Dugin Thread

[Anonymous No.15499545]

Discussion of 4PT, Dugin, related works and legitimate criticisms allowed. No schizoposting.

[Anonymous No.15499556]

I am russia. In my country, this man he is nothing. A joke.

[Anonymous No.15499805]

what is duginism exactly

[Anonymous No.15499813]

>>15499805
distorting whatever philosophy you come across to support your genocidal tendencies

[Anonymous No.15499823]

>>15499813
what differentiates it from fascism and communism?

[Anonymous No.15499826]

I am russia. In my country, this man he is nothing. A joke.

[Anonymous No.15499924]

I am russia. In my country, this man he is nothing. A joke.

[Anonymous No.15499995]

>>15499556
>>15499826
>>15499924
filtered

[Anonymous No.15499999]

>>15499823

It's fascism on a budget

[Anonymous No.15500498]

>>15499999
Fascism was Modern and dealt with the concept belonging to the Enlightenment philosophy. It is absolutely wrong: the Modernity is evil and falsehood. It was Modern political theory. Much better than other modern political theories, but still modern. Essentially. In all its aspects that were non-Modern, anti-Modern and Post-Modern it was not wrong.
It was eurocentric. Any ethnic group (we-group) is ethnocentric. It is quite normal. But to be eurocentric in the Modern Europe is the same as to be anti-European, because the european Modernity is not European at all. Being eurocentric in Modern Europe and against all other (non-European) societies judged retarded and sub-human means to be anti-traditional. The appeal to the return to the european (German, indo-aryan) roots was quit legitimate and good. But opposition of the deep identity of Europe to the identities of other societies (much less modernized than Germany of XX century) was absolutely wrong and unjustifiable.
It was based on little nationalism. So Germans against French's, Slaves and so on. It was wrong and many German thinkers and fighters supporting Hitler were against such position (including Leon Degrelle for example). German or Italian nationalism is one thing - finally little thing. Indo-European (indo-aryan) is other, much greater. The Sacred Tradition and the Third Empire of Spirit is the third thing, the greatest one. If little nationalism agrees to be embedded in the Indo-European context is good. When it stresses the inner differences it is bad. The same for Indo-European civilization. If it recognizes its sacred nature (Tradition) is good. If it conceives itself as goal in itself it is not acceptable and looses its legitimation.
It attacked the first political theory and second political theory simultaneously. That was main reason of its strategic and military defeat. On the ideologically level the same was the reason of its intellectual defeat. The rule (explicitly defined in the 4PT) is the attack on the communism is valid and legitimated ONLY AFTER the common victory over the liberals. Geopolitically speaking Land wins the Sea and only AFTER that its parts decide who is Heartland. If the inner struggle starts BEFORE the victory over first political theory (capitalism and anglo-saxon thalassocratic Empire of money and lie) or even if the communists are declared the enemy number one instead of liberals, the fascism helps the liberals to win and pushes the communists on the side of the MAIN EVIL. So the fascism was absolutely wrong here.
These four points are essential negative moments. There were other less important as the theoretical weight. There were some positive moments: anti-capitalism, anti-materialism and other anti-modern features. That is valid for real historic fascism with all its terrible and fascinating (for some) aspects.

[Anonymous No.15500746]

>>15499813
genocide is justifiable though