Dugin, Heidegger, and the Politics of Openness

uQ3cZNI

There is quite a bit of commotion these days over the state of the world, including the state of our State.  We are witness to dramatic shifts in geopolitics, as well as social and economic relations among peoples, as trailing indicators of shrinking resources in a heating planet. We see more ‘terrorism,’ more protest, more conflict, more retribution, more genocide, more war, more mischief, more propaganda, more disinformation, more maneuvering for position, and much less understanding, giving, or sharing in the world today… but quite a lot more taking.

The cult of the Individual, of accumulation and privatization, has taken on global proportions. While the cults of Nationalism and Statism are also ascendant in various quarters, taking for granted their own priority and significance, along with the necessary and concomitant reduction-via-objectification of the ‘Other’.

We can trace such modern political and social behavior back to the Greeks, and to some extent long before that to the emergence of cities and nation-states in the ancient Middle East, the early instantiations of hierarchy and what would finally emerge as Western Civilization, in the area of the Fertile Crescent.

Seeking to get beneath this propensity of the Western Curriculum to articulate and highlight alterity, and thus, towards generating ongoing conflict and manipulation, Martin Heidegger (a German philosopher of the mid to late 20th Century) re-described human existence on the far-side of objectification and the politics of control.  Heidegger saw in our modern (technologized) temperament, beginning with the Greeks, a tendency to interact with the world from two common perspectives: the world as “present-to-hand” (objects to be observed, spectacles to be seen), and the world as “ready-to-hand” (objects to be used, manipulated for our projects or purposes).  These perspectives, while pre-thematically given, are not strictly foundational. They presuppose our own “thrownness,” our own being-there-in-the-world, embodied, engaged, and part of the world in which we find ourselves surrounded.  There is, in addition, a certain ‘Care’ structure to human existence (Dasein or Being-there), a relational structure prior to objectification, manipulation and control. ‘Being-with’ is how Heidegger describes this Care structure in terms of our interaction with ‘others’.  It defines Dasein’s relations to other humans with whom one always, already finds oneself thrown (even when one is ostensibly alone). Our very being-there presumes being-with. Being-with-the-other thus underpins our natural concern for other people, our ability to share, prior to any project of objectification, manipulation, or control. It implies a fundamental condition of openness (Gelassenheit) or availability to the other, and to the mystery of our mutuality… equal epicenters of meaningfulness, and not as simply objects present or ready to hand.  In my reading, it thus implicates us in a profound circle of reciprocity with the other, as a given of being-human.

575179_414056375285542_100000435487264_1360998_1671776581_nThese are some of the concepts that inform the philosophic backdrop to the work of Aleksandr Dugin, Russian sociologist, philosopher, and founder of neo-Eurasianism. These neologisms underlay much of his new politics – The Fourth Political Theory.  In this regard he intends that his politics addresses neither the individual (apparent democracy), the collective (communism) nor the State (fascism); for, each of these in their own right objectify the Other.  Rather, Dugin wants to find a way that addresses the person as Dasein, recognizing its essential care structure. This, I assume, would provide the moral foundation guiding human (social) relations among a body-politic, overcoming the neoliberal relativism of the Western Curriculum on the one hand, and the absolutism of a radicalized Islam in the rising East, on the other.

There are, in my view, at least two conclusions to be drawn from Dugin’s reliance upon Heidegger.  Real community (a genuine body-politic) must be egalitarian in form (much like the tribes of pre-civilized hunter/gatherers, I presume).  Hierarchy of any kind — apparent democracy, communism, or fascism — must be seen as contradictory to our feral core.  All three systems are grounded in structural hierarchies, and militate against Dasein’s foundational Care structure, our availability to the other and our natural tendency to share.  Second, our rootedness is being squandered in an ever-expanding panoply of spectacle and technology, dissipating our essential humanity, and virtualizing our contacts and our commitments to one another as well as to the earth.  As Dugin says, we are at risk of losing the last vestiges of what makes us human, our embeddedness, our facticity, our embodied being with the other and our openness to the mystery of our own thrownness.

Some are fearful that Dugin’s philosophical assumptions may lead to a new type of fascism (much as Heidegger’s thinking apparently led him to National Socialism); however, of that I am still uncertain.  Yet, not withstanding any reservations about the political direction in such thought, his view of Western society at the precipice, his concern over the loss of our basic humanity, his openness to the mystery of our very being, and his concern for the central role of technology in destroying what is fundamentally human… this for me seems a brave new starting point, perhaps providing an avenue for retrieving what had been lost — opening us to an authentic act of “recollective resolve,” not anticipating what newness the future might hold, but rather forcing the rediscovery of a foundational past that lies hidden perpetually within us.  But, after many millennia of hierarchy, such a return seems highly dubious and unlikely in our current frame of reference. Perhaps, the only stage upon which such an approach might find a foothold, would be the post-apocalyptic stage that seems to lie just ahead of us on this road to perdition.

44 Responses to Dugin, Heidegger, and the Politics of Openness

  1. Disaffected says:

    Perhaps we just need a natural disaster that is bigger than any and all of us and our “ready to hand” philosophical compartmentalizations? Northern California got just such a reminder earlier this morning in the form of a 6.0 earthquake just south of Napa, a mere shadow of “the big one” that scientists agree is long overdue for the entire Pacific Northwest region. Earthquakes are such a stunningly good metaphor for a wake up call from nature, as the violent shaking almost always comes “out of the blue” without warning and the resulting destruction can devastate areas for years afterward. It’s as if mother nature is physically grabbing us by the scruff of the neck and trying to shake us out of our egocentric stupor.

    Perhaps conscious life on earth exists within a larger continuum of which we are only dimly aware and our psychic disturbances can actually lead to physical environmental disturbances as well? I have absolutely no evidence to support that idea, but it’s one I’ve heard from time to time down through the years and holds a certain sort of intuitive appeal. And remember, in an infinite universe, the amount of knowledge we are not aware of is by definition always infinite. “Ready to hand” indeed! We’re still too ignorant to have any conception of even a minute portion of all that we don’t know! We’re still little more than civilized apes at this point, although I’m sure the apes would beg to differ.

    http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-g-napa-quake-and-aftershocks-20140824-htmlstory.html

  2. Karl North says:

    It is nice to see our present global predicament framed in terms of a thread in the rich tradition of European philosophy, one that is so lacking in our US culture. However, it struck me that something like Heidegger’s Care Structure is alive and well, even in America, among all the engagé Quakers I have known (the passive pacificist, garden variety Quaker is another story). Sometimes described by them as ‘mindfullness’, the Quaker sense of “Being-with-the-other” seems to infuse their whole approach to life, from individual to political relations. For Quakers, the awareness of an a priori Care Structure means that we are engagé whether we like it or not. It implies a connected, systemic universe in whose web we must navigate. And as you say, it is a view of the world that forces a “rediscovery a foundational past that lies hidden perpetually within us”.

    My own discovery of Heidegger came via French Existentialists like Sartre and Camus. It is significant that existentialism was grounded in a critical re-assessement of the state of health of Western culture in the aftermath of WW1 and WW2.

  3. Disaffected says:

    Forgot to add, this is a very good and timely post, as always, and glad to see you back peppering us with regularity Sandy! It made me think of the phrase cult of personality as well, which, until I looked at this link, I hadn’t realized is actually a rather well-researched and documented academic subject, closely related to secular religion. Apparently, 25% of Russians believe that such a cult surrounds Vladimir Putin. Perhaps this could be a subject of a future post? There’s even a section on the United States and the ‘imperial presidency’, which seems at first blush to be a rather worn out idea, as the presidency has been trumped operationally by higher powers that stay safely out of view of the public – Cheney was our first real hint of that. But the idea of the presidency as some sort of mythical cult-like figurehead still lives on, which is the illusion that gives all the other subterfuge room to operate safely in the first place.

  4. Terry David says:

    I’m still trying to familiarize myself with Dugin. I’ve only heard of him recently in a tangential way while searching for what on Earth makes these Leo Straussian neo so-called-conservatives tick. As to the latter, we mere mortals are inadequate to understand the hidden meaning of Deep Philosophical Thinkers’ writings and teachings. “You’ll find out what we meant after you’ve been afflicted by our power over you. And stop trying to think beyond you’re pay grade.” This is what I hear from them.
    It raises my suspicion that these Very Special Readers/Disciples strenuously project their own pathologies onto many such writings. This includes Heidegger’s, which are given some blame for Nazism as well as being an influence on Deep Thinkers like Strauss or Donald Kagan (founder and leader of the Kagan neocon clan running foreign policy in the U.S.) or Birchers like the outspoken Rivolo Oliver (political power by any means).

    Getting to Dugin’s Fourth Way, this video isn’t a bad starting point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4steSLHoUY

    I suppose Dugin’s haters out there are judging (reactionarily reacting to?) his work based on his expansion on one or another of Heidegger’s concepts. So that makes him a Fascist. Or a Nazi. Oh, wait — he seems to have Putin’s ear, so he must be a communist. Never mind that he defines all these totalitarian systems as a failure. Regardless, I haven’t made up my own mind on this.

    This business of thinking beyond my pay grade is making my head hurt.

    • Disaffected says:

      Planetary idiotism. Nice concept. This is all pretty profound stuff. Not sure I followed that fascism is already defunct. Seems to me its at an all time apogee, but perhaps he’s using it in a different context. But the idea that we need an entirely new conceptual basis to move forward seems self-evident.

    • Disaffected says:

      I think the neo-cons and neo-libs like to fancy themselves as deep thinkers in the same way that they like to imagine that they’re all doing “god’s work,” which is to say that’s all a bunch of narcissistic malarkey. They’re all about seizing power by whatever means possible and exercising it for their own self-interest thereafter. Nothing new there, just the same old greed and hubris that’s characterized imperial societies throughout the ages. In that sense, capitalism is actually a breath of fresh air of sorts, in that it dispenses with all the bullshit and shamelessly extolls the virtues of unbridled greed and lust, which we now have on display for all to see here in the Corporate Capitalist States of America. Still, reminders from the past of the follies of that kind of thinking do exist. Perhaps the AMC TV series Breaking Bad hinted at this larger meaning when it borrowed this title for one of it’s final episodes?

      Ozymandias
      I met a traveller from an antique land
      Who said: “Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
      Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
      Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
      And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
      Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
      Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
      The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
      And on the pedestal these words appear:
      `My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
      Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!’
      Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
      Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
      The lone and level sands stretch far away”.

      http://www.online-literature.com/shelley_percy/672/
      http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/guide/238972

  5. the Heretick says:

    ” We know so much intellectually, indeed, that we are in danger of becoming the prisoners of our knowledge. We suffer from a hubris of the mind. We have abolished superstition of the heart only to install a superstition of the intellect in its place. We behave as if there were some magic in mere thought, and we use thinking for purposes for which it was never designed. As a result we are no longer sufficiently aware of the importance of what we cannot know intellectually, what we must know in other ways, of the living experience before and beyond our transitory knowledge. The passion of the spirit, which would inspire man to live his finest hour dangerously on the exposed frontier of his knowledge, seemed to me to have declined into a vague and arid restlessness hiding behind an arrogant intellectualism, as a child of arrested development hides behind the skirts of its mother.” – Sir Laurens Van der Post

  6. the Heretick says:

    “The death of God does not restore us to a limited and positivistic world, but to a world exposed by the experience of its limits, made and unmade by that excess which transgresses it.” – Michel Foucault

    I am just about to the point of giving up trying to ever get people to understand how deeply Messianic thinking is ingrained into Western thought., and how it is used to sell people a bill of goods. The primary indicator of the unthinking acceptance of uniformity is my old favorite is the almighty UPC, or Universal Product Code, if the Apocalypse junkie ever needs a handy candidate for The Mark………………………the UPC is ready made.
    And what a Beast it is, ready to devour the world with the All Seeing Eye in the form of your friendly neighborhood checkout scanner.

    Referring back to the WSJ post in the last post, Zubrin certainly believes Putin and/or Dugin to be the Devil Incarnate, just in case we need a candidate for False Prophet.

    What all the upset is about, what it’s been about for 100 years, is the joint UK/US effort (along with their junior partner France) to gobble up the world and hobble the economies of any competitors. Vietnam was all about a former French colony, Great Britain sure didn’t want to give up India, and the US has definitely been the hit man for the blood soaked attempt to impose neo-colonialism using whatever Doctrine, Shock or otherwise, that got the job done.

    Now, I don’t know about all this fancy philosophical thought, we’re just plain folk down here on the plantation, but I do now a power grab when I see one. Once again, the problem with universal ideals? They’re universal, and all the self righteousness/certitude/condemnation from whatever quarter? Usually used to the advantage of them that just want to get their hands on the goods.

  7. kulturcritic says:

    More thoughts: According to Dugin there is a war of worldviews that has been going on for millennia between the Eurasianists (land based powers) and the Atlanticists (sea based powers). These are diametrically opposed views of the world in which one must prevail. The Atlanticist view is anti-traditionalist and gives rise to a hyper-rationalism, science, technology, and ‘progress’. This worldview is ultimately destructive of human community and life on earth, and it must be destroyed before its hegemony is spread over the planet. It fosters several ideologies (fascism, communism and liberalism). At root, the Atlanticist view leads to materialism, consumerism, and the loss of fundamental realities. It must be stopped at all costs. This is where Dugin’s view, his neo-Eurasianist worldview itself becomes totalitarian as well. There is no room for the alternative (i.e., the Atlanticist view). But, perhaps this is the blessing of his approach. After all, if the neoliberal/neo-con (Atlanticist) machine is not stopped, then our planet along with all its creatures are at risk of permanent extinction. Anyway, you be the judge.

    • the Heretick says:

      I’m watching the video linked above, Dugin has to have read Baudrillard and/or Virilio, althiugh people can come up with this stuff on their own. he seems to be getting at some thoughts that I was digging for in X Factor, Cellular identity, et al. Baudrillard described modern thought as viral and essentially rootless.

    • the Heretick says:

      “society of the spectacle” Guy Debord uses that term, this has taught us to look at ourselves only in relationship to the system, as products to be used, this thinking gets to the root of our mental state, it goes where a lot of people don’t want to go.

      He’s good, really good. I’m impressed.

    • the Heretick says:

      Right at the end I see the challenge he presents to the power brokers, he uses the world “regional”, which means economic independence for discrete entities (countries), including cultural, religious, legal, etc. this goes against the grain of enforced uniformity of customs, this could be where the charges of fascism arise.

      I do think he makes an error in not identifying globalism as a sort of world-wide tecno-fascism. he is right about he alienation from the dasein.

      • Disaffected says:

        I think globalism is just thinly veiled western fascism. Yes, it’s technological based, but that goes without saying for most things these days (and all of those technologies are themselves oil based, just to complete the circle). But the word “globalism” is itself a misnomer meant to mislead from the very start, in that it conveys that we are somehow all one big happy global economic community thanks to the wonders it provides. Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, the concept it describes is global in nature, but make no mistake about who first conceptualized, instituted, and maintains the system, and most importantly, who benefits from it. Yes, the profits from it have metastasized in some small part globally, but, contrary to current Economics texts, the beating heart of the disease still resides in two key pressures points: NYC and London.

        But back to your main point HT, I think he identifies globalism as part of fascism in general, and thus paints with an overly broad brush. I’m going back to review his video links again now to see if my first impressions last night were correct. Seems like he dismissed fascism rather out of hand the first time I heard them, but I could be wrong.

        • Disaffected says:

          Tried to deconstruct this yet again tonight and I must admit, I’m even more confused than before. Never a good sign if you’re trying to “win friends and influence people.”

    • the Heretick says:

      Last comment, a lot of people aren’t going to like this guy, nevertheless he is right at the point I arrived at awhile back, he mentions Deleuze in another talk, who I have never read, but who cares? Umm, this guy is going to drive some people crazy, but he seems to be correct. Baudrillard on steroids, where he was going before he died. the Foucalt quote was apropos, now how the hell did I get to be so damn good?

    • the Heretick says:

      He’s deep, he has sen thru the simulation.

      • kulturcritic says:

        Heretick- a very clear articulation by Dugin of the challenge, the war between the pull of Dasein, the archaic, and the push of modernity/post-modernity and the death of humankind. Good video find. kC

      • Disaffected says:

        Sounds like he’s deeply critical of Russian society as archaic, but then doubles back to say that’s actually a good thing. And I think his description is accurate. Lots of religious imagery as well. Most modernists in the west would look at this video and merely reply, “huh?” What he’s making are all essentially religious based arguments.

    • Disaffected says:

      At root, the Atlanticist view leads to materialism, consumerism, and the loss of fundamental realities. It must be stopped at all costs. This is where Dugin’s view, his neo-Eurasianist worldview itself becomes totalitarian as well. There is no room for the alternative (i.e., the Atlanticist view). But, perhaps this is the blessing of his approach. After all, if the neoliberal/neo-con (Atlanticist) machine is not stopped, then our planet along with all its creatures are at risk of permanent extinction. Anyway, you be the judge.

      All of which reveals exactly where we are stuck: at hierarchical based authoritarian political systems. Although I think I understand the basic gist of his philosophical circumlocutions, the raging bull elephant in the room is the fact that the current system has already built quite an impressive array of technologically based infrastructure to serve its needs, which has in turn allowed/demanded an exponential increase in human population to serve its needs, and which now finds its continued survival vitally dependent on the maintenance and safekeeping of said infrastructure. Reconnection with our earth and human roots at this point would require the mass acknowledgement that the whole several centuries long project has been one big colossal mistake (Oops! Looks like we fucked up!), and that 7B+ humans on terra firma at any given point in time just ain’t “doable.” Wanna talk about a hard sell? Try pushing that agenda forward anytime soon! Unfortunately, it’s also the truth, hence the massive cognitive dissonance, especially here in the west among the so-called environmentalist crowd. They simply have to know that no amount of “trimming around the edges,” as politically unfeasible as even that is, will ever be effective. Meanwhile, the western juggernaut rolls relentlessly on, headed for the only kind of end it ever could have: a system crash(es) of epic proportions when all the fuel inevitably runs out and the illusion of our immortality is revealed for the fairy tale it always was.

  8. kulturcritic says:

    I think the only problem with Dugin is his desire to impose this transformation back politically (hence militarily). That cannot work in my view, for it will impose a new system of control that is contrary to will and hence unsustainable. The only way “back” as I see is through a systemic collapse of the current system and a recollection of what was lost and thence recoverable.

    • Disaffected says:

      My thought as well. There’s accrued power and privilege in the current state of affairs, and those actors ain’t going anywhere without a fight. But we’ll never get rid of the current system by imposing another one. Hate to say it but it’s the same basic concept as the Christian one, where some guy named Jesus comes and says I’m here to show you the way and a bunch of followers seize on the king and his kingdom imagery of their Holy Books and believe he’s there to overthrow the current regime and impose a new one. Only problem was he was trying to describe an internal transformation and not an external one. That’s what I’m hearing from Dugin here. More apolitical than political. Hardly descriptive of a mass movement, at least initially. More of a turning away. All of which I think will happen amid the rubble of our current system, but not before. Once again, too many powerful vested interests that will resist until their dying breath.

      • the Heretick says:

        “More apolitical than political.” I think that is correct, it’s radical, but more of a turning away, which is exactly what the rule of a single system cannot tolerate. This is what challenges the tyranny of reason, humanity, strangely enough.

  9. kulturcritic says:

    And the more I listen to Dugin, the more I see he is wedded to hierarchy. So, while his insights about the hyper-rational, neo-liberalism of the Western hegemony are correct, he may fail to see the MOTE in his own eye. For this reason, I see his project as undoable, unrealizable; and only the manic attempt to replace one power structure with that of another. State is the most evil of evils according to Nietzsche; and the State that is transfigured implicitly in his discussion seems to be capable of exactly the same evil. For him, the hierarchy of the Orthodox Church and its symphony of leadership with the Russian State is essential, so it seems. This to me is trading one problem for another.

    • Disaffected says:

      That said, consider his ideas in the spirit of brainstorming. A whole lot of people throwing ideas out there, most of which will be total garbage, but in the aggregate, might eventually produce something workable. Or not. Either way, we’ve got nothing to lose, cause the current system damn sure ain’t long for this world. And neither are most of us for that matter.

    • the Heretick says:

      To me he sounded, at points, to be nothing more than a Russian version of the GOP, but his insights go deeper than just about anyone I’ve heard recently. The vision of the West, though what is called “liberal”, is nevertheless messianic, it is Cartesian in it’s insistence upon linearity, “progress”. This linearity is strange, seeing as how it’s so post-modern. The critique of post-modern thought has been brewing for awhile now.

      • kulturcritic says:

        DA and HT, Look, I think Dugin is grounded in some fairly positive “archaic” (almost tribal) intuition at points.  This is his most positive source of inspiration.  He recognizes the problems stemming from the rationality and liberalism of the Western hegemony.  But, he apparently fails to recognize the failings of the Orthodox Russian faith that he brandishes with a sword.  From my perspective hierarchy is hierarchy; and an Orthodox State is no better than a Neoliberal State, or for that matter an Islamic State.  The screws of hierarchy still hold sway… precisely because we are living in a post-Modern political reality.  Leviathan has been unleashed with the birth of hierarchy many millennia ago, and perfected in this, the twilight of civilization, Hobbes’ objections notwithstanding.  I cannot argue with Dugin’s critique of the West and its trashy, sleazy consummerism.  But, I would argue that his solution to the problem… the establishment of the Kingdom of Orthodoxy on mother earth is no solution at all.  It is simply a replacement mechanism.  He is a Russian traditionalist, I am an anarcho-primitivist.  Yet, I would still agree that Dugin has seem the value in the archaic, in the primitive, and in the soiled soul of the Russian people.

        • Disaffected says:

          From my perspective hierarchy is hierarchy; and an Orthodox State is no better than a Neoliberal State, or for that matter an Islamic State.

          Exactly! That’s the problem in a nutshell. The main problem then is moving from hierarchy back to anarchy. Hierarchy won out in the first place because it’s a superior system for imposing its will on reluctant populations. Some form of anarchy – possibly organized – with much smaller populations may indeed be the only way we can survive in harmony with this physical world, but in the meantime we’ve still gotta deal with the colossal mess we’ve already created. On the “plus” side, our current system is devolving more and more toward anarchy daily as we speak, so perhaps we already we have our answer and just don’t want to hear it.

  10. kulturcritic says:

    I also think his analysis of ‘subjectivity’, the remnant of the archaic, in the Russian turn to modernity, is brilliant and right-on! (watch the video from .54 seconds through the next one minute or so.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quxWhp5y23E#t=288

    • Disaffected says:

      I like all of Dugin’s ideas and he’s obviously a much more profound and deep thinker than I am, but I just don’t find much of it “actionable” at this point. But that’s not surprising either, since any devolution back to a more primitive state, which is what I think we’re all talking about here, is going to mostly involve non-action, or a turning away from current systems. And most of that will only happen for most when there’s no other choice; as in, after the collapse of the current system. But hey, we’ve spent many lifetimes and have a WHOLE LOT of blood, sweat, and tears invested in the current state of affairs. It’s only natural that shunning it will be a major undertaking.

      • kulturcritic says:

        All be it, the current state of anarchy is not what I had in mind 😉

      • Disaffected says:

        Dugin sounds more and more like Ted Kaczynski, other than Kaczynski was reaching for religion as a life preserver. Might have been interesting to see what “Terrible Ted’s” philosophy had morphed into had he avoided the Unabomber impulse. His description of what ails us was spot on from what I’ve read, and much of his prescription (shunning) as well. But of course the urge to destruction must grow unbearable when you’re that smart, that isolated, that focused, and that determined.

  11. Terry David says:

    I just had a thought. What if those who want to resurrect (no pun intended) the prominent role of the Orthodox Church in Russia want to defend the Russian soul by preventing a spiritual/religious vacuum created by post modern collapse? Such vacuum could be filled by fundamentalist religious interlocutors of one stripe or another. That perhaps they want to hedge their bets against the potential of post modernity being cancelled and a dystopian model of religious control overtaking most of the world?

    If I stand back and look at the state of religious affairs in the world, I would never have guessed in, say, the late 1970’s, that there would be the threat of religious explanations of proven scientific phenomena being taught in schools in the 21st century let alone that a corporate CEO’s religion can trump an employee’s constitutional rights. When the young earth creationists came along in the ’80’s, and then the Dominionists, the fundamentalist Pentecostals, and the gleeful Armageddonists followed, I thought I’d seen everything. Until the Acquisitionist Theology came along via televangelists like Kenneth Copeland (looks like the Devil to me) who brags about his oil company profits and how much money he has. And that Jesus speaking of “rewards” means money in the present age, so therefore one’s net worth is an indication of Jesus’ approval. Oy.

    Then you have the Wahabbist extremists creating mayhem everywhere (see today’s guest post at Cluborlov). There’s the Zionists who believe they need to set the stage for the Second Coming, most of whom are the fundie Christians (or, as they’ve been called, “God Botherers”) as described above. I think Pope Francis sees this and is pushing back against the pathologically right wing Christians. Certainly the Orthodox make for a natural alliance with Catholics in the current milieu.

    The reason I mention this is because of the role of the neocons in all the provocative destabilization efforts throughout the world. The neocon philosophy identifies the need for religion (especially the virulent and militant) to control the population for the new overlords. Consumerism is out, but so is democracy and self determination. I was once sure that the neocons wanted to repeal the New Deal, but then I realized that they also want to repeal the Good Government Progressive era of Teddy Roosevelt, that got us things like food inspections, etc. Only recently have I become aware that the ultimate goal, according to Straussians, is to repeal the enlightenment, only with the specter of technology as the final method of population control. And through US funded NGO’s (and cohorts, including Saudi Arabia and the US’s “Plucky Little Outpost in the Mideast* “). Word on the street has it that efforts toward destabilization have been underway within Russia itself (besides Ukraine).

    If there’s a good chance that these “neochristians” and the “neoislamists” successfuly aflict the world, wouldn’t it make sense for a) the Catholic Church to appoint a populist Pope, and b) Putin to cultivate a renewed role for the Orthodox Church to help maintain Russian cultural sovereignty by displacing the religious interlocutors?

    I guess this is less a deep philosophical question than than one with a vein of Realpolitik. Enquiring minds want to know.

    *Chris Floyd’s term for Israel

    • kulturcritic says:

      According to Dugin there is a “symphony” of power between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Kremlin already in place.

      • Terry David says:

        Good point. I’ve never heard, at least from any accurate sources, what the true status of the Russian Orthodox Church was during the Soviet era, with the official party line being what it was. Is this “symphony” something that arose naturally in the absence of the Soviet government or has Putin’s leadership been a defining moment in the relationship? If the latter, it further reveals the depth and breadth of Putin’s long term plans for Russian sovereignty.

    • Disaffected says:

      Whatever you think of him, Putin might be the only honest “leader” we have left today. Looks like the west has opted for stooges like Bush and Obama, meant only to manage the “optics” of empire, while HillBillary has been busy off stage buffing up her acting chops preparing for her role of a lifetime.

  12. Disaffected says:

    Looks like the ISIS/ISIL/IS card is being played to expand the war in the ME to new heights (But this IS NOT Iraq III goddamn it! It’s ISIS I!) Lots of evidence as well that the Foley execution was at least staged, and very possibly entirely fabricated. Who knew Wag the Dog was actually a documentary/primer on things to come? The wars and rumors of wars look to be here to stay now, with the manufacture of enemies and disinformation being an exponential growth industry. Who says America doesn’t make anything anymore?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/isis-incredible-fighting-force-us-special-ops-sources/story?id=25116463

    http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/563629/20140822/james-foley-beheading-video.htm#.U_2rs_k7um4

Join the discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s