By: Burke S.

Burke S.
Fri, 22 Apr 2022 19:08:49 +0000

What is the philosophical underpinning of modern liberalism except the placement of the individual above all collective identities? Liberalism has freed the individual from the collective identities of tribe, ethnicity, religion, nationality, family, and now gender. The next step in this evolution will be freeing the individual from humanity itself in the form of digitalization, a process well underway, where the individual will be freed from the tyranny of the physical being. The full glory of liberalism: The individual as nothing but an atomized being attached to absolutely nothing. But without belonging, what is the individual at all but a meaningless drop in the universe?

While liberals today cheer on Ukrainian nationalism, even remark in the beauty of it, the thought of the same nationalism emerging in western societies is seen as utterly regressive and must be fought. “There is no such thing as a true Englishman! There is no true Frenchman!” the modern liberal will say, but does this not also mean there is no such thing as a Ukrainian? Indeed, the internal opposition to Dugin in Russia is often in the sphere of ethno-nationalism: “Those mountain dwelling Uzbeks and Tajiks and Chechens are not Russian, and don’t belong in Moscow!” This nationalism is of course the end of the Russian federation and dissolvement into a thousands pieces. But Dugin would argue that Eurasianism is the ideology of uniting the ‘heartland’ while Western Nationalism would be raising western man above his state of interchangeable worms who are merely defined as replaceable consumers by our inglorious ominpresent non-national elite to once again becoming something great, something which belongs to a place and people. To have found Dasein.

The “traditionalist” school is inherently post-Modern and Western because it acknowledges there is no going back to the pre-Modern world even in places such as the Islamic world where the rejection of Modernity (and it’s accompanying love of rationalism and hatred of the sacred) is in full swing. Although Western liberalism has utterly failed to win in the Islamic world, that world is so divided against itself it could never muster a true challenge to the imperialists who believe they know the truth for all mankind. Which is, of course, molding all of mankind in their own image. And 20 Years of Afghan failure and ultimate rejection does not deter the belief! Imagine for a moment that the west hadn’t tried building a state based on western ‘values’ of individual autonomy (and external weakness) but a state based on religious belonging against the heretics– What a dream it would have been! So while Chechens now fight for Russia , Afghanistan now harbors our enemies yet again.

As modern liberalism is defined by the liberation from collective identity, it has reached a dead end. This is obvious in Ukraine, who’s success is a direct rebuke to that idea. And whatever happens in Ukraine now, as long as Russia survives as a state it will serve as a new pole in a new world order: The unipolar world will be dead, and the new world that emerges will be of multipolarity.

It’s not Russia or Dugin who insists their ideology is universal and should be spread throughout the globe, it’s the liberals who believe in their universal values. And that era will end, cheered on by Chinese and Indians and Pakistanis and Africans and Latin Americans who may despise the war itself but view the cutting off of ties between the West and Russia as Dugin does: A wonderful blessing from the Lord!

How else could this break have happened?