GDR Army

[Desert Fox]

The day USSR started liberalisation - it was doomed.

The USSR was subverted by Liberalism mainly because it competed with liberalism rather than against it. There was no antithesis.

If two people are competing to achieve the same thing then one of them becomes redundant if the other one can so easily and successfully achieve the same goal far better.

Compare former Soviet bloc countries during immediate aftermath of the USSR's collapse to a country even as materially "primitive" as Afghanistan. Ask yourself, which one has incorporated American Liberalism and which one has successfully resisted it?

 

[Desert Fox]

We never opposed Marxism and Liberalism. The confrontation was between Communism (socialism, as its intermediate stage between Capitalism and Communism) and Capitalism. Liberalism, in our understanding, is the opposition to Conservatism, not related to the two of this economic and political systems.
Internationalism in Soviet meaning - is true friendship of nations (peoples), not merger of all nations into some no-nation or over-nation global society. May be during first few years after Revolution, while most of high ranking Communists were Jews, there were some wrong tendencies. But after that there was even over-nationalism in republics - "Korenizatsiya" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korenizatsiya (you can call it National-Bolshevism).
Later they found some compromise between nationalisaton and federation.

Yes, and alot of these people migrated to America where they formed Trotskyist anti-Soviet lobby.

We never opposed Marxism and Liberalism. The confrontation was between Communism (socialism, as its intermediate stage between Capitalism and Communism) and Capitalism. Liberalism, in our understanding, is the opposition to Conservatism, not related to the two of this economic and political systems.

Yes, but for simplicity sake it's easier to categorize each under its mother ideology (Capitalism under Liberalism and Communism under Marxism) as it prevents confusion.

Also, conservatism means many things these days. In America Republicans are called conservatives when they have in fact conserved nothing of value.

I think Traditionalism is a far better term to use.

A true antithesis of American Liberalism would be the following:

1. Anti-materialist
2. Religious/spiritual and thus anti-secular (separation of church & state)
3. Moral and ethical
4. Hierarchical & traditional in its worldview

Imperial Russia of Czarist era fits this description far better than Soviet Union.

And i think it is false to believe that a traditional society cannot function in the modern world. In fact I think that any society that has a true antithesis of Liberalism can beat it far better than a society that tries to beat Liberalism at it's own game.

Liberalism is the champion of materialistic world order and is best at what it does. One has to provide a true counter solution to liberalism and not a competitor towards the same goals as Liberalism.

 

[vostok]

A true antithesis of American Liberalism would be the following:

1. Anti-materialist
2. Religious/spiritual and thus anti-secular (separation of church & state)
3. Moral and ethical
4. Hierarchical & traditional in its worldview

You can not fight materialism because the whole scientific and technical progress is based on idea that you can and should know the world as Universe of billions of galaxies and quantums, and not flat Earth as centre of small material creation in endless spiritual "true" world. If you deny matrialistic view - you should deny all modern science because it was born and grown in materialistic view.
So, I think we should not seek antithesis, we should find our own thesis, necessarily taking into account the mistakes of modern US capitalism and Soviet socialism of the past. We can not build Czarist Russia or Soviet Union or Third Reich etc. - but we should take all the best from all the human history (including USA) and try to fix their faults in some form of new society.

 

[Desert Fox]

You can not fight materialism because the whole scientific and technical progress is based on idea that you can and should know the world as Universe of billions of galaxies and quantums, and not flat Earth as centre of small material creation in endless spiritual "true" world. If you deny matrialistic view - you should deny all modern science because it was born and grown in materialistic view.
So, I think we should not seek antithesis, we should find our own thesis, necessarily taking into account the mistakes of modern US capitalism and Soviet socialism of the past. We can not build Czarist Russia or Soviet Union or Third Reich etc. - but we should take all the best from all the human history (including USA) and try to fix their faults in some form of new society.

Of course we live in a physical (material) world and this is a reality. We are not ghosts that can walk right through walls. With new discoveries in science and technology we should also have newer ways to adopt these scientific advancements for the benefit of our environment and for ourselves.

But the problem arises when this substitutes as our purpose for existence which is the case in a secular, atheistic and materialistic worldview but even then these are terrible replacements because the people who believe in them end up becoming nihilistic because they lack a true sense of purpose.

Maybe this is where we differ, but in Islam and as Muslims for us our sole reason for existence is to worship our Creator Allah and everything else that Islam provides forms as a spiritual guide/infrastructure towards this purpose (five daily prayers, fasting, charity, etc.). All else is secondary and only a means to this end.

Whether you become rich or poor, whether you live in a hut or a mansion, whether you drive a Mercedes or a still ride a horse driven car, it doesn't matter because your purpose is still the same; to worship your Creator Allah and serve Him through emulating the example of His final Prophet Muhammad (SAW). Your destination is still the same.

Islam's strength lies outside of any materialist claim and this is why even the poorest Muslim countries would rather retain their freedom to live Islamically (even if imperfectly because all humans are imperfect, including Muslims) rather than have superficial decorations like McDonalds, sky scrapers, etc.

This is also why Muslim communities in the West are still comparatively most conservative, traditional and slowest to "integrate" into the mainstream culture. Whereas ex-Soviet bloc immigrants very quickly adopt the mainstream American liberal culture and way of life.

The greatest strength of Liberal materialism is its ability to tap into the animalistic impulses of the average person who has been detached from a spiritual sense of purpose; mainly the sexual impulse. This is why ads are hyper-sexualized, Hollywood is hyper-sexualized, all of liberal culture is hyper-sexualized.

Modern science is valuable and important, but it is not the purpose of our existence. How can this be proven you may ask? There are 7 billion people on this earth, but there aren't 7 billion scientists, physicists, philosophers, doctors, presidents, prime ministers, inventors.

You would think that in this age of ease of accessibility to information with computers and smartphones everyone would be supermen brainiacs, but most people use technology for feeding their basic animalistic impulses (sex, hunger, entertainment). And this is exactly why Liberalism is so successful; it offers us iPhones, p0rn, McDonalds, MTV, videogames. Something it's cold war competitor Communism could not offer.

But to the credit of Fascism, Nazism and Japan of WW2 they understood the fallacy of Marxist philosophy (Mussolini was a former socialist) and why it was not viable against Liberalism. Nazism tried to offer race as a religion, Fascism offered the Roman concept of State as a alternative, Japan remained true to its Samurai spirit despite modernization, but these three countries lost a physical war and ultimately their ideologies died with them because they were, with the exception of Fascist Italy, indeed too nationalistic and localized (Germanic/Nordic nationalism, Japanese nationalism).

 

[vostok]

Of course we live in a physical (material) world and this is a reality. We are not ghosts that can walk right through walls. With new discoveries in science and technology we should also have newer ways to adopt these scientific advancements for the benefit of our environment and for ourselves.

But the problem arises when this substitutes as our purpose for existence which is the case in a secular, atheistic and materialistic worldview but even then these are terrible replacements because the people who believe in them end up becoming nihilistic because they lack a true sense of purpose.

Maybe this is where we differ, but in Islam and as Muslims for us our sole reason for existence is to worship our Creator Allah and everything else that Islam provides forms as a spiritual guide/infrastructure towards this purpose (five daily prayers, fasting, charity, etc.). All else is secondary and only a means to this end.

Whether you become rich or poor, whether you live in a hut or a mansion, whether you drive a Mercedes or a still ride a horse driven car, it doesn't matter because your purpose is still the same; to worship your Creator Allah and serve Him through emulating the example of His final Prophet Muhammad (SAW). Your destination is still the same.

Islam's strength lies outside of any materialist claim and this is why even the poorest Muslim countries would rather retain their freedom to live Islamically (even if imperfectly because all humans are imperfect, including Muslims) rather than have superficial decorations like McDonalds, sky scrapers, etc.

This is also why Muslim communities in the West are still comparatively most conservative, traditional and slowest to "integrate" into the mainstream culture. Whereas ex-Soviet bloc immigrants very quickly adopt the mainstream American liberal culture and way of life.

The greatest strength of Liberal materialism is its ability to tap into the animalistic impulses of the average person who has been detached from a spiritual sense of purpose; mainly the sexual impulse. This is why ads are hyper-sexualized, Hollywood is hyper-sexualized, all of liberal culture is hyper-sexualized.

Modern science is valuable and important, but it is not the purpose of our existence. How can this be proven you may ask? There are 7 billion people on this earth, but there aren't 7 billion scientists, physicists, philosophers, doctors, presidents, prime ministers, inventors.

You would think that in this age of ease of accessibility to information with computers and smartphones everyone would be supermen brainiacs, but most people use technology for feeding their basic animalistic impulses (sex, hunger, entertainment). And this is exactly why Liberalism is so successful; it offers us iPhones, p0rn, McDonalds, MTV, videogames. Something it's cold war competitor Communism could not offer.

But to the credit of Fascism, Nazism and Japan of WW2 they understood the fallacy of Marxist philosophy (Mussolini was a former socialist) and why it was not viable against Liberalism. Nazism tried to offer race as a religion, Fascism offered the Roman concept of State as a alternative, Japan remained true to its Samurai spirit despite modernization, but these three countries lost a physical war and ultimately their ideologies died with them because they were, with the exception of Fascist Italy, indeed too nationalistic and localized (Germanic/Nordic nationalism, Japanese nationalism).

You have your answer to all questions - religion. It is good for mono-religion societies, but not for federations, such as Russia. We can not rise the level of religion role in Russia, because we have regions with non-Christian population - Islam, Buddhism, and even shamanism.
People from Eastern Europe easily integrating in Western societies because we have same race, and same religon and cultural roots with Western Europe, not because we are weaker or more sinful.
Liberalism itself means nothing - it is just another form of colonialism, it is not even true ideology. There is no such Liberalist's book or moral codex on which you can point and say - It is true, because it was written so. It is just some form of behavioral patterns, imposed by US to control another states from within. So - to fight Liberalism is to fight Western (USA) hegemony. Everyone who fight West fights Liberalism as its emanation - be it illiterate Afgany with AK, Russian military theorist from the General Staff or Chinese businessman who creates industrial and financial empire.

 

[Desert Fox]

You have your answer to all questions - religion. It is good for mono-religion societies, but not for federations, such as Russia. We can not rise the level of religion role in Russia, because we have regions with non-Christian population - Islam, Buddism, and even shamanism.
People from Eastern Europe easily integrating in Western societies because we have same race, and same religon and cultural roots with Western Europe, not because we are weaker or more sinful.
Liberalism itself means nothing - it is just another form of colonialism, it is not even true ideology. There is no such Liberalist's book or moral codex on which you can point and say - It is true, because it was written so. It is just some form of behavioral patterns, imposed by US to control another states from within. So - to fight Liberalism is to fight Western (USA) hegemony. Everyone who fight West fights Liberalism as its emanation - be it illiterate Afgany with AK, Russian military theorist from the General Staff or Chinese businessman who creates industrial and financial empire.

We don't really disagree on much except on how we diagnose the problem and what solution we offer.

I like Dugins solution: encourage all forms of regional cultural, religious and traditional identities in order to counter Liberal globalized hegemony. This can be done through an alliance of nations and communities who are traditional and conservative.

And yes, I agree Liberal cultural hegemony is the control of behavior through perfecting and implementing the study of human impulses (psychology and social sciences). The best way to counter this is to encourage spiritual beliefs that give the masses a sense of purpose and self control which they are receptive to, and this is why Islam is spreading quickly in Western countries at the grassroots level at least.

People from Eastern Europe easily integrating in Western societies because we have same race, and same religon and cultural roots with Western Europe, not because we are weaker or more sinful.

All human beings are "sinful", more or less depending on which religion one is talking about.

But there are European groups in the west that haven't "integrated" into mainstream Liberal culture like the Amish and the Mormons for example. They are considered "puritan" by their own Liberal societies yet they are one of few White communities with healthy sense of community and purpose.

 

[vostok]

We don't really disagree on much except on how we diagnose the problem and what solution we offer.

I like Dugins solution: encourage all forms of regional cultural, religious and traditional identities in order to counter Liberal globalized hegemony. This can be done through an alliance of nations and communities who are traditional and conservative.

And yes, I agree Liberal cultural hegemony is the control of behavior through perfecting and implementing the study of human impulses (psychology and social sciences). The best way to counter this is to encourage spiritual beliefs that give the masses a sense of purpose and self control which they are receptive to, and this is why Islam is spreading quickly in Western countries at the grassroots level at least.


All human beings are "sinful", more or less depending on which religion one is talking about.

But there are European groups in the west that haven't "integrated" into mainstream Liberal culture like the Amish and the Mormons for example. They are considered "puritan" by their own Liberal societies yet they are one of few White communities with healthy sense of community and purpose.

I am sure after multi-polar world become reality there will be several ideologies, competing with each other and mutually enriching each other.