Amarna Forum

Full Version: War of Competing Eurasianisms
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I would assume that most here on the Amarna Forum know what "Eurasianism" is. But, for the sake of completeness, Eurasianism is the term usually used in reference to Dugin's Fourth Political Theory. In that book, Dugin promotes a Russo-centric realism and a Russo-centric powerbase in Central Asia and Eastern Europe as an antidote to Western idealism. Dugin more or less echoes the Slavophiles of the 19th century, who disagreed with Peter the Great's policy of pushing Russian politics and society closer to Western Europe. Dugin, like the Slavophiles, sees Russia as a separate culture that combines Byzantinism (in the form of the Orthodox church) with Asiastic culture and political dynamics inherited from the "Tartar yoke" of the Golden Horde. All of these ideas were, in my opinion, better stated in Konstantin Leontiev's Byzantism and Slavdom. Suffice it to say, Russo-centric Eurasianism envisions Russia as a third player between Atlanticism and a rising China. Guillaume Faye sort of created a Western-centric Eurasianism by promoting a Pan-European state from Brest to Vladivostok, but that idea is a gigantic pipedream at the moment. 

There is another Eurasianism that is just as powerful, but far less studied by the West. The Republic of Turkey may not directly promote Pan-Turkism (similar to Neo-Ottomanism but less focused on religion), but President Erdogan's political coalition does include Pan-Turanist political parties, most notably the paramilitary Grey Wolves. Pan-Turkism is the ideology of a pan-Turkish identity based around not only the Turkic languages, but also Sunni Islam. Pan-Turkism is in conflict with Russian Eurasianism, as Pan-Turkists would see Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and many other former Soviet states as Turkic partners. The lack of support from Kazakhstan for the current Russian war effort could be a sign of Nur-Sultan seeking a break from being a Russian satrap. Given the long history of conflict between Russia and Turkey, as well as the current use of Bayraktar drones by the Ukrainian military on top of the proxy conflict still ongoing in Syria, I predict even more conflicts between these two competing visions of Eurasianism (throw in too Turkey's suppport for the Uyghurs in China as another sticky point). 

Here's the problem with this in re: the West. A rapprochement with Russia is out of the question and may never happen again following the complete economic freezeout of 2022. However, Turkey under Erdogan is not a better alternative. Not only is Ankara's economy in shambles, but the purging of the army of CHP leaders has rendered the Turkish Armed Forces more ideologically aligned but less proficient. Also too we should not forget Erdogan as the man most responsible for flooding Europe with Syrian and Afghan "refugees," plus his government turned Hagia Sophia back into a mosque. 

If a more multipolar world develops, then I expect to see more Russia-Turkey proxy wars or conflicts in Central Asia and the Middle East, and frankly the West would be wise to stay clear. Sadly, given our elites, I fear that the West would go all-in with supporting Turkey, which would ultimately mean more money in the hands of Islamists and refugees. 

Thoughts?
In only way Russia can become properly "eurasian" is by obliterating its european character and further diluting its white blood-a direction that Putin seemed to have rejected before the war as evident by, for example, his decision to declare ethnic russians a state-forming people(what was widely widely protetsted by tatars and other asiatics). War with Ukraine migh have changed that and in a sense cast Russia back to Asia-which would be terrible from our point of view. There exists something of a conflict for a russian soul inside Russia between nationalists who define their country as easternmost outpost of Europe the way tsardom did, and those who define as a civilization unto itself and look up to bolsheviks-this conflict will be surely resolved after Putins death since he attempts to in a sense appease both sides.

Turkey I believe wont be relevant in the future-it has no way to expand except southwards and the turkic nations except Azerbeijan have no will nor strength to do anything else then choose either the chinese or russians as their overlords.
Turkey hasn't been a 1st rate power since WW1, and will continue to be an ACK mostly irrelevant backwater too weak to challenge Russia, let alone America for at least 30 more years. Plus separatism in Russia is mostly a meme due to the Military occupation garrisons, the election doesn't really matter even for Turks that much. To simplify, imagine Erdogan as 60% Pan-Turkist and 40% Pro-NATO, the opposition leader is the opposite at 40-60. But in both cases not much is going to change on Turkic geopolitics. Still trying to be an assertive regional power while still being relatively loyal to the block. Their prestige not ever fully recovering from Lepanto and Malta
If such a thing were to happen, it would take place in Central Asia, an area in which The West (America) has neither the ability nor the interest to influence, especially post-Afghanistan.  Witness the total noninvolvement in Armenia.  At most you could expect some material support to Turkey since it's a NATO member and isn't Russia.
(05-10-2023, 05:19 AM)Toledo_Keyed Wrote: [ -> ]Turkey hasn't been a 1st rate power since WW1, and will continue to be an ACK mostly irrelevant backwater too weak to challenge Russia, let alone America for at least 30 more years. Plus separatism in Russia is mostly a meme due to the Military occupation garrisons, the election doesn't really matter even for Turks that much. To simplify, imagine Erdogan as 60% Pan-Turkist and 40% Pro-NATO, the opposition leader is the opposite at 40-60. But in both cases not much is going to change on Turkic geopolitics. Still trying to be an assertive regional power while still being relatively loyal to the block. Their prestige not ever fully recovering from Lepanto and Malta

Not having a tard run your country into the ground is useful on the world stage. Even if the external politics wouldn't change, the internal political economy matters a lot. If you had to choose between 1960s Japan's political coalition and the 1960s English political coalition, you know which one would be nicer to live in. Both were and are committed to the Western bloc, but one isn't shitting in their own bed while they do it.
OP, you may be interested in looking into the history of 'Turanism'. It's been used by Turks, Estonians, Finns, Hungarians and others as a history of population dispersal across Eurasia. Many in Hungary and Finland used it to differentiate themselves from their Russian and Slavic neighbors. Perhaps we will see a return of this peculiar rhetorical artefact now that many branches of the Turanic family have coalesced under the NATO umbrella... maybe we will see Uzbek ascension into NATO. 

It is also possible that this is all smoke and mirrors. Vladimir Putin has very interesting physiognomy... he looks to be Finnic-Baltoid type. If we count this under the Turanic umbrella, then we would perhaps expect some sort of allegiance (whether explicit or implicit) between Turkey and Russian. Putin is the Turanic bridge that will unite Slav and Turk. Whether he will do it by force or diplomacy remains to be seen.

[Image: 1920px-Linguistic_map_of_the_Altaic%2C_T...8en%29.png]

also, i am new here. so plz forgive if it is in bad taste to bump such an old thread...

edit: fixed image
Slav and Turk will never unite, they have been engaged in a race war for over a thousand years.
Multipolarity is mostly a meme. For all the talk from hopeful columnists India, Brazil, SS Africa, and MENA are all handicapped by either weak dysfunctional states and/or crippling poor human capital that will prevent them from becoming major players in the near future. Even Turkey is unlikely to become anything more than a 2nd rate power unless Russia totally collapses. Pan-Turkism is only slightly less pipe-dreamy than Faye’s pan-Europeanism due to the fact that the US was (at least as of the 2000’s in Azerbaijan) actively promoting pan-Turkism to counter Russian influence in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. That aside, Pan-Turkism is unlikely to pull through due to Central Asia still being caught between Russia and China, whose relationships they will not sacrifice for Turkey. As far as I can tell Turkish support for Uyghurs doesn't go far beyond rhetoric so as to not upset their Chinese economic lords. The war of Eurasianisms if it can be called that is still very much between the West and Russia, with China as a rapidly rising player now increasingly being confronted by the US.

Ukraine has very clearly reinvigorated the US after Afghanistan and regardless of whether Trump wins in 2024 I can’t see that trajectory changing short of a collapse in military capacity (which is very possible with increasing pushes for hard affirmative action within the US military). The US is visibly going to try to cling onto Europe at all costs and Ukraine has only solidified that relationship. Meanwhile the Pacific is more tricky and the USG seemingly knows that hence Japanese military expansion.

Russia will come out of Ukraine weakened and exhausted for the time being and the West will continue to pivot towards Asia. Whether Russia joins China in its Eurasian ambitions as auxiliary or ally, or falls out over conflict can’t be said for sure. What is sure is that Putin has broken with the west completely by launching the war and set Russia on its own course, perhaps not properly Eurasian but something far closer to it than before the war, with a desire to create a sort of ex-USSR anti-western sphere of influence/grossraum. The pale of settlement Yids and hawkish liberal factions within the US very clearly want Russia totally defeated, perhaps even balkanized, and I would expect them to continue on that course until it either happens or the US as mentioned before becomes crippled by internal strife and temporarily cannot project power on that scale.
It should be noted that Dugin's Eurasianism picked Japan, not China, as the preferred partner...
(05-19-2023, 10:46 PM)fox Wrote: [ -> ]Slav and Turk will never unite, they have been engaged in a race war for over a thousand years.

Slavs only got their round heads around 1000 AD.  Before that they had the longer Western skull. 
We need to figure out why, and return to those conditions.  Civilization will follow.

Guest

(06-01-2023, 12:10 AM)casual rapist Wrote: [ -> ]Slavs only got their round heads around 1000 AD.  Before that they had the longer Western skull. 
We need to figure out why, and return to those conditions.  Civilization will follow.

Race-mixing with Alpinoids. Dark haired brown eyed slavs are Alpine while the blonde haired blue eyes are Nordic. Race-mixing ends races. Alpine have round heads while both Nordic and Mediterranean have long skulls.
(06-01-2023, 01:47 AM)Guest Wrote: [ -> ]Race-mixing with Alpinoids. Dark haired brown eyed slavs are Alpine while the blonde haired blue eyes are Nordic. Race-mixing ends races. Alpine have round heads while both Nordic and Mediterranean have long skulls.


Yes, I believe it was Gauguin famous for his paintings of the Alpinoid idyllic in his state of nature.
(05-31-2023, 12:41 PM)Svevlad Wrote: [ -> ]It should be noted that Dugin's Eurasianism picked Japan, not China, as the preferred partner...

I get the impression that no one in Russia actually likes China or the Chinese and it's all begrudging cooperation against American dominance for the moment
(06-01-2023, 12:10 AM)casual rapist Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-19-2023, 10:46 PM)fox Wrote: [ -> ]Slav and Turk will never unite, they have been engaged in a race war for over a thousand years.

Slavs only got their round heads around 1000 AD.  Before that they had the longer Western skull. 
We need to figure out why, and return to those conditions.  Civilization will follow.

HBD bloggers already solved this: overly harsh feudalism combined with frequent destruction of the non-peasants

Except Dinarics, of course, as mountainous environments naturally select for brachycephaly for whatever reason.

It seems primarily related to becoming more "tolerant" of discomfort
Does anyone have strong opinions on the Intermarium? Seems like the most viable path for the West compared to the Globohomo of Brussels.

My username probably makes me sound like another vatnigger but I couldn't be further from one. However, I do have a fascination with Russia's geopolitics. In many ways it is not dissimilar to the United States: two land powers that conquered massive continents, founded by White Christians despite being multiethnic and multicultural today. Whether it's decommunization, annexation of neighboring territories, maximizing oil profits, criminalizing homosex, or staging a coup against the oligarchic bureaucracy, America should be watching Russia closely and taking notes. Regardless of whether you support them or not.
(06-24-2023, 03:02 PM)Mladorossi88 Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone have strong opinions on the Intermarium? Seems like the most viable path for the West compared to the Globohomo of Brussels.

My username probably makes me sound like another vatnigger but I couldn't be further from one. However, I do have a fascination with Russia's geopolitics. In many ways it is not dissimilar to the United States: two land powers that conquered massive continents, founded by White Christians despite being multiethnic and multicultural today. Whether it's decommunization, annexation of neighboring territories, maximizing oil profits, criminalizing homosex, or staging a coup against the oligarchic bureaucracy, America should be watching Russia closely and taking notes. Regardless of whether you support them or not.

Intermarium seems to be a feasible and desirable path for (what I consider) Eastern Europe proper (Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Belarus, with Hungary, Slovakia, Moldova, Slovenia, Czechia, Romania, and the Balkan states being "greater" Eastern Europe), as it provides a "way out" for a bloc of nations that are more or less dependent on a larger power for survival (for most of these nations, that power is the US, though for some of them it was/is Russia). Were plans for such a bloc actualized, their combined economies, manpower, and military strength would be such that they could finally begin to sever ties with the US, which they would no longer need due to their newly gained ability to deter Russia from invading/meddling in their affairs. 

What makes Intermarium feasible for these places is that it need not even be a state, it could be an EU-like union or even a Visegrad Group-esque bloc within the EU (perhaps it could begin as the latter, but with time become the former), which would afford each member nation a degree of autonomy and independence from the others (something that many of these nations, which are insecure about their place in Europe and have a strong desire to remain independent so as not to lose their identity and recently gained power, value greatly). Furthermore, these nations are sufficiently close to one another in terms of their political leanings and values and have historical and cultural ties to one another (particularly those nations which were once part of the PLC), and thus there would not be any huge linguistic obstacles or cultural hangups that would make the integration of member nations into this union too difficult; this would circumvent one of the biggest issues that Eastern European countries have that has historically prevented them from being too united: ethnic chauvinism and blood feuds between neighboring countries (this has plagued the Balkans and the former PLC the most). 

One can imagine that this bloc/union would be quite influential in European politics on account of its large population and slowly-but-surely growing economic power and would impact Europe`s political situation for the better, specifically with regard to immigration policy (were such a bloc to exist within the EU, it is highly likely that it would exert its influence on Brussels by threatening to leave the EU if it continues pushing buttsex and unlimited immigration from MENA and SSA, which would damage the EU`s cohesion greatly). It would also more or less exclude Russia from European affairs, which would be a positive development imo.