Uncategorized

Of Alexander Dugin
Source: Heretically
We present, courtesy of the publisher, an extensive excerpt from the book by the Russian philosopher and political scientist Alexander Dugin “Multipolar World Theory”, recently released for the types ofAGA Publishingand can be ordered at the following address:http://www.orionlibri.net/negozio/teoria-del-mondo-multpolare/.Translation of: Donato Mancuso. Curator of the work: Maurizio Murelli.
After the Second World War and the defeat of Nazi Germany and the Axis powers, a has developedbipolar systemof international relations called «Yalta system». Legally, international law continued to recognize the absolute sovereignty of all nation states but in fact fundamental decisions on central issues relating to world order and world politics were taken in only two places: a Washington e a Mosca. […] THE UNIPOLAR MOMENT
With the collapse of one of the two poles (the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991), the bipolar system has also collapsed. […] While acknowledgingde juresovereignty, the world of Yalta wasin factbuilt on the principle of the balance of two symmetrical and relatively equal hegemons. With the exit of one of the hegemons, the entire system has ceased to exist. […] From this moment, the entire structure of the world order has changed qualitatively and irreversibly. The pole led by the United States and based on liberal ideology, democratic and capitalist, it is a phenomenon that still exists and has continued to spread over the years, on a global scale, its own socioeconomic system based on democracy, on the market and on the ideology of human rights. We are therefore faced with a phenomenon that we can precisely identify asworld, and world order, unipolar. Within the unipolar world there is a single decision-making center regarding major global issues. The West and its core, the Euro-Atlantic community led by the United States, assumes the role of the sole hegemonic power. […] In the 1990s the unipolar world seemed to be a definitively consolidated reality, and some US analysts have elaborated, on this basis, the thesis of «end of the story» (Fukuyama). This thesis consisted of the idea that the world would become completely homogeneous ideologically, politically, economically and socially, and that from now on all the trials that would take place, they would no longer be a historical drama based on the clash of ideas and interests, but rather an economic competition (and relatively peaceful) between market players, similar to how the internal politics of liberal democratic regimes are constructed. As, democracy becomes global. On the planet there is only the West and its periphery, composed of the countries that gradually integrate into it. […] Therefore, according to Fukuyama, the time of national states is over and the world is close to complete and definitive integration. Humanity is transforming into a global civil society, politics gives way to economics, war gives way to trade, liberal ideology becomes the undisputed and universally recognized standard, and all peoples and cultures blend into onecruciblecosmopolitan. […] CIVILIZATION AS AN ACTOR
Huntington objects to these points from a pessimistic position. According to him, the end of the bipolar world does not automatically lead to the creation of a global and homogeneous liberal democratic world order, Therefore, history is not over and it is premature to talk about the end of conflicts and wars. The world has ceased to be bipolar, but it has become neither global nor unipolar. It has a completely new configuration characterized by new collisions and clashes, tensions and conflicts. Who, Huntington gets to the most important point of his argument: he puts forward a hypothesis that is entirely valid and still underestimated todaywho will be the actor, the main character of this future world. He calls such an actorcivilization.
This conceptual step could be considered the beginning of a completely new theory: themultipolar world theory. Huntington highlights a central element: identifies a new actor, civilization, and at the same time it speaks of the multiplicity of these actors, using this word in the plural in the title of his book –The clash«of civilizations". […] Thanks to Huntington, we obtain as a first approximation a picture of a new theory, which postulates a model within which different decision-making centers coexist at a global level in the field of international relations, and each of them corresponds to a civilization. Read More