Wednesday, September 13, 2017

Paul Robinson — Interview with Alexander Dugin


Alexander Dugin is one of the premier thinkers of our times. His work is often somewhat difficult to approach for  those not well-acquainted with the range of material with which he deals, especially since it comes from a specifically Russian point of view that is also individual to him, just as Nietzsche's thought is German in essence but also highly individual.

This interview with Paul Robinson is the most accessible relatively short piece that I have encountered and I highly recommend reading it closely, if not studying it. Dugin captures "the russian soul," the understanding of which is necessary for approaching contemporary geopolitics. He also gives a critique of Western liberal with which I would largely agree.

I am not in full agreement with everything I read in Dugin's work, but I respect his erudition and insight, and appreciate his deeply considered point of view. This interview cuts to the chase in a way that most Westerners should be able to grasp. If you are unfamiliar with Dugin other than as "Putin's brain" or "Putin's Rasputin," this is a good introduction.
PR: Finally, I would like to ask you about the influence of your ideas. You no doubt remember the article ‘Putin’s Brain.’ There it’s written that you have a significant influence on geopolitical thinking in Russia. But others say that you have no influence and are a peripheral figure.
AD: Those who think that I stand on the periphery of power are correct. I have no influence. I don’t know anybody, have never seen anyone, I just write my books, and am a Russian thinker, nothing more. I write books, somebody reads them.
Far from being an insider, Dugin was fired from his professorship and relieved of his post as Head of the Department of Sociology of International Relations at Moscow State University in 2014, ostensibly because he had become a controversial figure by recommending further Russian expansion. He was sanctioned by the US in 2015.

Irrussianality
Interview with Alexander Dugin
Paul Robinson | Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa

5 comments:

Dan Lynch said...

Thanks for posting this.

Perhaps it is due to the translation, but I found his manner of speaking unclear. He beats around the bush a lot. But it was clear that he does not like Western political correctness (rooted in identity politics, though he doesn't talk about that).

Tom Hickey said...

Robnison's tgranslation is one of the easiest translations to read that I have encountered. Most are more literal translations of Russian. The same is true of languages that are not more closely related to English. The meth of conceptualization is different and unfamiliar. Dugin's work is further complicated by the fact that he is an academic and dealing with intersections of different fields is a highly nuanced way. This is a reason I suggested studying the post rather than reading it carefully. There is a lot in there and I and to consult reference several times in reading it.

His conceputalization of the modern and archaic also applies more to the West and US then he suggests, although he probably sees this as rather minimal incomparison with Russia and he may be correct.

But there are a lot of contraditions in Western culture between science and religion, for example. Protestanism enable the liberal revolution but it also resulted in biblical fundamentalism. The two are incompatible, of course, and this has led to contradications, which Dugin not bega in about 1980, which conicides with the "marriage" of conservative politics and fundamentalist religion.

Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.
— Barry Goldwater, said in November 1994, as quoted in John Dean, Conservatives Without Conscience (2006) (Wikiquote)

Tom Hickey said...

Correction: not bega should be "notes began"

Matt Franko said...

"of contraditions in Western culture between science and religion,"

That too can be looked at as a cognition problem .... the orthodoxy there doesn't pay any attention to specific teaching methodologies...

Science (which deals with material) is best taught via active methodology while religion (Christianity anyway) is NON material and was taught by Paul via rote methods... "have a pattern of sound words..." Tim

So today you have people in Christendom in the west trying to apply active methods to their "religion" and it ofc doesn't work well if at all...

Matt Franko said...

Russia is more determinist via the eastern church vs the west which is 99.999% free will oriented via the western church and the western church's active methodologies...

The western church effectively believes that the teaching methodology matters to someone's salvation... you have to be seen to use active methodology or "St Peter won't let you in...." or you go to hell (who is the Norse goddess of the underworld), etc ... all types of coercion...