The Empire of the West between Multiculturalism and Multipolarity

Nationalism is dead. Nationalism is a product of bourgeois civilization and must therefore be discarded. In its place must be the ethnic, cultural, and spiritual unity of all European peoples, manifested in a sovereign political form—the Empire of the West.

As Yockey says: "In this last formative age of a great Culture, which will last through the 21st century, the motivation of the perpetual power-struggle is supplied by the unity of the Western Civilization itself. The real front of the wars of this age is simply Europe versus anti-Europe." Yockey also says: "...the white populations strewn over the world belong to Europe..." In other words, at a time when the friend-enemy political configuration is based on the dualism of forces between a pole defending Europe and an Anti-European one, there can be no room for any form of bourgeois nationalism based on arbitrary borders, but only for the border that runs through our veins: blood.

At a time when tech oligarchs would have us believe that blind meritocracy is the source of progress, we must ask ourselves why the greatest scientific advances occurred in an ethically homogeneous West, and precisely now—in a West that embraces diversity as a theological dogma—we see a blackout of scientific intelligence in the West. Not that the great cultural traditions of European countries don't represent noble values, but that the political grammar of nationalism has never been and never will be a spiritual and territorial affirmation of such values, but merely the secular shell of the nation-state; which today is nothing more than an unburied corpse.

It's not that we should put nationalism against globalism, but that we should take the reins of this process. In a historical era in which European populations are ghettoized within their own countries, only the internationalist solidarity of the European identity cause will be able to lead them once again to a territory that expresses their political, cultural, and spiritual sovereignty. This is why the call for geopolitical multipolarism by someone like Dugin seems to me a theoretical and practical mistake. For the simple reason that authentic multipolarism is impossible. Hegemonic geopolitical cores have always existed and will always exist, as they are expressions of superior military dominance. Some form of "multipolarity" may exist when blocs or empires find themselves in a situation of near-equilibrium of power. But such equilibrium is always temporary, and some form of unipolarity is reestablished. Such was the example of the Cold War. It seems to me that Dugin's "multipolarity" is simply a geopolitical mask for his militant Eurasianism, which seeks geopolitical supremacy for Russia. This is normal for any patriot who loves his land and people. But Dugin is no friend of the West.

Dugin is explicitly open in his hatred for the West. Yet he is celebrated in many circles as a "friend" of the West. Here is why this is a mistake. Dugin, with his Eurasianism, is a descendant of Slavism - the idea that Russia's role is to redeem the world from the satanic and nihilistic West. Dugin believes not only that the West has lost its way with nihilism and postmodernism, but that such moments are the necessary conclusion of Western history; making the West the very expression of the Antichrist.

Dugin: "...in essence, we are simply dealing with an updated version and continuation of a Western universalism that has been passed down from the Roman Empire, Medieval Christianity, modernity in terms of the Enlightenment and colonisation, up to the present-day phenomena of postmodernism and ultra-individualism." (4PT) Also Dugin: "Even more important is the fact that the entirety of Russian history is a dialectical argument with the West and against Western culture, the struggle for upholding our own (often only intuitively grasped) Russian truth, our own messianic idea, and our own version of the ‘end of history’, no matter how it is expressed — through Muscovite Orthodoxy, Peter’s secular empire, or the global Communist revolution." (4PT)

It is clear how Dugin puts the issue: The West, with its universalist power, was destined to produce an anti-civilization — a political order that, by placing itself above all cultures and traditions, ends up abolishing the very idea of ​​a Tradition. What is left for the world now is a global resistance in the name of Tradition against the nihilistic and satanic West: "Eurasianism, recognizing the pretence of the Western logos to universality, refuses to recognize this universality as an inevitability. This is the specific character of Eurasianism. It considers Western culture as a local and temporary phenomenon, and affirms a multiplicity of cultures and civilizations which coexist at different moments of a cycle." (4PT)

The question that arises for every Western man is: Doesn't Dugin end up offering a "traditionalist" and "right-wing" version of the vision that the global left proposes: a resistance of the "rest" against the West? Of course he does. If the left uses a rhetoric eminently based on notions of social justice and economic exploitation, Dugin, with his Eurasianism, offers a version that can be called traditionalist Bolshevism. The direct result of Dugin’s 4PT is the same as that of liberal globalism: the reduction or even destruction of the West in the name of global multiculturalism resentful of the glories and strength of the West. Dugin is not our friend.

Against Dugin, we should remember the lesson of Francis Yockey: “This age and its spirit would not shrink from entering upon its task of building the Empire of the West even if it were told that the outer forces are too strong, that they will never succeed. It prefers to die on its feet rather than live on its knees, like the materialists and other cowards who now make themselves serviceable to the outsiders in their great task of looting and destroying the Western Civilization.”

The task of the 21st century that weighs on the shoulders of every Western man as a destiny imposed by God is to accomplish the creation of the Empire of the West. Therefore, it is not a question of abolishing the idea of ​​universalism (every virile and vitalistic people will necessarily express their form of life as universal), but of freeing such an Idea from the shackles of multiculturalist globalism - right or left - and endowing it with the sacred values ​​of the West - Order, Hierarchy, Authority, Idealism and Truth. Yes, it is the West against the rest. It has always been so and will continue to be so. At least until the day when the stars are ours...