Foundations of Geopolitics - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org

Thanks to @barneypiccolo@lemm.ee for the following summary and turning me on to the linked excellent summary of the book.

Foundations of Geopolitics was published in 1997 by Aleksandr Dugin. It outlines how Russia can become the world’s dominant superpower without warfare. It is taught in Russia’s military officers school, Putin keeps a copy in his office, and it is Russia’s geopolitical playbook. Dugin is still closely involved with Putin and Russian intelligence, and so was his daughter, who was murdered in a car bombing that was likely meant for him.

Under the section for the United States, it says:

Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States and Canada to fuel instability and separatism against neoliberal globalist Western hegemony, such as, for instance, provoke “Afro-American racists” to create severe backlash against the rotten political state of affairs in the current present-day system of the United States and Canada. Russia should “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social, and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics”.

  • join@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    11 days ago

    To what extent is this different than what the US currently does?

    This just reads like a guy that was frustrated by the fall of the Soviet Union and Americas following hegemony, and said: what if we did all that.

    Especially the tactic of destabilizing rivals. For example: how sincere can Americas concern for a Muslim minority in China be, when they have directly caused the death of millions in all their illegal Middle-East adventures of the past decades.

    • realitista@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      01·
      10 days ago

      The US has done many of these things, it’s true. A few differences IMO are:

      1. The US of the last century has had no ambitions to conquer countries militarily for the purpose of ursurping their land. These kinds of wars are the ones that cause the most death and destruction as we see in Ukraine.
      2. The US doesn’t require nearly as many “puppet regimes” as Russia does. The US has had some in the past, but generally in most cases are happy as long as there are democracies in place. Russia requires near complete control of their puppet states like Belarus and Ukraine when they controlled it.
      3. The US doesn’t directly commit genocide as we see happening in Ukraine or in almost every terriory Russia has ever brought under it’s rule.
      4. Countries allied with the US generally become more prosperous and free, whereas those under the Russian umbrella tend to experience the opposite.

      So, given the choice between being under US hegemony or Russian imperialism, I personally would choose to ally myself with the US. Though, as a resident of the EU, in a country formerly a Soviet sattelite state, I would prefer to be beholden to neither. In a small country as this one, I would prefer to have a strong united EU with it’s own strong military.

      • Amnesigenic@lemmy.mlEnglish
        11·
        9 days ago

        1. Verifiably wrong

        2. Laughably wrong

        3. Completely wrong

        4. Delusional

        You are either an incurable moron or a state department psyop

          • Amnesigenic@lemmy.mlEnglish
            11·
            9 days ago

            Being from an instance you don’t like doesn’t make me any less correct, cry about it patriot

            • realitista@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              11·
              9 days ago

              No, saying absolutely nothing of substance is what made you wrong. Being from .ml just makes the fact that you say nothing of substance expected.

              • Amnesigenic@lemmy.mlEnglish
                11·
                9 days ago

                You made several paragraphs worth of unsubstantiated assertions, I made an appropriate response. Asserted without evidence=dismissed without evidence, the fact that you need this explained is embarassing.