Alexandr Dugin's absurd mysticism
Or why sounding deep does not make you wise
If you like this article, please don’t hesitate to click like and restack! It’s a quick way to make sure more people will get to enjoy it too.
And don’t hesitate to subscribe to my newsletter for free to receive my new articles right in your inbox!
Alexandr Dugin is somewhat of a new figure in the West.
Since the war in Ukraine started, he’s been propped up and called “Putin’s right-hand man” by the mainstream media outside of his native Russia, to an audience who had previously mostly never heard of the man.
Dugin himself has been in the Russian public’s eye since the 1990s though — which corresponds to the overthrow of the Soviet Union and forcible establishment of capitalism. This period, known as “shock therapy”, led to one of the worst humanitarian crises in modern history. Almost overnight, life expectancy decreased by almost 10 years. Poverty more than tripled (search for “Soviet Union”). One in ten children now live in the streets. GDP per capita halved between 1997 and 1999.
All of these numbers hide a harsh reality on the ground for the people. Many women who previously had jobs as scientists in prestigious Soviet institutes and universities, for example, found themselves out of work and with no choice but to turn to prostitution. Children were not spared either, and I urge you to watch the short documentary Children of Leningradski which will make you hate what the “restoration” of capitalism, under Bush Sr.’s and Clinton’s orders, did to Russia and the Soviet republics.
It’s in this turbulent context that Dugin first rose to prominence. In 1993, he founded the National Bolshevik party (or nazbol for short), based on a strange mix of politics. According to its chairman Eduard Limonov, a Russian-French national, the party was ‘the most left-wing among the right-wing parties, and the most right-wing among the left-wing parties’ (source). Later, such a party might come to be described as ‘right-wing on values, left-wing on the economy’ by another French national-bolshevik, Alain Soral, who deserves his own article in due time.
Such a strange mix of politics could only be distilled in the form of a party in this specific period in time. In this way, it reminds us of the Strasser brothers, who espoused a similar ideology before and during the early Hitler years until they were disposed of in 1934. Their “guild socialism” proposal was also born out of a complex period in German politics, and did not make much sense either, becoming the synthesis of a weird mix of Nazism and what they believed to be communism.
While we could explore the party programme of the National Bolshevik party in-depth, I ultimately feel it was a very contradictory party which never made much sense. Instead of a coherent party with a clear objective, it should be seen rather as a contradictory product of a contradictory period. It is, however, a contradictory ideology Dugin follows to this day.
Dugin was more of a writer than a leader though. While Limonov was the head of the party, Dugin published 9 books in the period the National Bolshevik party existed. A party which, we should note, has only ever remained a very niche party in Russian politics until its ban in 2007.
One of his most recommended books by his followers, The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia, was one of those 9, published 1997, and I will eventually write about it. But first, I felt it was important that readers get to know Dugin as a person before we review his entire book.
Let’s rewind
Let’s rewind back to our beginning premise.
While Dugin became known in the mainstream after our media picked up his name and, whether they wanted to or not, gave him large amounts of publicity by plastering his name and face everywhere, he was already gravitating in the US through one of his devoted followers: a man by the name of Caleb Maupin.
Caleb Maupin is another highly unusual figure who deserves his own piece too. Originally promoting himself as a communist, Maupin quickly was found out to be anything but. He came to prominence in the mid-2010s with pretty tame Marxist discourse, although some concerning signs were already there.
You see, Caleb Maupin eventually outed himself as a National Bolshevik too, but of the American variety. He did not don the symbols of the Soviet Union, but of the United States — the flag, for which millions of innocents have been killed. The nationalism, for which an entire continent was conquered from its Native population. The exceptionalism, for thinking he was doing anything new.
Before that, when it was still unsure whether Maupin stood on the actual left — the one I’m a part of — or was just using the words and symbols of the left to promote a reactionary message, he was getting cozy with Dugin.
This is how Dugin first came to be known in the West, through Maupin’s publishing of his books through his “think tank”, the Center for Political Innovation.
What does Dugin believe?
We have spent some time talking about Dugin as a person, and we have even looked at some of the figures that gravitate around him.
But so far, we have not gone into his actual beliefs yet.
This was intended.
Dugin is the product of a chaotic, confusing time. He himself has taken on these traits in his writing.
In other words, what he says means nothing and everything at the same time. He’s a mysticist — mysticism being the belief that there are things humans are fundamentally unable to understand no matter how hard they might try.
This is how he presents his writing, as something very deep and wise that one needs to decipher. You, the reader, get to do this work, and come to your own conclusions.
And if you disagree with Dugin’s writing (or any of those esoteric writers really), then that doesn’t mean he’s wrong. It means you just didn’t get it on the first try.
Read again and again until you get it.
He’s infallible.
But most of the time, Dugin says little more than “the current situation could either turn out good or bad”. He just does it with ten times the amount of words and a Thesaurus.
To illustrate that, I would like to go through one of his recent Twitter posts, made on October 7 2023, on the day the Palestinian resistance launched their operation Flood of al-Aqsa. This is the post:
An escalation in Israel could trigger a chain reaction. The Palestinians have no chance in such a war, because they cannot destroy Israel or inflict a significant military defeat on it, but Israel also has nothing to fight for. Palestine is technically Israeli territory, which it does not and cannot control under any circumstances. It is equally impossible to physically destroy all Palestinians.
If we were in a different international situation, the Palestinians could count on the compassion of the international left, but the US is led by neocons and globalists. They certainly do not care about the Palestinians, although they are not too close to Israel's nationalist policies either.
But it is the chain reaction - and especially the behavior of the Islamic states (primarily Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf states and Egypt) - that could be the logical continuation. Or at least, this is what Hamas strategists may have had in mind when they decided to start the conflict.
Multipolarism is strengthening, the intensity of Western hegemony in the collective non-West is weakening. The West's allies in the Islamic world - especially Turkey and the Saudis - do not automatically follow every order from Washington. This is the situation in which the Islamic pole, which recently provocatively joined the BRICS, will be put to the test.
Of course, the conflict could spread to other territories. The involvement of Iran and Hezbollah cannot be excluded, which means the potential transfer of hostilities to the territories of Lebanon and Syria. In Israel itself, there are enough Palestinians who fiercely hate Jews. All this could have unpredictable consequences.
In my opinion, the US and the globalists will try to shut everything down now, as they can achieve nothing good from further escalation.
One more thing: the analogies between separatism, irredentism, etc. in different regions of the world are no longer valid. The West recognizes both territorial unity and the right of peoples to secede when it benefits them and does not recognize them when they are not beneficial. There are no rules. In fact, we should treat the matter the same way (and indeed we do). What is favorable to us is right.
In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is difficult - at least for now - for Russia to choose one side. There are pros and cons in every configuration. Ties with the Palestinians are ancient and, of course, victims, but Israel's right flank also tries to pursue a neutrally friendly policy towards Russia and, in doing so, deviates from the wild and unequivocal Russo-phobia of the collective West.
Much will now depend on how events unfold in the future.
Yes, and of course we must not lose sight of the eschatological dimension of events. The Palestinians have called their operation the 'Al-Aqsa Storm', i.e. the tension around Jerusalem and the messianic (for Israel) horizon of building the Third Temple on the Temple Mount (impossible without demolishing the Al-Aqsa Mosque, an important Muslim shrine) is growing again. The Palestinians are trying to ignite the eschatological sensibilities of Muslims - both Shiites, who are increasingly sensitive to this issue, and Sunnis (after all, they are no strangers to the reasons for the end of the world and the final battle). Israel and Zionism are the Dajjal for Muslims.
To what extent this is serious, we shall soon see, but in any case it is clear that those who ignore eschatology will not understand anything about great modern politics. And not only in the Middle East, although it is more evident there.
This post caught my eye on the day it was made, but it’s become especially interesting now that a full month has gone by and we can see how many of his predictions came true. His final thesis is essentially “Hmm… this could be good… or bad… it remains to be seen”, for which he paid $8 to Elon Musk to deliver.
And that was apparently enough to get him 3 million views. 3 million people exposed to the most inane, surface-level, “baby’s first words” analysis of October 7 one could have possibly made.
And his defenders will still claim he’s actually a very interesting and profound thinker who deserves to be read. Maybe as a case on what not to do as a writer!
So let’s take it up line-by-line then, and see what comes out of Dugin’s writing.
The Palestinians have no chance in such a war, because they cannot destroy Israel or inflict a significant military defeat on it
Palestinians have been inflicting heavy casualties on Israel for years. It was especially after the 2006 war that “Israel”’s image as an invincible army (an impression promoted by the USA mostly) was shattered, after the Lebanon war. Prior to that, “Israel” had been driven out of Gaza by Hamas (their first major victory and what made them popular in Gaza), and after the occupier’s attempts at invading Gaza in 2005 and 2014, their image was further destroyed. The world saw perhaps for the first time then that “Israel” wasn’t unbeatable. That Dugin cannot see this or chooses not to look at the historical context is frankly concerning, considering his own history.
but Israel also has nothing to fight for.
Does “Israel” not fight to establish their settler-colonial project unimpeded, much like the USA or Rhodesia in its time?
Unfortunately, Dugin does not expand upon what he means there. This is a recurring theme with him; he writes half a point and expects you to fill in the rest. It’s possible even he didn’t know what he meant when he wrote “Israel has nothing to fight for” — that’s a common trait in confusing writers like Dugin or Jordan Peterson.
Palestine is technically Israeli territory, which it does not and cannot control under any circumstances
“Palestine is technically Israeli territory” doesn’t mean anything. Sure, it sounds like something when you gloss over it. But once you think about it, you realize it’s, once again, only half of a point.
The problem is the word ‘technically’. What does he mean by technically here? The UN for example recognizes its 1947 partition plan which has a State of Palestine and a State of “Israel”. It recognizes that “Israel” is occupying more than its official territory.
Or does he mean that Palestinians technically don’t recognize “Israel” as a legitimate state? Unlikely, as he says that Palestine is “Israeli” territory.
Perhaps he means that “Israel” controls the occupied territories, which means there is no Palestine left. Perhaps he means the State of Palestine there, which is recognized as a legitimate state by the UN (again due to the 1947 partition plan), but indeed doesn’t really “exist” per se (there is the Gaza Strip and the collaborationist Palestinian Authority in the West Bank).
But he should have clarified he meant the state of Palestine then. Calling it simply Palestine is confusing, and confusion is the opposite of what geopolitical analysis should do. It should clarify everything to the reader in no uncertain terms.
There is still a Palestine left. There is the potential of a Palestine left — as long as Palestinians live (and Dugin admits it is physically impossible to destroy all Palestinians). There is the West Bank and Gaza, which form sort of a Palestine (not one the UN or some countries really recognize, but it still exists in the real world).
Again, I’m going that far to analyze his words — only two sentences in! — to really point out how much of a mysticist Dugin is. Like I said, it’s entirely possible even he doesn’t know what he means by “Palestine is technically Israeli territory”. He might have thought it sounded cool and deep; this is perfectly on brand for him.
If we were in a different international situation, the Palestinians could count on the compassion of the international left, but the US is led by neocons and globalists.
I find it very interesting that a man who has lived through the Shock Doctrine forced upon the ex-USSR would think the US counts as “left”.
I myself am on the left. I’m a communist. I can say with absolute confidence that the left has been on Palestine’s side throughout October 7 and before. Today, far after October 2023, we are still on Palestine’s side. Palestine can count on the ‘compassion’ (he means solidarity but probably doesn’t know this is the word we use) of the international left.
Unless he means the international left as in countries. To which I would ask which countries are on the left nowadays?
I’m also not sure how the “international left” and “United States” fit together in a sentence. He’s going from one argument to the next there with a simple comma.
They [The United States?] certainly do not care about the Palestinians, although they are not too close to Israel's nationalist policies either.
“Israel” is a glorified military base, the so-called “unsinkable aircraft carrier” that gives the USA access to oil and gas. They certainly do not care about the Palestinians, but they are very close to Israel’s “nationalist” policies. Again, not sure what Dugin means by “nationalist” policies. Does he mean the policy of colonialism? Of eradication of Palestinians? Or just creating the “Israeli” identity?
But it is the chain reaction - and especially the behavior of the Islamic states (primarily Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf states and Egypt) - that could be the logical continuation.
Some of these states have normalized relations with “Israel” — namely Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE.
It’s difficult to take Dugin seriously as a political analyst or theorist when he commits such newbie mistakes.
And nevermind that his sentence doesn’t really make sense or explain anything. So far, three paragraphs in, Dugin has only exposed pieces of the situation, he’s just (attempted to) stated facts that anyone who’s been paying attention in the past 5 years knows already.
Multipolarism is strengthening, the intensity of Western hegemony in the collective non-West is weakening
This is one of those sentences that make him sound wiser than he really is. Does he really have to write in such a convoluted way? Just say “Western hegemony is weakening”. Done.
This is the situation in which the Islamic pole, which recently provocatively joined the BRICS, will be put to the test.
The famous “Islamic pole” that I hear so much about.
The “Islamic pole” that doesn’t agree with each other and has gone (and is going) to war with each other (e.g. Yemen genocide by Saudi Arabia).
In Israel itself, there are enough Palestinians who fiercely hate Jews […]
This is a very nicely placed weasel word. After you’ve read a diatribe over 4 paragraphs, you don’t have the mental energy to think too hard about this line. But it’s perhaps the most important in this entire post.
“Palestinians who fiercely hate Jews” is self-serving to Dugin, who is the one who hates Jews. It’s projection.
The inclusion of this single line now reveals the whole agenda. Dugin is trying to show himself not as a friend to Palestine, but as an impartial, objective and spectating analyst. This single line, however, changes everything and exposes him as a self-serving vacuous propagandist.
He’s trying to get you to hate Jews too by proxy of supporting Palestine.
What Palestinians hate, by and large, is the occupation. It doesn’t matter that the occupation is primarily Jewish. This is the line promoted by absolutely all resistance groups in Palestine: they talk of the occupation. This is what matters; what some Palestinians may or may not think about Jews is inconsequential in the situation of Gaza being bombed to rubble and genocide by famine being enacted.
In my opinion, the US and the globalists will try to shut everything down now, as they can achieve nothing good from further escalation.
This worked out wonderfully!
Like we said already, the US has a lot to gain from removing Palestine forever. Pretending “Israel” is off the leash and they can’t control it works in their favor; they get to keep their hands clean and let “Israel” take the blame for everything.
And this is why I don’t make sweeping predictions in my analyses.
In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is difficult - at least for now - for Russia to choose one side. There are pros and cons in every configuration. Ties with the Palestinians are ancient and, of course, victims, but Israel's right flank also tries to pursue a neutrally friendly policy towards Russia and, in doing so, deviates from the wild and unequivocal Russo-phobia of the collective West.
This is why I said earlier that Dugin is a mysticist; he purposely writes confusing arguments, giving readers a show and letting them think they have access to the deep thoughts of an exclusive theorist, but all he does is longingly stroke his beard and say “Hmm, this could be good… or bad… I can’t say”.
Here’s this whole paragraph condensed into an actual sentence: “Russia is unsure which side to pick. We have historical ties with the Palestinians who are victims of genocide, but some factions in Israel are also trying to get closer to Russia, who is a powerful ally to have”.
Yes, and of course we must not lose sight of the eschatological dimension of events
Eschatology is Dugin’s buzzword of the decade, and you should expect that he’ll use it as much as he can.
In theology, eschatology (from the Greek éskhatos, “last” and logos, “speech” — last speech) has to do with the conceptions of the “last things”: immortality of the soul, rebirth, resurrection, migration of the soul, and the end of time.
What theological and religious speech has to do with geopolitical analyses is anyone’s guess. But it does sound deep and mysterious — mysticist.
Mysticism found its roots in religion for a very logical reason: you cannot understand God. Not fundamentally. You can try, but you will never really get His plans. So don’t even try to. It’s not surprising then that a hack such as Dugin would find inspiration in theology to make himself seem more profound than he truly is.
The Palestinians have called their operation the 'Al-Aqsa Storm', i.e. the tension around Jerusalem and the messianic (for Israel) horizon of building the Third Temple on the Temple Mount (impossible without demolishing the Al-Aqsa Mosque, an important Muslim shrine) is growing again.
The Gazan joint operations room (what they call collective operations carried by all resistance groups) has called the operation the “Flood of Al-Aqsa”. They use Islamic names for all their operations, that is true, but to claim that this somehow manifests something bigger into existing is a stretch.
The Islamic names (references to the Quran) given to the operations is not necessarily indicative of religion, but of culture. Historically in Muslim countries, your denomination was more important than your geographical origin. A culture of ‘civic’ Islam has grown — the Sharia for example, which just means ‘law’ and is historically grounded on the Quran but not necessarily taken from it. That is to say, Sharia is not necessarily fundamentalist (the belief that holy books must not be interpreted and must be taken literally).
it is clear that those who ignore eschatology will not understand anything about great modern politics.
I think I’ll be okay, thanks.
This is what Dugin says in his long post. But it’s also interesting to look at what he doesn’t say.
The goal of the October 7 operation was to throw the Zionist’s back against the wall, and force him to reckon with Palestine once and for all. Abu Obeida, the spokesperson for the al-Qassam brigades (Hamas’ military wing), said it on that day: “For us, there is either freedom or martyrdom, but no in-between”. That Dugin did not quote any of the relevant parties in his ‘analysis’ of the operation tells me he didn’t really care to go look for what they said, and rather just wanted to get out his “eschatological” buzzword out to sell his latest book.
On that front, the operation succeeded on all accounts. It was the biggest incursion Palestinians had ever made against the occupier, and it achieved three things:
It finally shattered what little sense of security “Israel” thought it had left.
It showed the world what the Zionist Entity exists on: genocide of the Palestinian people. Now, the whole world stands with Palestine with no ifs and buts.
It left no way out for Nethanyahu, which is something I explored in a previous article: Possible conclusions for the Gaza POWs.
I will come back to Dugin soon. But he is such a complex character (complex as in ‘wide as the ocean, deep as a puddle’) that I felt I needed to write a primer on him before properly diving into his character.
Stay tuned for the complete exposé!