Russia has reached a relevant historical
threshold. It is necessary to cast a look on the path
behind, to realise its place in the present world, to
mark the next steps.
New challenges for Russia, new strategic orienting
points, new purposes
Russia faces a set of new historical
challenges. Today more than ever before it is necessary
to affirm in a new form priorities, purposes, constants
of the historical path of Russia and to correlate them
with the shapes of that new world in which we shall live
in the next millennium.
Traditions. Fundamental directions of development
of Russia as State, people, society
Addressing to the future, we must give a
pondered estimation of our past. This past more than
once in Russian history has been rewritten in a favour
of this or that ruling ideological group. Today, leaving
the era of ideologies behind, we are obliged to sum up
the landmarks of our historical path as much as possible
objectively and impartially beyond ideological
preferences, outlining the most important features and
leaving aside the details. To this purpose there are
today all reasons and conditions. This freedom from
untouchable dogmas and obligatory clichés is possibly
the most positive achievement of young Russian
democracy.
`
The eurasist choice
There is no doubt that Russia has its
own path. Its external forms constantly vary, sometimes
in dramatic turnarounds. But in every epoch a common
line is traced — the eurasist direction, the eurasist
substance of Russian history. Much can be questioned in
considering our past, future and present. But the
eurasist Idea is not subject to doubt. Russia is
Eurasia, and this predetermines its geographical,
cultural, civilizational, strategic and economic
life.
Assertion of a special civilizational
mission
The eurasist identity of Russia
constitutes the substance of our historical mission.
Russia has its own image of the logic of history, of the
Truth of the world. The search for this Truth and its
affirmation is the content of national historical life.
Loyalty to this Truth was defended by our ancestors,
many generations of Russian people, Russians giving
their lives on the altar of Fatherland. To defend this
mission is our duty, also beyond the present moment. It
is our historical covenant.
Russia has only an eurasist future
Our future must be planned and built
according to the common landmarks of our history. Any
attempt to depart from this road, to refuse its
predestination, means the end of our historical being.
Russia has either an eurasist future, or none.
We are for idealism (cult of the truth)
The cultural forms of national life vary
through the centuries. But the idea of a society of
Equity and Good was always saved as a constant. Cultural
feature of the Russians is traditionally the aspiration
to a high ideal and some kind of neglect of the sphere
of material benefits. A heightened feeling of idealism
and universalism can be distinguished at the most
different stages of Russian history. The ideal of
sacrifice was initially understood in Christian terms,
as a special liability of the Russians to the Christian
Tradition, entrusted to them. In the Soviet period the
same Russian idealism was understood in a secularised
way, as the ethics of heroical service to the principles
of social justice and universal equality. Is is
characteristic, that the basic conflicts in Russian
history passed not between supporters of idealistic
systems and pragmatists, but almost exclusively between
two idealistic camps, in different ways and with a
different degree of intensity defending idealistic,
sometimes even utopian models, variedly expressed and
formulated. The cultural style of the Russians through
the whole course of history is characterised by a
dynamic rethinking in a national key of aesthetic and
stylistic elements borrowed from different cultural
contexts, their creative and original elaboration, their
skilful insertion into a particular specifically Russian
context. Freedom of creative adapting and assimilation
of borrowed scales of values, doctrines and symbols
discovers the openness of the Russians to the ethnic
variety surrounding them. The loyalty to its own
national origin, reshaping anything borrowed into a
unique and unrepeatable typical Russian product,
vice-versa, demonstrates the constancy of the cultural
type, its national specificity and stability.
Our idealistic conformation implies that the set of
our ideals is also the set of our purposes:
Our ideal of own self-consciousness
- We are a special people, a special
world, a special geopolitical formation
As an historical community (people), as
a unique economic and social organism, as a special
geopolitical formation, we represent a complete
self-supporting system entered in the common planetary
equilibrium of civilisations, cultures, peoples,
religions and states. To affirm and to save our
multivariate originality is our major task.
- We are against the repetition of
mistakes
We are simply obliged to not retry the
bloody mistakes of our ancestors, having taken in the
new millennium all the best of our national history. In
the new conditions, the limit to rough mistakes and
sharp departures from our destiny has been reached. The
fatality of some definite mistakes repeatedly made by
our ancestors has become obvious. Our task is not
retrying the most rough of them. We have to accept our
destiny, to realise it and triumphally to affirm before
the world the RUSSIAN TRUTH.
- We are for succession
The succession of civilizational
policies and strategies distinguishes wise peoples from
senseless ones, mature states from adventurist ones. The
most various classifications of the historical periods
of Russian history converge in saying that the Russian
people (being rather young in comparison to the majority
of the European ethnoses), nevertheless has left youth
behind, and is characterised by a deep attention to its
destiny, a more mature estimation of its position in the
world. The wise state reflects about its historical
predestination, about the combination of traditions and
vanguard innovative paths more and better than the
adventurist, temporary, transient state. Russia has
clearly approached to the necessity of a new deep
comprehension of its “ego».
Our ideal of internal political construction:
organic democracy, eurasist federalism
The eurasist political model must be
founded on the imperative of participation of the
society in adopting the founding historical decisions,
on genuine people’s government. The participation of the
people to its own destiny — so is defined a genuine
democracy. This participation can be realised in various
ways. As Russia represents a massive strategic
formation, the management of its strategic potential
must be concentrated in the hands of a small group or
distinct personalities, no matter how they are called
— president, monarch, High council, leader etc.
Such personification of authority does not contradict
the principle of organic democracy in the event that the
communal vector of activity of the highest State
personalities (or group of persons) corresponds to the
reference direction of historical development, and is
based on the constants of national life. Thus, criterion
for evaluating the adequacy (or inadequacy) of the head
of the State must not simply be his efficiency in
fulfilling his functions and official duties, but first
of all his loyalty to the «great project» of the people,
his being at the service of the historical mission of
the State.
At a basic level,
«organic democracy» supposes a wide and flexible system
of self-government correlated to cultural, religious and
professional traditions of concrete collectives.
Somewhat it is possible to see in this pattern an
analogy to the Soviets (councils). Here must act
the principles of «direct democracy», the mechanisms of
collective elaboration of decisions having local
political significance and inscribed in concrete
regions.
Between the strategic
unitary principle of the supreme authority and the
differentiated plurality of autonomous groups at a local
level, there must exist a flexible system of political
co-ordination in the person of bodies of the executive
and legislative authority of an intermediate level,
realising the co-ordination between the will of the
communities and the strategic line of the central
administration.
The cohesion will be
mostly effective in the event that the highest State
authorities will control only those aspects of political
life, which have strategic meaning, such as:
-
preserving territorial integrity of the State;
- ensuring its sovereignty and independence;
-
planning the development of strategic sectors of
industry and economy;
- ensuring juridical
norms to the citizens;
- asserting the
interests of Russia across the globe etc.,
but in
the remaining non-strategic questions the many public
local formations will be granted the highest autonomy,
independence and right to define the parameters of
political life at a local level.
- eurasist centrism
The politological identity of Russia
predetermines that vector of political world-view which
must be accepted as an axis of the political Centre.
This vector supposes the combination of principles of
social justice rule and social economy (left-wing
economy, socialism) with values of conservatism and
cultural traditionalism in the pure political
orientation of the State (right-wing politics,
conservatism). This combination of “left» and
“right-wing» elements in the definition of the Russian
idea of political Centre is the opposite of the way
similar elements are combined in the liberal politics of
the West, where the political Centre is founded on the
combination of the «free market» (right-wing economy,
liberal–capitalism) with modernism, innovation and
antitraditionalism in the political sphere, but also at
the level of ethics, culture, religion (left-wing
politics, progressism).
Around
the fundamental line of the eurasist political Centre,
political flanks directions can dynamically be developed
— right and left-wing, i.e. parties, fractions and
different political formations disagreeing in this or
that direction from the centrist line. Yet they will be
limited by their loyalty to the common historical
project of Russia, fully reflected in the position of
the Centre. The transition beyond a definite limit
toward alternative politological models will be
equivalent to political marginalisation. Thus the
tolerance of the Centre in relation to even the most
extreme, extremist and extravagant projects (close to
the liberal politological pattern) will depend directly
on the intensity of geopolitical confrontation with
atlantism. If the situation in international life will
be favourable to Russia, the political tolerance to
liberal and extremist political formations will
increase. In the difficult times of active
confrontation, this tolerance, vice-versa, must become
minimal.
- third path
The combination of moderately socialist
elements in economy and conservative statalist
traditionalist of the tendencies in politics is
conventionally called as «third path» model, in order to
distinguish it both from usual socialism (the Marxist
version, which offers a combination of left-wing economy
and the left-wing politics), and rightist dictatorial
regimes (where political conservatism is combined with
market mechanisms and absolute power of a financial
oligarchy). The «third path», in its different
interpretations, most exactly corresponds to the
political history of Russia. Moreover, an attentive
analysis of the shifts between the rightist and leftist
regimes in Russian history finds that these
revolutionary processes streamed around of a common
axis, some of them departing from it, some of them
turning closer. This axis represents just that absolute
political Centre - until now never plainly
manifest - whose politological the configuration is
identical to the «third path» model. Hence, choosing the
political system of the «third path» as fundamental
shall be the thoughtful, responsible, fatal step toward
the definitive adoption by Russia of its leading role as
the most general, universal and all-inclusive
alternative world-view in the political field. And if
such transition to the theory of the «third path» will
indeed take place, this will mean liquidating the basic
reasons of the dramatic revolutionary confrontations, of
the cruel destructive revolutions and extremist unrest
which coloured Russian political history in a bloody
tone. The «third path» is the only guarantor from
forthcoming revolutions, civil wars and revolts, which
again can divide Russia between conflicting camps in the
event that such choice will not take place. The
thoughtful and clear adoption of that model - which has
been the hidden core of Russian political history - as
the basic tendency of political Centre will mean real
political consent, long-term stability and internal
political peace.
- eurasist federalism
The scale of historical mission of Russia, necessary
to prevent the establishment of the «new world order»
and to oppose to it a global alternative, implies the
creation of such internal political system as much as
possible open for involving in the eurasist block other
peoples and states with diverse cultural,
civilisational, political, religious and economic
history. For this purpose the general political
structure of Russia must be as much as possible close to
the model of the forthcoming eurasist continental
formation. It means building the system of «eurasist
federalism», whose main feature must be combining
strategic unity at the level of central administration
and wide diversity of political, social, legal and
economic organization of the forming parts.
Eurasist federalism supposes a
political and administrative system considerably
different from the pattern of nation-state on which the
modern western powers are based. In a nation-state there
are strict political centralism, linguistic and cultural
homogeneity, universal requirement of a uniform
juridical, constitutional, political and economic
system. The nation-state is supposed to represent a
uniform mono-cultural block composed of atomized
citizens, enjoying the equal juridical status before the
unitary state system.
Eurasist
federalism is based on completely different reasons. It
precisely shares two concepts — strategic unity and wide
ethno-cultural, regional pluralism. The state is
politically unitary, in the sense of accomplishing a
unique historical mission, a common geopolitical «great
project». But this unity does not apply to a usual
country, but to a whole civilisation; here we have no
ordinary state formation, but the liberation of a
«democratic empire» of a new kind. Therefore solidarity
at a level of planetary destiny is accompanied by the
broadest differentiation at the level of the constituent
parts, of advanced cultural and religious autonomies.
Even in its present shape, Russia has saved distinctly
federative features, basic signs of an «empire» made of
a whole constellation of extremely heterogeneous regions
in the ethnic, social, cultural and geographical sense.
Each region represents a self-supporting system with a
lot of unique, unrepeatable features. This specificity
as an ethnic, social, juridical and communitarian mosaic
must be mirrored also at the political level, as a wide
federal association of collective subjects differing in
status and level. At the basic definition of units of
federal space must not lay administrative and
territorial descriptions (as in centralist
nation-states), but a flexible system of criteria taking
into account the whole complex of cultural, social,
historical, economic, ethnic identity must lay. And the
federal subject, playing a structuring role in the
formation of the State, must replicate the
federative-democratic pattern also at an internal level,
i.e. represent the not the narrow analogue of a small
scale nation-state (as it happens in the case of newly
formed republics separated from Russia, of national and
territorial-administrative formations aspiring today to
raise to political autonomy, down to separatism), but of
a mini-empire with the broadest spectrum of internal
collective subjects, being structured, in turn, as the
subject of the great federation. And so on, down to
self-ruling working collectives, executive boards of
local communities and councils.
Such internal federative system will facilitate Russia’s
strategic union with the different powers, potential
participants of the continental eurasist block. In case
of conclusion of such unions, the federative principle
will be saved inviolable, but the configuration of the
federative room will be extended (in the event that the
strategic integration will be very tight). All
territorial controversies, fully or partially
preventing the establishing of tight allied mutual
relation between neighbouring states will thus be
solved. If – for instance – Russia’s neighbouring
countries and potential participants to the eurasist
block will go on developing federalism inside their
states, the dimensions of the Eurasist Union organically
and naturally will begin to expand, since the presence
of wide cultural and religious autonomies will not
weaken the traditional states, constantly threatening
separatism and military conflicts, but, vice-versa, will
strengthen the strategic block, in which many small
peoples and cultural ensembles will have the
long-awaited chance of reunification into an organic
whole and by that become a binding element, having
changed today's (destructive) geopolitical mission into
its opposite. For multinational Eurasia such wide
federalist approach would be the ideal solution.
In an even more remote perspective,
eurasist federalism could become an attractive political
pattern across the globe, representing the political
alternative to the mondialist levelling of the «new
world order».
Our ideal of geopolitical strategy for
Russia
The highest geopolitical priority for
Russia in the forthcoming century (millennium) is the
creation of an eurasist strategic block — with a
flexible and differentiated world-view and a multilevel
membership — as a counterweight to atlantist and
mondialist tendencies on a global scale.
As against the previous epoch, the axis
of such block must be neither a world-view
[weltanschauung] neither a specific economic or
political system, but geopolitical and strategic
principles, civilisational imperatives.
Russia must definitely understand itself as the
«geographical axis of history», as the core of Eurasia,
with full responsibility to affirm at the new stage and
in new terms the global extent of its historical and
civilisational destiny (taking into account mistakes and
deviations of previous historical periods).
- the multipolar world
In a long-term perspective it is necessary to
be guided by the aim of creating a genuinely free and
fair multipolar world, organically forming around
different cultural, civilisational, social and
historical centres. The riches of mankind is directly
linked to the variety of civilizations, which must not
only be saved, but also newly asserted. Eurasia itself,
in the best periods of its history, was distinguished
for this «imperial» variety, where strategic and
geopolitical unity was combined with a constellation of
organic and cultural autonomous parts. The eurasist pole
initially must be formed as a civilisation stronghold of
liberation, so that the forthcoming multipolarity
becomes for Eurasia the natural and desirable result of
the temporary return to the bipolar pattern. Hence, the
same structure of the new eurasist block must initially
bear in itself the germs of cultural pluralism, of
differentiation, of variety, of «blossoming
complexity». In such case the forthcoming advent of a
genuinely multipolar world will be the organic
continuation of the eurasist line, opposed to the
unifying unidimensional logic of atlantism.
- eurasist strategic unions
The realisation of the eurasist project
implies a series of steps aimed at increasing the
strategic significance and the self-supporting weight of
Russia. No other State, for geopolitical reasons, is
able to become the axis of the eurasist block. Russia
holds a geographically central place in Eurasia, and has
a strategic potential, sufficient for ensuring the
successful start of integration processes at the first
stage. For Russia it is vitally necessary to be guided
in external and domestic policy by the one and only
imperative, to which all remaining ones must be
subordinated — the creation of the Eurasist
Union.
- minimal size: the post-Soviet
integration
The minimal scale of the eurasist
integration, or its first stage, must become the
strategic reunification of CIS countries (former Soviet
republics) in a common strategic construction, united by
the consciousness of common geopolitical concerns and
common strategic and civilisational destiny. The
integration of CIS countries into a new, more solid
strategical formation must be based on global
geopolitical tasks, instead of momentary social and
economic interests or combination of forces within
political élites. The fatal meaning of the Eurasist
Project is so great, that it incomparably exceeds the
balance of practical pluses and minuses originating from
such integration, of obviously stands well above the
political and psychological portraits of contingently
ruling leaders and parties.
The
geopolitical integration of CIS (which is possible since
the first stage, except for those states too deeply
involved in atlantist mechanisms) must be realised as
the execution of the eurasist destiny, instead of
arbitrary act of any political or ideological grouping.
For this reason, the unity of geopolitical purposes must
consolidate among themselves both ruling regimes and
opposition, both the establishment élite and the
revolutionary counter-élites.
The history of
mankind, the chance of establishing a multipolar world
depends on the real integration of CIS. Hence, narrow
political dissent must retreat in second plan before the
grandiosity of this project, and political-social
conflicts — objectively inevitable in any society — must
not extend in any case to the sphere of the general
strategic course, which under no circumstances can be
held hostage by interparty struggles or social
frictions.
In this precise
way the geopolitical succession of US atlantist élite
(which one disputing — sometimes rather roughly —
tactical questions, political problems methods,
decisions) never put into question what in America is
called «Manifest Destiny», i.e. «clear
predestination».
Eurasia,
according to its own parameters, has a similar vocation
and predestination, as much global, but with the
opposite sign.
And the
accomplishment of this eurasist predestination must
gather the CIS ?lite at the first stage of the new
affirmation of the eurasist block.
- continental block
The following stage of the Eurasist
Project, which can be realised of in a parallel way to
the strategic integration of CIS, is the creation of a
unitary strategic association with eurasist States
vitally interested in building an alternative to
autocratic planetary domination of the US and the
countries of the atlantist West. Such countries are some
Arabian states of Near East and Northern Africa, Iran,
India, China, and other Far Eastern countries included
in the Pacific zone.
These countries
have their ancient culture, advanced religious systems,
and a complex and particular social and political
structures. Their economic way of life represents an
original germination of formations and systems. The
majority of these countries have their own historical
project expressed in the terms of civilizational,
cultural, political, social and national originality.
Not always this project harmoniously corresponds to the
projects of neighbouring powers and civilizations, but
they are united in the opposition to atlantist
universalism, in the denial of liberal mondialist
levelling, in the refusal autocratic domination of the
US. On the basis of the principle of common negation,
all these elements can be involved in the large scale
continental block.
In the coming
future, from this picture of highly differentiated
plurality, a multipolar reality can be formed on the
basis of a common Eurasist Path.
- union with Europe and Japan
Integration within the framework of CIS,
the creation of the eurasist strategic block represent
the preliminary steps towards an active planetary
strategy of Eurasia, without which a strategic
civilisational alternative will not have sufficient
stuffing.
The following stage
(which, in its basic features, can be prepared with no
delay and in a parallel way to the other two) is
activating a geopolitical line toward Europe and Japan.
Europe and Japan represent the two major strategic
«coast zones», the control upon which ensures to
atlantism (the US) a steady supremacy over a potential
eurasist civilisation.
For this
reason, the final destiny of Eurasia will depend on the
successful neutralisation of Europe and Japan, from
their exclusion from US strategic control, and their
subsequent including in the pan-eurasist project. Only
once such dimension will be reached — including Europe
and the whole Pacific region together with Japan — the
Eurasist Project will be quite complete and is able to
exert a decisive effect on planetary processes.
- purpose: civilisation promotion of a new
multipolar planetary reality
The global geopolitical task of Russia
consists in the creation of a multipolar world, in the
strategic promotion of such world. The transition to it,
as to a pluralist and differentiated alternative to
unidimensional atlantist mondialism, will be possible
only in the course of the realisation of all three
stages of the Eurasist Project. A multipolar free world,
with a blossoming complexity of cultures and
civilisations — here is the highest geopolitical ideal
of Russia, its vocation, its predestination.
Our ideal of geoeconomic strategy of Russia:
self-sufficiency of large spaces
- eurasist principle of «economic
pluralism»
The eurasist economic model is based on
a principle opposite to liberal universalism, to the
postulates of the so-called «classical school» of
economics. Each historical community has its own unique
history of economic development, its own special
structure as economic organism. The system of criteria
according to one economic efficiency is valued, the
parameters of success or failure, cannot be
separated from the historical, social and cultural
context of a given society. The thought of the western
classic school of economics comes from the wrong
supposition of unidirectional economic development for
all peoples and states, only with miscellaneous paces.
On this belief is based the representation about «the
doubtless advantages of the western economic pattern, as
the most advanced stage in realisation of the economic
pattern common to all peoples». Being pushed by this
belief, the West felt itself legitimated to act as the
economic arbitrator across the globe, imposing to anyone
else that system of economic criteria, which reflects
the logic of development of economic systems of western
countries.
The eurasist economic
pattern will come from the opposite principle — the
impossibility of evaluating the economic systems of the
various peoples starting from general abstract criteria
and separately from historical and cultural reality.
Against the economic monism of the liberal political
economy, the eurasist world-view exposes the concept of
an economic plurality. In practice it means that the
world economic system consists of separate sovereign
economic units developing according to their internal
logic and unsuitable to be assessed proceeding from any
general theory. Precisely just as it is impossible to
demonstrate on the basis of abstract criteria the
superiority of one culture over another, the truth of
one faith in comparison with a different faith, the
supremacy of one race above another, so it is impossible
to justify the supremacy of one management system above
another, since it would mean obliterating the original
economic history of each concrete people and
state.
The traditional economic
complexes of archaic nations are perfectly efficient,
balanced and adequate within the framework of their
historical and cultural context, as well as the advanced
industrial technological complexes of the Western world.
Economic and management specificity mirrors cultural
peculiarity. The task of the eurasist economy is to
warrant within its domain the sovereignty, conservation
and organic development of all present economic systems
reflecting the cultural-historical path of concrete
peoples. The economic plurality of the eurasist pattern
mirrors at an economic level that principle of
multipolarity, to which eurasist geopolitics are
oriented.
- creation of advanced self-sufficient economic
systems of the mixed kind (plurality of
regimes)
The economic vector of development of
Russia must be organically adjusted to the basic
geopolitical and strategic orienting point of its
development, i.e. with the Eurasist Project. It is
perfectly clearly, that following abstract dogmas of
purely economic ideologies — be it Marxism or liberalism
— withdraws Russia from its destiny in labyrinths of
scholastics and civil conflicts.
Moreover,
liberalism, as well as Marxism, insists on economic
unification, on the levelling of management processes.
The natural development of the economy of Russia in the
future must be realised on the basis of a complex
approach taking into account both economic and
non-economic factors. The strategic imperative of the
eurasist line requires the edification of the economy in
a regime of «expanded self-sufficiency»,
prospectively on a continental scale. It is the
neo-keynesian pattern of «economic isolation» or the
updated version of the «customs union».
This economic pattern supposes the
partial openness of economy (concerning the strategic
allies) and the existence of economic barriers against
the economic systems of countries belonging to the
antagonist strategic block.
The
second imperative of development of the Russian economy
is the requirement of a due plurality of regimes, the
differentiated combination of various economic systems —
from state control (in strategic areas) to the free
market (in small and medium production, trade system,
services) through miscellaneous systems of collective
management (cooperatives, joint-stock companies etc.) .
- keynesism for Eurasia, «eurasist economic
isolation»
The economic pattern most suitable to
modern Eurasia in view of establishing a civilisational
factor is the keynesian pattern, centrally placed for
respecting the strategic priorities of the eurasist
ensemble of states and nations. In defining the
orientation of economic reforms, emphasis must be put
not simply on the achievement of the highest economic
efficiency, but on the general civilisational and social
context, in whose interest these reforms must be
realised according to the logic of things. And since
this context in its basic vectors is not simply
different, but in many respects opposite to the liberal
atlantist system, to the «new world order», a major
problem is the creation of an «eurasist economic
island», possessing relative self-sufficiency. It
implies a paternalistic economic variant, indispensable
through the whole period of economic development of
Eurasia. Thus the development of the basic sectors of
industry, information systems, agriculture and
especially of high technology must be the main task of
the central authority, responsible for strategic issues.
Market elements, completely indispensable in a number of
sectors of the economy — small and medium production,
sphere of services etc. — must be combined with the
public sector. The problem of employment must be solved
at strategical state level, and not just at market
level. The parasitic class of the rentiers must be
marginalised to the benefit of productive social groups
of businessmen and workers receiving a wage in the
private and state enterprises (so-called
«wage-earners»).
- eurasist finance
It is necessary for Russia to create its
own currency in a common planetary financial context.
This is possible in three ways:
1) pegging it
to the dollar (being de facto the world reserve
currency),
2) pegging it to the currencies of
other large geoeconomic regions (European or
Pacific),
3) creating its own financial system
within the framework of a vast eurasist customs union -
the so-called «eurasist rouble».
The first
alternative disappears for strategic reasons, as it
makes the eurasist economy of Russia dependent from the
atlantist geopolitical pole (that means suicide). The
second and third alternatives can be realised in a
parallel way with a the prioritary perspective solution
of the «eurasist rouble». The warranties of the
«eurasist rouble» cannot only stay in our
industrial-economic structures, but in the whole
aggregate of geopolitical, resource and strategic
potential of Eurasia, with a special emphasis on the
sphere of Russian nuclear weapons and other innovative
military technologies, assessed as a financial
equivalent of the extent of power potential. Exactly
according to such logic of US achieved supremacy in the
post-war world within the capitalist camp have, having
translated their strategic force superiority in the
equivalent financial domination of the dollar as the
world reserve currency, and – just as a result of such
operation - having provided a solid base for strong
economic growth. Within the framework of the eurasist
strategic block Russia can quite reasonably repeat the
given schema and peg its currency, the «eurasist
rouble», to the conservation and development of its
military strategic potential, seen as a warranty of
freedom and independence for other eurasist powers from
the neo-colonial dictatorship of the «new world
order».
- fourth zone, pragmatical involvement in world
virtual economy
Major economic task of Russia is the
creation of a self-supporting, autarchic, closed
economic zone within the limits of Eurasia. The eurasist
fourth zone — along with the existing three: American,
European and Pacific — must reunite in a common economic
space the territory of CIS countries, and a number of
East Europe and Asian countries interested to strategic
independence in front of the economic pressure of the
«rich North». Potential participants of the fourth zone
can be countries with various economic systems, which
implies an economic integration at miscellaneous paces
depending on the specificity of the given region or
country. The fourth economic zone must be guided by
prioritary interaction with the neighbouring economic
spaces — European and Pacific - with the long-term
purpose of opposing American hegemony across the globe
and normalising the economic balance on the territory of
the whole planet. Even the first steps toward the
realisation of the fourth zone will change the economic
balance between highly technological, industrial regions
and regions richly endowed with resources, breaking the
univocal domination of the «rich North» and the colonial
exploitation of the «poor South».
- involvement in planetary geoeconomical processes
with the purpose to give them an eurasist civilisational
direction
The financial and economic system of
Russia can not ignore the forming of a virtual economy
at a world level, the translation of economic potential
into the sphere of information technology and electronic
stock exchanges. In a distant perspective, the eurasist
policy course must result in the relativization (and
even deletion) of such virtual financial system and in
the returning to the priorities of real sectors,
long-term investments and concrete production of
material goods, to the transition from virtual capital
to real, creative and organising management. But at a
transitory stage Russia must participate in the world
virtual economy, by delegating to special broker groups
under strict strategic control of the highest state
authorities, in order to assimilate the most recent
technologies and whenever possible to readdress global
trends in a direction strategically amplifying the
positions of the eurasist geoeconomy.
Our ideal of strategy of industrial development of
Russia
- informatization
The creation of the fourth zone requires
a radical modernisation of the domestic industry, the
large-scale and systematic introduction of advanced
technologies in key spheres of strategic production. At
the roots of such modernisation must lay the system of
informatization, communication and transport, which
constitutes the axial reality of the post-industrial
stage of development of the economy. Due to large-scale
informatization, many organisational problems of
production, merchandising and allocation, and also
processes of economic integration and work allocation
within the framework of the eurasist zone will be
successfully solved. Thanks to technological
flexibility, informatization can be introduced both in
hi-tech processes and in some traditional spheres of the
economy, everywhere multiplying the efficiency. Planned
and universal informatization must become a strategic
priority of the State. In the issue of creating a solid
system of eurasist customs union, informatization will
play a central role, and the success of such union will
depend to no small degree on it.
- regionalisation
Integration processes in the eurasist
economy must be accompanied by increasing significance
of the single regions and increasing extent of their
administrative and economic independence. Industrial
zones must be integrated in a communal eurasist economic
field not by way of decrees, but through organic and
natural horizontal connections reproducing on an
economic level the federative system. The control from
the centre must encompass exclusively the strategic
spheres, set general economic parameters, but the
concrete ways of accomplishing the general tasks of
industrial development must be decided at a local
level.
- creation of self-contained industrial cycles
linked to local spaces
The allocation of work within the
framework of the fourth zone does not imply the
centralisation of production management. The large
industrial areas must be based on the use of local
infrastructures and resource potential. Such
organisation of partially self-contained industrial
cycles linked to local systems is indispensable for
increasing the solidity of the pan-eurasist economic
pattern and raise the level of industrial safety. The
industrial complexes in such situation must become the
core of social ensembles in view of the ethnic,
demographic, religious and cultural specificity of the
population.
- ecological qualification of industrial
productions
The environmental factor must be
included among the basic priorities in expert estimation
of industrial projects, and its evaluation is also
indispensable in the issue of restructuring
existing productions. The probability of an ecological
catastrophe in the present conditions increases, and in
this situation the conservation of the eco-system
becomes a major element of strategic safety.
Our ideal of cultural development: the
conservation of heritage, the eurasist
synthesis
- conservation of variety of cultural
heritage
A major task of the Eurasist Project of
Russia at a cultural level is the affirmation of a
pluralist, multilevel, differentiated pattern
alternative to the schemas of unidimensional
unification, offered by the supporters of «globalism
under aegis of the West». The uniform consumer society,
formed on the American stamp and based on individualism,
inevitably results in the eradication of cultural,
social, religious, ethnic variety. Russia must formulate
across the globe its mission of guarantor of the
«blossoming complexity», advanced watchman of the
relations among the natural variety of human civilised
ensembles. The affirmation and conservation of real
historical variety of the cultural life of peoples and
states is the highest purpose of the Eurasist Project of
Russia at a civilisational level.
- Eastern post-modern
The common feature of post-modern shows the intrinsic
characteristic of development of a human civilisation,
and for this reason the voluntaristic rejection of
post-modern is impossible, as it was impossible at the
time to ignore the call of the New Times (modernity)
thrown to the traditional societies. This especially
concerns countries and peoples claiming for active
participation in the definition of the historical path
of mankind (and Russia undoubtedly refers to the number
of such «great powers» which are not indifferent to the
destiny of all mankind). For this reason Russia must
master the argument of post-modern, but using it for its
own historical purposes, reformulating in post-modern
the terms its historical mission (just as the Soviet
period was the formulation of the same mission in the
terms of New Times, of the modern). This newly born
cultural direction, provided with a colossal
perspective, is conventionally called «Eastern
post-modern» (or «post-modern of diversity»), as against
the «Western post-modern» (or «universalistic
post-modern»). If the «post-modern» of the West
represents «the end of history» and the extravagant
overlaying of internally heterogeneous, meaningless
ethical masses, in the absence of a centre of values,
«Eastern post-modern» represents the return to a
synthetic, integrated style recreating at a new
historical level the wholeness, peculiar to the
traditional societies.
- new eurasist culturology
The new eurasist culturology must be
based on the conceptual assimilation and development of
the basic reasons of «Eastern post-modern» as a new
synthetic method of cultural analysis recognising the
equal dignity of cultures, belonging to various
historical and geographical sectors. The new eurasist
culturology rejects the «racist», «suprematist» division
of cultures between «advanced» and «under-developed»,
«progressive» and «archaic», on «civilised» and «not
civilised». Each culture must be valued in the system of
co-ordinates peculiar to itself, instead of any abstract
external pattern claiming for true in the last resort.
Such eurasist culturology must become the antithesis to
the veiled «cultural racism» practised by the
atlantism.
- polilogue of cultures as subjects
In the eurasist world system the basic
historical acting figure is not the individual, but the
community, ethnos, culture, social organic formation.
Therefore the principle of cultural interaction among
the various parts of Eurasia must be the complex,
dynamical and open polilogue of cultures, acting not as
incomplete formations, subject to abstract mechanical
improvement on the basis of abstract schema, but as last
and highest authorities forming in their interlacement
the multidimensional fabric of the manifold, organic
living world.
- rejection of cultural levelling (smoothing out
of cultural differences)
Russia must become the central pole of
an enormous the cultural revolution representing
alternative to atlantist cultural levelling into a
uniform surrogate of style copying the «American way of
life». The universal meaning of Russia’s cultural
mission within the Eurasist Project is to contribute to
the development of a differentiated, free and cultural
multipolar world. In this sense, the continental project
of Eurasia acquires world-wide meaning, as starting line
of a global cultural alternative to the «new world
order» and undivided domination of atlantism.
- wide conservative pluralism
The conservation and development of
cultural plurality both within the framework of Russia,
and on a larger scale — within the framework of Eurasia
and within the limits of the whole world — is the
specificity of the Eurasist Project, some kind of a
conservative plurality. Such cultural plurality refers
to the conservation («conservation») of the basic
ferments of cultures, to the due correlation of dynamic
development, in which the vital origin of the society is
embodied, with the deep basic parameters of its
traditional core. The basic feature of «Eastern
post-modern» lays in such prioritary relation to
Tradition.
Our ideal of social system: socially oriented
community, deep ecologism
- eurasist socialism
In contrast to the absolutization of the
liberal pattern laying at the economic base of the «new
world order», the Eurasist Project supposes the
reference to a wide spectrum of the socially oriented
patterns of a social system, which can be sometimes
globally called as «socialism» or «socially oriented
community». The social environment is the natural
habitat of the man, and in his basic features man is
defined just as in relation to a definite community. As
against dogmatical Marxism, this community can be
understood in very different ways —as a cultural type,
as community collective unconscious, as ethnic identity,
as religious faith, as a social-historical formation, as
a class-professional belonging etc. All these social
features can be taken into account in a common summary
pattern, which, conditionally, it is possible to call as
the «eurasist socialism», free from the dogmatists,
creative, open, incorporating both traditional forms of
social identification and new social forms growing in
modern conditions. The social feature of Eurasism does
not exclude at all the value of the individual,
and the more so it does not reject some definite
elements of market management. It is a common spirit, a
priority attitude toward the social system, where in the
economic, social, scientific and political areas the
models based on the principle of the general social
subject are encouraged, and the major basic instance is
the organic collective of an old or new kind.
- new ecological consciousness
The eurasist society must be built on a
deep consideration of the environmental factor. Peculiar
to the modern epoch is the relation to the environment
as to a passive, lifeless scenery, which the active man
is free to arbitrarily shape; such relation has brought
mankind on the brink of global catastrophe. Such
approach is being inertially inherited also by the
architects of the «new world order». Eurasist sociality
must be based on the opposite reason: on the prioritary
consideration of the factor of deep ecology. It means a
special relation to the environment, as to a living,
substantial reality meaningful, in which man is assigned
a special place and given a special liability for
preserving a fine balance among the constituting parts
of the whole natural ensemble. The eurasist society must
be built on the basis of an attentive reflection upon
the natural environment, on the harmony with it, on the
accurate intervention into existing ecosystems and their
extremely delicate manipulation. Ecological
consciousness must become the dominant kind of
consciousness.
- new safeguard and «conservative
revolution»
The eurasist society must be based on a
safeguard, conservative principle. But this refers not
to political institutions — and specially to those which
bear on themselves the mark of modern — but to deep
cultural and psychological orientations, establishing
the identity of peoples, states and communities. To
careful conservation are subject the intrinsic deep
settings of ethnic psychology, acting in the different
historical periods in different, sometimes externally
opposite forms. Such deep safeguard does not at
all contradict active social dynamics, as the objective
course of history requires constant adaptation of the
essential identification elements to varying conditions.
The system itself, with the raise of new stimuli,
requires active social creativity, but the ultimate
subject of this creativity, changing and being
transformed, must save the maximum of identity. Such
combination of a safeguard principle (conservative) and
a creative principle (revolutionary) is defined as «
conservative revolution».
Our ideal of life of traditional eurasist
religions (Orthodoxy, Islam, Buddhism, residuals of
ancient cults)
- discovering the ecumenical mission of the
Orthodox Church
At a religious level the Eurasist
Project of Russia implies conservation and «public»
development of the spirit of Tradition, a new reference
to religious sources of mankind. The religious mission
of Russia, in its widest significance, consists in such
«return to the sources». The axial form of Tradition in
the eurasist Project is the Orthodox, Eastern Church, as
depository of authentic Christian spirit preserving the
universal dimension of Christian tradition. The mission
of the Orthodoxy is not narrowly ethnical, limited to
any concrete region or historical period. This mission
is ecumenical. The Russians traditionally clearly
realised the messianic character of their Belief,
consciously or intuitively they followed the ecumenical
drive to the universal affirmation of Salvation, Good
and Just. For the orthodox consciousness the «new world
order» is identified with the «coming of the
anti-Christ». For this reason opposing to it, affirming
a global religious, ethical and world-view alternative,
is not a simply social, but a religious due of the
Christians. The fineness of the eschatological
identification of the «new world order» with the «prince
of this world» makes Orthodoxy an axial reality of
global religious resistance across the globe, as in
other traditional religions the eschatological aspect is
not so brightly expressed and stressed. Orthodoxy
becomes the religious geopolitical pole of the eurasist
Project. But such central place does not mean at all
diminishing of value of other traditional eurasist
confessions.
- union of traditional religions
Eurasist confessions, being various from
the point of view of dogmas and not reducible to a
common scheme, have nevertheless a number of features
which draws them closer. This concerns not so much
dogmatic side, how much psychological type of eastern
religiosity — more contemplative than active, more
paradoxical than rationalistic, more linked to the
eternal aspect of things, rather than to historical
process. These common psychological features give the
bases for the union of traditional eurasist confessions,
without mixing their faith principles or missionarily
imposing doctrinal theses, unacceptable by the others.
The union of traditional religions of Eurasia must
represent a geopolitical and cultural agreement based on
the observance of the sovereign rights to confessional
freedom of each people and each man.
- Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Induism, Taoism,
archaic cults
Christianity (Orthodoxy), Islam,
Buddhism, Induism, Confucianism, Taoism and some local
archaic cults prevail n Eurasia. The eurasist union of
religions must be founded on
- cultural and
geopolitical co-ordination of these confessions in the
issue of the sermons;
- joint settling
of possible inter-confessional conflicts;
-
development of a common eurasist style of religious
traditionalism, based on the respect of the rights of
other eurasist religions. To the degeneration of the
religious element in the West - from practical
materialistic atheism, extravagant artificial cults
(often totalitarian) and «racist» patterns of
Catholic-Protestant fundamentalism based on open hatred
toward eurasist religions - Eurasia must oppose a new
traditionalism, a universal solidary return to religious
roots.
Our ideal of interethnic relations in
Russia-Eurasia
- necessity of special policies of preservation of
ethnoses, as the highest value of history
Peoples, ethnoses are the highest value
and subject of human history. They live according to
natural organic cycles, mutation waves etc. In some
moments of their history ethnoses can blend with each
other, in other moments they rigidly save their
characteristics. This process is extremely delicate, and
any interference in it — artificial mixture, artificial
isolation, planned resettlement of the peoples etc.
leads to enormous unrecoverable catastrophes. Thus the
proposed mondialist pattern of universal mixture of
peoples and races is as much dangerous as the
discredited nationalist theory of «racial purity». In
both cases such rough projects lead to ethnocide. The
eurasist relation to the ethnos is of safeguard,
emanating from the principle of necessary protection of
each ethnic group from an outlook of historical
disappearing. This refers both to large ethnoses, and to
populations of a few hundreds individuals. In any cases
ethnoses are subject to protection both from the
dogmatic supporters of universal mixture and from
xenophobic aggressions of the nationalists. Eurasism as
a model supposes the assertion of ethnic differences,
but for the same reason excludes any «mixophoby»
(hostility to mixture). In a definite moment and in a
definite situation, ethnic mixture is inevitable and
positive (great-russians have arisen as a nation through
the blending of the Slavs with Turks and Ugres). But its
parameters and dimensions must be naturally and
organically defined, with the highest
accurateness.
- creative differentialism and
demography
The eurasist ethnic plurality must be
creative. In the demographic issue, projects oriented to
preserving positive or balanced demographic equilibrium
must be realised in order to prevent the disappearing of
ethnoses. The common responsibility of the
representatives of the different ethnic, religious,
state and social élites toward the continental destiny
of Eurasia must be shown in flexible agreements
concerning ethnic and demographic policies taking
account all factors traditionally influential in each
concrete region and within the framework of each
concrete ethnos. The purpose is the joint effort to
preserving that ethnic balance in Russia and, more
widely, within the potential eurasist block, which
existed up to the present day, together with the
extraordinary amending of some catastrophic tendencies
threatening with degeneration and fading the single
peoples (especially the Russian people, axial for the
whole eurasist construction).
- dual relation toward processes of ethnic mixture
— openness at the level of élites, limitation at a mass
level
A flexible pattern of eurasist
differentialism in its most general terms can be
structured according to the following principle:
tolerant toward ethnic mixture at the level of élites,
and cautious attitude at a mass level. Thus let the
choice always remain open in individual cases, according
to the rights and freedom of each single citizen. Such
specific attitude was typical of the ethnic approach in
traditional societies, which in many respects formed
social patterns of behaviour also for modern peoples.
Such pattern is organic and natural. Besides, it will
contribute to the universalism and cultural width of
views within the administrative élites of Eurasia, able
to encompass ethnic and culture variety; but at the same
time it will contribute to preserving the vital
creativity of ethnic centres, saving invariant
traditional identities and forming new cadres for the
pan-eurasist élites.
Our ideal of civilisational strategy for
Russia
- civilisational priorities must be placed above
national, state, confessional ones
The Eurasist Project for Russia supposes
placing geopolitical and civilisational criteria above
all the other. At the beginning of the XXI century,
Russia is entering a deciding phase of civilisational
opposition, whose outcome will be definitively decided:
will victory definitively and irrevocably go to the
atlantist model of world system, with its whole
aggregate of disturbing religious, cultural, economic,
ecological and political tendencies? Or will Eurasia
manage to affirm on a planetary scale a global
alternative, having demonstrated its own historical
rightness, having justified the Eurasist,
great-continental predestination? For this reason the
supreme end, the supreme task of the same historical
existence of Russia acquires a distinct shape, and is
reduced to the execution of a clearly formulated
GEOPOLITICAL MISSION. The geopolitical and
civilisational dimension must be the standard and
criterion for all the remaining spheres of development
of Russia — economic, social, cultural, political etc.
If in the near future it will be possible to keep faith
to this mission, to lay the bases of the global eurasist
alternative to the «new world order», all the remaining
levels will be step-by-step developed, normalised,
ordered in optimal conditions. But during the first
stages, everything will have to be subordinated to the
very central geopolitical problem. From this follows –
and it is necessary to take it into account - that even
the rather efficient development of the economic,
social, cultural or political sectors of Russia,
separated from the realisation of the major geopolitical
civilisational Project (or to the detriment of it), in
the medium and long term will not bring any positive
results and will only postpone for some time the final
catastrophe, which will fatally come to Russia with the
establishing of the «new world order».
- structure of the eurasist Armed Forces
The Eurasist Project can only be
realised in the event that Russia will manage to save
and consolidate its nuclear and strategic potential,
taking a number of decisive steps in the field of
elaboration and introduction of weapons of new
generation. To realise the eurasist alternative in an
evolutionary way, without involving mankind in planetary
dictatorship, ecological catastrophe or total civil war
on a world scale will be possible only as long as the
military balance of NATO countries and Russia (including
its military allies — Belarus etc.) remains stable, and
the threat of using strategic weapons against NATO
countries can effectively constrain the neo-colonial
plans of atlantism. Nuclear weapons, the Russian
anti-missile defence system, the most recent
technological research of the Russian
military-industrial complex: here are the major reason
of the possibility for Russia to fulfil its
historical mission. By virtue of this circumstance,
major tasks of Russia will be reinforcing the strategic
sector of the Armed Forces, activating research in the
sphere of high technology weapons of new kind,
preserving the readiness to fight of the Armed Forces,
strengthening their structure, modernisation of control
systems etc. The Russian army and the Russian
military-industrial complex, their structural reform,
active consolidation and development must be the highest
priorities of the eurasist policy. The destiny of
Russia, of Eurasia, as a civilisation, depends directly
on the quality of the Armed Forces.
- military pacts
The axial significance of the Russian
Armed forces (and especially of their strategic sector)
must entail the creation of a serial of military pacts,
which are required to provide steadiness to the eurasist
block along its strategically relevant borders. Major of
these pacts is the Russian-Iranian military alliance,
which for the first time in history could open to Russia
an exit to the «warm seas», and allow the
disposition of Russian strategic weapons on the southern
shores of Eurasia. As Iran is strategically oriented
against West domination and is guided world policy by
eurasist priorities, objective reasons for such military
do exist. In a medium term outlook just the
Moscow-Teheran military axis is able to organise a
strategic power space countering the West in the Near
East, in the Caucasus and in Central Asia.
Among the Arab countries, military
pacts must be concluded with Iraq, Syria and Libya, that
will allow Eurasia to receive a major lever of control
on the Mediterranean space.
In
Eastern Europe a military pact with orthodox Serbia is
relevant, and also it is desirable to neutralise (even
better, to attract on our side) orthodox countries
(Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Macedonia etc.),
contributing to their distancing from NATO.
Other major pact is the military
alliance of Moscow with India and China. (Though it is
hardly possible to hope for strong geopolitical ties
with China, since between Moscow and Peking there are
too many strategic contradictions, and in a critical
situation China will probably act as a coast base of
atlantism).
In a parallel
way to the conclusion of military pacts within the
framework of Eurasia, it is necessary to actively
cooperate to splitting the unity of NATO countries, and
to contribute to the strategic neutralisation of the
Central-European region (more widely, of all Europe) and
the Pacific region.
Very
important to the conclusion of these strategic pacts
will be to demonstrate, that the issue is not about the
religious, ideological, political likeness of the
participants of the Eurasist Block, but about unity of
common purpose — the opposition to atlantist hegemony,
to the autocratic establishing of US «new world order»
and to the oligarchic «world government». Hence, any
given military alliance pursues a defensive and, most
important, liberation purpose, ensuring geopolitical
conditions of sovereignty to all states and peoples
before the planetary offensive of the mondialist
pattern, which means depriving them of this
sovereignty.
- eurasist intelligence-community of a «new
kind»
To the efficient execution of eurasist
policies, Russia requires a deep reform of its system of
military information offices, and especially of
intelligence and counter-intelligence services. It is
necessary to establish a new kind of intelligence
structure (analogous to the geopolitical intelligence
services of atlantism), acting also on supra-statal and
supra-national level, guided not simply by the concerns
of Russia as a State, but by the geopolitical and
civilisational priorities of the creation of a
large Eurasist Block. Reference directions of activity
of such geopolitical intelligence services must
become:
1) Creation (or reconstruction) of an
eurasist geopolitical lobby in the foreign countries and
in the West (with the interaction of all social,
political, cultural, religious and ideological forces,
for this or that reason disagreeing with the
establishing of the «new world order», with the
totalitarian supremacy of the «liberal ideology»
etc.)
2) Organisation of a constant
pro-eurasist, integrationist trend in the environment of
political, cultural and economic ?lites of countries
being potential allies of Russia in the Eurasist
Block.
3) Operative definition,
identification, isolation and elimination of groups of
geopolitical atlantist influence acting within Russia,
and other friendly eurasist powers.
- manipulation of chaotical (random)
processes
The future probability of chaotical
processes across the globe, linked with social,
ecological, technical, psychological catastrophes, is
valued by the atlantist experts as a spectrum of «new
challenges» to American domination and the stability of
the «new world order». The random chaotical
factor, in this way, becomes a relevant instrument for
the accomplishment of the eurasist strategy. The
artificial manipulation with this factor and its
monitored and limited use to strategic purposes
represents a major direction of strategic elaboration of
the Eurasist Project in its crato-political (force)
component.
Our ideal of operation of mass Media: the eurasist
mass-media
- mass-media under control of Eurasia
The factor of mass-media influence in
contemporary reality is so significant, that this area
becomes a major strategic factor. For this reason the
Eurasist Project to a large extent depends on depth of
control of the eurasist strategic centre upon the system
of Russian mass-media and mass-media of the potential
participants of the Eurasist Block, and also from an
effective diffusion of the eurasist line in the general
informational space. In the conditions of the «new world
order», just mediacracy plays the central role in the
social programming of the population for the
introduction of the establishing civilisational setting
of mondialism. Thus the mondialisation of the mass-media
precedes the establishing of the «new world order» at a
political level, preparing it.
The eurasist mass-media must play the opposite function,
consequently creating the psychological bases for the
adoption of the alternative Eurasist Project, and then
projecting it both on an internal audience and outside.
The eurasist mass-media must have planetary scale of
broadcasting.
- advantages of interactive mass-media of new
generation
The development of information systems
in a short time will result in the universal diffusion
of interactive communication facilities, such as the
INTERNET network. In interactive environments the user
receives an incomparably larger freedom of choice of
sources of information, than in the case traditional
mass-media. The technological development of interactive
systems allows the receiver of the information to get
gradually closer to the technical potential of the
creator and distributor of the information - which was
excluded by the operative conditions of traditional
mass-media. The Eurasist Project must favour this
technological trend, and along with the effective
utilisation of traditional mass-media, it is clearly
necessary to develop an eurasist networks of interactive
information, preparing the logistic platform for the
creation of «virtual Eurasia» — a system of interactive
mass-media, steadily providing an
informational-analytical, psychological and cultural
introduction to the principles of eurasist
consciousness, alternative in relation to the clich?s of
the «new world order».
- three stages of development of the eurasist
mass-media
At a level of general strategy of the
eurasist mass-media it is necessary to outline three
stages, which can be realised in a parallel way to each
other —
1) opposition to mass-media
mondialisation along the schemes of the atlantist order
(to this purpose, efficient use of the specificities of
the regional broadcasting and press, localisation,
connection to the linguistic environment, direct
opposition and sabotage of universalistic projects, such
as CNN, BBC etc.)
2) development of national
mass-media, under control of state authorities linked to
strategic planning
3) creations of a planetary
alternative system of mass-media, which would bring the
eurasist line in the informational-analytical
illustration of basic events.
Our ideal of the juridical system: the «rights of
the peoples»
- transition to the concept of «rights of the
peoples»
The Eurasist Project demands a massive
revision of the basic juridical categories predominant
in the Western world, and first of the concept of «human
rights», axial for the atlantist civilisation. The
juridical theory of «human rights» as the foundation of
universal law is the closing stage of the affirmation of
the philosophy of individualism in the West. The concept
of «human rights» is inseparable from the other
fundamental trends of the «new world order» and
represents its juridical expression. The eurasist
alternative is founded upon a considerably different
juridical concept — the concept of «rights of the
peoples» or «rights of communities». The concept of
«people» must be chosen as the basic juridical category,
as the major subject of the international and civil law.
In such pattern there arises a completely new scheme of
juridical mutual relations between the citizen and the
supreme legislative authority, traditionally linked to
the State - but in the conditions of the «new
world order» gradually offset by the authority of «world
government». At the centre of the eurasist law there is
the people, the basic juridical subject. The citizen,
the individual is juridically responsible before his
people and before the historically developed legitimate
regime of this people on the account of many factors —
religious, ethnic, cultural etc. Ethnic, religious and
cultural belongings places the citizen in this or that
different juridical context. Peoples themselves – in the
person of their plenipotentiary ?lite authorities
(defined also according to different methods, on the
basis of tradition)- are juridically accountable to the
supreme strategic government of the geopolitical block,
to the Supreme body of the eurasist federation. Thus,
the eurasist juridical pattern represents a combination
of the federative law, where the full juridical subject
of the eurasist federation is the «people» and of the
«strategic law», settling mutual relations between the
subjects of the federation, on the one hand, and between
each of them and the central authority, on the
other..
- «discriminating» jurisprudence
The eurasist juridical pattern is
founded on a differentiated approach to the juridical
civil and criminal code, depending on the national or
regional context. Special attention is given to
recovering the bases of religious juridical models,
gathering confessional, social and moral standards and
attaching confessional and ethical character to the
legislative area. The variations of juridical
establishments in the differing ethnic, cultural and
confessional contexts can be most wide and varied. Only
a minor part of papers of the juridical documents will
touch the strategic level. The primary categorical
imperative of each citizen, not dependent from its
confessional and ethnic belongings, is to remain loyal
to the eurasist State.
- geo-juridical system, special codes for
multi-confessional agglomerates and
megalopolises
Besides the conditioning of ethnic and
confessional differentiation upon the juridical system,
juridical variations can appear also in the local laws
of the single administrative units, in conformity to
regional features. Besides, complex multiethnic and
multi-confessional agglomerates and megalopolis, and
also the sectors with special social-professional
features can present in their juridical codes
significant differences reflecting their concrete
specificity.
- eco-juridical system
The environmental factors must receive a
major place in the eurasist law, consolidating through
the legislative way the rules of ecological approach to
the environment.
January 2001
|