Is Dugin Fascist, Neo Marxist, or What? | Stephen Hicks at the Museum of the Second WW 

Like how? Give us an example, concrete one, let it be as long as possible.

@@AsadAli-jc5tg You can't read a book??

@@safardebon9720 Well I can, but so many other books are in my reading quene, so I thought someone would tell me the gist of it, for example I've read that Dugin considers blacks and middle easterners bestial people.

I totally agree. In this presentation he brings up quotes, lets you read them & then blatantly misinterprets them. He has no interest in giving Dugin a fair analysis - he is giving a biases misrepresentation of his ideas. Given the political situation he is probably incentivised to give Dugin a bad interpretation

@@AsadAli-jc5tg Sorry I didn't see this until now. I will make this brief. The first one is that Dugin is explicitly anti-fascist in 4PT. Prior to 2009, Dugin believed that there were redeemable aspects of communism and fascism. For fascism, he said that nationalism as far as the love of one's own people, and the love of history of one's own nation is a redeemable quality. But in 4PT he goes into a lot of detail explaining how if you remove the political subject of racism from fascism, it fails to be fascism any longer. He says that it is like an animal that has its most important internal organ torn out. It will fail to exist. So people just ignore statements like that and they claim that Dugin is certainly fascist. Which is just a blatant lie or ignorance from not having read him.

Interestingly this is an Americanization of Liberalism. We accepted the brutalist aesthetics and the Brits stuck to their traditions. Americans were always more Germanic, more fundamentalist (which meant revolutionary), and less trusting of tradition.

It's not at all clear what group you're referring to. Are you referring to Leftists, the "woke", the very few defenders of free markets, or anyone who is opposed to the criminal Russian regime? It would be nice if comments like this make an implicit, vague statement explicit and clear.

@@alexanderscott2456 I wouldn’t say we’re talking about groups rather ideologies. The underlying metaphysic of Liberalism proliferates at the societal level in a variety of ways. Liberalism pervades the entire political spectrum in the United States.

@@DioscuriA85 If you're using the term "Liberalism" that broadly, it sounds like a package deal to include Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin, or even Reagan and Thatcher. It doesn't sound like you're only referring to woke lunatics.

@@alexanderscott2456 That is correct. That’s not to demonize people. I’m stating: At the deepest levels of being, Liberal-modernity is not in accordance with what we actually are as human beings.

🤪

@@thereignofthezero225 Zounds! The "zany" Emoji. I offer you this: 😘

I'd imagine that battle would result in something very similar to the Hicks vs. Thaddeus Russell debate 😄

@@thereignofthezero225 Absolutely not. Russell is a lightweight labile atheist postmodernist, God bless him. Millerman is a middleweight mystic postliberal traditionalist, 6'9" and he trains jiu jitsu. He would place Hicks in an intellectual headlock so tight Hicks'd be like: 🤪. And Millerman would be like: 🥱.

@@markcounseling I'll check him out

Heidegger was a Ph.D. and highly versed in political developments. He joined the Nazi Party and became its most-famous academic exponent. He did not do well as a political activist and so backed out of day-to-day politicking. He never, ever, expressed disagreement with Nazi philosophy or recanted his activism.

@@StephenHicksPhilosopher It's a little bit more complicated. There were parts in Nazi ideology (I would not call it a philosophy), namely a strong anti-intellectual streak (expressed in the book burning) that he reprehended. And in the "Schwarzen Hefte" are some very critical remarks about the Nazis which clearly show his disappointment and estrangement. However, to be clear, I would never deny that there are strong ideological ties of Heidegger's philosophy and Nazi ideology.

Yes, about 10% different at most.

@@StephenHicksPhilosopher no.

@@vaibhavsajith4267 : Go for it, and lay out the major differences you see.

what has changed about him? I also know that he met Leon Degrelle at some point.

@@Petronium123 he's suggested a whole new paradigm to fight liberalism because both communism and fascism failed according to him

I agree

I see, Indigenous and Slavic.

That's a problem, and so is the rightist reactionary fascism led by Trump. Let's defeat them both!

And you think Dugin is not woke?

​@@SuperDrainBamage yes hes traditional nor woke

If he gets canceled by all those then all these are corrupt or terrorized (which is the same). Do as Solzhenitsyn said. "The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world." Keep speaking the truth.

OP is an apologist for a malevolent dictatorship. He's no better than the woke scum he pretends to hate.

Lmao, that's the dumbest sht I've read all day, and there was some *dumb sht* , I tell ya...

I read dugin. I have like hardly anything i picked up worth anything. Mostly a waste of time. I give him credit for a slightly different spin on the limits of freedom in liberalism. Other than that. Yah. Nothing...

That is not corporations but the state as "corporeal body" which is an idea that goes back to at least Plato. It's the idea that the judiciary is the kidneys, the philosopher is the mind, and the vanguard is the immune system, etc. Corporatism was very popular for most of human history. Honestly there is something to learn from it in the modern age as the failure of institutions of government (or their success) is not limited to democratic government. The success of Louis IV's economic policies and then the problems they create in encouraging the French revolution are a lesson for modern times.

Because the book takes longer and isn't very good

The 2nd part of the lecture is better. Spiritual is not the same as religion. Russians have more sense of community than Anglo saxons. Marxism, liberalism and fascism are very materialistic and are lacking spiritually.

But Fukuyama was a conservative.

Why is that? They are not perfectly libertarian, just as there is no perfect circle, but I think they represent major advances in libertarian thought.

@@SavingCommunitiesDS Locke was a majoritarian. and the majority could treat free enterprise as they best judged. So was the United states. No regime of "individual rights."

@@ozzy5146, the two are not mutually exclusive. He was comparing the majority to kings who never respected individual rights.

@@SavingCommunitiesDS But Locke had absolutely no problem with the majorities in parliament to define freedom any way they wanted. And any such restriction on individual freedom can be considered "fascist." So whatever problem Hicks has with Dugin can also be applied to locke! Or, of course, Jefferson. In fact, to anything short of anarchy!

@@ozzy5146 A flippant and facile response if I've ever seen one. Loaded with hyperbole, exaggerations, and misappropriated, or undefined and abstract terminology.

It does that on its own. Have you read it?

He is sh...:)

Fascist only in a different way. You explained this well. The character is the son of a KGB officer. It has 100% something to do with Putin. His idea is to invade Ukraine. He mentioned it for a long time and it finally happened. I don't like him at all. Greetings.

@ NewDawn, thanks for that, it’s unbelievable how many Putin lovers there are in Britain and the alt media in general. If you read the Bible and do a study of eschatology, we are definitely seeing a world wide exposure of all these Dictators intentions. A lot of people are caught up in this “ Great Awakening “ mindset, which is the false light of Lucifer. The people of the world are being set up to be deceived by the Anti Christ, Dear Leader that is coming with great miracles, wonders, charm and promises of economic prosperity for all. Thank God, he is going to send witnesses warning people to repent of their unbelief and turn back to Jesus Christ, the Saviour of their soul, who died on the cross for their sins

God willingly, God willingly.

He is a fascist and you are a defender of a monstrous totalitarian dictatorship that destroys human life and freedom.

No they won't, and neither should they. Anyways what's your point in asking this question? Russia is the clear oppressor in Ukraine war.

Thank you ❤

Good comments ❤❤❤

What's funny is, you're arguably right. If we take Umberto Eco's or Lawrence Britt's definitions of fascism, the ultimate goal of Dugin fits on a scale. I've only read exerts of aIlyin, and plan on reading his descriptions of "superior Russian." If you knw accepNot classical, but novel way of postmodern fascism. Hut you hit nail on the head with Ilyin, as in Russian supremacist evolving ideology, it's not Dugin, but Ilyin, which putin takes most methodics from, by both ananalyzing his actions and rethorics and leaked info from Kremlin shaika, as Putin did admit it beimg on top of the list. He carefully crafted his favourite 15 writers, Ilyin was among them, Dugin wasn't. That's hidfen on purpose. Some might argue, that this Dugins thought salad is not actual Nazism, but only if we take '30s Nazism definition: he don't spell it out to copy all of that failed quagmire. Howeber denying rhetoric connections, he suggests the very methods between the limes. And Kremlin already uses them, in own suitability. Like their Roskomnadzor with trollfarms are a modern coppy of aGoebbels office, and muvh more powrrful. That's why we have so much Russophilic tankies in the world and in these comments. The youth camps, perversed education system and history textbooks, collectivism and Grdtapo agents among own population, mindless repeating and slogans, talking points, casus-belli, the list is endless. Only thing - it's not Aryan supremacy, it's 'Russian' supremacy, not even based on ethnicity for most. It's based on ideology and 'way of being', with same postmodern spin on "homo sovieticus". Everyone can become a 'Russian', if sing by their book, that's why anyone can get the new label of "rashist". The less you know their accurate history, the betger. You just have to accept "the special Russian truth" and that's it. No thinkung, logic necessary and God forbid you find a healthy reason or common sense. But, if you live in thrir path of restoring the Empire, like me - you either accept the ideology of slaves, or -- . Ask Timofei Sergeytsev, about "What to do with " them who resist. The final solution of people who betrays Russian 'plan'. I bet most of those here, same as in '30s Europe (and many in US) are led to love Dugin's methaphysical cocktail are the ones dismissing democracy, all the things Dugin 'seems' to reject for a western mind, and unknowingly push for new fascism . Accusing the other side of their own traits, out of reason. That's why tankues who don't admit their preference for fascist system are now called 'sczizofascists'. The trend started in Russia: they religiously believe their holy war against 'fascist Ukraine' and would extend the frontline to all western border, as all neighbours there have long been labeled fascists. The more someone resist their bloody power show, the more fasco or Nazi they are. Dugin is not an innovative phylosopher. The reason why you see all these quotes and paraphrasing, is because his theory and ideology is a postmodern Frankenstein. It's carefully crafted to be appealing to certain values and demography, which has neen ever growing, probably unexpectedly. I don't despair or find surprising for loud voices giving support for Russia from genuine westerners, among massive trollfarm fake voices. What i find sombre is, that even after getting apparantly educated academically, the more you go into rashist fascism, the more you love it, at least from a distance. Grass is allways greener.. and some will happily move to Russia . Usually the black-ptropaganda quagmire and conspiracys flow from most ignorant, or pseudo-anything victims. And actually it's not so different in these comments. Most of 'intelligent' discussers are pseudo-intelligent ignorant fascism sympathisers or confused in post-truth, post-fact conservatives or extremists. They pretend to be high up educated philosophers themselves, but lack of understanding Russian and historic extreme-spectrum ideas show trough. You have to get to know the region and people on both sides of Russias border to go deeper tgan this or correctly getting Dugins thought. As of this deep as in the lecture, it passes for framework. Those who think he is the greatest philosopher and we live in 'his times', sorry to disapoint you. He rhashed and served what tankies like also for reasons of effective populism in society driven by engagement and increasingly confused. Newertheless it's the sign of times, if horrifying to see people who unknowingly justify return to the past dressed in whatever suits their beliefs. This is not progress, but regress to demolish basic human rights,

..as defined by centuries of writing them in blood. Dugin wants to abolish rules-based order and instil new rules, defined by the 'big man'. And that's exactly what ageing Putin - and all his supporters are dreaming of. We stand in their way and don't know yet how they'll react and how many will try to join them. I never thought this is where postmodernism leads, allthough read a book of warning against it, which seemed written by a conservative. Please, friends of books, read "1984". Read the description of double-thought, double-speech and the state of the world. And particulary think about newspeech - but in a syntax form. Simplifying things and making them mantra. One example today is Rashists not only calling everyone who disagrees Nazis and fascists, but terms like Kyiv regime and US regime. Rare of them know

.. that it's against definition of regime, if you know what i mean. After few hundred times hearing it, no way of convincing them that it's them, who have a regime, not somewhere in Europe. And same goes for 1st world tankies. This is a warning to all. Don't fall in these traps, get to know sides fighting for your sympathy and appealing with propaganda personally. Harder to do with Russians, but given a chance - talk ti them, to Ukrainians, to any real Palestinians ("") though), Israelis, Iranians, Chinese, Azerbaijanis,

..Balltic people, etc. Most will know the hustory, if nit necessarily Dugin's work. But they'll be able to explain where he is coming from. Excuse the multi-reply essay, and especially spelling mistake. You'll have decypher this with eyeball spellcheck - unfortunately i'm on my reserve phone, which doesn't display text while i write replies, often glitches that keyboard disappear and i can't edit that mess, only deleete. Be safe.

Consider that, Mr. Ozzy here, cannot reconcile (or aknowledge) natural law as an operative force, let alone any universal, cosmic moral order, either existentially or ontologically. This may be evident in his remarks regarding JL, where in the period a major crux was the move from the objective to the subjective.

No. Dugin is a philosopher not a politican. Even if he did say it no one is gonna take him serious. Dugin actually endorses what he calls a version idealism of According to the Noose and he’s writing a huge project called Numahia. The Origins in the Noose which is the foundation of civilization come from what he calls the Newsphere which comes from the a mind and its through the intellect that one can interface with this and comes to actually reflect this. Dugin ascribes to a kind of metaphysical idealism. And according to his own words the idea has Primacy. So Dugin does respect the intellectual traditions of the world including Europe. Dugin has engaged in just about every single intellectual of the European Canada in the 20th century including the far left and the left. Dugin is first and foremost a philosopher and he’s not calling for violence or extermination of people or the massacre anyone. He’s a philosopher. And his daughter Dugina was going based of his philosophy. Walter Benjamin was a Jewish Marxist from the 1930s talked about something called “Divine Violence” and the meaning of violence has been very clear in the Marxist tradition. So Dugin saying words about violence in the abstract that dosent indict him as a Facist at all. now the claim Dugin wants an Imperial state. Dugin dosen’t want one but he recognizes what he calls the Russian big space of a common civilization. He wants a state to reflect that. But he dosent dream of the Hitlerite adventurism of just building something out of nothing cause might is right. It’s not where he’s coming from. And even if Dugin did say he wants to destroy Europe or Ukraine in this case. I’m sorry even if he did say that in the context you’re trying to say he did that dosent make a facist. There are also many anti-colonial Grievances and resentment over European Imperialism and European colonialism which actually forms is the concrete context of where facism came from. There is no facism without European colonism. There is no facism without European Slaverly, there is no Facism without the genocides in Africa and else where and also the interment camps that the Europeans pioneered. Hitlers camps wouldn’t have been possible if it were not for those camps. And by destroying Europe all Dugin means is destroying NATO and the European Union. In Ukraine he talks about the Bandeite regime that took power by a Western backed coup in 2014. So people claim Russia accuses anyone in Ukraine who resists “Russian colonism” being a nazi banderite. First of all Azov Battalion isn’t a battalion of philosophers they are a battalion of active neo nazis. When I say active neo nazis who do believe that Russians should be exterminated have taken actions towards the end of exterminating Russians in the Donbas and other parts of Eastern Ukraine. Including killing journalists and beating political activists and people dessidents of Ukraines so that’s a very real thing. The Azov Battalion has engaged in the terrorism aganist civilians of Donbas. That is an actual application of hitlers methods and methods of the banderites who massacred over hundreds of thousands of Polish in the 40s. Second of all the question of Stephan Banderas legacy in Ukraine is not a matter of dispute. Ukrainian schools and Ukrainian Government institutions and Ukrainian politicians are almost all unequivocal in their their campaign to redeem the image of Stefan Bandera. The Ukrainian independence movement unequivocally and indisputable has its origins in Banderism. They literally have songs where they call themselves “Banderists” in schools right now. So that’s not a smear by Russia. Finally the claim of colonization Russia does not want it. There’s no evidence of colonizing Ukraine. The only motivation we can derive as far as Russia’s intervention into Ukraine is because of NATO expansion. Russia does not want NATO to have a have stronghold and having a footing in Ukraine. Russia wants to defend its own border’s rightfully from NATO’s expansion. People call Russia or Putin “Hitlerite” and facists. But Russians were not the ones expanding militarily to the west unprovoked. As soon as the Soviet Union dissolved NATO decided to March East. Now they wanna go into Ukraine after a coup in 2014 that was explicitly anti-Russian and yet Russians have no right to be worried or somehow concerned that NATO is making these moves right on its border? Let me ask the following question would the US tolerate Russian bases in Mexico or Canada?

@Nikolaievich9837 Damn, kremlinbot, your FANfarm slavedrivers really care about what westerners think about your genocidal sczizofascists..

We don't know the audience. Possible he's simplifying for audience

@@itsallminor6133 possibly. But there's something comical about taking anyone from Ayn Rands ideology seriously. lol! I mean isn't everyone's boomer uncle dead at this point or too old and embarrassed to defend such positions?

Third-way politics, which really was a new fourth type. I believe this Russian form is a similar, but more stringent form of mixing the left and right than in the US and UK, but it has the same roots. Both Clinton and Blair supported third-way, and Blair used Sweden as a model. Blair was also big on "social justice" and so were the Clintons, which we can see the results of today. Look for Antifa's banner in Minneapolis on February 18, 2017, in the Antifa Wikipedia article. Notice the colors: red banner, white circle, with black symbols. Much of what they use have always mimicked this. It was several years ago, but I read an article from the CFR about how the national socialists and socialists got their heads together, and come to an agreement, which they agreed to pursue.

Complete opposites. Only thing common is seeming notion of end of rules based order. Anarchist want end of authority, not international rules as Dugin. And this way of thinking, is exactly what he preaches. Irony has never been so great, because this is a cult. Sczizofascist is your new name.

What a strange creature

When an animal feels hungry, they are "shoulding" in the same way as when a man feels hungry. "Should" is an evolved thing, like all the things in man.

@@karlnord1429 there's a difference between doing something and saying the thing SHOULD be done. Animals can't SAY what is right or wrong. that's the difference.

@@ozzy5146 Animals communicate desire all the time. Right and wrong---as human concepts---are abstractions of basic desire. If you kick a dog it will growl. If you kick a man he will as well. Somehow, though, I think dogs end up killing each other less than humans kill each other. So how good are these religious abstractions in practice when confronted with man's tyrannical nature?

@@karlnord1429 dogs can't be philosophers because they have very limited abilities to communicate. Thus, they never make "should" arguments.

The book is too

He isn't

@@hazelwray4184 I was wondering about that. Haven't looked into it, but I hope you're right

Wrong, dugin is great

@Tankie Bot doubtful, but I'll investigate

@@tankiebot704 I investigated and determined you are wrong. Good luck figuring that out for yourself.