In his work The Fourth Political Theory, Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin critiques the prevailing global liberal order and proposes an alternative vision centered on the resurgence of civilisations as geopolitical entities. Dugin’s theory emerges in response to what he sees as the dangers posed by liberalism, particularly its universalist and individualistic tendencies. At the heart of his critique is the idea that liberalism, in its attempt to homogenise the world and bring about the "end of history," threatens the very ontological basis of human existence. For Dugin, this existential threat is not merely political but deeply metaphysical, targeting the core of human identity, time, and history. In this essay, we will explore Dugin’s arguments regarding the global liberal order, his vision of civilisations as essential units of geopolitical resistance, and his conception of time and human existence as central to understanding the political challenges of the modern world.
Dugin’s vision of geopolitics rests on the idea of civilisations, which he defines as "wide and stable geographical and cultural zones united by approximately common spiritual, moral, stylistic, and psychological arrangements". Civilisations, according to Dugin, represent more than just political entities or nation-states. They are defined by deep-rooted historical, cultural, and spiritual experiences that shape their collective identity. This is a key distinction from the modern liberal order, which tends to emphasise the autonomy of the individual and the nation-state as the primary unit of political and social organisation.
For Dugin, the decline of traditional civilisations in the face of global liberalism is a dire consequence of the West's unipolar dominance. The current world order, according to him, is structured around Western liberalism, which is increasingly imposed upon other cultures, undermining the autonomy of non-Western civilizations. He draws on Samuel Huntington’s thesis in The Clash of Civilisations, which posits that the world is increasingly divided into distinct cultural blocks, each with its own identity and values. Dugin agrees with Huntington that, in the post-Cold War world, nation-states are becoming less significant, while large-scale civilisations—such as China, Russia, and India—are rising in importance. He writes:
The philosophical foundation of Dugin’s critique of liberalism lies in his understanding of ontology—the nature of being. Dugin argues that liberalism, with its emphasis on individual autonomy and universalism, undermines the very essence of human existence. Central to his argument is the concept of transcendental subjectivity, which he derives from the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl. For Dugin, consciousness is not simply a passive receptor of external stimuli but an active, self-referential process that constitutes the perception of time and reality. This transcendental subjectivity is the core of human existence, and it forms the basis of Dugin's understanding of time, history, and identity.
Dugin’s conception of time is deeply intertwined with his ontological views. He argues that time should not be viewed in a linear, mechanistic sense—as something that progresses relentlessly toward an inevitable end, as liberalism suggests. Instead, Dugin believes that time is a social construct, experienced subjectively and shaped by the collective consciousness of each civilization. He draws a parallel between time and music, suggesting that, like a musical composition, time is not a series of isolated moments but an interconnected whole, where the past, present, and future are in constant dialogue with each other. The present moment is shaped by both the past and the future, and the future itself is always anticipated, though it is never fully determined. As Dugin writes:
Dugin's most profound critique of liberalism is its proposed "end of history." This idea, famously articulated by political scientist Francis Fukuyama, suggests that liberal democracy represents the final stage of human political development. For Dugin, however, the liberal end of history signifies the death of true historical consciousness and the destruction of the unique, culturally embedded sense of time that each civilisation possesses. The imposition of a universal liberal order would, according to Dugin, create a "post-human" state where individuality and collective identity are eradicated.
In such a scenario, human beings would become mere interchangeable units, devoid of their historical and cultural specificity. Dugin warns that this would lead to a world where human beings exist only as isolated, autonomous individuals, with no deeper connection to their collective past or future. As he writes:
In The Fourth Political Theory, Alexander Dugin offers a compelling critique of the liberal world order, one that transcends mere political analysis to address deeper philosophical and ontological concerns. His call for the resurgence of civilisations as geopolitical actors is rooted in the belief that only through the recognition of cultural and historical diversity can humanity preserve its authentic existence. The liberal imposition of a universal, linear conception of time and history threatens to erase the unique identities of different peoples and reduce human beings to mere cogs in a global machine. For Dugin, the defense of civilization is not merely a matter of politics but an existential struggle to preserve the very essence of what it means to be human in a world increasingly shaped by the forces of liberalism. As he concludes:
FPT pdf: https://somacles.wordpress.com/wp-c...7/alexander-dugin-fourth-political-theory.pdf
Dugin’s vision of geopolitics rests on the idea of civilisations, which he defines as "wide and stable geographical and cultural zones united by approximately common spiritual, moral, stylistic, and psychological arrangements". Civilisations, according to Dugin, represent more than just political entities or nation-states. They are defined by deep-rooted historical, cultural, and spiritual experiences that shape their collective identity. This is a key distinction from the modern liberal order, which tends to emphasise the autonomy of the individual and the nation-state as the primary unit of political and social organisation.
For Dugin, the decline of traditional civilisations in the face of global liberalism is a dire consequence of the West's unipolar dominance. The current world order, according to him, is structured around Western liberalism, which is increasingly imposed upon other cultures, undermining the autonomy of non-Western civilizations. He draws on Samuel Huntington’s thesis in The Clash of Civilisations, which posits that the world is increasingly divided into distinct cultural blocks, each with its own identity and values. Dugin agrees with Huntington that, in the post-Cold War world, nation-states are becoming less significant, while large-scale civilisations—such as China, Russia, and India—are rising in importance. He writes:
The rise of civilisations as geopolitical poles in a multipolar world is central to Dugin’s argument. He believes that a multipolar world, rather than a unipolar one dominated by the West, is essential for preserving the diversity of human cultures and for defending against the universalising tendency of liberalism. In such a world, each civilisation would have the opportunity to express its unique values and historical experiences, free from the homogenising pressures of global liberalism. Dugin's vision for geopolitics is thus one of deep pluralism, where civilisations coexist alongside each other, respecting their distinctiveness while engaging in a complex network of relations.
The philosophical foundation of Dugin’s critique of liberalism lies in his understanding of ontology—the nature of being. Dugin argues that liberalism, with its emphasis on individual autonomy and universalism, undermines the very essence of human existence. Central to his argument is the concept of transcendental subjectivity, which he derives from the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl. For Dugin, consciousness is not simply a passive receptor of external stimuli but an active, self-referential process that constitutes the perception of time and reality. This transcendental subjectivity is the core of human existence, and it forms the basis of Dugin's understanding of time, history, and identity.
Dugin’s conception of time is deeply intertwined with his ontological views. He argues that time should not be viewed in a linear, mechanistic sense—as something that progresses relentlessly toward an inevitable end, as liberalism suggests. Instead, Dugin believes that time is a social construct, experienced subjectively and shaped by the collective consciousness of each civilization. He draws a parallel between time and music, suggesting that, like a musical composition, time is not a series of isolated moments but an interconnected whole, where the past, present, and future are in constant dialogue with each other. The present moment is shaped by both the past and the future, and the future itself is always anticipated, though it is never fully determined. As Dugin writes:
This subjective and cyclical view of time is in direct opposition to the liberal conception of time, which Dugin associates with a materialistic, linear worldview. According to liberalism, history progresses inevitably toward a utopian end, a vision of universal democracy and global peace. For Dugin, this "end of history" is not only a political dead-end but an existential threat. By imposing a uniform conception of time and history, liberalism erases the particular identities of different cultures and civilisations, reducing them to mere stages in a global process that ultimately leads to the dissolution of authentic human experience.
Dugin's most profound critique of liberalism is its proposed "end of history." This idea, famously articulated by political scientist Francis Fukuyama, suggests that liberal democracy represents the final stage of human political development. For Dugin, however, the liberal end of history signifies the death of true historical consciousness and the destruction of the unique, culturally embedded sense of time that each civilisation possesses. The imposition of a universal liberal order would, according to Dugin, create a "post-human" state where individuality and collective identity are eradicated.
In such a scenario, human beings would become mere interchangeable units, devoid of their historical and cultural specificity. Dugin warns that this would lead to a world where human beings exist only as isolated, autonomous individuals, with no deeper connection to their collective past or future. As he writes:
This threat to authentic human existence is, in Dugin's view, the greatest danger posed by the liberal project. By seeking to homogenise the world and eliminate the diverse modes of existence that characterise different civilisations, liberalism threatens the core of what it means to be human. The loss of historical continuity and the reduction of human life to a series of isolated present moments would lead to a kind of nihilism, where human beings no longer experience themselves as part of a larger, meaningful narrative. Dugin warns that this is a step toward "post-humanity," a state of existence where "the individual is no longer to exist".
In The Fourth Political Theory, Alexander Dugin offers a compelling critique of the liberal world order, one that transcends mere political analysis to address deeper philosophical and ontological concerns. His call for the resurgence of civilisations as geopolitical actors is rooted in the belief that only through the recognition of cultural and historical diversity can humanity preserve its authentic existence. The liberal imposition of a universal, linear conception of time and history threatens to erase the unique identities of different peoples and reduce human beings to mere cogs in a global machine. For Dugin, the defense of civilization is not merely a matter of politics but an existential struggle to preserve the very essence of what it means to be human in a world increasingly shaped by the forces of liberalism. As he concludes:
This stark warning underscores the existential stakes of Dugin’s critique, calling for a multipolar world where civilizations can assert their unique identities and resist the forces that seek to erase them.
FPT pdf: https://somacles.wordpress.com/wp-c...7/alexander-dugin-fourth-political-theory.pdf
