In our time it is becoming increasingly clear that man himself, his very existence, is in question, and it is becoming increasingly clear that we are living in a critical, extremely critical moment in history, and it is possible (and even probable) that we are living in the end times.
Epidemics and wars are decimating millions of lives, in the SMO, the world has been brought to the brink of a nuclear war that, once started, could end humanity's existence.

The most thoughtful observers of the Ukrainian front note the peculiar nature of this war: the chaos factor has increased enormously. This applies to all sides of the Special Military Operation, both to the actions and strategies of the enemy and our command, as well as to the dramatically increased role of technology (all kinds of drones and UAVs), and the intensive online information support, where it is almost impossible to distinguish the fictitious from the real. This is a war of chaos. It is time to revisit this fundamental concept.

Západ sa pridržiava nenaplniteľného sna o hegemónii, hovorí ruský filozof pre RT

Konflikt na Ukrajine je „prvou multipolárnou vojnou“ na svete, v ktorej Rusko bojuje za právo každej civilizácie vybrať si svoju vlastnú cestu, zatiaľ čo Západ si želá zachovať svoj totalitný hegemonický globalizmus, povedal Alexander Dugin pre RT v piatok v exkluzívnom rozhovore.

Un trait caractéristique de la philosophie russe, selon certains historiens de la philosophie russe, est l'ontologisme de la pensée. La position de l'ontologisme en philosophie, contrairement à la position opposée du gnoséologisme, implique la considération primordiale non pas du processus de la pensée, mais de l'objet de la compréhension. Étant du côté de l'ontologique, nous cherchons avant tout à identifier et à répondre à la question : "QUOI est, QUOI est l'objet de notre connaissance, QUOI est le centre de notre intuition intellectuelle". 

Bu Ukrayna ile bir savaş değil. Bu, bütünsel bir gezegen fenomeni olarak küreselleşmeyle bir yüzleşmedir. Jeopolitik ve ideolojik olmak üzere her düzeyde bir yüzleşmedir.

Rus milliyetçi entelektüellerin yeni internet sitesi zavtra.ru'daki son yazısında Aleksandr Dugin, Rusya'nın Ukrayna üzerindeki niyetlerini tüm çıplaklığıyla açıkladı. Dugin'i göre artık Ukrayna Doğu Slav Birliği'nden ayrılamayacak.... Batının B planı terörizm... Afganistan'dan ABD'nin ayrılması Taliban'ı güçlendirip bize güneyden saldırtmak için!..

Para comprender la transformación del orden mundial que está aconteciendo ante nuestros ojos, sobre todo el proceso de cambio de un modelo unipolar (globalista) a uno multipolar, es necesario recurrir a diversas ideas y conceptos que permiten realizar una explicación coherente de la misma. He propuesto mi propia visión del asunto en libros como Teoría del mundo multipolar  y La Geopolítica del mundo multipolar, pero estas son solo aproximaciones a un tema bastante complicado. En este artículo quiero desarrollar tres conceptos que pueden ayudarnos a comprender mucho mejor el proceso de transición que está teniendo lugar en las Relaciones Internacionales. Creo que estos conceptos explican las tendencias, conflictos y problemas que se producen actualmente, como, por ejemplo, los conflictos en Ucrania, Taiwán y otras partes del mundo. Solo comprenderemos lo que está sucediendo ahora si entendemos las razones detrás de esta transición, lo cual requiere de una contraparte conceptual. Los tres conceptos que vamos a abordar hacen parte de una explicación de este asunto.

We come to a third concept, crucial for understanding the transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world and the place of the BRICS countries in this process. We are talking about the concept of the civilisation-state. This idea has been formulated by Chinese scholars (in particular by Professor Zhang Weiwei) and most often the concept of the civilisation-state is applied to modern China and then by analogy to Russia, India, etc. In the Russian context, a similar theory was put forward by the Eurasians, who proposed the concept of the Peace-State. Actually, in that trend, Russia was understood as a civilisation, not just one of the countries, hence the main Eurasian concept - Russia-Eurasia.

Let us now turn to a different theory: the 'world-system analysis' constructed by Immanuel Wallerstein. Wallerstein, an exponent of the Marxist school of International Relations (especially in its Trotskyist interpretation), on the basis of the doctrine of "the long run" (F. Braudel) and the Latin American theorists of structural economics (R. Prebisch, S. Furtado), developed a model of world zoning according to the level of development of capitalism. This view represents a development of Vladimir Lenin's ideas on imperialism as the highest stage of development of capitalism, according to which the capitalist system naturally gravitates towards globalisation and the spread of its influence over all humanity. Colonial wars between the developed powers are only the initial stage. Capitalism is gradually realising the unity of its supranational goals and forming the core of world government. This is fully consistent with liberal International Relations theory, where the phenomenon of 'imperialism', critically understood by Marxists, is described in apologetic terms as the goal of a 'global society', the One World.

Týchto 14 bodov treba považovať za sémantické uzly suverénnej ideológie. Odteraz štát prevzal zodpovednosť za stav verejného vedomia a sociálny model, alternatíva Západu, bude vychádzať z nich. V istom zmysle sa stávajú posvätnými."

Prvé tri body sú spoločné pre ruskú tradíciu a liberálne ideológie Západu.

Právo na život . Prvý bod uznávajú rôzne spoločnosti – tradičné aj moderné – ako tradičnú hodnotu. Život človeka je zverený len jemu a iný človek nemá právo vziať život druhému podľa vlastného uváženia. Navyše v náboženských spoločnostiach sa za trestný čin považuje aj samotný akt samovraždy (nehovoriac o nátlaku k nej vedúcemu).

Jedinou výnimkou je štát, ktorý má za určitých okolností právo nakladať so životmi svojich občanov – trestať odsúdených za preukázané zločiny alebo ich posielať bojovať na obranu vlasti. Ale ak je život tradičnou hodnotou, ktorú treba zachovať a posilniť, potom by to mal štát brať do úvahy v extrémnych prípadoch – preukazovať, ak je to možné, milosrdenstvo voči zločincom a chrániť životy vojakov a bojovníkov.

The “New Right” is an ensemble of intellectual movements that appeared in 1968 as a reaction to ideological crisis and the strengthening of liberal hegemony in Europe. By 1968, the classical “rightwing” movements were riddled with liberal ideological motives, such as the adoption of capitalism, pro-American sentiments, and statism. In turn, the “left-wing” agenda, the core of which was constituted by opposition to capitalism [1], was also affected by liberal influences. Egalitarianism, individualism, the negation of differences between cultures, and universalism were rendering “left-wing” movements allies and partners of the liberal doctrine.

Dnes už takmer každý chápe, že bez ideológie ŠVO nemôžeme vyhrať. A čo to je za ideológiu, je tiež každému krištáľovo jasné. Toto je ruská myšlienka, ktorá zahŕňa sebavedomé a nekompromisné presadzovanie našej identity, našej etiky, spravodlivosť, vernosť odkazu predkov, nezávislosť a slobodu vlasti od tlakov, vplyvov a útokov. Táto ruská idea nám bola odopieraná najmenej 100 rokov. Teraz však bez nej nemôžeme urobiť jediný krok vpred a dokonca ani zachrániť to, čo máme. Bez ruskej idey sa jednoducho zrútime – nehovoriac o víťazstve vo vojne.

Political philosophy has always been denied full recognition, focusing on analyzing the metaphysical aspects of Neoplatonism. Neoplatonic concepts such as “permanence” (μονή), “emanation” (πρόοδος), “return” (ὲπιστροφή), etc. were treated in historical-philosophical works separately from the sphere of the Political. Thus, the Political was interpreted only as a stage of ascent toward the Good, embedded in the rigid hierarchical model of Neoplatonic philosophical thought, but not as an independent pole of the philosophical model.

A Rússia é um país enorme que abrange todo um continente e, portanto, é muito difícil mudar sua dinâmica por causa de sua inércia. Entretanto, seria absurdo permitir que esta inércia nos conduzisse ao abismo. É por isso que as reformas (e outras emendas que precisam ser feitas) são muito difíceis de serem feitas.

Rusia es un país enorme que abarca todo un continente y por eso resulta muy difícil cambiar su dinámica debido a la inercia que tiene. Sin embargo, resultaría absurdo permitir que esta inercia nos lleve al abismo. Es por eso que las reformas (y otras enmiendas que deben hacerse) resultan muy difíciles de hacer.

El propósito de este artículo es examinar la figura del "Anticristo" y el campo semántico del "fin de los tiempos" sin referencia a ninguna tradición religiosa en particular.

Rusia lanzó la operación militar especial en Ucrania con la intención de defender su soberanía. Mientras tanto, Occidente ha decidido usar a la nación ucraniana – sí es que puede ser llamada así – como un proxy para detener a los rusos. El predominio militar, económico y formal de Occidente es algo obvio. Sin embargo, Occidente no es solo una estructura política, económica y militar, sino una civilización que tiene un código de programación particular. Este código es el que se convierte posteriormente en armas militares o sistemas económicos, políticos, culturales, educativos, comunicativos, etc… El problema actual subyace en que Rusia debe luchar en contra de este código que da vida a Occidente.

Sú to absolútne fantazmagórie, komentuje Duginove vyhlásenia sociológ Mesežnikov. Dugin je podľa neho typickým predstaviteľom ruského fašizmu.

The events of the last few weeks have highlighted the axes of new geopolitical alliances and completely rebuilt the geopolitical map of the world.

Soçi’de yapılan son görüşmeye dair arka plan bilgilerine vakıf olduğunu aktaran Dugin “O gün Erdoğan ve Putin dünya dengeleri açısından hangi tarafta yer alacaklarını konuştu ve aldıkları kararı paylaştı. Kürt haritasından Kırım’a, Afganistan’dan Libya’ya, Kafkaslardan Suriye’ye tüm alanlara ilişkin hayati konularda kendi kırmızı çizgilerini çizdi. Başta İdlib olmak üzere birçok konuda uzlaştıklarını söyleyebilirim. Ancak bu tarihî buluşmada konuşulanların önemli bir kısmı sır olarak kalacak. Biz sadece sahada yansımalarını göreceğiz’’ dedi.
Putin’in dış politikasını belirleyen isimlerden Aleksandr Dugin, ABD’nin Suriye’den çekileceğini ve bunun kademeli olarak gerçekleşeceğini anlattı. Amerika’nın çekilmesi ile tüm meselelerin hallolmayacağı görüşünü dile getiren Dugin “ABD çekilse bile kriz üretmeye devam edecek. Bu noktada tek belirleyici unsur Rusya, Türkiye ve İran’ın tutumu olacak” diye konuştu.

Although the concept of hegemony in Critical Theory is based on Antonio Gramsci’s theory, it is necessary to distinguish this concept’s position on Gramscianism and neo-Gramscianism from how it is understood in the realist and neo-realist schools of IR.

The classical realists use the term “hegemony” in a relative sense and understand it as the “actual and substantial superiority of the potential power of any state over the potential of another one, often neighboring countries.” Hegemony might be understood as a regional phenomenon, as the determination of whether one or another political entity is considered a “hegemon” depends on scale. Thucydides introduced the term itself when he spoke of Athens and Sparta as the hegemons of the Peloponnesian War, and classical realism employs this term in the same way to this day. Such an understanding of hegemony can be described as “strategic” or “relative.”

In neo-realism, “hegemony” is understood in a global (structural) context. The main difference from classical realism lies in that “hegemony” cannot be regarded as a regional phenomenon. It is always a global one. The neorealism of K. Waltz, for example, insists that the balance of two hegemons (in a bipolar world) is the optimal structure of power balance on a world scale[ii]. R. Gilpin believes that hegemony can be combined only with unipolarity, i.e., it is possible for only a single hegemon to exist, this function today being played by the USA.

In both cases, the realists comprehend hegemony as a means of potential correlation between the potentials of different state powers. 

Gramsci's understanding of hegemony is completely different and finds itself in a completely opposite theoretical field. To avoid the misuse of this term in IR, and especially in the TMW, it is necessary to pay attention to Gramsci’s political theory, the context of which is regarded as a major priority in Critical Theory and TMW. Moreover, such an analysis will allows us to more clearly see the conceptual gap between Critical Theory and TMW.

Milí priatelia! Nastupujúc do funkcie Prezidenta Ruskej federácie, chápem svoju zodpovednosť voči Vlasti. Jej záujmy, bezpečnosť, blaho občanov krajiny vždy pre mňa boli a zostanú nado všetko. Spravím všetko preto, aby som nesklamal dôveru miliónov našich občanov. Považujem za zmysel celého svojho života a za svoju povinnosť službu Vlasti, službu nášmu národu, podpora ktorého ma inšpiruje a pomáha riešiť tie najzložitejšie a najťažšie úlohy. Spolu sme prešli dlhú a zložitú cestu, uverili sami v seba, vo vlastné sily, posilnili krajinu, vrátili si dôstojnosť veľkého národa, svet uvidel obrodené Rusko a to je výsledok úsilí nášho národa, spoločnej namáhavej práce, ktorej súčasťou je osobný vklad každého.