I told Tucker Carlson 'We are Fighting the same Enemy' │ Alexander Dugin

I think Russian and Western patriots have exactly the same enemy. And my recent conversation with Tucker Carlson, with whom I had the chance to speak here in Moscow during his visit, has totally convinced me about this. Because we started immediately to speak as brothers to each other, not as enemies who fight each other. Tucker Carlson is absolutely not pro-Russian. He's a liberal and an American patriot, and I am a Russian patriot. 

 

Saint George killing the dragon, the common enemy of the human race.

Obviously, we have many things in common but also disagreements concerning geopolitics, multi-polarity, Protestantism or Liberalism, for example. But in spite of all these, the main core of our world vision is the same. We are both fighting for Christianity, for the faith, for the roots, for the tradition, for the eternity, and for the human dignity. And we are fighting exactly the same enemy. So we need to take inspiration from each other. I am considered to be the main anti-Western Russian thinker. But I love Western tradition and admire Western philosophers. I am a follower of Plato, of Heidegger, of Aristotle, and of Christian thought in the West and in the East. We are totally free to have this inspiration from the classical heritage of each other because the Russian tradition has maybe the same roots as the Western one.

 

Plato, Aristotle, Greece, Rome, Byzantine Empire, Roman Empire, Mediterranean culture - all that we have in common. And we try to preserve, to conserve and to save something of it because the modern Western elite eliminates anything that has real classical roots. In that sense, we are in the same boat and on the same front line with American and Western European patriots. It is not about either West or East. It is about tradition and roots versus globalism and its artificial, anti-human and nihilist hegemony. That is our common enemy.

 

Quoted from:

Dimitri Simes Jr. (Feb 15, 2024) - Alexander Dugin and Pepe Escobar on Russia’s Fight against Globalism. (complete video)

Tucker, Putin, and the Apocalypse │ Alexander Dugin

Why is Tucker Carlson’s interview considered pivotal for both the West and Russia?

 Tucker Carlson (Feb 8, 2024) - The Vladimir Putin Interview. (video)

 

Let us start with the simpler part: Russia. Here, Tucker Carlson has become a focal point for two polar opposites within Russian society: ideological patriots and elite Westernisers who nonetheless remain loyal to Putin and the Special Military Operation. For patriots, Tucker Carlson is simply ‘one of us’. He is a traditionalist, a right-wing conservative, and a staunch opponent of liberalism. This is what twenty-first-century emissaries to the Russian tsar look like.

Putin does not often interact with prominent representatives of the fundamentally conservative camp. The attention the Kremlin pays him ignites the patriot’s heart, inspiring the continuation of a conservative-traditionalist course in Russia itself. Now it is possible and necessary: Russian power has defined its ideology. We have embarked on this path and will not deviate from it. Yet, patriots are always afraid we will. No.

On the other hand, the Westernisers sighed with relief: see, not everything in the West is bad, and there are good and objective people, we told you! Let us be friends with such a West, think the Westernisers, even if the rest of the globalist liberal West does not want to be friends but only bombards us with sanctions, and with missiles and cluster bombs, killing our women, children, and the elderly. We are at war with the liberal West, so let there at least be friendship with the conservative West. Thus, Russian patriots and Russian Westernisers (increasingly more Russian and less Western) come to a consensus in the figure of Tucker Carlson.

Tucker going through the roof (as of Feb 11, 2024).

 

In the West, everything is even more fundamental. Tucker Carlson is a symbolic figure. He is now the main symbol of the America that hates Biden, liberals, and globalists and is preparing to vote for Trump. Trump, Carlson, and Musk, plus Texas Governor Abbott, are the faces of the looming American Revolution, this time a Conservative Revolution. To this already powerful resource, Russia connects. No, it is not about Putin supporting Trump, which could easily be dismissed in the context of war with the United States. Carlson’s visit is about something else. Biden and his maniacs have effectively attacked a great nuclear power through the hands of Kiev’s unleashed terrorists, and humanity is on the verge of destruction. Nothing more, nothing less.

The globalist media continue to spin a Marvel series for infants, where Spider-Man Zelensky magically wins with superpowers and magical pigs against the Kremlin’s ‘Dr. Evil’. However, this is just a cheap, silly series. In reality, everything is heading towards the use of nuclear weapons and possibly the destruction of humanity. Tucker Carlson conducts a reality check: does the West understand what it is doing, pushing the world towards the apocalypse? There is a real Putin and a real Russia, not these staged characters and settings from Marvel. Look what the globalists have done and how close we are to it!

 

 'Ukraine' in the 1911 edition of Russia's eternal enemy's Encyclopædia Britannica.

It is not about the content of the interview with Putin. It is the fact that a person like Tucker Carlson is visiting a country like Russia to meet a political figure like Putin at such a critical time. Tucker Carlson’s trip to Moscow might be the last chance to stop the disappearance of humanity. The gigantic billion-strong attention to this pivotal interview from humanity itself, as well as the frenzied, inhuman rage of Biden, the globalists, and the world’s citizens intoxicated with decay, testify to humanity’s awareness of the seriousness of the situation.

The world can only be saved by stopping now. For that, America must choose Trump. And Tucker Carlson. And Elon Musk. And Abbott. Then we get a chance to pause on the brink of the abyss. Compared to this, everything else is secondary. Liberalism and its agenda have led humanity to a dead end. Now the choice is this: either liberals or humanity. Tucker Carlson chooses humanity, which is why he came to Moscow to meet Putin. The whole world understood why he came and how important it is.

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin (Feb 8, 2024) - Tucker, Putin, and the Apocalypse.

 

» Do the United States need this? « (video clip)

Carl Schmitt's Land and Sea │ Alexander Dugin

In 1942, Schmitt published the most important work, Land and Sea. Together with the later text Planetary Tension between the East and the West and the Confrontation of the Land and the Sea, this constitutes the most important document of geopolitical science. 

 

The destruction of Leviathan by Gustave Doré, 1865.

 » World history is a history of the battle of sea powers against land powers
and of land powers against sea powers. «
Carl Schmitt, 1942.

The meaning of opposing land and sea in Schmitt comes down to the fact that we are talking about two completely different, irreducible and hostile civilizations, and not about variants of a single civilization complex. This division almost exactly coincides with the picture drawn by Mackinder, but Schmitt gives its main elements of thalassocracy (sea forces) and tellurocracy (land forces) an in-depth philosophical interpretation related to basic legal and ethical systems. It is curious that Schmitt uses the name Behemoth for land forces, and Leviathan for forces of the sea, as a reminder of two Old Testament monsters, one of which embodies all land creatures, and the other all creatures of water, the sea.

 

 » The holy king of Gods and men I call, celestial law  (Nomos) the righteous seal of all. «

Orphic Hymns to Nomos 63 (2nd or 3rd century AD).

The Nomos of the Earth exists without alternative for most of human history. All varieties of this Nomos are characterized by the presence of a strict and stable legalizing (and ethical) form, which reflects the immobility and fixity of the land, the Earth. This connection with the Earth, the space which is easily amenable to structuralization (fixed borders, constancy of communication paths, invariable geographical and relief features), gives rise to essential conservatism in the social, cultural and technical spheres. The totality of the Earth’s Nomos constitutes what is commonly called the history of the traditional society. 

 

In such a situation, the water and the sea are only peripheral civilizational phenomena, without intruding on the ethical sphere (or intruding sporadically). Only with the discovery of the World Ocean at the end of the 16th century does the situation change radically. Mankind (and first of all, the island of England) begins to get used to the marine existence, begins to realize itself as an Island in the middle of the waters, a Ship. But the water area is very different from the land. It is impermanent, hostile, alienated, subject to constant change. The paths are not fixed in it, the differences in orientations are not obvious. The Nomos of the Sea entails a global transformation of consciousness. Social, legal, and ethical standards are becoming fluid. A new civilization is born. Schmitt believes that the New Time and the technical breakthrough that opened the era of industrialization owe their existence to the geopolitical phenomenon of the transition of mankind to the Nomos of the Sea. Thus, the geopolitical confrontation of the Anglo-Saxon world of the external crescent acquires a sociopolitical definition from Schmitt: 

 

» The Nomos of the Sea is a reality hostile to traditional society. « 

 

The geopolitical confrontation between land and sea powers acquires the most important historical, ideological and philosophical meaning.

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin (1997) - Foundations of Geopolitics.

 

See also:

Carl Schmitt (1942) - Land and Sea: A World-Historical Meditation.

Carl Schmitt (1950) - The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum.

Carl Schmitt (1955) - The Planetary Tension between Orient and Occident and the Opposition between Land and Sea.

The Civilization-State | Alexander Dugin

The special military operation (SMO) is unanimously agreed by competent experts in International Relations to be the final and decisive chord in the transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world [...] The main actor of a multipolar world order is neither a nation-state (as in the realist theory of International Relations), nor a unified World Government (as in the liberalist theory of International Relations). It is the Civilization-State. Other names for it are 'Great Space', 'Empire', 'Ecumenism'.

 

 » Your aim must be to take All-under-Heaven intact.
Thus your troops are not worn out and your gains will be complete.
This is the art of offensive strategy.  «

Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

The term Civilization-State is most often applied to China. Both ancient and modern China. As early as ancient times, the Chinese developed the theory of 'Tianxia' (天下), the Celestial Empire, according to which China is the center of the world, being the meeting place of the unifying Heaven and the dividing Earth. And the Celestial Empire may be a single state, or it may be broken up into its components and then reassembled. In addition, Han China itself acts as a culture-forming element for neighboring nations that are not directly part of China - primarily Korea, Vietnam, the Indochina countries and even Japan, which is quite independent.

The nation-state is a product of the European New Age and, in some cases, a post-colonial construct. The Civilization-State has ancient roots and uncertain shifting boundaries. The Civilization-State sometimes pulsates, expanding and contracting, but always remaining a constant phenomenon. Contemporary China behaves strictly according to the principle of Tianxia in international politics. The One Belt, One Road Initiative is a prime example of how this looks like in practice. And China's Internet, which cuts off any networks and resources that might weaken the civilizational identity at the entrance to China, demonstrates how the defense mechanisms are built. The Civilization-State may interact with the outside world, but it never becomes dependent on it and always maintains self-sufficiency, autonomy and autarchy. Civilization-State is always more than just a state in both spatial and temporal (historical) terms. The Civilization-State may interact with the outside world, but it never becomes dependent on it and always maintains self-sufficiency, autonomy and autarchy.

Russia is increasingly gravitating toward the same status. After the beginning of the SMO this is no longer a mere wishful thinking, but an urgent necessity. As in the case of China, Russia has every reason to claim to be a civilization. This theory was most fully developed by the Russian Eurasians, who introduced the notion of a 'state-world' or — which is the same thing — a 'Russian world'. Actually, the concept of Russia-Eurasia is a direct indication of the civilizational status of Russia. Russia is more than a nation-state (which the Russian Federation is). Russia is a distinct world.

»  The Civilization-State always maintains self-sufficiency, autonomy and autarchy.  «

[…] A multipolar world consists of states-civilizations. This is a kind of world of worlds, a mega-cosmos that includes entire galaxies. And here it is important to determine how many such States-Civilizations can even theoretically exist? Undoubtedly, this type includes India, a typical Civilization-State, which even today has enough potential to become a full-fledged actor in international politics. Then there is the Islamic world, from Indonesia to Morocco. Here the fragmentation into states and different ethno-cultural enclaves does not yet allow us to speak of political unity. Islamic civilization exists, but the question of its assembly into a Civilization-State is rather problematic. Moreover, the history of Islam knows several types of Civilization-States — from the Caliphate (the First, Umayyad, Abbasid, etc.) to the three components of Genghis Khan's Empire converted to Islam (the Golden Horde, the Ilkhan and Chagatai ulus), the Persian Safavid Empire, the Great Mogul state, and finally, the Ottoman Empire. The borders once drawn are still relevant today in many respects. But the process of gathering them into a single structure requires considerable time and effort. The same situation is also true for Latin America and Africa, two macro-civilizations that remain rather divided. But a multipolar world will somehow push integration processes in all these zones.

 

[March 31, 2023]

Russia's New Foreign Policy Doctrine :
(1)   Free from ambiguity and understatement.
(2)   No more compromise.
(3)   Carthage must be destroyed.

Now the most important thing: what to do with the West? The Theory Of A Multipolar World in the nomenclature of theories of International Relations in the modern West is absent. Today the dominant paradigm is liberalism, which denies any sovereignty and autonomy at all, abolishes civilizations and religions, ethnicities and cultures, replacing them by a forced liberal ideology, the concept of 'human rights', individualism (in the limit leading to gender and transgender politics), materialism and technical progress elevated to the highest value (Artificial Intelligence). The goal of liberalism is to abolish nation-states and establish a World Government based on Western norms and rules. This is the line pursued by Biden and the modern Democrat Party in the U.S., as well as most European rulers. This is what globalism is all about. It categorically rejects the Civilization-State and any hint of multipolarity. That is why the West is ready for war with Russia and China. In a sense, this war is already going on in Ukraine and in the Pacific (the problem of Taiwan), but so far with the support of proxy-actors. 

Ejaz Akram, Zhang Weiwei & Alexander Dugin:
» The Westphalian system of the sovereignty of nation-states has long since become obsolete and ceased to function.
In its place will be erected a continental system of ' large spaces' (in the Schmittian sense), where individuals
are integrated in the social whole based on the insoluble bond of kinship and common tradition. « (HERE)

In the West there is another influential school - realism in International Relations. Here the nation-state is considered a necessary element of the world order, but only those who have achieved a high level of economic, military-strategic and technological development — almost always at the expense of others — have sovereignty. While liberals see the future in a World Government, realists see it in an alliance of major Western powers setting global rules in their own interests. Again, in theory and practice, a Civilization-State and a multipolar world are categorically rejected. This creates a fundamental conflict already at the level of theory. And the lack of mutual understanding here leads to the most radical consequences at the level of direct collision.

In the eyes of multipolarity supporters, the West is also a Civilization-State or even two — North American and European. But Western intellectuals do not agree with this: they have no theoretical frame for this — they know either liberalism or realism, and no multipolarity. However, there are exceptions among Western theorists, such as Samuel Huntington or Fabio Petito. They — unlike the vast majority — recognize multipolarity and the emergence of new actors in the form of civilizations. This is gratifying because through such ideas it is possible to build a bridge from supporters of multipolarity (Russia, China, etc.) to the West. Such a bridge would at least make negotiations possible. 

 

Want more war? Have it.
The Rest Against The West.
Russia's FM Lavrov [June 20, 2023] :
» Let NATO fight. Russia is prepared. «
 

As long as the West categorically rejects multipolarity and the very notion of the Civilization-State, the conversation will be conducted only at the level of a clash of rough power — from military operations to economic blockade, information and sanction wars, etc.

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin (2022) - The Civilization-State.

 

 

See also:

Alexander Dugin (April 07, 2023) - Russia's New Foreign Policy Doctrine. The Concept of Foreign Policy As The Apotheosis Of Multipolarism And The Catechism Of Sovereignty.
Zhang Weiwei, Alexander Dugin & Ejaz Akram (2022) - What is a Civilizational State? (video)

Martin Jacques (2022) - Civilisation-State versus Nation-State (video).

Matthew Kroenig (2022) - Washington Must Prepare for War With Both Russia and China. 
Alexander Dugin (2021) - The Theory of a Multipolar World.

Alexander Dugin (2009) - The Fourth Political Theory.

Alexander Dugin (2005) - Eurasian Mission: An Introduction to Neo-Eurasianism.
Alexander Dugin (1997) - Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia. 

Bruno Maçães (2020) - The Attack of the Civilization-State.

 Bernard-Henri Lévy (2019) - The Empire and the Five Kings. America's Abdication and the Fate of the World.

TPR (2016) - One Belt, One Road — Eurasian Century Unstoppable.

Zhang Weiwei (2011) - The China Wave: Rise of a Civilizational State.

Ejaz Akram (2009) - Ideals and Realities of Regional Integration in the Muslim World. 

John Mearsheimer (2001) - The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. 

Samuel P. Huntington (1992) - Clash of Civilizations.  

Carl Schmitt (1950) - The nomos of the earth in the international law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum.