Eurasia Above All

7/29/2019 Eurasia Above All

1/66

EURASIA ABOVE ALL

Manifest of the Eurasist movement

Crisis of ideas in contemporary Russia

In our Russian* society - specially in the social and political sphereat the

beginning of the new millennium a deficiency of ideas is painfully felt. The

majority of the people - including governors, politicians, scientists, workers - are

guided in life, in political choice by a set of momentary factors, casual concerns,

transient ephemeral calls. We are quickly losing any general representation about

the sense of life, about the logic of history, about the problems of man, about the

destiny of the world.

Existential and social choice has been substituted by aggressive advertising. In theplace of meaningful and accountable political ideology stands some effective (or

ineffective) PR. The outcome of the struggle of ideas is defined by the volume of

investments in entertainment. Dramatic clashes of peoples, cultures and religions

are turned into shows inspired by transnational corporations and oil holdings.

Human blood, human life, human spirit became statistical abstraction, consumer

cost, at its best - demagogic figure of speech in mellifluous and ambiguous

humanitarian lamentations, hiding a double standard.

In the place of totalitarian uniformity, a totalitarian indifference has come. The

majority of political parties and formalised social movements pursue tactical

purposes. Practically nowhere can be found an explicit and consequent ideologycapable to snatch man from a state of sleepy indifference, to make life worth

living.

Americanism and the need for alternative

The most rigorous - but at the same time most harmfulworld-view project has

been formulated by consequent liberals. These forces, geopolitical oriented

towards the US and the West, take as a sample for copying the American politics,

American economy, American type of the society, American culture, American

civilisation ideal. This camp has its dignity - their project is logical and consistent,

its theory and practice are linked. But also logical are world evil, death, dissolving,

division and loss of organic wholeness. The liberals say a decisive yes to thatuniform world, confused, vain, individualist, oligarchic, deprived of any moral,

spiritual and traditional orienting points, which the US - world superpowerstrive


2/66

to create on a planetary scale, understanding their technological and economic

superiority as a mandate for a privately-owned hegemony on a planetary scale.

This Americanisation of Russia, of the whole world, this slavish submission to the

new world gendarme - gendarme of showsobviously is not very much pleasant

to many people. But this opposition more often appears only emotionally,

fragmentarily, inconsistently. Peoples and whole socio-political movements are

inertially satisfied with the old thongs, with the residuals of different, more

harmonious and noble epochs, with anything at least in some way differing from

the atlantist tsunami which drags along the remains of our own Russian

civilisation. The hostility to the American way of life, to the famous new world

order is a fully positive quality, which should be greeted with favour anywherewe meet it. But it is not enough. An active counterproposal, a realistic, concrete

and capable alternative is indispensable for us. Conditions at the beginning of the

millennium are considerably new. And those who want a different future, rather

than that controlled chaos and neon-light disintegration imposed on us by America,are compelled not only to say no, but also to formulate, to put forward, todemonstrate and to defend a different, our own, civilisation Plan.

The most massive, most generalising world-view offering such an alternative to

the American hegemony, to the unipolar world, to the triumph of West, is

Eurasism.

The founding-fathers of Eurasism

Historically, Eurasism existed for 20 years as an attempt to interpret to the logic

of socio-political, cultural and geopolitical development of Russia as a uniform and

basically continuous process from Kiev Rus' to the USSR. The eurasists have

detected behind the dialectics of national destiny of the Russian people and the

Russian State a unitary historical mission, differently expressed at the various

stages. One major thesis of early eurasists (count N.S.Trubetskoy, P. Savitsky)

sounded like this: The West against mankind , i.e. the nations of the world

blossoming complexity of cultures and civilisations against the unitary, totalitarian

Western pattern, against the economic, political and cultural domination of theWest. Russia (both ancient, and orthodox-monarchic, and Soviet) saw the eurasists

as a stronghold and avant-garde of this world process, as a citadel of freedom

against the unidimensional hegemony on mankind of an irreligious, secularised,

pragmatical and egotistical excrescence - the Western civilisation, claiming for

supremacy and for juridical, material and spiritual domination. On this basis the

eurasists accepted the USSR as a new - paradoxical - form of the original path of


3/66

Russia. Disapproving atheism and materialism in the cultural sphere, they

recognised behind the external facade of communism the archaic national features,

behind Soviet Russia the legitimate geopolitical heritage of the Russian mission.

Being consequent and convinced Russian patriots, the eurasists came to a

conclusion about the inadequacy of the traditional forms, in which the National

Idea in Russia was vested during the last centuries. The Romanov motto -

Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality - was only a conservative facade hidingbehind itself quite modern contents, basically copied from Europe. Soviet

patriotism expressed the national idea in class terms, which neither grasps the

essence of the civilizational problem, nor did recognise the meaning of the

historical mission of Russia. The secular nationalism of the Romanov was but a

formal imitation of the European regimes. Soviet patriotism ignored the national

element, broke off the connection to traditions, swept aside the Belief of the

fathers.

A synthetical new approach was indispensable. Such approach was alsodeveloped within the framework of eurasist philosophy, within the social and

political movement of the eurasists. The founding-fathers of Eurasism for the first

time gave the highest possible estimation to the multi-national (imperial) nature of

the Russian State. They were especially attentive to the Turkish factor. The role of

the heritage of Gengis-Khan, trustee of the Tatar statehood assimilated by Moscow

in the XVI century, was seen as a decisive turn of Russia to the East, to its origins,

to its own values. In the orthodox legend just this epoch is linked to the Sacred

Rus', to the transformation of Moscow in the Third Rome (after the fall of Tsargrad

and the end of the Byzantian Empire). The mission of the Sacred Rus' was

expressed in the self-assertion of its own Eurasian culture, of an original social

system, distinct in its main features from that path followed by the countries of the

Roman Catholic and Protestant West.

Russia was conceived by the eurasists as the avant-garde of the East against the

West, as a forward defence line of traditional society against modern, secular,

ordinary, rationalised society. But in the centuries-old struggle for preserving a

cultural ego, Russia differently from other Eastern societies actively acquiredexperience of the West, adopted the techniques it applied, borrowed some methods

- but every time with the only purpose to confront the West with its own weapons.

In modern language, this is called modernisation without westernization.Therefore Russia also managed longer than other traditional societies to effectively

counter the pressure of the West.

From this the eurasists came to a major conclusion: Russia needs not simply to

go back to its roots, but to combining a conservative and a revolutionary new start.

Russia must actively modernise, develop, partially open to the surrounding world,

but strictly saving and hardening its own identity. Therefore some called the


4/66

eurasists as the orthodox Bolsheviks.Alas, historically, this remarkable movement was not appreciated in due

measure. The impressing successes of Marxist ideology made the refined

conservative-revolutionary perspective of the eurasist ineffective, superfluous. By

the end of the 30s, the original impulse of the eurasist movement, both in Russiaand among the Russian emigration, had definitively died away.

The relay race of the Eurasist idea was run henceforth not so much by politicians

and ideologists, how much by scientists (first of all the great Russian historian Lev

Gumilyov).

Neo-eurasism

The dramatic events of the last decades in Russia, all over the world, have made

again the eurasists ideas urgent, essential. The West coped with its most seriouscivilizational opponentthe USSR. Marxist ideology suddenly lost its appeal. But

a general new alternative to westernism and liberalism (which today are embodied

in their fullest development by the US and American civilisation - from which

even the Europeans, the grandparents of the world monster, begin to feel nervous)

has not appeared yet.

And could not appear anyway.

The separate pieces - pre-Revolutionary nationalism, clericalism, the all-inertial

sovietism or the extravagant imagination of ecologism and leftism - could not turn

into a united front. There was no common world-view base, no common

denominator. The occasional rapprochement of positions of the opponents toglobalism and Americanisation did not result in a true synthesis of world-views.

In this moment the most attentive minds, the purest hearts and the most flaming

souls were converted too to the Eurasist heritage. In it they discerned a saving

source, a germ of that doctrine, that ideology, which ideally met the requirements

of the present historical moment.

Neo-eurasism began to be built as a social, philosophical, scientific, geopolitical,

cultural current since the end the 80s. Distancing from the heritage of the Russian

eurasists of the 20-30s, having incorporated the spiritual experience of the

staroobryadtradition of Russian Orthodoxy, being enriched by the social criticismof Russian populists and socialists, having interpreted in a new way the

achievements of the Soviet stage of domestic history, and at the same time having

mastered the philosophy of traditionalism and conservative revolution, geopolitical

methodology and original revolutionary doctrines of the new left (i.e. those

intellectual currents, which were elaborated in the West, but directed against the

dominant logic of its development)Neo-eurasism became the most serious


5/66

world-view platform in modern Russian society, acquiring the form of complete

scientific school, of a system of social and cultural initiatives.

Neo-eurasism laid the bases of modern Russian geopolitics, gained a strong

personnel potential of supporters in government structures and ministries and

offices linked to the military sector, basing on eurasist geopolitics many serious

operational international, military and economic projects.

Neo-eurasism influenced modern domestic politology, sociology, andphilosophy.

Neo-eurasism gradually became a relevant conceptual instrument of Russian

state monopolies requiring a strategic pattern for developing a long-term strategy

of macroeconomic activity, depending not from momentary political processes, but

from historical, geographical and civilizational constants.

Neo-eurasism laid the basis of the whole set of vanguard currents in youth

culture, gave a vivifying impulse to creative, passionate development of the whole

direction in art.

Neo-eurasism had a strong impact upon political parties and movements in

modern Russia - we find large borrowings from neo-eurasist ideological arsenal in

the programmatic documents of Unity, KPFR [Communist Party], OVR[Otetchestvo-Vsyo Rossiya], LDPR [Liberal-democratic Party], the movement

Russia and of a series of smaller movements and parties. However theseborrowings remain fragmentary, combined with other sometimes heterogeneous

and even contradictory elements (all this makes large Russian parties rather

tactical, de-ideologized formations created for the solution of short-term, local

political problems).

The new social and political subject

The time has come to make the following step, to add eurasism a concrete social

and political dimension. Neo-eurasist ideology gradually exceeded the level ofpure theoretical elaboration. The new government of Russia is seriously engaged in

the solution of strategic problems facing the country, and is obviously not satisfied

with the primitive and destructive recipes imposed by the West and the bearers of

Western influence in Russia: it needs a world-view and social and political support.

The present authorities, their specificity, their social image, considerably differ

both from the post-Soviet period and from the times of uncritical passion for


6/66

reckless liberalism. A new state world-view, a new domestic pattern of polit-

correctness have ripened. This is testified by that persevering search of a National

Idea in which the authorities are today engaged.

If the usual political and party system is suitable for the decision of momentary

problems (though we consider it as inadequate even in the narrow pragmatical

sense), in an medium-term perspective (let alone a long-term strategic sight) it has

no chance at all, and requires radical reforming. The existing system evolved

during the process of demolition of the Soviet model and its substitution by a

liberal-democratic pro-Western formation. But today neither the former, nor the

latter is acceptable for Russia. And furthermore, it is inappropriate in the face of

the very difficult situation the country is confronted toa consequence ofludicrous policies previously followed. What we need are parties and movements

based on a world-view, reflecting the interests of concrete strata of the population,

merged with the people, educating, training and defending it, instead of exploiting

the trust (and naivety) of the masses for the sake of private or group benefit.

All conditions have blossomed for the appearance of a rigorous Eurasist

movement in new Russia. And those who stood at the origins of Neo-eurasism,

who formed the theoretical premises and bases of Russian geopolitics, eurasist

philosophy, conservative-revolutionary politology and sociology, who spent years

fighting for the ideals of Eurasia, for the revival of the Russian people and our

Great Power - those made the decision to form the new social and political

movement EURASIA.

Who shall be the participants to the movement Eurasia?

To whom are we addressing the call to enter and to back our movement? To each

Russian, educated and not, influential and the last of the dispossessed, to the

worker and to the manager, to the needy and the well-off person, to the Russian

and the Tatar, to the orthodox and the jew, to the conservative and the modernist,

to the student and to the defender of the law, to the soldier and the weaver, to the

governor and the rock-musician. But only to the one who loves Russia, who cannot

think of himself without it, who has realised the necessity of a severe effort, whichis required from all of us so that our country and our people remains on the map of

the new millennium (from which they persistently attempt to erase us), to the one

who wants, passionately wants, that all of us at last would raise in a mighty power,

would cast away from our common organism its parasitic excrescence, would tear

the veil of mental mist, would affirm above the country, the continent, the world


7/66

our solar Russian ideals - ideals of Freedom, Equity, Fidelity to the Origins.

Radical Centre

The movement Eurasia is founded on the principles of radical centre. We areneither leftists nor rightists, we are neither slavishly compliant to the authorities,

nor oppositionists at any cost, barking with a reason and without . We realise that

todays authority in Russia, the President of Russia Vladimir Vladimirovic Putinrequires help, support, solidarity, cohesion. But at the same time blind submission

to the leaders, uncritical connivance to authority only because it is authority, are

today not less (if not more) pernicious than straight rebellion. We are centrists to

the extent that the President and the authority act for the sake of the Power, for the

sake of the people. And not in a populist and transient way, but in a medium and

long-term perspective. Here again we will be for the President fervently, radically,up to the end, not paying attention to small inaccuracies, accepting all hardships

and difficulties, which will arise since Russia will seriously be set by the purpose

of rescuing itself and all the rest of the world from the terrible threat creeping from

the West. Anything more centrist than our unconditional and total support to the

patriotic power-building of the authority (even in its most unpopular actions)

simply could not be. So, our forerunners, the Eurasists, supported the hated

orthodox fundamentalist and Marxist regimes because they confronted the West

the worst of evils. But our radical centrism is not passive. We clearly realise that

the present authority in Russia according to the logic of things has no (and can not

have) clear representation of the fundamental strategic purposes, of thephilosophical and spiritual dramatic problem which is born by the new millennium

- terrible, risky, threatening, problematic, misunderstood during centuries of

bloody battles and cruel sufferings In this sense the authority today is lost and

requires help, orienting points, landmarks, specifying which is the task of the

people, its most active, strong-willed, clever, idealistic, patriotic side (this also

should gather in our movement, to become its core).

Here the roles are changed, and now is the turn of the authority to listen to the

voice of Eurasia. This voice is not the servile yes, sir? of condescending and

artificial parties, good for chairs and tv-screens. It is the mighty radical appeal ofthe earth, the vote of generations, the cry from the depths of our spirit and our

blood.

Priorities of the Eurasia movement


8/66

Our movement spreads the Eurasist principles to all levels of life.

In the religious sphere it means constructive solid dialogue between the creeds

traditional for Russia, - Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism. The Eurasian

branches of world religions have many differences from those forms which have

taken roots in other regions of the world. There is a common style of eurasist

spiritual view, which, however, does not eliminate at all differences and originality

of tenets. This is a serious and positive basis for rapprochement, mutual respect,

mutual understanding. Due to the Eurasist approach to religious questions manyinter-confessional frictions can be bypassed or arranged.

In the sphere of foreign policy, Eurasism implies a wide process of strategic

integration. Reconstruction on the basis of the CIS [Commonwealth of

Independent States] of a solid Eurasian Union (analogue to the USSR on a new

ideological, economic and administrative basis).

The strategic integration of internal spaces of the CIS should be gradually spread

also to wider areasto the countries of the Moscow-Teheran-Delhi-Beijing axis.

An eurasist policy is invoked to open for Russia an exit to the warm seas, notthrough war and sufferings, but through peace and open friendly co-operation.

Eurasist policies towards the West implies prioritary relations with the European

countries. Modern Europe - as against the epoch when the founding-fathers of

Eurasism acteddoes not represent anymore the source of world evil. The quick

political events of the XX century contributed to transfer this doubtful record evenmore west-ward - to Northern America, to the US. Therefore at a present stage

Russia can find in Europe strategical partners interested in the revival of its former

political power. Eurasist Russia should play the role of deliverers of Europe, but

this time from the American political, economic and cultural occupation.

The eurasist policy of Russia is directed towards active co-operation with the

countries of the Pacific region, first of all with Japan. The economic giants of this

area should see in the eurasist policies of Russia the orienting point for a self-

supporting political system, and also for a strategic potential of resources and new

markets.

At a planetary level Eurasism means active and universal opposition to

globalisation, is equal to the anti-globalist movement . Eurasism defends theblossoming complexity of peoples, religions and nations. All anti-globalist

tendencies are intrinsically eurasist.


9/66

We are consequent supporters of eurasist federalism. This means acombination of strategic unity and ethno-cultural (in definite cases economic)

autonomies. Different ways of life at a local level in combination with strictcentralism in the basic moments, linked to State interests.

We should revive the traditions of the Russian people, contribute to the recovery

of Russian demographic growth. And most important, awake in the people its

intrinsic organic spirituality, morale, high ideals, living and fervent patriotism.

Without the prioritary revival of the Russian nation, the eurasist project has nochance to become a reality. Understanding this fact is the base of our world-view.

Eurasism in social sphere means the priority of the public principle above the

individual, subordination of economic patterns to strategic, social problems. The

whole economic history of Eurasia proves that the development of economic

mechanisms here happens according to an alternative logic than the liberal-capitalist, individualist patterns of personal benefit which evolved in the West on

the basis of Protestant ethics. The liberal logic of management is alien to Eurasia,

and despite enormous efforts there is no way to break this deep-rooted feature of

our people. The collective, communitarian principle of governing the economy, the

contribution of the criterion of equity in the distribution process all this

represent a steady feature of our economic history. Eurasism insists on a positive

account and evaluation of this circumstance, and on this basis gives preference to

socially-oriented economic patterns.

Eurasism implies a positive re-evaluation of the archaic, of the ancient. Itfervently refers to the past, to the world of Tradition. The development of cultural

process is seen by Eurasism in a new reference to the archaic, to the insertion of

original cultural motives in the fabric of modern forms. The priority in this area is

given back to national motives, to the sources of national creativity, to thecontinuation and revival of traditions.

Being a new and fresh world-view, just having taken a definite form, Eurasism

primarily addresses to youth, to the people whose consciousness has not been

spoiled yet by random jumps from one inadequate ideological pattern to another,

even less adequate. The eurasist ideal is the strong, passionate, healthy and

beautiful man (instead of the bastard cocaine-addict of mondialist discos, the half-

assed gangster or the slut for sale). We are in the condition to offer different,

positive values, instead of the cult of ugliness and pathology, instead of the

cynicism and servilism before the surrogates of world shows. We shall not allow

our children to be killed, violated, degraded, perverted, sold or chained to a needle.


10/66

Our ideal is a celebration of physical and spiritual health, force and worthiness,faith and honour.

The movement Eurasia can become a reality only in the event that manypeople will gather around it. Much can be done even by a single man, but, as

Lautramont said, everyone should care for poetry!

To an even greater extenteveryone should care for Eurasia!

Now everything depends on our efforts. Nobody is promising just victories, raise

of welfare or entertainment industry shares. Ahead stays daily laborious work,

often invisible from the outside.

Ahead stay difficulty and battle, loss and labours, but ahead also stay pleasure

and Great Purpose!

Program of the Socio-political Movement EURASIA

Russia has reached a relevant historical threshold. It is necessary to cast a look on

the path behind, to realise its place in the present world, to mark the next steps.

New challenges for Russia, new strategic orienting points, new purposes

Russia faces a set of new historical challenges. Today more than ever before it is

necessary to affirm in a new form priorities, purposes, constants of the historicalpath of Russia and to correlate them with the shapes of that new world in which we

shall live in the next millennium.

Traditions. Fundamental directions of development of Russia as State, people,society

Addressing to the future, we must give a pondered estimation of our past. This

past more than once in Russian history has been rewritten in a favour of this or that

ruling ideological group. Today, leaving the era of ideologies behind, we areobliged to sum up the landmarks of our historical path as much as possible

objectively and impartially beyond ideological preferences, outlining the most

important features and leaving aside the details. To this purpose there are today all

reasons and conditions. This freedom from untouchable dogmas and obligatory

clichs is possibly the most positive achievement of young Russian democracy.


11/66

`

The eurasist choice

There is no doubt that Russia has its own path. Its external forms constantly vary,

sometimes in dramatic turnarounds. But in every epoch a common line is tracedthe eurasist direction, the eurasist substance of Russian history. Much can be

questioned in considering our past, future and present. But the eurasist Idea is not

subject to doubt. Russia is Eurasia, and this predetermines its geographical,

cultural, civilizational, strategic and economic life.

Assertion of a special civilizational mission

The eurasist identity of Russia constitutes the substance of our historical mission.

Russia has its own image of the logic of history, of the Truth of the world. Thesearch for this Truth and its affirmation is the content of national historical life.

Loyalty to this Truth was defended by our ancestors, many generations of Russian

people, Russians giving their lives on the altar of Fatherland. To defend this

mission is our duty, also beyond the present moment. It is our historical covenant.

Russia has only an eurasist future

Our future must be planned and built according to the common landmarks of our

history. Any attempt to depart from this road, to refuse its predestination, meansthe end of our historical being. Russia has either an eurasist future, or none.

We are for idealism (cult of the truth)

The cultural forms of national life vary through the centuries. But the idea of a

society of Equity and Good was always saved as a constant. Cultural feature of the

Russians is traditionally the aspiration to a high ideal and some kind of neglect of

the sphere of material benefits. A heightened feeling of idealism and universalism

can be distinguished at the most different stages of Russian history. The ideal ofsacrifice was initially understood in Christian terms, as a special liability of the

Russians to the Christian Tradition, entrusted to them. In the Soviet period the

same Russian idealism was understood in a secularised way, as the ethics of

heroical service to the principles of social justice and universal equality. Is is

characteristic, that the basic conflicts in Russian history passed not between

supporters of idealistic systems and pragmatists, but almost exclusively between


12/66

two idealistic camps, in different ways and with a different degree of intensity

defending idealistic, sometimes even utopian models, variedly expressed and

formulated. The cultural style of the Russians through the whole course of history

is characterised by a dynamic rethinking in a national key of aesthetic and stylistic

elements borrowed from different cultural contexts, their creative and original

elaboration, their skilful insertion into a particular specifically Russian context.

Freedom of creative adapting and assimilation of borrowed scales of values,

doctrines and symbols discovers the openness of the Russians to the ethnic variety

surrounding them. The loyalty to its own national origin, reshaping anything

borrowed into a unique and unrepeatable typical Russian product, vice-versa,

demonstrates the constancy of the cultural type, its national specificity and

stability.

Our idealistic conformation implies that the set of our ideals is also the set of ourpurposes:

Our ideal of own self-consciousness

- We are a special people, a special world, a special geopolitical formation

As an historical community (people), as a unique economic and social organism,

as a special geopolitical formation, we represent a complete self-supporting system

entered in the common planetary equilibrium of civilisations, cultures, peoples,religions and states. To affirm and to save our multivariate originality is our major

task.

- We are against the repetition of mistakes

We are simply obliged to not retry the bloody mistakes of our ancestors, having

taken in the new millennium all the best of our national history. In the new

conditions, the limit to rough mistakes and sharp departures from our destiny has

been reached. The fatality of some definite mistakes repeatedly made by our

ancestors has become obvious. Our task is not retrying the most rough of them. Wehave to accept our destiny, to realise it and triumphally to affirm before the world

the RUSSIAN TRUTH.

- We are for succession


13/66

The succession of civilizational policies and strategies distinguishes wise peoples

from senseless ones, mature states from adventurist ones. The most various

classifications of the historical periods of Russian history converge in saying that

the Russian people (being rather young in comparison to the majority of the

European ethnoses), nevertheless has left youth behind, and is characterised by a

deep attention to its destiny, a more mature estimation of its position in the world.

The wise state reflects about its historical predestination, about the combination of

traditions and vanguard innovative paths more and better than the adventurist,

temporary, transient state. Russia has clearly approached to the necessity of a new

deep comprehension of its ego.

Our ideal of internal political construction: organic democracy, eurasist

federalism

The eurasist political model must be founded on the imperative of participation

of the society in adopting the founding historical decisions, on genuine peoples

government. The participation of the people to its own destinyso is defined agenuine democracy. This participation can be realised in various ways. As Russia

represents a massive strategic formation, the management of its strategic potential

must be concentrated in the hands of a small group or distinct personalities, no

matter how they are called president, monarch, High council, leader etc. Such

personification of authority does not contradict the principle of organic democracy

in the event that the communal vector of activity of the highest State personalities(or group of persons) corresponds to the reference direction of historical

development, and is based on the constants of national life. Thus, criterion for

evaluating the adequacy (or inadequacy) of the head of the State must not simply

be his efficiency in fulfilling his functions and official duties, but first of all his

loyalty to the great project of the people, his being at the service of the historical

mission of the State.

At a basic level, organic democracy supposes a wide and flexible system of

self-government correlated to cultural, religious and professional traditions of

concrete collectives. Somewhat it is possible to see in this pattern an analogy tothe Soviets (councils). Here must act the principles of direct democracy, the

mechanisms of collective elaboration of decisions having local political

significance and inscribed in concrete regions.

Between the strategic unitary principle of the supreme authority and the

differentiated plurality of autonomous groups at a local level, there must exist a

flexible system of political co-ordination in the person of bodies of the executive


14/66

and legislative authority of an intermediate level, realising the co-ordination

between the will of the communities and the strategic line of the central

administration.

The cohesion will be mostly effective in the event that the highest State

authorities will control only those aspects of political life, which have strategic

meaning, such as:

- preserving territorial integrity of the State;

- ensuring its sovereignty and independence;

- planning the development of strategic sectors of industry and economy;

- ensuring juridical norms to the citizens;

- asserting the interests of Russia across the globe etc.,

but in the remaining non-strategic questions the many public local formations will

be granted the highest autonomy, independence and right to define the parametersof political life at a local level.

- eurasist centrism

The politological identity of Russia predetermines that vector of political world-

view which must be accepted as an axis of the political Centre. This vector

supposes the combination of principles of social justice rule and social economy

(left-wing economy, socialism) with values of conservatism and cultural

traditionalism in the pure political orientation of the State (right-wing politics,

conservatism). This combination of left and right-wing elements in the

definition of the Russian idea of political Centre is the opposite of the way similar

elements are combined in the liberal politics of the West, where the politicalCentre is founded on the combination of the free market (right-wing economy,

liberalcapitalism) with modernism, innovation and antitraditionalism in thepolitical sphere, but also at the level of ethics, culture, religion (left-wing politics,

progressism).

Around the fundamental line of the eurasist political Centre, political flanks

directions can dynamically be developedright and left-wing, i.e. parties,fractions and different political formations disagreeing in this or that direction from

the centrist line. Yet they will be limited by their loyalty to the common historical

project of Russia, fully reflected in the position of the Centre. The transitionbeyond a definite limit toward alternative politological models will be equivalent

to political marginalisation. Thus the tolerance of the Centre in relation to even the

most extreme, extremist and extravagant projects (close to the liberal politological

pattern) will depend directly on the intensity of geopolitical confrontation with

atlantism. If the situation in international life will be favourable to Russia, the

political tolerance to liberal and extremist political formations will increase. In the


15/66

difficult times of active confrontation, this tolerance, vice-versa, must becomeminimal.

- third path

The combination of moderately socialist elements in economy and conservativestatalist traditionalist of the tendencies in politics is conventionally called as third

path model, in order to distinguish it both from usual socialism (the Marxist

version, which offers a combination of left-wing economy and the left-wing

politics), and rightist dictatorial regimes (where political conservatism is combined

with market mechanisms and absolute power of a financial oligarchy). The third

path, in its different interpretations, most exactly corresponds to the political

history of Russia. Moreover, an attentive analysis of the shifts between the rightist

and leftist regimes in Russian history finds that these revolutionary processes

streamed around of a common axis, some of them departing from it, some of themturning closer. This axis represents just that absolute political Centre - until now

never plainly manifest - whose politological the configuration is identical to the

third path model. Hence, choosing the political system of the third path as

fundamental shall be the thoughtful, responsible, fatal step toward the definitive

adoption by Russia of its leading role as the most general, universal and all-

inclusive alternative world-view in the political field. And if such transition to the

theory of the third path will indeed take place, this will mean liquidating the

basic reasons of the dramatic revolutionary confrontations, of the cruel destructive

revolutions and extremist unrest which coloured Russian political history in a

bloody tone. The third path is the only guarantor from forthcoming revolutions,civil wars and revolts, which again can divide Russia between conflicting camps in

the event that such choice will not take place. The thoughtful and clear adoption of

that model - which has been the hidden core of Russian political history - as the

basic tendency of political Centre will mean real political consent, long-term

stability and internal political peace.

- eurasist federalism

The scale of historical mission of Russia, necessary to prevent the establishment of

the new world order and to oppose to it a global alternative, implies the creation

of such internal political system as much as possible open for involving in the

eurasist block other peoples and states with diverse cultural, civilisational,

political, religious and economic history. For this purpose the general political

structure of Russia must be as much as possible close to the model of the

forthcoming eurasist continental formation. It means building the system of


16/66

eurasist federalism, whose main feature must be combining strategic unity at the

level of central administration and wide diversity of political, social, legal and

economic organization of the forming parts.

Eurasist federalism supposes a political and administrative system considerably

different from the pattern of nation-state on which the modern western powers are

based. In a nation-state there are strict political centralism, linguistic and cultural

homogeneity, universal requirement of a uniform juridical, constitutional, political

and economic system. The nation-state is supposed to represent a uniform mono-

cultural block composed of atomized citizens, enjoying the equal juridical status

before the unitary state system.

Eurasist federalism is based on completely different reasons. It precisely shares

two conceptsstrategic unity and wide ethno-cultural, regional pluralism. The

state is politically unitary, in the sense of accomplishing a unique historical

mission, a common geopolitical great project. But this unity does not apply to a

usual country, but to a whole civilisation; here we have no ordinary stateformation, but the liberation of a democratic empire of a new kind. Therefore

solidarity at a level of planetary destiny is accompanied by the broadest

differentiation at the level of the constituent parts, of advanced cultural and

religious autonomies. Even in its present shape, Russia has saved distinctly

federative features, basic signs of an empire made of a whole constellation of

extremely heterogeneous regions in the ethnic, social, cultural and geographical

sense. Each region represents a self-supporting system with a lot of unique,

unrepeatable features. This specificity as an ethnic, social, juridical and

communitarian mosaic must be mirrored also at the political level, as a wide

federal association of collective subjects differing in status and level. At the basic

definition of units of federal space must not lay administrative and territorial

descriptions (as in centralist nation-states), but a flexible system of criteria taking

into account the whole complex of cultural, social, historical, economic, ethnic

identity must lay. And the federal subject, playing a structuring role in the

formation of the State, must replicate the federative-democratic pattern also at an

internal level, i.e. represent the not the narrow analogue of a small scale nation-

state (as it happens in the case of newly formed republics separated from Russia, of

national and territorial-administrative formations aspiring today to raise to political

autonomy, down to separatism), but of a mini-empire with the broadest spectrumof internal collective subjects, being structured, in turn, as the subject of the great

federation. And so on, down to self-ruling working collectives, executive boards of

local communities and councils.

Such internal federative system will facilitate Russias strategic union with the

different powers, potential participants of the continental eurasist block. In case of

conclusion of such unions, the federative principle will be saved inviolable, but the


17/66

configuration of the federative room will be extended (in the event that the

strategic integration will be very tight). All territorial controversies, fully or

partially preventing the establishing of tight allied mutual relation between

neighbouring states will thus be solved. Iffor instanceRussias neighbouring

countries and potential participants to the eurasist block will go on developing

federalism inside their states, the dimensions of the Eurasist Union organically and

naturally will begin to expand, since the presence of wide cultural and religious

autonomies will not weaken the traditional states, constantly threatening

separatism and military conflicts, but, vice-versa, will strengthen the strategic

block, in which many small peoples and cultural ensembles will have the long-

awaited chance of reunification into an organic whole and by that become a

binding element, having changed today's (destructive) geopolitical mission into its

opposite. For multinational Eurasia such wide federalist approach would be the

ideal solution.

In an even more remote perspective, eurasist federalism could become anattractive political pattern across the globe, representing the political alternative to

the mondialist levelling of the new world order.

Our ideal of geopolitical strategy for Russia

The highest geopolitical priority for Russia in the forthcoming century

(millennium) is the creation of an eurasist strategic blockwith a flexible and

differentiated world-view and a multilevel membershipas a counterweight to

atlantist and mondialist tendencies on a global scale.As against the previous epoch, the axis of such block must be neither a world-

view [weltanschauung] neither a specific economic or political system, but

geopolitical and strategic principles, civilisational imperatives.

Russia must definitely understand itself as the geographical axis of history, as

the core of Eurasia, with full responsibility to affirm at the new stage and in new

terms the global extent of its historical and civilisational destiny (taking intoaccount mistakes and deviations of previous historical periods).

- the multipolar world

In a long-term perspective it is necessary to be guided by the aim of creating a

genuinely free and fair multipolar world, organically forming around different

cultural, civilisational, social and historical centres. The riches of mankind is

directly linked to the variety of civilizations, which must not only be saved, but

also newly asserted. Eurasia itself, in the best periods of its history, was


18/66

distinguished for this imperial variety, where strategic and geopolitical unity was

combined with a constellation of organic and cultural autonomous parts. The

eurasist pole initially must be formed as a civilisation stronghold of liberation, so

that the forthcoming multipolarity becomes for Eurasia the natural and desirable

result of the temporary return to the bipolar pattern. Hence, the same structure of

the new eurasist block must initially bear in itself the germs of cultural pluralism,

of differentiation, of variety, of blossoming complexity. In such case the

forthcoming advent of a genuinely multipolar world will be the organic

continuation of the eurasist line, opposed to the unifying unidimensional logic ofatlantism.

- eurasist strategic unions

The realisation of the eurasist project implies a series of steps aimed at

increasing the strategic significance and the self-supporting weight of Russia.No other State, for geopolitical reasons, is able to become the axis of the

eurasist block. Russia holds a geographically central place in Eurasia, and hasa strategic potential, sufficient for ensuring the successful start of integrationprocesses at the first stage. For Russia it is vitally necessary to be guided inexternal and domestic policy by the one and only imperative, to which allremaining ones must be subordinated the creation of the Eurasist Union.

- minimal size: the post-Soviet integration

The minimal scale of the eurasist integration, or its first stage, must becomethe strategic reunification of CIS countries (former Soviet republics) in acommon strategic construction, united by the consciousness of commongeopolitical concerns and common strategic and civilisational destiny. Theintegration of CIS countries into a new, more solid strategical formation mustbe based on global geopolitical tasks, instead of momentary social andeconomic interests or combination of forces within political lites. The fatalmeaning of the Eurasist Project is so great, that it incomparably exceeds thebalance of practical pluses and minuses originating from such integration, ofobviously stands well above the political and psychological portraits ofcontingently ruling leaders and parties.

The geopolitical integration of CIS (which is possible since the first stage,except for those states too deeply involved in atlantist mechanisms) must berealised as the execution of the eurasist destiny, instead of arbitrary act of anypolitical or ideological grouping. For this reason, the unity of geopoliticalpurposes must consolidate among themselves both ruling regimes and


19/66

opposition, both the establishment lite and the revolutionary counter-lites.The history of mankind, the chance of establishing a multipolar worlddepends on the real integration of CIS. Hence, narrow political dissent mustretreat in second plan before the grandiosity of this project, and political-

social conflictsobjectively inevitable in any societymust not extend inany case to the sphere of the general strategic course, which under nocircumstances can be held hostage by interparty struggles or social frictions.

In this precise way the geopolitical succession of US atlantist lite (whichone disputingsometimes rather roughlytactical questions, politicalproblems methods, decisions) never put into question what in America is

called Manifest Destiny, i.e. clear predestination.Eurasia, according to its own parameters, has a similar vocation and

predestination, as much global, but with the opposite sign.And the accomplishment of this eurasist predestination must gather the CIS

?lite at the first stage of the new affirmation of the eurasist block.

- continental block

The following stage of the Eurasist Project, which can be realised of in aparallel way to the strategic integration of CIS, is the creation of a unitarystrategic association with eurasist States vitally interested in building analternative to autocratic planetary domination of the US and the countries ofthe atlantist West. Such countries are some Arabian states of Near East andNorthern Africa, Iran, India, China, and other Far Eastern countries included

in the Pacific zone.These countries have their ancient culture, advanced religious systems, and a

complex and particular social and political structures. Their economic way oflife represents an original germination of formations and systems. Themajority of these countries have their own historical project expressed in theterms of civilizational, cultural, political, social and national originality. Notalways this project harmoniously corresponds to the projects of neighbouringpowers and civilizations, but they are united in the opposition to atlantistuniversalism, in the denial of liberal mondialist levelling, in the refusal

autocratic domination of the US. On the basis of the principle of commonnegation, all these elements can be involved in the large scale continentalblock.

In the coming future, from this picture of highly differentiated plurality, amultipolar reality can be formed on the basis of a common Eurasist Path.

- union with Europe and Japan


20/66

Integration within the framework of CIS, the creation of the eurasiststrategic block represent the preliminary steps towards an active planetarystrategy of Eurasia, without which a strategic civilisational alternative will nothave sufficient stuffing.

The following stage (which, in its basic features, can be prepared with nodelay and in a parallel way to the other two) is activating a geopolitical linetoward Europe and Japan. Europe and Japan represent the two majorstrategic coast zones, the control upon which ensures to atlantism (the US) asteady supremacy over a potential eurasist civilisation.

For this reason, the final destiny of Eurasia will depend on the successful

neutralisation of Europe and Japan, from their exclusion from US strategiccontrol, and their subsequent including in the pan-eurasist project. Only oncesuch dimension will be reachedincluding Europe and the whole Pacificregion together with Japanthe Eurasist Project will be quite complete and

is able to exert a decisive effect on planetary processes.

- purpose: civilisation promotion of a new multipolar planetary reality

The global geopolitical task of Russia consists in the creation of a multipolar

world, in the strategic promotion of such world. The transition to it, as to a pluralist

and differentiated alternative to unidimensional atlantist mondialism, will be

possible only in the course of the realisation of all three stages of the Eurasist

Project. A multipolar free world, with a blossoming complexity of cultures and

civilisationshere is the highest geopolitical ideal of Russia, its vocation, its

predestination.

Our ideal of geoeconomic strategy of Russia: self-sufficiency of large spaces

- eurasist principle of economic pluralism

The eurasist economic model is based on a principle opposite to liberal

universalism, to the postulates of the so-called classical school of economics.Each historical community has its own unique history of economicdevelopment, its own special structure as economic organism. The system ofcriteria according to one economic efficiency is valued, the parameters ofsuccess or failure, cannot be separated from the historical, social and culturalcontext of a given society. The thought of the western classic school ofeconomics comes from the wrong supposition of unidirectional economicdevelopment for all peoples and states, only with miscellaneous paces. On this


21/66

belief is based the representation about the doubtless advantages of thewestern economic pattern, as the most advanced stage in realisation of theeconomic pattern common to all peoples. Being pushed by this belief, theWest felt itself legitimated to act as the economic arbitrator across the globe,

imposing to anyone else that system of economic criteria, which reflects thelogic of development of economic systems of western countries.

The eurasist economic pattern will come from the opposite principletheimpossibility of evaluating the economic systems of the various peoplesstarting from general abstract criteria and separately from historical andcultural reality. Against the economic monism of the liberal political economy,

the eurasist world-view exposes the concept of an economic plurality. Inpractice it means that the world economic system consists of separatesovereign economic units developing according to their internal logic andunsuitable to be assessed proceeding from any general theory. Precisely just

as it is impossible to demonstrate on the basis of abstract criteria thesuperiority of one culture over another, the truth of one faith in comparisonwith a different faith, the supremacy of one race above another, so it isimpossible to justify the supremacy of one management system above another,since it would mean obliterating the original economic history of eachconcrete people and state.

The traditional economic complexes of archaic nations are perfectlyefficient, balanced and adequate within the framework of their historical andcultural context, as well as the advanced industrial technological complexes ofthe Western world. Economic and management specificity mirrors culturalpeculiarity. The task of the eurasist economy is to warrant within its domainthe sovereignty, conservation and organic development of all presenteconomic systems reflecting the cultural-historical path of concrete peoples.The economic plurality of the eurasist pattern mirrors at an economic levelthat principle of multipolarity, to which eurasist geopolitics are oriented.

- creation of advanced self-sufficient economic systems of the mixed kind(plurality of regimes)

The economic vector of development of Russia must be organically adjustedto the basic geopolitical and strategic orienting point of its development, i.e.with the Eurasist Project. It is perfectly clearly, that following abstract

dogmas of purely economic ideologiesbe it Marxism or liberalismwithdraws Russia from its destiny in labyrinths of scholastics and civilconflicts.Moreover, liberalism, as well as Marxism, insists on economic unification, on


22/66

the levelling of management processes. The natural development of theeconomy of Russia in the future must be realised on the basis of a complexapproach taking into account both economic and non-economic factors. Thestrategic imperative of the eurasist line requires the edification of the economy

in a regime of expanded self-sufficiency, prospectively on a continentalscale. It is the neo-keynesian pattern of economic isolation or the updatedversion of the customs union.

This economic pattern supposes the partial openness of economy(concerning the strategic allies) and the existence of economic barriers againstthe economic systems of countries belonging to the antagonist strategic block.

The second imperative of development of the Russian economy is therequirement of a due plurality of regimes, the differentiated combination ofvarious economic systemsfrom state control (in strategic areas) to the freemarket (in small and medium production, trade system, services) through

miscellaneous systems of collective management (cooperatives, joint-stockcompanies etc.) .

- keynesism for Eurasia, eurasist economic isolation

The economic pattern most suitable to modern Eurasia in view ofestablishing a civilisational factor is the keynesian pattern, centrally placedfor respecting the strategic priorities of the eurasist ensemble of states andnations. In defining the orientation of economic reforms, emphasis must beput not simply on the achievement of the highest economic efficiency, but on

the general civilisational and social context, in whose interest these reformsmust be realised according to the logic of things. And since this context in itsbasic vectors is not simply different, but in many respects opposite to theliberal atlantist system, to the new world order, a major problem is thecreation of an eurasist economic island, possessing relative self-sufficiency.It implies a paternalistic economic variant, indispensable through the wholeperiod of economic development of Eurasia. Thus the development of thebasic sectors of industry, information systems, agriculture and especially ofhigh technology must be the main task of the central authority, responsible for

strategic issues. Market elements, completely indispensable in a number ofsectors of the economysmall and medium production, sphere of servicesetc.must be combined with the public sector. The problem of employment

must be solved at strategical state level, and not just at market level. Theparasitic class of the rentiers must be marginalised to the benefit ofproductive social groups of businessmen and workers receiving a wage in theprivate and state enterprises (so-called wage-earners).


23/66

- eurasist finance

It is necessary for Russia to create its own currency in a common planetaryfinancial context. This is possible in three ways:1) pegging it to the dollar (being de facto the world reserve currency),2) pegging it to the currencies of other large geoeconomic regions (Europeanor Pacific),3) creating its own financial system within the framework of a vast eurasistcustoms union - the so-called eurasist rouble.The first alternative disappears for strategic reasons, as it makes the eurasisteconomy of Russia dependent from the atlantist geopolitical pole (that meanssuicide). The second and third alternatives can be realised in a parallel waywith a the prioritary perspective solution of the eurasist rouble. Thewarranties of the eurasist rouble cannot only stay in our industrial-

economic structures, but in the whole aggregate of geopolitical, resource andstrategic potential of Eurasia, with a special emphasis on the sphere ofRussian nuclear weapons and other innovative military technologies, assessedas a financial equivalent of the extent of power potential. Exactly according tosuch logic of US achieved supremacy in the post-war world within thecapitalist camp have, having translated their strategic force superiority in the

equivalent financial domination of the dollar as the world reserve currency,andjust as a result of such operation - having provided a solid base forstrong economic growth. Within the framework of the eurasist strategic blockRussia can quite reasonably repeat the given schema and peg its currency, theeurasist rouble, to the conservation and development of its militarystrategic potential, seen as a warranty of freedom and independence for othereurasist powers from the neo-colonial dictatorship of the new world order.

- fourth zone, pragmatical involvement in world virtual economy

Major economic task of Russia is the creation of a self-supporting,autarchic, closed economic zone within the limits of Eurasia. The eurasist

fourth zonealong with the existing three: American, European and Pacific

must reunite in a common economic space the territory of CIS countries,and a number of East Europe and Asian countries interested to strategicindependence in front of the economic pressure of the rich North. Potentialparticipants of the fourth zone can be countries with various economicsystems, which implies an economic integration at miscellaneous pacesdepending on the specificity of the given region or country. The fourtheconomic zone must be guided by prioritary interaction with the neighbouring


24/66

economic spacesEuropean and Pacific - with the long-term purpose ofopposing American hegemony across the globe and normalising the economicbalance on the territory of the whole planet. Even the first steps toward therealisation of the fourth zone will change the economic balance between highly

technological, industrial regions and regions richly endowed with resources,breaking the univocal domination of the rich North and the colonialexploitation of the poor South.

- involvement in planetary geoeconomical processes with the purpose to give

them an eurasist civilisational direction

The financial and economic system of Russia can not ignore the forming of avirtual economy at a world level, the translation of economic potential into thesphere of information technology and electronic stock exchanges. In a distant

perspective, the eurasist policy course must result in the relativization (andeven deletion) of such virtual financial system and in the returning to the

priorities of real sectors, long-term investments and concrete production ofmaterial goods, to the transition from virtual capital to real, creative andorganising management. But at a transitory stage Russia must participate inthe world virtual economy, by delegating to special broker groups under strictstrategic control of the highest state authorities, in order to assimilate themost recent technologies and whenever possible to readdress global trends ina direction strategically amplifying the positions of the eurasist geoeconomy.

Our ideal of strategy of industrial development of Russia

- informatization

The creation of the fourth zone requires a radical modernisation of the domestic

industry, the large-scale and systematic introduction of advanced technologies in

key spheres of strategic production. At the roots of such modernisation must lay

the system of informatization, communication and transport, which constitutes the

axial reality of the post-industrial stage of development of the economy. Due to

large-scale informatization, many organisational problems of production,

merchandising and allocation, and also processes of economic integration and

work allocation within the framework of the eurasist zone will be successfully

solved. Thanks to technological flexibility, informatization can be introduced both

in hi-tech processes and in some traditional spheres of the economy, everywhere

multiplying the efficiency. Planned and universal informatization must become a


25/66

strategic priority of the State. In the issue of creating a solid system of eurasist

customs union, informatization will play a central role, and the success of such

union will depend to no small degree on it.

- regionalisation

Integration processes in the eurasist economy must be accompanied by

increasing significance of the single regions and increasing extent of their

administrative and economic independence. Industrial zones must be integrated in

a communal eurasist economic field not by way of decrees, but through organic

and natural horizontal connections reproducing on an economic level the federative

system. The control from the centre must encompass exclusively the strategic

spheres, set general economic parameters, but the concrete ways of accomplishingthe general tasks of industrial development must be decided at a local level.

- creation of self-contained industrial cycles linked to local spaces

The allocation of work within the framework of the fourth zone does not imply

the centralisation of production management. The large industrial areas must be

based on the use of local infrastructures and resource potential. Such organisation

of partially self-contained industrial cycles linked to local systems is indispensable

for increasing the solidity of the pan-eurasist economic pattern and raise the level

of industrial safety. The industrial complexes in such situation must become the

core of social ensembles in view of the ethnic, demographic, religious and cultural

specificity of the population.

- ecological qualification of industrial productions

The environmental factor must be included among the basic priorities in expert

estimation of industrial projects, and its evaluation is also indispensable in the

issue of restructuring existing productions. The probability of an ecological

catastrophe in the present conditions increases, and in this situation the

conservation of the eco-system becomes a major element of strategic safety.

http://www.evrazia.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=455
http://www.evrazia.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=455http://www.evrazia.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=455http://www.evrazia.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=455


26/66

Home Page |Eurasian theory in 4 maps|Eurasian Common House |EurasianManifest |Eurasian Path|Eurasian Vision |Millstones of eruasianism |Structure

A.Dugin

The Eurasian Idea

What is Eurasianism today? What forms the concept of Eurasia? -- Sevensenses of word Eurasianism -- Evolution of notion of Eurasianism

Changes in the original meaning of Eurasianism

Different terms lose their original meaning though their daily use over the course

of many years. Such fundamental notions as socialism, capitalism, democracy,fascism have changed profoundly. In fact, they have turned banal.

The terms "Eurasianism" and "Eurasia" also have some uncertainties because they

are new, they belong to a new political language and intellectual context that is

only being created today.
http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1915http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1915http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1886http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1886http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1886http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1884http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1884http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1884http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1851http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1851http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1851http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=244http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=244http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=244http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=86http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=86http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=86http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1916http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1916http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1916http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1916http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=86http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=244http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1851http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1594http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1884http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1886http://evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1915


27/66

The Eurasian Idea mirrors a very active dynamical process. It's meaning hasbecome clearer throughout history but needs to be further developed.

Eurasianism as a philosophical struggle

The Eurasian Idea represents a fundamental revision of the political, ideological,ethnic, and religious history of mankind, and it offers a new system of

classification and categories that will overcome standard cliches. The Eurasian

theory went through two stages - a formational period of classical Eurasianism at

the beginning of the XX century by Russian emigrant intellectuals (Trubeckoy,

Savickiy, Alekseev, Suvchinckiy, Iljin, Bromberg, Hara-Davan etc.) followed by

the historical works of Leonid Gumilev and, finally, the constitution of neo-

Eurasianism (second half of 1980's to the present).

Towards neo-Eurasianism

Classical Eurasian theory undoubtedly belongs to past and can be correctly

classified within the framework of ideologies of the XX century. Classical

Eurasianism might have passed, but neo-Eurasianism has given it a second birth, a

new sense, scale, and meaning. When the Eurasian Idea arose from its ashes, it

became less obvious, but has since revealed its hidden potential.

Through neo-Eurasianism, the entire Eurasian theory has received a new

dimension. Today we cannot ignore the large historical period of neo-Eurasianism

and must try to comprehend it in its modern context. Furthermore, we will describethe various aspects of this notion.


28/66

Eurasianism as a global trend

Globalization as the main body of modern history

In the broad sense, the Eurasian Idea and even Eurasia as concept do not strictly

correspond to the geographical boundaries of the Eurasian continent. The Eurasian

Idea is a global-scale strategy that acknowledges the objectivity of globalization

and the termination of "nation-states" (Etats-Nations), but at the same time offers a

different scenario of globalization, which entails no unipolar world or united global

government. Instead, it offers several global zones (poles). The Eurasian Idea is an

alternative or multipolar version of globalization, but globalization is the currently

the major fundamental world process that is deciding the main vector of modernhistory.

Paradigm of globalization - paradigm of Atlantism

Todays nation-state is being transformed into a global state; we are facing the

constitution of planetary governmental systems within a single administrative-

economic system. To believe that all nations, social classes, and economic models

might suddenly begin to cooperate on the basis of this new planet-wide logic is


29/66

wrong. Globalization is a one-dimensional, one-vector phenomenon that tries to

universalize the Western (Anglo-Saxon, American) point of view of how to best

manage human history. It is (very often connected with suppression and violence)

the unification of different social-political, ethnic, religious, and national structures

into one system. It is a Western European historical trend that has reached its peakthrough its domination of the United States of America.

Globalization is the imposing of the Atlantic paradigm. Globalization as Atlantism

absolutely tries to avoid this definition. Proponents of globalization argue that

when there will be no alternative to Atlantism and that it will stop being Atlantism.

The American political philosopher F. Fukuyama writes about the "end of

History," which actually means the end of geopolitical history and the conflict

between Atlantism and Eurasianism. This means a new architecture of a world

system with no opposition and with only one pole - the pole of Atlantism. We may

also refer to this as the New World Order. The model of opposition between twopoles (East-West, North-South) transforms to the center-outskirt model (center -

West, "rich North," outskirt - South). This variant of world architecture iscompletely at odds with the concept of Eurasianism.

Unipolar globalization has an alternative

Today the New World Order is nothing more than a project, plan, or trend. It is

very serious, but it is not fatal. Adherents of globalization deny any alternative plan

for future, but today we are experiencing a large-scale phenomenon - contra-

globalism, and the Eurasian Idea coordinates all opponents of unipolarglobalization in a constructive way. Moreover, it offers the competing idea of

multipolar globalization (or alter-globalization).

Eurasianism as pluriversum

Eurasianism rejects the center-outskirt model of the world. Instead, the Eurasian

Idea suggests that the planet consists of a constellation of autonomous living

spaces partially open to each other. These areas are not national-states, but a

coalition of states, reorganized into continental federations or "democratic

empires" with a large degree of inner self-government. Each of these areas is

multipolar, including a complicated system of ethnic, cultural, religious and

administrative factors.

In this global sense, Eurasianism is open to everyone, regardless of ones place ofbirth, residence, nationality or citizenship. Eurasianism provides an opportunity to

choose a future different from the cliche of Atlantism and one value system for all


30/66

of mankind. Eurasianism does not merely seek the past or to preserve the current

status quo, but strives for the future,acknowledging that the worlds currentstructure needs radical change, that nation states and industrial society have

exhausted all their resources. The Eurasian Idea does not see the creation of a

world government on the basis of liberal-democratic values as the one and only

path for mankind. In its most basic sense, Eurasianism in the XXI century is

defined as the adherence to alter-globalization, synonymous with a multipolarworld.

Atlantism is not universal

Eurasianism absolutely rejects the universalism of Atlantism and Americanism.

The pattern of Western-Europe and America has many attractive features that can

be adopted and praised, but, as a whole, it is merely a cultural system that has the

right to exist in its own historical context along with other civilizations and culturalsystems.

The Eurasian Idea protects not only anti-Atlantic value systems, but the diversity

of value structures. It is a kind of "poliversum" that provides living space for

everyone, including the USA and Atlantism, along with other civilizations, because

Eurasianism also defends the civilizations of Africa, both American continents,and the Pacific area parallel to the Eurasian Motherland.

The Eurasian Idea promotes a global revolutionary idea

The Eurasian Idea on a global scale is a global revolutionary concept, called upon

to be a new platform for mutual understanding and cooperation for a large

conglomerate of different powers: states, nations, cultures, and religions that reject

the Atlantic version of globalization.

If we analyze the declarations and statements of various politicians, philosophers,

and intellectuals we will see that majority of them are adherents (sometimes

unaware) of the Eurasian Idea.

If we will think about all of those who disagree with the "end of history" our spiritswill be raised and the failure of the American concept of strategic security for the

XXI century connected with constituting the unipolar world will be much morerealistic.


31/66

Eurasianism is the sum of the natural, artificial, objective, and subjective obstacles

on the path of unipolar globalization; it offers a constructive, positive opposition to

globalism instead of simple negation.

These obstacles, however, remain uncoordinated in the meantime, and proponents

of Atlantism are able to manage them easily. Yet, if these obstacles can somehow

be integrated into a united force, they will be can be integrated into something

united and the likelihood of victory will become much more serious.

Eurasianism as the Old World (continent)

The New World is a part of the Second Old World or a more specific and narrow

sense of the word Eurasianism applicable to what we call the Old World. The

Notion of the Old World (traditionally regarding Europe) can be considered in a

much wider context. It is multi-civilizational super space, inhabited by nations,states, cultures, ethnicities, and religions connected to each other historically and

geographically by dialectic destiny. The Old World is an organic product of humanhistory.

The Old World is often opposed to the New World, the American continent,

discovered by Europeans and transformed into a platform for an artificial

civilization, where European projects of modernism were created. It was built

based upon human-produced ideologies as a purified civilization of modernism.

The United States was the successful creation of the "perfect society," formed byintellectuals from England, Ireland, and France, while the countries of South and

Central America remained colonies of the Old World. Germany and Eastern

Europe were less influenced this idea of a perfect society.

In the terms of Oswald Spengler, dualism between the Old and New World can be

brought to opposites: culture-civilization, organic-artificial, historical-technical.

The New World as Messiah

As a historical product of Western Europe during its evolution, the New Worldvery early on realized its "messiah" destiny, where the liberal-democratic ideals of

the Enlightment were combined with the eschatological ideas of radical protestant

sects. This was called the theory of Manifest Destiny, which became the new

symbol of belief for generations of Americans. According to this theory, American

civilization overtook all cultures and civilizations of the Old World and in its

current universal form, it is obligatory for all nations of the planet.


32/66

With time, this theory directly confronted, not only the cultures of the East and

Asia, but came into conflict with Europe, which seemed to the Americans to be

archaic and full of prejudice and antiquated traditions.

In turn, the New World turned away from the heritage of the Old World. Directly

following WWII, the New World became the indisputable leader in Europe itself

with the "criteria of verity" of others. This inspired a corresponding wave of

American dominance and at a parallel time the beginning of a movement that seeks

geopolitical liberation from the brutal, transoceanic, strategic, economic, andpolitical control of the "elder Brother.

Integration of the Eurasian continent

In the XX century, Europe became aware of its common identity and step by step

started to move towards the integration of all its nation into a common union, ableto guarantee full sovereignty, security, and freedom to itself and all members.

The creation of the European Union became the most important event that helped

Europe restore its status as a world power alongside the United States of America.

This was the response of the Old World to the excessive challenge of the New

World.

If we consider the alliance of the USA and Western Europe as the Atlantic vector

of European development, European integration under the aegis of the continental

countries (Germany, France) may be called European Eurasianism. This becomesmore and more obvious if we take into consideration the theory of Europe from the

Atlantic Ocean to the Urals (S. de Goll) or even to Vladivostok. In other words, theintegration of the Old World includes the vast territory of Russian Federation.

Thus, Eurasianism in this context may be defined as a project of the strategic,

geopolitical, and economic integration of the north of Eurasian continent,considered the cradle of European history and the matrix of European nations.

Parallel with Turkey, Russia (alike ancestors of the Europeans) is historically

connected with the Turkic, Mongolian, and Caucasus nations. Russia gives theintegration of Europe an Eurasian dimension in both the symbolic and geographic

senses (identification of Eurasianism with continentalism).

During last few centuries, the idea of European integration has been proposed by

the revolutionary faction of European elites. In ancient times, similar attempts were


33/66

made by Alexander the Great (integration of the Eurasian continent) and Genghis

khan (founder of historys largest empire).

Eurasia as three great living-spaces, integrated across the meridian

Three Eurasian belts (meridian zones)

The horizontal vector of integration is followed by a vertical vector.

Eurasian plans for the future presume the division of the planet into four vertical

geographical belts (meridian zones) from North to South.

Both American continents will form one common space oriented on and controlled

by the USA within the framework of the Monroe Doctrine. This is the Atlantic

meridian zone.

In addition to the above zone, three others are planned. They are the following:

Euro-Africa, with the European Union as its center;

Russian-Central Asian zone;

Pacific zone

Within these zones, the regional division of labor and the creation of

developmental areas and corridors of growth will take place.

Each of these belts (meridian zones) counterbalance each other and all of them

together counterbalance the Atlantic meridian zone. In the future, these belts might

be the foundation upon which to build a multipolar world: the number of poles will

be more than two; however, the number will be much less than the number of

current nation-states. The Eurasian model proposes that the number of poles must

be four.


34/66

Great spaces

The Meridian zones in the Eurasian project consist of several "Great Spaces" or

"democratic empires." Each possesses relative freedom and independence but isstrategically integrated into a corresponding meridian zone.

The Great Spaces correspond to the boundaries of civilizations and include several

nation-states or unions of states.

The European Union and Arab Great Space, which integrates North, Trans-

Saharan Africa and the Middle East, form Euro-Africa.

The Russian-Central Asian zone is formed by three Great Spaces that sometimes

overlap each other. The first is the Russian Federation along with several countries

of the CIS - members of the Eurasian Union. Second is the Great Space of

continental Islam (Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan). The Asian countries of the

CIS intersect with this zone.

The third Great Space is Hindustan, which is a self-dependent civilization sector.

The Pacific meridian zone is determined by a condominium of two great spaces

(China and Japan) and also includes Indonesia, Malaysia, The Philippines, and


35/66

Australia (some researchers connect it with the American meridian zone). Thisgeopolitical region is very mosaic and can be differentiated by many criteria.

The American meridian zone consist of the American-Canadian, Central, and

North American Great Spaces.

Importance of the fourth zone

The structure of the world based upon meridian zones is accepted by most

American geopoliticians who seek the creation of a New World Order and unipolar

globalization. However, a stumbling block is the existence of the Russian-Central

Asian meridian space: the presence or absence of this belt radically changes the

geopolitical picture of the world.

Atlantic futurologists divide the world into the three following zones:

American pole, with the European Union as its close-range periphery (Euro-Africa as an exemption) and

the Asian and Pacific regions as its long-range periphery.

Russia and Central Asia are fractional, but without it as an independent meridian

zone, our world is unipolar.

This last meridian zone counterbalances American pressure and provides theEuropean and Pacific zones ability to act like self-dependent civilization poles.

Real multipolar balance, freedom, and the independence of meridian belts,Great

Spaces, and nation-states depend upon the successful creation of a forth zone.

Moreover, its is not enough to be one pole in a two-pole model of the world: the

rapid progress of the United States of America can be counterbalanced only by thesynergy of all three meridian zones.

The Eurasian project proposes this four-zone super-project on a geopolitical

strategic level.

Eurasianism as Russian-Central Asian integration

Moscow-Teheran axis


36/66

Fourth meridian zone - Russian-Asian meridian integration. The central issue of

this process is the implementation of a Moscow-Teheran axis. The whole process

of integration dep

Documents

Eurasia Above All