We interviewed, exclusively, Darya Platonova Dugina, philosopher graduated from Moscow State University, specialised in Neoplatonism, able political commentator and daughter of Professor Aleksandr Dugin. The interview was made originally bilingual (Italian and Russian), in order to be diffused also to the Russian-speaking public.
Daria, first of all thank you for accepting our interview. The ever-changing geopolitical situation is turning towards a new multipolar world order, which is in contrast to the new globalist world order, of the Great Reset, of the financial oligarchies and hidden power. Russia is currently the country leading the ‘clash of civilisations’: what do you think is Europe’s role?
Europe is a battlefield of two worldviews – globalist and anti-globalist. This is now evident in all countries. The French presidential elections were held recently and analysing them we can clearly see the existence of two blocs – one representing the people, the other the transnational elites. Le Pen, and with her Melanchon, were anti-globalisation in their programmes, the main goal of their campaigns was to increase the purchasing power of the French, and to strengthen the sovereignty of the French state (one could call this to some extent a Gaullist strategy in the case of Le Pen, and a non-aligned position in the case of Melanchon). Today, Europe is a political field subordinated to the dictatorship of American hegemony. Unfortunately, the European elites blindly follow the orders of the United States. But the crisis, which has already had a major impact on Europe, sufficiently shows the negative consequences of these policies – and that only on the economic side. There are many signs, voices and political manifestations of the alternative approach emerging before our eyes – there are forces in Europe that want multipolarity. These are the anti-globalist movements. They are the future of Europe, globalism and the EU elites are its past. Everything points to the ‘decline of Europe’ – growing tyranny was also highlighted by Spengler as a key feature of the end of ‘culture’, as were technocratic governments and the dominance of money as a value. The EU elites are pursuing a consistent policy of destroying European countries. However, the resistance that exists on the part of the peoples – the resistance to the death of their own cultures – must be kept in mind. It still has to show itself.
In Italy, people were singing the praises of Russia and Putin until a few months ago; today, a large part of the population has sided with NATO and is pointing the finger at Moscow. Misinformation and widespread ignorance in political science have led to an alarming and dangerous climate of ideological hatred. Yet, Italy is the seat of the First Rome, it is the source of art, philosophy, science and beauty for centuries and centuries, but it seems to have dozed off and forgotten its own origins and greatness. How do you think an awakening of the Italic Logos and a return to the greatness of this people can take place?
First of all, I think it is necessary to realise that the media propaganda system aims to strengthen American influence on the European continent. This, by the way, is often talked about in Italy. It is very important to understand that today the regime in Kiev is a stronghold of a destructive globalist ideology with ideas of xenophobia, radical hatred and tyranny.
Many people in Italy, but more generally across the European continent, do not look favourably on Russia, despite being against NATO and American imperialism. There is a perception of the risk of going from being subjugated by one empire to another. What do you think about that?
Of course, it is a big risk. However, there are different shades of approval. One can disapprove of a special military operation by the Russian Federation but refrain from supplying arms to Kiev. This is also a position. Europe has every right to be ‘neutral’; geopolitically it is an independent pole that belongs neither to the civilisation of the sea nor that of the land. This intermediate status implies a certain neutrality. Today, the processes we see are the subordination of EU countries to the will of the USA, i.e. total subordination to the norms and imperatives of the civilisation of the sea. This is imperialism 2.0, and it passes through culture. Gramsci was very precise in saying that in the modern world, the seizure of power happens through culture. Whoever controls culture (as well as the media) controls the country politically and economically. Today culture in Europe is unfortunately controlled by pro-American structures.
You are an expert and passionate about French philosophy and politics. France, as we all know, is one of the strongest nations in the European Union and plays a key role in relations with Russia and beyond. What scenarios do you foresee from the upcoming French presidential elections? How would the EU’s relations with Russia change if Macron had lost?
The presidential elections have shown that the globalist structures have done everything to keep their protégé, Emmanuel Macron, who represents the interests of global finance capital. His mentor, the French economist Jacques Attali, wrote about the importance of globalisation and the creation of a ‘new nomadic elite’, totally detached from its national roots. In such a world, all differences between cultures, peoples, traditions and everything becomes universal. Such an agenda is a threat to the multiplicity of European identities. Despite the anti-people policy of Macron’s five-year plan, the whole mechanism of the globalist system was aimed at the artificial continuation of his mandate. It should be noted that the situation is revolutionary: at the head of the country there is a candidate who does not have the support of the majority of the population. He could be called a nihilist candidate – because his victory is entirely negative.
Even two days before the second round of the elections Macron announced that France had sent self-propelled artillery units and anti-tank missile systems to Kiev. From appeasement, Macron moved on to actively supporting the Kiev regime. In a phone conversation on 30 April 2022 Macron discussed with Zelensky plans for French support for Ukraine and said he would increase military support for Kiev.
If Marine Le Pen had succeeded in coming to power, the situation would have changed radically. She was an outspoken critic of NATO in relation to the Ukrainian conflict. Her position has an anti-globalisation basis. If she wins, France could become a country with which Russia could have a dialogue. He has repeatedly stated that France suffers from the anti-Russian sanctions imposed, calling them ‘harakiri’ for the country. Unfortunately, France has now become hostage to the interests of the globalist elites.
As a final question, from geopolitics we turn to philosophy. Who are your favourite philosophers? And which thinkers do you think should be rediscovered, at this historical moment, in order to cooperate in the great awakening that is taking place?
In my opinion, it is absolutely necessary to know the works of Plato and the Neo-Platonists, these are fundamental authors who, among other things, can give us clues about the events that are happening today. In Platonism, the basic idea was that of hierarchy, which manifests itself both in the soul (the three beginnings of the soul) and in the state. When the order and hierarchy are changed, the material – lustful beginning becomes the head, justice leaves the soul and the state, a reign of tyranny begins (what we see in the West today). It is also crucial to refer to Gramsci’s writings – and his ideas of ‘hegemony’ – this is important to describe the process of subjugation of the European space to globalism. The main battle today is not so much military as cultural. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the new mission of culture, which carries the semantics of civilisation. In Europe, a culture that is spreading like an epidemic is the culture of globalism (we can distinguish different trends – cyborgization of art, fascination with object-oriented ontologies and many others).
Baudrillard with his idea of death in modernity is more relevant than ever, in my opinion. In short, he notes that modern society strives to abolish death. In abolishing this denial of death, death floods everything, subordinates all processes. If we analyse, for example, French politics from the point of view of Thanatology, then this modern attitude with the ‘denial of death’ can be seen in the figure of Macron. His focus on virtuality (a pre-election room in the game Meinkraft), his appeal to the future (and not the past), his biohacking in the service of his ideological mentors (Bernard-Henri Lévy) are all evidence of the ideology of trying to overcome death, which is actually embedded in the ideology of globalism itself.
If we try to turn to existential analysis, I think it is extremely important to follow the philosophy of Heidegger, who brilliantly described the experience of man’s clash with Being. The experience of war and conflict is an opportunity for man to see the ‘authentic’, an opportunity to get to its ‘sacred’ basis.