Publicist Alexander Bovdunov: Russia will be separated from several poles – the Eurasian
The political and social structure of Russia, the situation on the world stage, global problems – all areas of coverage, except for political, military and philosophical expert communities and analysts. Our guest today Alexander Bovdunov is a publicist, journalist, writer, analyst of the international Eurasian movement, political expert. In this regard, Moscow’s problems and tasks arise in the field of the study of the Russian world, social reconstruction and the relationship between society and natural resources. He can often be found among experts on global issues on television, and in Alexander’s arsenal there are many books on geopolitics and society. It came out this year book about the political picture “Greater Eastern Europe: Geopolitics. Geosophy. Third Traditionalism. We will deal with these and other topics today with a common interlocutor.
– Hello, Alexander! Welcome to the Arguments of the Week page. Let’s meet readers with numerous experts.
− Hello! I will be glad to answer your questions.
− You represent the International Eurasian Movement. Tell us about what it is widely represented and what does it mean?
− The International Eurasian Movement is a public organization that has existed since 2003. It is registered in Russia, but has branches in many foreign countries: from Turkey and Serbia to Brazil. It is a network structure that interacts with management functions and organizations. All of us are waiting for the fight against US hegemony and the global world, the idea of Russia as a self-sufficient civilization. The ultimate goal is the creation of a multipolar world. Almost all active MEDs, including the leader and founder Alexander Dugin, have been on the US, EU, and UK sanctions lists since 2014. This is, if you like, the best assessment of our activities, starting from the geopolitical beginning.
– How do they relate to the concepts of the Russian world, Russian spring? Are you a direct participant in the events or an observer, an ideologue?
− The concept of “Russian World” is found among the first Eurasians, when Eurasianism was only taking shape as an ideological trend in the 1920s. “Russian world” Pyotr Savitsky called “Eurasia” in the narrow sense of the word. Not a continent with the same name, but “the “third world” of the Old World, not an integral part of Europe or Asia, but different from them and at the same time proportionate to them”, the place of development of Russian civilization. The Russian world is the space of the territory of Russia, the world where Russians live, mastered by Russians. Together with other peoples of Russia, but still located in the Russian cultural space. Therefore, it occupies a place in the space of New Russia. This is the former “Wild Field”, literally a zero-magnitude settled civilization. And at the same time, in this space, which would never have been inhabited without Russia, Russian spaces have always belonged to representatives of many ethnic groups, from the Greeks who founded Mariupol, the Serbs and Albanians to the size of the population throughout Russia of the Tatars. The Russian spring was the awakening of this Russian civilization, developing, multidimensional, drawing in many ethnic groups and people of different ideological views in response to the massacre by the Ukrainian nationalist project.
From 2014 to this day, it is a process in which it is difficult to stand on the sidelines and just “observe”. If you are into media and ideology, then you are already involved. And now it is already clear that most of the remaining people, who were neither engaged in media, nor carried out humanitarian activities, nor participated in hostilities, are no longer returning to the side. One way or another, it affects everyone.
– How did you perceive the expansion of our borders? How do you assess the course of the SVO from the point of view of a public figure and analyst?
– The expansion of Russia to its historical lands is good, but this expansion must also be defended. The course of NWO land is two things. The first is that the state system, the military system, in many respects turned out to be unprepared for the most serious challenge – behind the back of the main material, managerial, intelligence support of NATO. We have to reorganize on the go, change our thinking, including with regard to the participation of troops and the conduct of hostilities. In general, the transition from the “special operation” regime to the people’s uncompromising war is obvious and overdue, especially since the enemy does not meet the desire for compromises from the words “absolutely”.
– Your stay is politics, conservatism, popularization of the outdated way of society. How to combine academicism with the events of the present times?
– Without academicism: on the one hand, scientific rigor, philosophical reflection, help to history, it is difficult to understand what is happening in general and where we are going. Oswald Spengler that history is a concept with which a person tries to comprehend the living being of the world, inseparably from his own destiny, and in this assessment measures the reality of his life. Turning to religion, history and philosophy, we understand that a lot depends on us, especially at such turning points as now. Each of us is responsible to our ancestors and our peoples. Behind each is a thousand-year-old Russian civilization and its main idea – in religious language, the idea of the Third Rome, the catehon, the last barrier before the onset of the kingdom of Antichrist – to prevent evil from triumphing in the world.
On the other hand, without a history of ideas, it is difficult to understand why the West is so fiercely opposed to us. He insists on his imperial idea, the end of history and the triumph of liberal ideology, the withdrawal of man from any collective identity, almost to the identity of a similar one. The West is fighting not only for Ukraine and its resources. He fights for liberalism and the freedom to abolish the individual. Russia, perhaps, does not notice itself, simply does not accept the scornful ideology of freedom of choice of sexual commitment – it becomes focused on the path to the triumph of the liberal – at the expense of the ultimate posthuman ideal.
– How has the political landscape in the world changed over the past decade?
− The world is trying to become multipolar. After 200 years of unconditional Western hegemony, the world is emerging from colonial subjugation. Russia in the NWO, at least, made a claim not to obey its norms and rules, to oppose itself to it. That’s why it’s such a tough answer. But other centers of power are also rising – China, India. And, what is important, both there and there in the main countries of the elite, who turn to representatives of their peoples. In India, in the state party, whose ideology “Hindutva” is political Hinduism. In China, Xi Jinping talks about “socialism with a Chinese perspective.” In subsequent years, in a whole assembly of countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea, CAR), “black Che Guevara” came to power – anti-colonialists, exporting friendship with Russia. In the largest country in South America – Brazil – both the left and the right do not join the anti-Russian policy of the United States. The old cases against the “rights” and “lefts” are becoming a thing of the past. Rather, the priority is the value for “patriots”, populists, as well as liberals and globalists.
– Can we say that the real demolition of the previous unipolar system led by the West is already underway?
– It is possible, but the old system does not give up intentionally. It is a process that expands gradually, in what the great French historian and sociologist Fernand Braudel called “long duration”, at least it will take more than one decade. The world is no longer subordinate to the West, even such a NATO country as Turkey, for example, can be conducted in almost everything as an independent collaborator. Such a policy of Ankara cannot be presented 20 years ago. China is the main world factory (20 years ago it was not). But the US is still the financial center of the world and a tourist military power with bases all over the world. The positive ideas and cultural dominance of the West is also strong.
– What will replace it? Globalists do not give up so easily, perhaps.
− A multipolar world will come to replace it. Instead of one pole of power and one civilization – European-American, establishing and maintaining the rules of what is good and what is bad on a global scale – there are several poles-civilizations – large integration associations. This world will arise and not necessarily calm, but some kind of culture of universality of its attitudes will be required, their obligatoriness for everyone. The West, Europe and the USA have their place in, but only as local cultures, among other foreign cultures, no better, no lower.
− What role do you assign to Russia in the new world order?
– Russia will be singled out from several poles – the Eurasian one. There are no single, from many centers of their own ordinary worlds. It is difficult to say now what countries and lands of the former USSR and the Russian Empire will turn out. But it will be an independent country with an independent culture, an understanding of its place in the world, respect for its traditions and building the future on their basis, carefully observing some of the poles and adapting to their innovations if they correspond to attitudes and ideals. A people’s state, formidable on the outside and fair on the inside.
− At the end, give a forecast on the situation in the country for the next year, please!
– I think that the mutual loyalty of the people and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief will be a constant. The president in Russia is more than a president, the royal archetype is projected onto him, the archetype of the ruler-protector, the father of the people. Against the background of the idea of SVO, society will demand a patriotic, but without hatred, clear identification of failures and achievements, those responsible and those who have not coped with the task of a large-scale assessment of difference to the West. If this is not the case, fermentation will begin.
But besides answering the question of who is to blame, something needs to be done. A reasonable project for the future, initiatives to help the front, verified public initiatives. Like air, patriotic cultural projects are needed: cinema, series, music – from the growth of culture to the elite, a lot and of high quality are needed. It is clear that this is not done in a year, but we need to start.