What do you think about Dugin's 4th Political Theory? >about what? don't be a pleb, read the book but tl;dr: >fascism and communism were destined to fall because of their aggressive ideologies and lots of logical fallacies >liberalism is has enormous faults, but still dominating, just because there's no alternative >The solution? To make a Fourth Political Theory (4th PT)! >but how? Easy: >consider the previous three >determine their biggest flaws and strongest points, avoid the formers at all cost, and try to keep the latters >determine a central idea (not ideology)
ITT: we discuss the possibility of a new Fourth Political Theory, discuss Dugin's version, and/or try to come up with our own.
First, we need to determine the subject of our theory. >what is a subject? It's the central idea which drives the theory. Historically the other three subjects were >communism: class >fascism: nation/race >liberalism: individual Dugin choice of subject for the 4TP is "Dasein", which is German for "being there" or "existing". It was the philosophical concept of Heidegger. >Dasein, as the subject of the 4TP, means a form of collective, councious existing in time and place. Humans are not the subject, but their counciousness is, the fact that they know that they exist and are active and thinking participants in the flow of history. What do you think? Is Dasein the ultimate theoretical subject or should be discarded? What else could be the subject of the 4TP?
Mate, if you didn't know some Jews set up a sociological institute in Frankfurt in 1923 and now any social commentary or thought outside of what is liberal in Dugin's description is a no go.
Thomas Hughes
elaborate?
Jason Nguyen
Sure. Hang on a few minutes, will elaborate.
Jose Reed
Technological civilization depends on the self-directing forces of efficiency, efficacy and the primacy of 'the one best way' to reach a given goal that these forces inexorably lead to. In the face of technology and its intrinsic laws of self-directed development and progress, ideological models such as Capitalism, Communism and National Socialism are little more than just slightly different social representations of technological civilization. Industrialization and the economy at large do not depend exclusively on any authoritarian regime, no matter how authoritarian it may be, nor do they depend on any democratic regime, no matter how 'benevolent' it may strive to be. Technological progress is a self-directing semi-autonomous force, no matter what the purported ideological context may be.
For example, the best way to mass-produce a car is the same whether it be in a Constitutional democracy or in a Marxist-Leninist dictatorship. Another example: the problem of optimal production and distribution of wheat is on a strictly technical level the same in an Anarcho-commune as it is in a Fascist ethnocentric white community. The keyword here is 'optimal'; anything less than optimal is just a hinderance, one which no ideological gymnastics alone can improve. In any industrialized society, no matter what the underlying ideological tenets, only pure technical solutions will in the end address technical problems.
Point being: high-organization and efficient logistics are the same everywhere, no matter what the incidental ideological/propagandistic context may happen to be. In all cases, ideology and its propaganda will soon effect any necessary changes to the ideological infrastructure in order to accomodate the needs of technological progress as may be eventually required by the tech-system.
In this context, rethinking ideology in search of a 4th P.T. is NOT impossible, but foolish if it ignores the supremacy of technical complex over ALL human affairs.
Cooper Lewis
are you saying we should try to build a 4TP only from a technocratic point of view?
Michael Russell
It sounds that way.... But no, precisely the opposite, a 4th Political Theory should stem from an uncompromisingly anti-tech point of view, an all-or-nothing stance regarding the relation between Man, Wild Nature, and the semi-autonomous self-directing force that is the technological complex.
What the previous post was about was attempting to show that in the face of the technological complex, all ideology is rendered nearly meaningless; the innate laws of logic, 'the one best way' to achieve any given goal, etc. that characterize Technique will in the end dominate and ultimately obliterate mankind, and perhaps eventually even all of Wild Nature as well.
More kino from this retarded timeline: Dugin is going to be analyzing Twin Peaks live in 20 minutes on Guide to Kulchur for anyone interested. youtube.com/watch?v=8lvf59_ncKU
Nicholas Parker
you are retarded. the ideology we need is national syndicalism.
Ayden Davis
Yeah, but he thinks along the lines of establishing some sort of symbiotic relationship with AI and 'hoping for the best', basically. NOT an expert on Elon, but it was something along those lines.
This position described in the previous posts would be quite contrary to Elons words (and actions...). A kind of 'abolish ALL tech attitude', or more precisely, all high-organization-dependent tech. One of the MOST important techniques of all time that no one seems to think about is organizational technique.
Also, kind of as an after-thought, what have ALL ideologies, ALL of them had in common....? Propaganda. The technique of propaganda. ALL ideological constructs were dependant on propagandizing the citizenry or whatever; without the technique of propaganda, NO ideology could prosper.
I got like 3 pages into it before I threw it in the trash. 1. It's just straight up Bolshevism. Nice little bow on it, but it's still a turd. 2. Dugin, if he's not a Jew himself (which judging by his wormy way of writing I highly suspect), is 100% controlled opposition Dugin and co are there to make european ethnic nationalism look evil and monstrous. Because he himself is.
Dugin is a kgb psy0p for pseuds, but to this: >determine their biggest flaws and strongest points, avoid the formers at all cost, and try to keep the latters I have a proper picture.
is national socialism and fascism always going to be attributed to ethnocentrism?
Brody Martinez
dugin, oh ffs, this is a cianiggerpuppet that appears on that aj cia puppet show godddammit
Mason Lewis
>hurr fascism but call it something else while pretending it's not fascism Ok
Jack Cooper
>Please elaborate further
Here it is. See:
Grayson Ramirez
Yes but without the gay parlementarian shit please
Grayson Flores
It's german autism of thinking words can have profound meaning to them.
Brandon Wright
Dugin is a glownigger, he has nothing to bring to the table. Everything he peddles has the main goal of bringing down/weakening Europe and USA.
Jose Martinez
Only when it's constitutionary. Great Britain, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Monaco, and the others are the best countries to live in. Brunei, Oman, Qatar, Saudis and Eswatini are not as much.
Aye. I wish Charles I had crushed Cromwell under his boot. And that Louis XIV had crushed the French revolution.
Jaxon Reyes
Those are all effectively republics. Having a parliament is fine and dandy so long as the king can slap them into line when they start spouting Whiggish nonsense.
Dominic Lewis
Shit, Louis XVI I mean. Louis XIV was far too based to ever let that shit happen.
