Atlantocentrism and Eurasianism

May 01 2008

Posted by: 阿偉 in The Modern World

Joel Garreau’s book The Nine Nations of North America is one which addresses some interesting features of North American bioregionalism from racial, political, economic, and environmental perspectives. There seems to be, at least in the implied sense, the idea of a “real state,” that is, one which is either held together by cultural cohesiveness, or which is a product of historical events. As the title implies, Garreau is primarily concerned with America, he argues that the United States is largely an artificial construction; a cobbling-together of various subregions with an internal character that are held together only in by texts which define the said polity (i.e. the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence).

The implication of the struggle between “artificial states” and “natural states” applies in a grander scheme too, expressing itself on the super-national and super-regional scales. For example, in pre-modern times, it would not be unreasonable to the Levant, the Arabian Peninsula, Iran, and Turkey into a natural cultural sphere, which was known as al-Khilaafa. Likewise, it was possible for a Europa Magna to exist as Christendom, and for various Chinese dynasties to exist. In other words, what bound the various regions of the world was more than just geography, it was also culture: an organic “natural” manifestation of the patriciate. In addition to the three historical superstates we mentioned before (Christendom, the Caliphate, and the Sinosphere), there was also Hindustan as well as the greater Slavic territories.

In modern times, the constructions of how the world is viewed from the suprapolitical standpoint have changed. America, the reductio ad absurdum of the worst and most regressive aspects of Western Europe is the prime example of this, as is the monstrous imperialist bund known as NATO. Whereas in the past, it was culture that held the supranational entities together, in the case of NATO, it is unculture and politics. NATO is the expression of the dangerous geopolitical doctrine known as Atlantocentrism, which is essentially an attempt to create a ‘New Rome’ with a center in Washington, DC and bring the world under its control by spreading “liberalism” and so-called “democracy”. However, “democracy,” in this context, far from meaning a system of representative government is a mere euphimism for a system of government that is essentially assimilated into the NATO order. The current conflicts in the world, from Serbia to Tibet, are all indications of the militant Atlantocentric designs of the United States and its allies. Israel is a special case, and is a strategic base in the Middle East for the continuation of an Atlantocentric policy.

Opposing the Atlantocentrist imperialism is Eurasianism, which forms a much more natural suprastate in geographical terms than Atlantocentrism. For historical reasons, this is also a more comfortable arangement: the Silk Road stretched across Eurasia. The conflict of Atlantocentrism and Eurasianism is thus one of land (tradition, religion, identity) and sea (liberalism, atheism, individualism). Therefore, the establishment of Eurasianism is both political and cultural. One one hand, we see many nations rejecting American and Western culture, which is based on the material, and turning to their traditional cultures. This is best summed up in Aleksandr Dugin’s book Osnovy Geopolitiki: “The new Eurasian empire will be constructed on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us. This common civilisational impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union”.

Today, both Russia and China, along with Iran, are contributing to the fall of the Atlantocentric imperialism and attempting to establish their geopolitical prominence in the world. Iran has experienced a full revolution based on the principles of Islam, while China has rejected the subversive influence of communism. China’s military might may soon challenge that of the US, spelling the reversal of fortunes for Atlantocentric interests worldwide.

No related posts.

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 1st, 2008 at 11:11 am and is filed under The Modern World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.