Short Introduction to Eurasianism

myslpolska.info 1 year ago

Eurasianism, as a social doctrine and political ideology, can be brought to 4 basic methodological principles:

1. Historical rule – traditionalism;
2. Geosophical rule – a civilizational approach;
3. The geopolitical rule – a geopolitical approach;
4. Cultural-historical rule – archeomoderism.

The traditionalist approach to planet history, contradicting historical universalism, argues that past does not represent a single and continuous process. past is divided into 3 paradigmically different era-epistemas: Premodernity (Tradition), Modernity and Postmodernity. In the Age of Tradition human consciousness and existence, the structures of the outside planet themselves form in the context of religion, religion acts as the main social regulator: ethics, law, politics, economics, culture – all spheres of human activity are straight or indirectly subordinate to religion. The modernity, which was born in Western Europe in the 16th–XVIII centuries, from the point of view of traditionalism was a direct negation of Tradition. Modernity presented a secular-anthropocentric paradigm, consistently eliminating religion from all spheres of public life and putting on pedestal quadriumvirat of science, economy, law and ideology. Modernity is simply a paradigm of advancement that replaced tradition; it is simply a claim to the unlimited power of Faust over nature. Finally, Modernity is simply a crisis and energy exhaustion of Modernity, negation of Modernity and continuation of the denial of Tradition by abolishing any normative framework. If Modernity only denied religion, then Modernity destroys everything it touches. discipline becomes a post-science, society becomes a post-sociality, and man becomes a post-humanity. Modernity is the triumph of freed sin, the arrival of Mephistopheles to Faust for final payment.

Traditionalism raises the question of the legitimacy of technological and technological advancement to the detriment of moral improvement (save) of man and society as a whole. Traditionalism claims that the transition from Tradition to Modernity was not historically a logical step, but a fatal mistake, a collective sin of humanity. Therefore, before it is besides late, before conventional institutions (Church, ethics, family, conventional culture) are completely destroyed, we must return to conventional foundations as far as possible. Traditionalism does not halt at making a diagnosis, but besides presents a method of restoration – a conservative revolution.

Traditionalism is closely linked to the teleological, eschatological principle, postulating the end of history. Liberal Teleology (globalization) and Modernist Teleology (the explanation of progress) opposes traditionalism of spiritual eschatology. For Russia, this is an Orthodox eschatology, according to which the Final Times will come sooner or later, the Antichrist will reign, Armageddon (the last conflict of good and evil) will erupt, and yet the Second Coming of Christ will come. However, Antichrist will only be able to reign if there is no Resisting Lawlessness (Katechon) in the world. And today, Katechon is an Orthodox civilization with a center in 3rd Rome, Moscow.

This image identifies 2 main entities of past – the east Church (Philadelphian) and the Western Church (Laodycian). The dialectics of their confrontation uncover the mysterious trajectory of the spiritual content of history. In the case of the Western Church, the issue is clear – it is simply a mosaic of Western religions, headed by Anglo-Saxon Protestant fundamentalism. And in the case of the east Church, the question is open: whether the Russian Orthodox Church will become Philadelphia is not a pre-established fact, but it is its main historical mission.

The civilization approach contradicts the unification of cultural and historical types (civilization). Geographical space has a immense impact on the culture and national past of peoples. Each people, developing in a circumstantial geographical environment, forms their own national, ethical, legal, linguistic, ritual, economical and political forms. The ‘place’ in which there is ‘development’ of a people or a state importantly determines the trajectory and the meaning of that ‘development’ to the degree that they become inseparable. This is the importance of the most crucial Eurasian concept of "place development". past cannot be separated from spatial conditions, and the analysis of civilization must take place not only in the timeline, but besides in space. There is no universal model of development, the diversity of the landscapes of Earth generates a variety of cultures, each having its own cycles, its own logic. No local improvement has the right to claim to be a model for others. Each nation has its own model of development, its own “time”, its “reasonability” and it must be understood and assessed on the basis of first interior criteria.

Based on the fact that the unity of spiritual, historical, cultural, intellectual and symbolic traditions is mostly determined by the spiritual community, eurasians specify and limit the number of civilizations to “core” religions. The subject of civilization is an authentic people. A alternatively cumbersome expression of “authentically existing people ” should be understood not as a collection of cultural groups and nations inhabiting a certain territory, but as its spiritual core, as God’s thought of it. For succinctness, the Heidegger word ‘Dasein’ could be utilized if it did not require additional explanations. Authentically existing people are the bearer of sacrilege, initiated by the “core” religion; it is simply a cultural-historic community of fate, carrying a certain mission, a certain language, a certain idea.

The civilisational approach, which asserts the equality of civilizations in global relations, thus declares not only the anticipation but besides the necessity of a multipolar world, in which each civilization represents a unique pole.

A geopolitical approach. Civilizations in the planet arena happen as the main actor of geopolitical vein. However, regardless of the diversity and diversity of civilizations in cultural and historical terms, they all boil down to 2 basic geopolitical models: the civilization of the Sea and of the Civilization of the Land, and between them is the intermediate civilization of the Coast.

Maritime Civilization (talassocracy) only forces the coastal region to develop, refraining from penetration inland; recognises dynamism and mobility as the highest social values; promotes innovation and technological discoveries; develops commercial forms of society, capitalism; promotes the exchange and autonomy of the financial sector.
The Civilization of the Land (tellurocracy) reaches deep into the continent and derives from land distant from the coast; it creates rigid hierarchical societies of the male, military type, based on strict submission, ideals of courage, honor, devotion and fidelity; it contributes to the creation of unchangeable but rigid socio-political formations which are not susceptible to economical and technological development; it advocates the creation of empires with a advanced degree of sacralisation of central power and militarization of broad layers of population; it inhibits cultural exchange and innovation through conservative and conventional cultural attitudes.

The geopolitical approach postulates a conclusion of major importance – the duality of civilization, the inevitable confrontation of tellurocracy with thalassocracy, not only in the strategical and pragmatic key, but besides from the point of view of fundamental differences and the inconclusive contradictions in the deep guidelines of values, cultural and even metaphysical landmarks. The thought of metaphysical confrontation of civilization is given by W. J. Katasonov's concept of abel and kainic civilization as 2 central archetypes of civilization.

This dual civilizationalism – “Land vs Sea” and “Sea vs Land” – has been permanently recorded in planet history. The Civilization of the Sea seemingly represents the major Anglo-Saxon countries, the USA and the United Kingdom; the Civilization of the Land embodies Russia-Eurasia. 2 geopolitical poles – the Atlantic West and the continental Eurasia – compete in a planetary duel. Atlanticism strives to conquer Eurasia and consolidate its prey in a single-polar world, a planet of globalism. The opposing pole seeks to reconstruct balance, to be reborn in a fresh form, given the sad experience of failure. And erstwhile he is reborn, he will make another world—multipolar, not unpolar. This is the geopolitical mission of Eurasianism

Archeomonism. Traditional, civilizational, and geopolitical approaches make it possible to explain so not entirely apparent a phenomenon as archeomoderism, without knowing which eurasianism cannot be understood. Western civilization developed a peculiar strategy of principles and values that it identified with a universal system. This Roman-German strategy (today more associated with Anglo-Saxon civilization) began to be imposed on another peoples and cultures by force and cunning. The spiritual and material colonization of the remainder of humanity by the West is simply a negative phenomenon, which we call archeomodenicism ("Roman-German yoke" in terms of the classics of Eurasianism).

The essence of archeomodernism is that in the same society since Peter I developed a two-level model of explanation of practically all phenomena and principles – in politics, culture, everyday life, etc. The base of the people remains alternatively archaic and inactive lives in conventional society, while the state is officially modern, fundamentally western. So our economy, political life organization and ruling layer are completely liberal, Western European systems of Modernity. All of this, however, functions completely different from those of the modern Western countries, as it is interpreted by a mostly conventional society in its own way. This creates archeomoderism, a strategy in which everything on the outside is modern, but internally is profoundly archaic.

Archeomodenicism is simply a disease, a kind of social schizophrenia. The same society sees itself in a diametrically contradictory way. Externally and from above it is simply a modern liberal democracy in the Western style, from within and from below it is simply a planet power with the will to revive the Empire, with the Sacred ultimate Ruler at the head, with conventional values and conservative psychology, which rejects the "progressive" liberal attitudes as perversion and Satanism.

From the authorities' point of view, only ‘modernisation’, ‘progress’ and Russia's integration into the global West can be the solution to the problem of archeomodernism. However, tough, though passive and poorly reflected opposition from the bottom-up to “modernization” gives the elite the belief that they have received “the incorrect people”. That is why archeomoderism is simply a continuous effort to culturally transform the consciousness of the people according to Western patterns, which is rightly seen by the people as a “Yarm”.

Russia found itself in the position of archeomodernism not through direct colonization, like most countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, but through cultural colonization. This is why Russia has possibly retained the chance to carry out a conservative revolution for Tradition, reject the Western model of civilization and reconstruct the process of the authentic existence of Russia in history.

Theology of liberation. These demands form a full defined political doctrine capable of presenting a comprehensive and coherent image of the world, the driving forces of history, its main actors, and the place and mission of Russia in history. Russia's mission is to liberate the country, the nations surviving in it and the planet as a full from western hegemony and the Atlantic colonial yoke. This liberation must be complete and encompass all levels of human (or even superhuman) existence. triumph is full and final only if the enemy does not have a single gap, not a single “grey zone” in which he could gather for revenge and the fresh Drang nach Osten.

This large liberation war has respective fronts, and the spiritual front is no little crucial than the front inside the country, and even in each of us. uncovering authentic existence is simply a fundamental transformation of the deepest foundations of social existence; it is simply a metanoia, a transformation of “Saul in Paul” in each of us. Everything, absolutely everything should be radically revised by the strictest standards. We take with us into the future only what we cannot build the Kingdom of Heaven without—the Real One; everything else – false, superficial, evil – we leave in the past without regret.

This holistic and extremist approach is not even the doctrine of liberation, it is the theology of liberation, deeper and more extremist than the Catholic theology of liberation of Latin America. specified an answer, in general, does not necessarily arise from 4 postulates – in fact, it is the 5th postulate, which fundamentally rethinks the "geometry" of the world, as the 5th axiom of Łobaczewski radically changed the "ordinary" geometry of Eulides. This postulate is in fact an alpha and omega of Eurasianism.

Moreover, only this postulate is simply a fundamental feature of Eurasianism (Fourth Political Theory). Eurasianism can be understood without traditionalism; Eurasianism can profess different religions and so profess different eschatologies; there are Eurasian trends that reject the position of classical geopolitics; Eurasianism takes place on continents another than Eurasianism – and all of this will be Eurasianism! Eurasian Rustem Wachitow erstwhile expressed “the paradox of the failure of Eurasianism,” lamenting the erosion of the “Eurasian dogma” formulated by the founding fathers of Eurasianism. However, Eurasianism would not be eurasian if it were a purely exclusive concept, rejecting everything the creators did not capture in the "golden canon". Eurasianism is an inclusive science, it focuses under its banner all those who have taken up the fight against liberalism, atlantism, capitalism and Satanism, regardless of political or spiritual beliefs. Eurasianism is an encouraging philosophy: “He who is not with the enemy is with us!” In specified terms there is no "paradox of the disappearance of Eurasianism" but there is simply a categorical imperative of gaining Eurasianism.

Together with this, Eurasianism has its very circumstantial conceptual framework, the above-mentioned postulates form its structural basis – a skeleton without which Eurasianism threatens to transform into an amorphous communicative "for all good against all evil." The more demands the Eurasian accepts, the closer he gets to the point of doctrine. The little demands the Eurasian accepts, the further it is from the core. Eurasianism can be compared to a comet, where "core eurasianism" is the nucleus of a comet, "peripheral eurasianism" is the tail of a comet, and "fifth postulate" is the orbit of a comet, to which both the comet nucleus and its tail are directed.

Basic Oppositions

The planetary duel of the West against Russia-Eurasia ("The large Dispute" according to W. Solovyov) resulted in conceptual dualism in the form of opposition, which is already partially mentioned above (we will not dwell on them). R. Wachitow in the monograph "Eurasianism: Logos. Eidos. Symbol. Myth" proposed ordering Eurasianism through categories-oppositions and we will apply this very fruitful method. Let us mention the main oppositions that let to fill in the content of the Eurasian base:

– mechanical – organic;
what is acceptable to God, what is hostile to God;
– individual – impersonal;
– ideology – pragmatism;
– tradition – progress;
– civilization – globalisation;
– imperiality – imperialism;
– Capitalism – Anticapitalism.

Not all of these oppositions are equally crucial and independent (some oppositions are a consequence of the basic opposition, projections on a circumstantial field of action), but in pursuit of the brevity of the presentation we ignore these subtleties.

What's mechanical is what's organic. Civilizations: Western and Eurasian are united into a single community on a fundamentally different basis. Western unions are mechanical institutions, a formal multiplicity of parts ("kingdom of quantity" according to Guenon); the Western society itself, the nation is simply a multiplicity of individuals formally united ("social agreement"). Eurasia, on the contrary, is simply a model of organic interior unity, welded together by unknown "connectors". In the West everything is governed by procedure, in Russia the influence of secrecy is inactive strong. Integrity and organicity find the degree of unity unattainable to Europe or another improvement sites, which seems natural to us, but which scares and offends the people of the West. All western alliances bind the hegemony of the home country over the colonies and fall apart into separate national states. Eurasia breaks down only under the force of external forces, and each specified breakdown is seen as a "geopolitan disaster", and the decaying parts sooner or later merge into a unified whole, into a unique empire without a metropolis.

Unity corresponding to divine providence is simply a affirmative unity, a kind God. This is the unity of a multi-people civilization, a cultural-geographical planet or a cultural-historical zone. It is opposed to negative, incompatible unity with God, contrary to God's plan, and built on human sinful interests (trying to make all-human or transcending places of cultural improvement or empires), a fresh construction of the Tower of Babel. The rejection of God in the Age of Modernity for the worship of humanism and advancement was indeed a mammon cult, which entailed the rejection of both the search for fact and man himself.

What's individual is what's impersonal. In liberal society, only what is individual and private is real, and what is general is illusory. Western society's individualism depersonalizes man, making him an anonymous agent of exchange relations. Eurasianism, emphasising the primacy of the general over detail, proclaims the existence of a council-like, symphonic personality that goes far beyond the boundaries of a separate individual. Personality is integrity and cannot so be brought to the simple sum of individuals who are part of the people. In full accord with the Orthodox perfect of the apostolic community (“many believers had 1 heart and 1 soul. And no 1 called his own property, but all had in common") renewal, the gathering of the Russian-Eurasia people in a united, symphonic personality constitutes the anthropological (and sociological) perfect of Eurasianism.

Ideocracy – pragmatism. According to the sociological concept of P. Sorokin society in its evolution passes through 3 phases: ideal, perfect and sensual. The thought model is dominated by the rule of spiritual faith, asceticism, heroism and disregard for material things. In the idealistic model, reason dominates, rational awareness, higher ideals balance with material interests, and discipline flourishes. The sensory model attaches primary importance to the physical, material, pragmatic side of things. The rule of pleasance (cult of consumption) prevails over everything else. Western civilization yet went into a sensual phase, while for Russia-Eurasia this rule is civilizational alien, and the ideological model most full corresponds to its social ideal. Ideocracy is the exact other of a pragmatic-commercial approach. The Eurasian state must be built, starting with the first spiritual impulse, from top to bottom, the full structure must be created in accordance with the apriority idea, and a peculiar class of “spirital waters” must be at the head of this structure.

Imperiality – imperialism. 2 civilizations, the West and Eurasia, form 2 polarally different types of empire. In geopolitical terms, the West affirms a model of metropolitan regulation over colonies, a model of force on the periphery by the center through its "modernisation", continuous expansion outwards, occupying resources and territories – a model of pure external effect. At the same time, the West embodies an extended kind of economical governance, drawing strength and resources from outside. Eurasia affirms a relation model without a colony erstwhile the center embraces the periphery and lifts it to its level. The Eurasian model is pure interior, turned inward. The West is an exclusive model of cultural, economical and political hegemony, erstwhile everything that is first and sovereign is suppressed in the colonies, but at the same time the colonies will never become a metropolis; on the contrary, the hold of the periphery towards the centre is increasing. Russia-Eurasia is an inclusive model, inviting neighbours to a common home on equal terms, who at the same time do not lose their culture, tradition and certain autonomy. At the same time Russia-Eurasia embodies an intense kind of economical governance, not only satisfying its own resources, but besides generously sharing them with the periphery.

Two types of empire supply 2 models of statehood. Western imperialism is simply a flat model of "civil society" with the facade of liberal democracy and shadow oligarchy. It is simply a model in which "social welfare" is broken down into individual goods. The perfect of Eurasian statehood is the hierarchical model of the state of the "burden", facing upwards and subordinate to the above-ground social ideal, ruling the Idea. Western imperialism establishes the hierarchy of dominance – Eurasian imperialism proclaims the hierarchy of service. Among the Eurasians there is no agreement on a peculiar model of government – whether it be a monarchy, a people's power (demotion, continuation of the Earth Council or russian rule), or synthesis of both systems (a folk monarchy) – but in any case it will be self-loathing, a unique and proven kind of Russian power, fundamentally incompatible with oligarchy.

Capitalism – anticapitalism. Western civilization, having abandoned the ban on borrowing interest, is immanently linked to specified a social strategy as capitalism. It can even be said that wherever capitalism arises, it does not arise alone, but under the banner of modernization is planted by uninvited missionaries from the West. Eurasians are united in the criticism of capitalism and the affirmation of anti-capitalist governance, but there is no single economical model. The left-wing Eurasians propose a socialist model, right-wing Eurasians, following the Slavophiles, mention to the patriarchal community and to the self-loathing Czarka preromanian period. However, paradoxically there are no circumstantial contradictions in these approaches – even P. Florenski pointed to the parallelism between socialism and the mediate Ages (early feudalism). Orthodox socialism (which A. Dugin calls “legal socialism”) could be a commonly acceptable model.

Basic concepts

We have already touched a number of Eurasian concepts: tradition, conservative revolution, authentic existence, archeomoderism, civilization, place of development, symphonic personality, democracy. So let us halt at concepts that have not yet been mentioned, and which are essential for knowing the phenomenon of Eurasianism.

Radical Entity is an actor of fresh Metaphysics, its pole. extremist Entity is an entity free from the suggestive force of paradigms; it is an entity that considers external paradigms and thus recognizes them as paradigms alternatively than as obvious.
No paradigm, looking from the inside, is considered to be a paradigm, but is recognized as something unchanging, apparent and understandable by itself. For a man of Tradition, e.g. a Christian, another religions are heresy, though more or little understandable, Modernity is the beginning of the end, and Modernity is truly everything, hell. For the modernist, all religion of Premodernity is obscurantism, savagery and stupidity, and yet for the Modernity obscurantism and savagery are both Premodernity and Modernity. Almost all man born and raised in a paradigm is enslaved by him, so the full society as a full sees the planet in its own way in different epochs and cannot realize another perspective. The exception is feedback points (such as between Premodernity and Modernity – Renaissance), in 1 of them, between Modernity and Postmodernism, we are now. At this point, a extremist subject is born.

Eurasian selection. Russia-Eurasia, as the expression of a forest-stepped empire on a continental scale, requires a circumstantial model of governance based on a peculiar "selection". This ‘Eurasian selection’ shall be based on a circumstantial ethics corresponding to scenery conditions. It is the ethics of collective responsibility, selflessness, common assistance, asceticism, will, perseverance and unconditional submission to superiors. Only specified features can guarantee that control of the vast, sparsely populated areas of the Eurasian forest-steppe region is maintained. The ruling class of Eurasia was formed on the basis of collectivism, asceticism, military virtues, and strict hierarchy. The formalization of these principles became the basis of Genghis Khan's Jasa. Later the main motives of the “Eurasian selection” were embodied in the political structure of Moscow Rusi. Regardless of ideological facades, the real mechanics for governing Russia-Eurasian regulation naturally tends towards the logic of "Eurasian selection".

Turkish factor. Russia emerged as a self-contained civilization as a consequence of the collision of virtually Slavic regulation with Turkish. The legacy of the Mongol-Tatar period was 1 of the most crucial elements of Russia's history, which turned respective peripheral, fragmentary east principalities into the skeleton of a planet empire. The districts of Kiev Rusi, which were under European influence in the 13th century, gradually dissolved in it, losing their political and cultural independence. The lands that became part of the Orda later became the core of the continental empire. The Tatars retained the spiritual identity of the Old Ruth who was reborn in the Moscow Kingdom and entered into the "Gengis-chan inheritance". Eurasians positively considered the Turkish factor, recognising the surviving origin of Eurasian statehood in the dialectics of Russian-Tatar relations.

The 4th Political explanation (4PT) is simply a political ideology created by Eurasianism, but it is not identical to it. 4PT is "integral Eurasianism"; an ideology purified of Eurasianism in a narrow sense, in relation to the geographical context applicable to all continents, peoples and traditions, taking into account their cultural and historical context. 4PT is simply a global task for the world, inviting all another civilizations to participate equally. 4PT proposes going beyond the political boundaries of Modernity and tying the future to tradition, returning to the tradition interpreted as eternal alternatively than as the past. The defence of eternity through simultaneous recourse to Premodernity and Postmodernity – that is the sense of 4PT.

The subject of the 4PT is the people as an existentially reasoning unity, it is simply a “people's soul”. The people are a spiritual, historical and at the same time ahistorical concept, encompassing the dead, the surviving and the unborn. The people as a "body" will find a "soul" to become a actual subject of the 4PT, must gather together in a united, symphonic personality and become a radical, authentically existing and aware of its historical mission.

Basic Myths

Eurasianism is not fundamentally a secular doctrine; although it is not a religion, it is immanently linked to it, i.e. it has a substantive metaphysical basis. The metaphysical aspect is improbable to undergo close conceptualization, but it can be partially reconstructed with myths that appear openly or indirectly in the Eurasian narrative. First of all, these are Bible stories: about the Tower of Babel, about the Jews leaving Egyptian captivity, about the prodigal son, about Katechon.

The construction of the Babel Tower is repeated throughout the modern era, and its culmination is the present era of globalisation. N. Trubićkoj saw in the Tower the symbol of a human, ungodly, materialistic civilization, which the modernist West is trying to make by levelling all another cultures. Sooner or later, the Lord will destruct the tower (it has already tilted and began to fall), but it is crucial that humanity should not be among the underdeveloped builders to be the hand of the Lord destroying this tower.

Egyptian bondage is archeomederism, a period that began with the Western reforms of Peter erstwhile the governing layer in Russia renounced national traditions and began to take over and implant Western institutions, culture and values. As a result, the elite and all educated classes became “Egyptians”. The forty-year wandering of Jews in the desert is simply a period of slow, painful and inconsistent awareness of the Roman-German yoke and its elimination.

The parable of the prodigal boy is to seduce Russia by European temptation, to forget its own path, to renounce its roots ("father"), long attempts to integrate into alien civilization and yet to save from the spell of Euro-centrism. The return of the prodigal boy to the home has not yet come, but the prodigal boy is already at the threshold of his father’s house. The subject of "return" is simply a full set of myths in which R. Wachitov can be considered a story of losing and uncovering a name, a story of a sleeping princess, a story of Matsiedranath yoga – telling about forgetting a name (real personality) and its later understanding.

The catechon (the "stopping now") is simply a theological and religious-political concept based on Christian eschatology. It is simply a historical entity whose mission is to prevent the eventual triumph of evil in history, the coming of the Antichrist and the hold of the end of the world. The apostle Paul's mysterious phrase: "The mystery of lawlessness is already being accomplished, but it will not be accomplished until the 1 who is now holding back is removed from the way" (Tes 2.7) in the Eurasian key is interpreted as a transition from conventional society to post-traditional society, but it is the presence of the Catechon that prevents the Antichrist from coming. After the fall of Byzantium and the emergence of the doctrine “Moscow – 3rd Rome” Russia assumed work for maintaining Orthodox religion and peaceful legal order within its borders. This is Russia's function as Katechon.

The medieval legend of Dr Faust is 1 of the basic myths of Eurasianism. According to legend, the wizard scientist Dr Faustus makes a pact with the devil to gain dominance over humans and nature. By thus gaining power, Faust begins to usage it to satisfy his own sensual and intellectual needs and to carry out an ambitious task that would bring happiness to millions of people. An authentic legend (as opposed to Goethe's celebrated tragedy) tells of the unsavory end of the sorcerer, the collapse of his designs and the entry of the lost soul into hell. In the late mediate Ages, people inactive had the ability to see spiritually and understood the price of a pact with the devil. Genius Goethe no longer understood it, did not realize the depths of the spiritual disaster of Modernity and rehabilitated Faust (and Modernity as a whole). Faust is simply a full European civilization that sold its soul in exchange for conquest of nature and power over people. For a reason, Europe is called by various researchers "Faust Civilization" – O. Spengler, I. Sikorski, W. Katasonow...
Slavophilic mythologists about Holy Ruth, the town of Kitezh and Bielowode are organically intertwined into the body of Eurasian myths. Holy Ruth is simply a methonymy, semantic transfer of the Holy Land to Russia, giving Russia sacred meaning. The expression “Holy Rus” crosses what cannot be exceeded: holiness crosses Russianism. Not any partial overlap, but an absolute coincidence – paradoxical (and at first glance blasphemous) view that our earth is sacred. What is peaceful and transcendent, metaphysical and concrete, having a geographical and historical outline and having an cultural medium, is identified and merged. This myth, let and with reservations, is accepted by ecclesiastical consciousness – Russia is holy due to the fact that it is under intercession, the peculiar care of the Blessed God-parent. Russia is the palace of Queen of Heaven, in the territory of large Russia (ZSRR) there are 3 of the 4 apanases of Our woman (Iweria, Lavra Kiev-Pecherska, Monastery of the Holy Trinity and St. Serafim of Sarov in Diveev).
Legends of Kitez-Grad say that for the purity of the soul and good religion in the Lord during the Batu invasion the full city was hidden in the waters of Lake Svetlojar, where it remains invisible, appearing only to the righteous. Legend tells of a miracle that hoped to overcome the effort to invade and destruct Tatar-Mongolian. Legend is 1 of the varieties of the story squad about returning. The real Russia is hidden in the salvific depths, while on the Russian earth there is simply a yoke of external enemy and ruin.
In the legend of the ancient rites of Belovod, Belovod is simply a wonderful country of freedom, without mediocre and rich, without ladies and criminals, a fortress of Orthodox faith, in which only the righteous live. The White Water Country was only open to virtuous people and was located in the north, “in Pomerania, from the large Obu to the mouth of the Bielowater River”. It's besides 1 of the versions of the comeback myth.
In the wonderful task "Noomachia", at the same time culturally-historical and metaphysically, A. Dugin proposes to consider the past of the world, covering all aspects and spheres of human activity, as a united process of clashing 3 logos ("war of minds"): Apollo, Dionysus and Kybele. Noomachia shows how noological structures form cultural complexes of philosophy, metaphysics, myths, rituals, etc., in the context of large spaces and epochs or in the context of narrower borders. Noomachia describes how specific, historical (horizontal) structures are built based on basic existential structures Logos of a given culture, reflecting each time a peculiar and first combination of elements of 3 vertical Logos.
PS. W. Arnold considered his celebrated book "Mathematic Trivium" as a collection of "not any hard problems, but those simple questions which are strictly essential minimum" (in brackets, we point out that the problems collected in the collection were not at all simple). As an example of our effort to present the basics of Eurasianism in the most accessible way, we called it the "Eurasian trivium", stressing that it is the minimum minimorum, the "prolegomena" to specified a complex and diverse phenomenon as Eurasianism.

Andrej Kosterin

Translation by Dr. Krzysztof Karczewski

To Geopolitik.ru

Read Entire Article