ALEXANDR DUGIN: „The economy is not autonomous – it is only a projection of certain cognitive attitudes and philosophical principles”

12:12, 20 decembrie 2017 | Actual | 707 vizualizări | Nu există niciun comentariu Autor:

Speech of Mr. ALEXANDR DUGIN, at the International Conference “Financial capitalism and its alternatives for the 21st century. Contributions to the 4th Economic Theory”

 

To the Fourth Economic Theory

 

Preamble

In general, 4PT does not give priority to the economy and this is not accidental. The material aspect of the existence in the 4PT is considered to be secondary and completely dependent on more general social and philosophical attitudes – especially metaphysical and religious ones. The economy is not autonomous – it is only a projection of certain cognitive attitudes and philosophical principles. It’s they that must be understood and comprehended. The field of economy is not an area of ​​objects, but a field of social relations.  Economy is not autonomous, not sovereign, not primary. It explains nothing and is not the cause. Economics is not a science, but a sphere of applications. Its nomination for the first positions is associated with the degradation of society, which cannot be indulged. The economy is based on myth and metaphor, which should be studied.

 

Part 1. Capitalism as a historical and social phenomenon

 

Sovereign community of total farmers

  1. The end of capitalism.

Today we are dealing with the deepest (hopefully, final) crisis of capitalism. This is not a technical failure, it’s a fate. To understand what the crisis is, what ends, we must remember how it all began.

 

  1. Capitalism is the result of a split (Spaltung). This split was concerned with a special figure – an integral (total) worker. The central normative figure was a free farmer, or rather two farmer’s families, bonded with properties. And this means that it was a settlement of a certain scale, which Robert Redfield defined as a folk-society.

 

  1. The main features of the integral worker were:
  • ownership of the means of production;
  • consumption of manufactured products;
  • natural exchange on a limited scale;
  • ritual consumption of surpluses (potlatch);
  • a gift / gift model – total supplies (M. Moss).

 

  1. The farmer’s community was conceived as something sovereign. The superstructure above it was a sphere of death and spirits (which in certain cases was occupied by heterogeneous groups – for example, the elite of the conquerors). There the victims were sent, regardless of whether this sphere was bodily representative (higher castes) or not (spirits, dead people). In any case, the meta-sovereign level was personified and was responsible for the destruction of surplus or deficiency. But (it is fundamental!) the balance of production/ consumption was in the realm of pure immanence, that is, it was sovereign.

 

  1. It was this social type that was the basis of the economies of all European societies from the Neolithic period – until the middle of the Twentieth century.

 

Split

 

  1. Capitalism is based on a split (Spaltung) of this type. The split manifests itself in:
  • alienation of the means of production;
  • separation of production and consumption;
  • division of labor;
  • transition to monetary exchange;
  • monetization of previously non-monetized (non-market) phenomena – land, labor, currency;
  • the cessation of victims and the abolition of the other worlds (in the form of religion and estates);
  • ban on potlatch and gift /giving.

 

  1. This led to the disintegration of the basic figure of economy, to the emergence of new actors – the bourgeois, proprietors of the means of production, of individuals and producers, of the masses (population) instead of the people or the community (from Gemeinschaft to Gesellschaft of Ferdinand Tönnies), the urban proletariat, and the phenomenon of the salarium and prekariat.

 

  1. The economy of Modernity – capitalism – is the process of aggravating disintegration of this type. Capitalism is based on the decomposition of the basic type of integral worker.

 

  1. The result of the split is the emergence of classes – that is, capitalists and labor people (Capital and Labor).

 

Integral types in the higher castes of Indo-European society

 

  1. It can be noted that the split of the integral worker was accompanied by similar processes in other estates. We can talk about the figure of integral (total) priest and integral (total) warrior.

 

  1. The total priest (the duality of Mithra-Varun in Dumezil) is divided into a sacred and diabolical (priest and sorcerer) from the general type of sacral (R. Otto).

 

  1. The total warrior is divided into a victim (martyr) and executioner (aggressor). The total warrior deals with death (in both cases, the killer / victim). He has means of killing (weapons). A warrior has a legitimate right to violence. Split in the class of a warrior creates a State, that appropriates the right to legitimate violence and turns into an executioner (weapons are selected), and turns the soldier into a soldier or a policeman.

 

  1. The split affects all three of the basic estates and it is impossible only in one separate caste. Therefore, capitalism is associated with the disintegrated (hypocritical) priesthood (primarily Protestantism), the deserialization of the world (modern science) and the disintegrated army.

 

  1. The split of the three types leads to a capitalist economy, a bourgeois state and the domination of the materialistic scientific and technical elite.

 

Part 2. Overcoming Capitalism

 

  1. Socialism is not a genuine alternative to capitalism, because it accepts schism as a universal destiny. The entire „Manifesto” of Marx is connected with this. He wants to be not only anti-capitalist (including pre-capitalist), but post-capitalist. Therefore, Marx hated the peasants. Marxism calls for the aggravation of the split, absolutes the Gestalt of Proletarian, who is the ultimate case (limit) of division and alienation. Proletarian does not exist also as an individual (the main figure of liberalism). There is only an urbanized peasant (unhappy and split in any case – both as a city industrial worker and as a petty bourgeois).

 

  1. 4PT rejects capitalism in its roots, as it rejects Modernity. Consequently, in the field of economy, 4PT stands for a return to the integral worker. More to all this corresponds to the American populism of the late XIX century (the Farmers’ Union and the creation of the Populist Party in 1892 – the founders of Frances Willard, Thomas E. Watson, etc.) or the agrarian anarchism of Proudhon, inspired by the experience of Switzerland.

 

 

  1. But the restoration of the integral figure of a worker is possible only together with the restoration of two other Indo-European types – an integral priest and an integral warrior (an example of an integral warrior is a knight).

 

  1. However, the restored integral type is not the original one. There is a dialectic of the Hegelian sense: «innocence – sin – virtue». Virtue is not innocence, but a clash with sin and overcoming it. Similarly, in capitalism: it is a sin and pure evil, a split / devil. Integral worker – innocence. A restored integral worker is a virtue. Therefore, confrontation with capitalism is an eschatological imperative.

 

  1. The end of the history in the 4PT optics is the end of the history of capitalism, and the transition to another counter-capitalist history based on integralism and holism directed towards an integral history.