Millerman Talks #18: Introduction to the Fourth Political Theory
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ค. 2024
- On the Introduction of Alexander Dugin's book The Fourth Political Theory.
[Update: I now have a full video lecture course on this book, available at DuginCourse.com]
This is the best break down on Dugin I've found - thank you for being objective
👍👍
This channel is a revelation and a terrific boost to my previous diet of digesting political malarkey broadcasts , which the alternative media are finding a struggle to overcome .
Cant read nearly enough as my eyes are failing ; my hearings good , so thanks .
I just started reading your translation of the Fourth Political Theory, perfect timing!
Awesome, good to hear.
I love your videos,and find Mr.Dugan fascinating,and profound.
Man I love this. Brings up so many good questions and a whole new sphere of thought.
I have another channel @iamKristianBell would love to have an interview or collab over there
Great intro, thanks for posting
I'm so excited about this. Thanks, Mike!
My pleasure. Glad you're finding it useful/interesting.
Glad your explaining Dugin to westerners. He's so misunderstood here in the west.
Great content Michael, and very well explanined by you, especially for non academic types but more self learners like me, congrats. Dugin was in my country Argentina this past month giving talks at our political bases Peronistas. In there he mentioned, to our applause, having found a "great fountain of inspiration" in the writings and political teachings of Juan Peron. Alexander is very fluent in Spanish. Would be nice if you could cover those aspects of Dugin's reaching abroad. Your take would be greatly appreciated.
For sure
I've just finished the book. Tough to read for general public due to a lot of philosophy theoretical stuff, but really worth it.
That book is so rare to find in hardbound editions.
Wow, this is really great! Sorry to hear the class is full, but I look forward to next semester :-)
Thanks for this content. I appreciate it.
14:25, Heidegger develops his distinction between philosophy and worldview as early as 1919, you don't have to wait for "Contributions."
Please put your Views on Slavoj Zizek ...
It’s interesting that Dugin represents the same rejection of what Voegelin called “doctrinalization”, which was the reason he so favored Plato over Aristotle. They seem to have similar points of view concerning what Voegelin called “modernity without restraint”, but I haven’t come across anyone connecting their work.
Man this is a first! Its rare to hear the translator's thoughts and opinions!!!
Appreciated. Are you conducting online classes?
What a great idea Michael!
What is your opinion on Dugin’s religious beliefs and the effect the Russian Orthodox
Church has on Russian politics.
What is Dugin definition for post-modernism?
He has a few different ways of defining it. Postmodernity is that period in the history of being (Heidegger) when we are most alienated from being. It is when the modern battle against outside authorities turns in on itself and starts to attack internal authorities, like the concepts of reason, nature, hierarchy, and even man. If in modernity man was an individual, in postmodernity he is a "dividual," rhizomatic and fragmented. In the reading group this is the sort of question we could track through the book, pulling out the various characterizations of postmodernity. Hopefully this quick approximation gives you a sense of what he means for now. There's an interesting video of Dugin talking about postmodernism on TH-cam that once had English subtitles but for some reason no longer does. Not sure why. There's another good video in a similar situation ("on the apparent and the unbelievable.") Maybe the person who made the subtitles decided to remove them. Or maybe someone else did.
Did you find that this translation was difficult to understand? I want to buy many books of Mr. Dugin’s, but I read terrible reviews pertaining to the book’s translation.
If not, would you mind recommending a route of purchasing the book?
I would really appreciate a response!
Edit: I see that you have translated some of his works, is that because of the issue I spoke about above?
I wish to buy: The Fourth Political Theory & Foundations of Geopolitics. Is there a reliable way of acquiring them both? In a good English translation?
There's no English translation of Foundations of Geopolitics. The Fourth Political Theory volume is fine (I co-translated it long ago). I have a long, free playlist from my course on the book that you might find helpful when you start to read it (DuginCourse.com). Cheers.
@@millerman Thank you for the quick response!
I will take a look at your site. Thank you. (Subscribed)
Have you ever read anything of Guillaume Faye’s?
I am reading “Why We Fight”, and as I read this, I cannot help but notice some similarities to Dugin’s ideas on Eurasianism. Faye speaks about how a “Eurosiberian” (Russian, Eastern European, and with time, the rest of Europe) coalition would be essential for Europe to regain its sovereignty from US control, and African illegal immigration supported by the USA. He even acknowledges that allying with China and India would be ideal because of our mutual enemies, the USA, and Islam.
Now, I do not have any of Dugin’s books just yet (they are coming in the mail), so I am not sure what his views are on diversity, and Islamic illegal immigration into Europe, etc., but the similarities are there though.
Most of this is written chapter 3: Strategic Principles: Toward a Eurosiberian Strategic Doctrine.
Is Dugin inspired by Faye that you know of? Or vise versa? Do you know if they ever speak about one another?
Tell me what you think.
I have not read Faye and I don't recall seeing Dugin refer to him, though I know Faye is published by Arktos and has some relationship to the general theme of anti-liberalism.
@@millerman Thank you for the response.
For any new political theory to be successful it must recognize the big unseen language problem. I define it as (The governed with their multiplicity of perspectives cannot solve multidimensional cultural problems with a poorly defined linear language system). Language drives us around what I like to call a matrix of possibilities but we are unable to experience the whole of this realm. When we drive around in the physical world our senses allows us to recognize we exist in a broadcast realm but not so much when we are taken on a linguistic ride. Solve the language problem and we have a true new political theory.
It is very important to recognize the matrix of possibilities as a broadcast realm because nested In this space is the perfect script for humanity.
Paul-talk-I'm like the cave dweller that escapes only to return to explain reality but it falls on deaf ears😂
Why is it so important that something ‘distinctly Russian’ operates behind the name the Russian Federation? It’s stated as a given that it is the correct path, but I’d be interested to hear how the first principle is established. I should probably read the book…
Does he explain at all his problem with liberalism?
This is really fascinating, but one thing isn't completely clear to me. If the core of the problem is that, once liberalism defeated its ideological enemies, it mutated and led to "clown world," then the problem isn't really liberalism per se, but hegemonic liberalism. That is, Dugin's argument doesn't seem to be so directly opposed to liberalism as it is opposed to the singular dominance of any one philosophy, as the domination of one particular conception of the good leads to a lack of guidance results in social malaise. Paradoxically, it seems like Dugin is actually trying to make liberalism stronger by building some alternative to it, such that liberalism will once again have to defend itself in the public arena. It reminds me of Voltaire's assertion that if God did not exist, we would have to invent him. If an alternative to liberalism does not exist, we must likewise invent one.
I have similar thoughts about that
Free-of-reality!
What's R E A L I T Y ?
(Micheal, come back=NOW!)
Does anyone know where i can find a solid breakdown of fascism without all the usual over-the-top demonization? Nobody ever really gives a good explanation of what it actually is, unusually just treating it as synonymous with authoritarianism in general.
Maybe Paul Gottfried's Fascism: The Career of a Concept. I have a video on Evola's Fascism Viewed from the Right, which is unusual in that it is a critical analysis of fascism...from the right, and hence it does not simply repeat the typical liberal or leftist criticisms.
Did you conveniently ignore Dugin saying that Bolshevism was most akin to his ideology?
No
@@millerman Weird, because that seems like an important detail. Much like his Satanist past.
Consider that I know more about Dugin than you do and that there's something for you to learn besides what you think you already know.
@@millerman That I had considered this was implied in my first comment. Which is why I am still perplexed why you refuse to address these dark facts about the man, provided you grasped this other implication.
Bakacam. Aklımda. Yalnız daha sakin bir kafayla dinlemek istiyorum.
His 'open project' is basically anything anti-liberalism! He's an idealogue by that measure. Nothing less.
His perception of liberalism, despite the various decadent and problematic manifestations in today's society, is unfortunately limited and boxed-in as though those problems are in an irreversible, unredeemable trajectory. Quite sad.
He supports what's happening in Ukraine.......
Sorry, he never explained what the fourth political theory is (other than that is NOT liberalism, communism, or socialism).
Aspiring to live in a criminal oligarchy, huh? Shoot for the stars, I guess. Lol
Jeremy Smith Your attitude has created more fascists than any blind bigotry or hate has.
@@ExitStrategies Seeing as though you know so much about my attitude, I am sure your opinion is valid. No data, yet quick to make conclusions, lol.
Congrats, you already live under a criminal oligarchy. You're welcome.
Post modernism is empty, and that’s a big pillar of his theory. If he rejects the three former theories (dismissing liberalism just because HE doesn’t like it), and cobbling together an alternative….if that theory happens to have fascist elements or looks like it, that’s not incongruent. He could do that. His critique of liberalism, democracy and modernism is just flawed. He insists that facts don’t exist. They do exist.
He’s wrong in that there were more than three theories, even in the 20th century, let alone previous centuries….feudalism, monarchism, anarcho-syndicalism……. And in each of these there are sub categories. His argument is just a way to try and undermine democracy, no matter what the economic sub category. I’ve heard him lecture and being interviewed and he is unimpressive and badly flawed on scientific principles, facts, evidence, burden of proof, and leans on superstition, mysticism and religion for objective truth.