The Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies has published, within the “Turjuman Series”, the book, Geopolitics of Postmodernity: The Age of New Empires, the outlines of political geography in the twenty-first century by Alexander Dugin. It is translated by Ibrahim Istanbouli and revised by Iskandar al-Kfoury, and it includes a general index.
The book examines the issues of political geography in general, and its issues for postmodernism in particular, and deals with the most important stages in the development of the science of political geography, and addresses the theories and major currents in this science. It examines in depth and in detail the main features of the current stage of contemporary history; The era of unipolar globalization, the attempt by the United States of America to consolidate its hegemony over the world, and the requirements and outcomes of efforts made by some countries to obstruct unipolar American globalization and the establishment of a multipolar world. It also explains the pursuit of Russia, China and other countries to establish a Eurasian alliance as an alternative or parallel project to American globalization.
Postmodernism: West, East and Russia
Postmodernism is based on the premise that the modernization of traditional society has ended successfully, and that there is no longer a dimension of the sacred in the social, political and economic sphere, and this is the reality of the situation in the West or close to it. The hegemony of the West on the planet has reached a far greater extent today than ever before, and we are faced with a complete illusion that all the regional elites of non-Western humanity have been successfully integrated into the context of “modernity”. An interesting phenomenon has been observed in these circumstances: the West is gradually delegating “postmodern” news to non-Western elites; This means defining a new paradigmatic space called to gradually replace “modern” rules and regulations, after societies that are not sufficiently modern have been effectively and definitively deprived of their traditional features.
Two main lines can be distinguished in Russian “postmodernism”. The first line is purely “colonial”, and it is nothing but Western “postmodernity” implemented in Russia by “comprador” intellectual elites, and they were required to create an explicit ray or vector for the accelerated modernization process, in which everything that was essentially “unconventional” is being dismantled. modernist” in “pseudo-Russian modernity” at a rapid pace. In this way, postmodernism played the role of an indicator and regulator of the correctness of the modernization path. Postmodernism in Russia was, in function of the 1990s, a form of hypercolonialism. This excessive colonialism imposed the “achieved end of history” in the West by force, and in a violent manner, on the countries whose history, in its entirety, was directed at getting rid of and escaping from this logic (and perhaps even disproving it).
As for the second trend in postmodernism, it develops what was previously thrown at the threshold of the modern era, that is, pre-modernity after it was transformed and given a new face. This is a naive and sacred view, and it forms the background to human existence, to his subconscious region, to his material nature, and to what is generally very old. In essence, the talk is that as a result of a process of “Nettoyage par le vide” (the term goes back to Jean Parvolescu), the basis of human culture, major ancient features begin to emerge. This holds the possibility that it might be called Le retour des Grands Temps (the term also goes back to Jean Parvolescu and is the title of his last novel) and this phrase means a return to pre-modernity, a re-evaluation of all that has previously been discarded him and throw him at the cusp of modernity. Here we are very close to the issue of empire. For the idea of empire had already been neglected on the cusp of the modern era, precisely with the beginning of the foundation of the bourgeois state-nation (Etats-Nations). In essence, the empire belongs to pre-modernity, and it simplifies its balance between individualism and totalitarianism, and since this balance is based on a very old position on ontology, society and culture.
Thus, postmodernism is a closing process of modernity on the one hand, affirming its final chord as a hyper-nihilistic event, and on the other hand, it presupposes the introduction of very old elements into the area previously scorched by modernity. Moreover, postmodernism raises questions that during the entire modern era were politically invalid.
Globalization and its options
Globalization usually means two different things, which is why such confusion of concepts arises. The first definition of globalization (actual or real globalization) is that it is a process taking place on the ground, in order to impose the Western economic, political, cultural, technological and informational formula on all countries of the world. The realization of this globalization is supervised by the “rich North” (the countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization “NATO”) and the “golden billion”, and it is directed at strengthening the hegemony of these countries over the world. It is a form of “neo-colonialism”. The “rich” control the “poor”, and the more developed control the less developed; This leads to the peoples and developing countries losing their “sovereignty”, and then they are left with only one of two options: either they integrate into the global system, or they become “pariah”, rogue, “axis of evil” countries.
From an economic point of view, this globalization insists on the necessity of adopting the liberal style of the economy everywhere, along with a radical monetary policy, and the adoption of the financial doctrine (development of the banknote market, venture capital companies, and so on). On the political side, real globalization emphasizes the need to establish a liberal, democratic and secular system on a broad and comprehensive scale, and the domination of the ideological “human rights”, “open society”, and “civil society”; This is what gradually leads to the abolition of the state institution and the administrations of power in various countries.
The second definition of globalization is prospective, potential, or “humanitarian” globalization – a purely theoretical project that spreads in human circles (often “left”, environmental, scientific, etc.) in developed countries. Human globalization is seen as the development of dialogue between cultures and civilizations, post-clash in a bipolar world. In this sense, “globalization” can be understood as a “global exchange of experience” and an intense dialogue between different actors, and not as the West’s imposition of an economic, cultural, political, informational and value pattern on the rest of the world’s peoples and countries. Such globalization presupposes the abandonment and eradication of the “colonial” (“racist”) approach. It seeks to give different peoples the freedom to choose the path of their historical and cultural development.
Human globalization also allows for diversity in socio-political and economic systems, which is peaceful in nature and leads to the elimination of nuclear weapons in all countries, including the United States, or it allows (in a transitional stage) the emergence of a number of nuclear poles that limit each other, and may be called Multipolar globalization, unlike unipolar globalization.
For Russia, it is better and more useful to occupy an anti-globalization position, through a watered-down version of “humanitarian globalization”, and not through a radical and extreme position. What is more meaningful is for Russia to declare its support and commitment to “multipolar or regional globalization.”
The geopolitics of gas
When we talk about the geopolitics of gas, we are talking about the extent to which the gas supply system, the production of gas, as well as its transportation and marketing, are in harmony with a specific geopolitical model. If we contemplate the economy of Eurasia in the abstract, from a purely economic point of view without any considerations, we will see that the balance of the gas market would have led to a rapid, harmonious and stable development of those Eurasian spaces. Let’s imagine that there are no political reasons for Russia to prevent the supply of gas to Europe, China and Turkey as well. Thanks to such a purely theoretical approach to the economies of these countries, especially the dependence of the economies of Europe and China on energy, and taking into account that both economies are naturally active and efficient, both will then obtain a stable base in order to achieve intensive, strong and stable development; That is, they will appear to have guarantees for the future.
Terror: Heretics of the Twenty-first Century
Treating the phenomenon of terrorism as a global threat (demonizing it) is a hallmark of the myths pervasive in liberal-democratic societies of the secular type. Here, the specificity of the political system itself is evident in those societies; The personality of the terrorist is portrayed, psychologically and politically, and categorized in those societies as the embodiment of the “other”, the “stranger” and the “enemy”. The terrorist is an ideal model of social discrimination, the outcast and the estranged. In addition, all components of terrorism, whether political, geopolitical, or psychological, belong to a complex of conditions that have been rigidly moved outside the arc of social norms.
In conjunction with the successes achieved by the globalization implemented by the Atlantic, and the accompanying liberal system of values, the category that is classified as terrorist will gradually develop, and will spread to include all socio-political and religious groups, various ethnic groups, and even specific psychological patterns, those that do not integrate and do not coherent With the liberal-democratic model of civilization. In the event that unipolar currents develop later at the expense of the geopolitical balance, the concept of international terrorism may become an independent social, political and civilizational category.
Book: Postmodern Geopolitics: The Age of New Empires, Outline of Geopolitics in the Twenty-first Century
Author: Alexander Dugin, political and sociologist, founder of the Russian Geopolitical School, and professor of sociology at Moscow State University.
Translation: Ibrahim Istanbouli
Published by: The Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies – Tarjman Series