before the total victory of liberalism (the first political theory) about the other versions of modern politics. Also, communism (second political theory) and fascism (third political theory) were the ideologies of modern politics based on the philosophical concept of the “subject” cartesian. All applications of this “subject” created by the three general forms of political philosophy: the subject as an individual, is at the center of ideology of liberalism;the subject, as a class, of marxism; and finally, the subject as a State or as a nation, was the essence of fascism.
Liberalism, at the end of the last century, has established itself as the ideology that best represents the whole of modernity. The last century was totally idealistic, because it was the clash between the three political ideologies; we watched the first two world wars to define what political ideology it represented the essence of politics and philosophy of modernity, and here the fascism, losing the war, lost the opportunity to be one. Soon came the context of the Cold War that was the clash between liberalism and socialism.After 1991, liberalism had won completely, and if stated as the only possible political ideology on a world scale: today we have an economic system and a political liberal, and a system of cultural and philosophical-based individualism. As I said Fukuyama, “the history of the world ended”, because liberalism has won, there is no alternative and it can, therefore, show its nature totalitarian: this is the post-modernity.Liberalism is stated, then within a “closed system”, such as the emancipation of the individual from all bonds with the identity and the collective: it is a process that began with the “liberation” of religions, continued with the “liberation” of the nation, and soon the gender and, finally, will come the emancipation of humanity (trans-humanism, post-modern). Liberalism is not only ideology, but also is the essence of “objects”, the center of reality, the absence of any transcendence.
This is the starting point of the 4TP, which does not accept liberalism as the unavoidable fate, wants to deny individuality, but without going back to the ideologies of the past that were modern and, as such, representatives of the most pure state of liberalism. We recognize this result from the history of ideology of modernity, we recognize that liberalism has won and the reasons why. We want, then, in opposition to liberalism victorious, something that goes beyond modernity, hoping that the return to pre-modernity, to the traditional world.However, we should understand that this should not be a “return to the past”, but to the eternal principles of Tradition that belong to all the time. When we speak of “tradition” we have the idea of the past, of old, of the reaction; the Fourth Political Theory, however, is not conservatism, but rather a call to the eternity, in whose context we can find the dimension of the man present, and future. This eternity is precisely that which is denied by modernity and liberalism. In this return to pre-modernity can be of help Heidegger with his critique of the logos western, modern and pre-modern; the pre-modernity by itself is not enough, because when it is designed only formally, and the Tradition loses its eternal sense, she is destined to do, overcome by modernity, as has already occurred when you lost your character, existential, living, reduced to a pure empty form without content the holy. The return to the sacred should be designed, in the context heideggeriano, as a new beginning, be built around the concept of Dasein: that is, the destruction of the concept of the individual in favor of the fact that the human, concrete, thinking.
SB – THE purpose of the Tradition, you never hid have been influenced in its trajectory theoretical by the work of two great europeans, René Guénon and Julius Evola. What is the contribution that the Russian world can give for the recovery of a traditional view of life?
Dugin, I Believe that we can make the liberal system “blow up” to get to the alternative, because nothing of this corresponds to what we should build; perhaps this is the reason why, for some means of mass communication western, I am “the most dangerous man in the world”. This is the potential of the revolutionary traditionalism of Evola and Guénon, who were true revolutionaries; marxist and socialist are “children” in relation to the great spiritual revolution, social, political and economic that we have to make as the representatives of the 4TP.
The validity of the thought of Guénon and Evola consists in the formality of the opposition between modernity and Tradition. His intuition more great is of which it can be understood as two ways, not as two phases; the two forms coexisting, which can be chosen as a model of society and life. For Russia, this possibility of choice is important because, as the Russians retain many aspects of traditional society: religion, family, collectivism, organic. The Tradition is the way that we can choose today to defend our values.
We can apply these principles to politics, to culture, to history, reconciling them with the traditionalism of Russian. In the struggle for the defense of our tradition we are in solidarity with other peoples who fight for their tradition, because we have the same enemy and the same oppressor: the modernity, which has destroyed the whole society, our, such as the western, the Islamic, the Hindu or the Chinese. It is a common struggle, although with different values.
It is always possible to oppose the Tradition, as a way, to the modernity. This choice translates also in political reality, and Putin plays precisely with this. When there is possibility to choose, the majority of the Russian people, but I also believe that of the European people, choose the Tradition. The liberals, notwithstanding, with his totalitarian act, impose modernity not as an option, but as a destination: not if you can not be modern.
SB – THE growing dissatisfaction with the various aspects of post-modernity is reflected at the political level, in the emergence of the movements called “populist” against the elite liberals who dictate the political agenda of the liberal (what you call “the swamp”). As you can see, these “populist uprisings” express effectively a radical critique of the liberal system, by which one can expect a paradigm shift real and effective, or are all immersed in it, and if they solve simply as instances of correction marginal, but without questioning the general?
Dugin – populism, as a phenomenon of post-modern, it is the rejection of liberalism, but it is a reaction that is visceral, “guts”, not intellectual. As a body live reacts to attempts against his life, the populism is the immediate reaction of the society that is still alive against the imposition of liberalism that kills all life. Also in this phenomenon we can find a demonstration of Dasein. Heidegger wrote, “Dasein existiert völkisch”. The man can not exist without the people: no language, no culture and no tradition, because the man is a element of the people and the people is the nature of man.The entire content of the man is popular. We must understand, then, populism as the awakening of the people that exists, and that it opposes to the metaphysics of modernity, against the liberal concepts of the individual and of civil society.
The opposition to the liberalism also explains why populism declines easily to the “populism of the left”, the pseudo-socialism (Syriza in Greece, we Can in Spain, the Movement 5 Star in Italy), or to the “populism of the right”, the pseudo-fascism (such as Le Pen in France, the AfD in Germany, the Northern League in Italy).Nevertheless, I believe that populism should not be interpreted neither from the left nor from the right, because otherwise if he falls in the trap of modernity, and if reestabelece the vicious circle of history: once again we would create a society “closed” with socialism or fascism, and liberalism again become an attractive alternative. It is necessary to avoid this, so the populism must be understood in a pure sense, without the interference of the “right” or “left”, as if it were an organic reaction that must be cultivated intellectually.Populism is the way the crude, primitive, the creation of the culture of the Fourth Political Theory, of which it represents the most important argument of their validity; should be understood in the sense of the overcoming of liberalism and its other critical ways modern, and only in this sense can be considered as an instrument to assert an alternative total to liberalism and globalisation. In this fight, the enemies of populism are the ideas manipulated by the liberalism itself: the for your site and fill (as in the case of Ukrainian), and the neo-socialism (such as the movements funded by Soros);populism should stand up to them then to these interpretations distorted the “right” or “left”, because here passes the difference between being an obstacle to liberalism, or to be an instrument of liberalism itself. It is not enough, therefore, with the capture of the dissent or the “protest vote”: it is necessary to be very clear, in the view of political leaders, the historic function of populism.
With Macron we see the situation much more clearly than post-modernity: he represents the liberalism pure, globalist, beyond left and right, is the Antichrist political. Whoever opposes him is right (Le Pen) or the left (Mélenchon); but the pole of populism pure, which is the centre of the Fourth Political Theory, is between Le Pen and Mélenchon. Also in Italy there is a “fourth position”;personally, I think that Salvini goes in this direction, although for reasons of convenience of political propaganda, so as not to lose the support of the liberals of the right of northern Italy, this aspect is not accented.
SB – THE purpose of the “populism”, can not fail to mention the case Trump. although his election has been characterized by proclamations, clear against the dogmas of liberal and mundialistas, the latest developments of its mandate seem to suggest a “normalization” policy in the act. In the face to the consummation of a betrayal to expectations, or is in fact a price that Trump must necessarily pay in the short term to be able to work “in-depth” in the direction he indicated from your application?
Dugin – Trump, including behaving often irrational, can not be interpreted as a perfect liberal, nor communist, nor fascist. His syncretic view and chaotic world denotes populism; but the “trumpismo” is more important than Trump, because this is what the american people aspired to and wanted, the Trump, “trumpista”, not the Trump manipulated by the Deep State, by the structures of liberal and globalist.
Trump said in the election campaign that you want to change the system, but without the will revolutionary is unthinkable win against the Marsh liberal. The existing system cannot be improved by modifying the procedures or the elites, and it must be destroyed in its principles. This is only possible through the total revision of modernity, imposing another philosophy of politics, science and society. The path is very long and little evident. Maybe Trump underestimate the challenge of this revolution is total, and that is why there is that works for other leaders to have the means that are lacking to him.
SB – In the european scope, the destination waveform immediately after the end of the Second World War is marked by subordination, political and ideological, and by the inability (or even by the waiver) to express a dimension of its own. A long “twilight,” which, however, seems in full becoming. What are the imperatives that the europeans should propose the level of political and pre-political, to reapropriarem of the story rather padecê it? Where it passes, in other words, a new dawn a european?
Dugin – Is necessary to concentrate on the concept of logos european, as I wrote in Noomaquia. There is a logos of the Europe that is apollonian and dionysian at the same time; it is patriarchal and solar as a whole, and is the axis of european civilization, traditional, present in the culture of civilization grecorromana and indo-european. Today, this axis is dominated by the logos of Cybele, the matriarcado and the way ctônica. The mother rails against the father, the principle apollonian, and against the son, the principle the dionysian; the logos of the liberal titanic express european modernity, that is anti-european.This fight by logos european is a matter of life or death; there is no peace possible between the Devil and Christ, between Heaven and Earth, as said by Heidegger. It is a necessary revolution apollonian total, political, cultural and economic against the structures in the professions.
I believe that there will come a time in which the system, the globalist will produce transformations so brutal to the point of imploding. At this time, the core of the logos committee will have to re-emerge, under penalty of nihilism more absolute, the world of the machines. Therefore, it is necessary to have in view this time, which will mark the possibility of a new beginning: there is that preserve their own identity against all destructive forces.The alternative education is the way to go: think of the writings of the author essentially european Dumézil, but also in the Right New French, without forgetting the heritage of the literary Italian. The romanidade should be saved, against all the forces that do not allow it to be manifest.