What do you think?
Rate this book
The Theory of a Multipolar World
يتألّف الكتاب من قسمين. في الأول منهما ثمّة افتراض وتأسيس لمفهوم التعددية القطبيّة بالاستناد إلى اللغة والمصطلحات، ونظرية العلاقات الدوليّة. وتتطلّب التعدديّة القطبيّة في الوقت نفسه نظرية أخرى تختلف عن النظريات الموجودة جميعها - الليبرالية، والواقعية، والماركسية، ومجموعة واسعة من نظريات ما بعد الوضعية. ويمكن في الوقت نفسه، أن يكون لـ "نظرية عالم متعدد الأقطاب" علائقُ مشتركة مع كل منها. لذلك، فإن وصف نظرية عالم متعدد الأقطاب، بمصطلحات نظريات العلاقات الدولية سيعطي صورة أكثر اكتمالاً لجوهرها.
أما القسم الثاني فمكرس للجغرافيا السياسيّة (الجيوسياسة) للعالم متعدد الأقطاب. توصف هنا التعدديّة القطبيّة في نظام إحداثيات مختلف - جيوسياسي صارم هذه المرّة.
في نظريّة التعدديّة القطبيّة تترابط الحضارات فيما بينها باعتبارها الهويّة الثقافية للمجتمعات (غالباً ما ترتبط بالدين والتقاليد) والتوجه الجيوسياسي، وكذلك عامل "الفضاء الكبير". ومن هنا، فإنّ النتيجة الرئيسة في نظرية عالم متعدد الأقطاب هي ظهور فاعل جديد في العلاقات الدولية. يعرّف هذا الفاعلَ العالمُ الصيني جانغ فييفي بشكل دقيق على أنه "الدولة - الحضارة". وقد استخدم فلاديمير بوتين هذا المصطلح في خطاباته، ودخلت النسخة الجديدة من المفهوم الروسي إلى السياسة الخارجية.
أما القسم الثاني فمكرس للجغرافيا السياسيّة (الجيوسياسة) للعالم متعدد الأقطاب. توصف هنا التعدديّة القطبيّة في نظام إحداثيات مختلف - جيوسياسي صارم هذه المرّة.
في نظريّة التعدديّة القطبيّة تترابط الحضارات فيما بينها باعتبارها الهويّة الثقافية للمجتمعات (غالباً ما ترتبط بالدين والتقاليد) والتوجه الجيوسياسي، وكذلك عامل "الفضاء الكبير". ومن هنا، فإنّ النتيجة الرئيسة في نظرية عالم متعدد الأقطاب هي ظهور فاعل جديد في العلاقات الدولية. يعرّف هذا الفاعلَ العالمُ الصيني جانغ فييفي بشكل دقيق على أنه "الدولة - الحضارة". وقد استخدم فلاديمير بوتين هذا المصطلح في خطاباته، ودخلت النسخة الجديدة من المفهوم الروسي إلى السياسة الخارجية.
166 pages, Paperback
Published June 21, 2021
8 people are currently reading
289 people want to read
About the author
Alexander Dugin
124 books446 followersAleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (Russian: Александр Гельевич Дугин, born 7 January 1962) is a Russian philosopher and activist. As a founder of the Russian Geopolitical School and the Eurasian Movement, Dugin is considered as one of the most important exponents of modern Russian conservative thought in the line of slavophiles. He earned his PhD in Sociology, in Political sciences, and also in Philosophy. During six years (2008 – 2014), he was the head of the Department of Sociology of International Relations in Sociological Faculty of Moscow State University. His publications include more than sixty books such as Foundations of Geopolitics, Fourth Political Theory, Theory of Multipolar World, Noomakhia (24 volumes), Ethnosociology. The influence of Dugin’s thought on modern day Russia (including political leaders) is recognized by not only his followers but also his philosophical and political opponents. His ideas are sometimes judged controversial or nonconformist but almost all agree that they are inspiring and original.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
February 9, 2022
Unlike some other work of Dugin, this is an actual attempt at a serious analysis. It does have its share of fascinating ideas--and, really, the whole idea of a "multipolar" world is worthy of consideration for many reasons.
That said, the presentation is borderline incoherent. Dugin contradicts himself over and over, his ignorance of physical and life sciences is on clear display (emphasized by his incongruous attempts to use scientific-sounding jargon from mathematics and physics) and--maybe the *least* of issues--his intolerance of dissent, of difference, and essential anti-humanism are clear throughout, even as he pleads the interests of humanity. His inability to separate the concept of individual liberty and human rights from capitalistic paradigm indicates that he really does NOT understand liberalism, but simply projects his own authoritarian, top-down hierarchical conception of society onto it.
Essentially, this is an attempt to justify one man's will to power and the use of force in molding the society into a quite idiosyncratic (and extremely kloodgy, almost Golberg/Frankenstein-y!) shape, which itself stands in clear opposition to his often proclaimed disdain for individuality. He frequently proclaims that "all civilizations" are free to develop in their own ways; but one walks away with an impression that such a claim is simply designed to disguise a deeper one: that *some* civilizations are more equal than others--and considering his stated opposition to hegemonies, such a claim would need to be disguised lest it sinks the veracity of the entire narrative.
But--again--worth reading for the bits and pieces of ideas floated therein. Yes, capitalistic hegemony must be opposed. No, rewarmed Heideggerian crypto-fascism is not the way to do it.
That said, the presentation is borderline incoherent. Dugin contradicts himself over and over, his ignorance of physical and life sciences is on clear display (emphasized by his incongruous attempts to use scientific-sounding jargon from mathematics and physics) and--maybe the *least* of issues--his intolerance of dissent, of difference, and essential anti-humanism are clear throughout, even as he pleads the interests of humanity. His inability to separate the concept of individual liberty and human rights from capitalistic paradigm indicates that he really does NOT understand liberalism, but simply projects his own authoritarian, top-down hierarchical conception of society onto it.
Essentially, this is an attempt to justify one man's will to power and the use of force in molding the society into a quite idiosyncratic (and extremely kloodgy, almost Golberg/Frankenstein-y!) shape, which itself stands in clear opposition to his often proclaimed disdain for individuality. He frequently proclaims that "all civilizations" are free to develop in their own ways; but one walks away with an impression that such a claim is simply designed to disguise a deeper one: that *some* civilizations are more equal than others--and considering his stated opposition to hegemonies, such a claim would need to be disguised lest it sinks the veracity of the entire narrative.
But--again--worth reading for the bits and pieces of ideas floated therein. Yes, capitalistic hegemony must be opposed. No, rewarmed Heideggerian crypto-fascism is not the way to do it.
Want to read
December 31, 2024. واحد من الكتب الذي يظهر عنوانه و اسم مؤلفه و غلافه أنه كتاب فخم سيغيرك و يجعلك شخص آخر و غالبا ما تتفاجا أنه مجرد كتاب ممل آخر
December 5, 2022
Poorly written and/or translated. Idea very interesting, the justifications, the how and the why not elucidated. Feels like Russian cope tbh. Dugins writing turns out to be as interesting or important as a wet paper bag.
January 31, 2023
As a fan of a lot of Dugin's ideas and writings this book was somewhat of a dissapointment. It starts of promising, with Dugin arguing that a new theory for International Relations should be formed based on civilizations instead of on ideas such as the nation-state. He then goes into detail about the different ways in which a civilization can be contrived and understood, stating that depending on the people it can be based on things like religion, culture, his own reading of Heidegger's Dasein etc.
He then looks at civilizations from a spatial dimension, using intersting concepts such as Carl Schmitt's large space here and using historical situations such as the cold war to make a strong argument for how many nation-state's in fact are not as free and independent within the Westphalian system as they might think. So far so good.
However, after this Dugin begins to discuss other theories and schools of IR and what a IR theory of multipolarity can learn from these schools, as well as what it should discard from them. While his critiques and insights are somewhat interesting and in his typical fashion he manages to pull from ideas both on the broad political left and from those on the right, what we can take from these fields is almost always the same: a way to criticize Western Liberal unipolarity and it's universalist asperations.
While this is interesting, in my opinion it is not super insightful and it goes on for too long. Sometimes he shortly goes into things like how intercivilizational interactions might work but this always is discussed in a few generalized sentences of how things might look. In the end then, while the book clearly lays out that Dugin wants International Relations to be based on a system which is divided into poles along self defined civilizations as opposed to what he sees as the oppressive Western unipolar system, it is not exactly clear how this would look in practice.
And since by now, most people that read Dugin would at least be familiar with the fact that he is a staunch critic of Liberalism, Globalism and Western unipolarity, the question is what new insights the book gives us, especially because the goal of the book was to give a more practical overview of the system, partly based on Dugin's normally more philosophical ideas which one can find in books such as "the Fourth Political Theory". In this regard I think the book doesn't really hit the mark as it mainly seems to be a reiteration of Dugin's critique of the West and an abstract overview of his proposal of a civilizational based multipolarity.
All in all the book still has a lot of interesting ideas but they perhaps serve better as a primer for someone who is new to his ideas than as a concretization of how his ideas of multipolarity would play out in practice.
He then looks at civilizations from a spatial dimension, using intersting concepts such as Carl Schmitt's large space here and using historical situations such as the cold war to make a strong argument for how many nation-state's in fact are not as free and independent within the Westphalian system as they might think. So far so good.
However, after this Dugin begins to discuss other theories and schools of IR and what a IR theory of multipolarity can learn from these schools, as well as what it should discard from them. While his critiques and insights are somewhat interesting and in his typical fashion he manages to pull from ideas both on the broad political left and from those on the right, what we can take from these fields is almost always the same: a way to criticize Western Liberal unipolarity and it's universalist asperations.
While this is interesting, in my opinion it is not super insightful and it goes on for too long. Sometimes he shortly goes into things like how intercivilizational interactions might work but this always is discussed in a few generalized sentences of how things might look. In the end then, while the book clearly lays out that Dugin wants International Relations to be based on a system which is divided into poles along self defined civilizations as opposed to what he sees as the oppressive Western unipolar system, it is not exactly clear how this would look in practice.
And since by now, most people that read Dugin would at least be familiar with the fact that he is a staunch critic of Liberalism, Globalism and Western unipolarity, the question is what new insights the book gives us, especially because the goal of the book was to give a more practical overview of the system, partly based on Dugin's normally more philosophical ideas which one can find in books such as "the Fourth Political Theory". In this regard I think the book doesn't really hit the mark as it mainly seems to be a reiteration of Dugin's critique of the West and an abstract overview of his proposal of a civilizational based multipolarity.
All in all the book still has a lot of interesting ideas but they perhaps serve better as a primer for someone who is new to his ideas than as a concretization of how his ideas of multipolarity would play out in practice.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 17, 2024
Alexander Dugin’s The Theory of a Multipolar World offers a systematic and theoretically dense articulation of a geopolitical vision that challenges the unipolar dominance of the United States and Western liberal modernity. Rooted in international relations theory, philosophy, and political critique, Dugin argues for a multipolar world order as a necessary framework for achieving civilizational diversity, sovereignty, and geopolitical equilibrium in the 21st century. His work builds on and critiques both Western liberal internationalism and the realist tradition, while proposing an alternative paradigm grounded in the existence of distinct “civilizational poles” that counterbalance Western hegemony.
The core of Dugin’s thesis is the rejection of unipolarity as the dominant geopolitical structure that emerged following the end of the Cold War. For Dugin, unipolarity—characterized by U.S.-led globalization, neoliberal capitalism, and universalist liberal values—constitutes not merely a geopolitical arrangement but a form of ideological and cultural imperialism. Drawing from Carl Schmitt’s notion of the “political,” Dugin frames the unipolar world as a totalizing order that suppresses cultural, spiritual, and civilizational differences under the pretense of liberal universalism. In response, Dugin advocates for multipolarity, defined as a system of distinct regional centers of power—what he terms “Great Spaces” or “civilizational states”—that operate as autonomous geopolitical and cultural entities.
Dugin’s multipolarity is underpinned by a critique of liberal modernity, which he views as corrosive to traditional identities and rooted in a homogenizing ideology. His appeal to the idea of a “multiplicity of civilizations” resonates with critiques of Western universalism advanced by thinkers such as Samuel Huntington and postcolonial theorists, although Dugin’s emphasis on spiritual and metaphysical dimensions sets his project apart. Drawing on philosophical currents from phenomenology to Traditionalism, Dugin grounds his multipolar theory in a metaphysical understanding of human societies as rooted in distinct cultural and historical lifeworlds that cannot be subsumed under a single global order.
Structurally, the book is divided into theoretical, geopolitical, and philosophical sections, with each layer reinforcing Dugin’s overarching argument. In the theoretical section, Dugin engages with international relations theories such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism, critiquing their Eurocentrism and limitations in addressing a multipolar vision. He introduces his concept of geosophy—a philosophical geopolitics that integrates spatial, cultural, and existential dimensions of human organization. In doing so, Dugin proposes a new theoretical language to challenge the epistemological assumptions of Western political thought.
The geopolitical section applies these ideas to contemporary global politics, analyzing the rise of powers such as Russia, China, and India as potential civilizational poles that resist unipolar dominance. For Dugin, these states are not merely regional powers but the bearers of distinct civilizational projects—each with its own cultural, spiritual, and historical essence. He advocates for a coalition of these poles, united by their shared opposition to Western hegemony, to create a more just and pluralistic global order.
The final, philosophical portion of the book situates multipolarity within Dugin’s broader intellectual project, drawing on Heidegger, Schmitt, and Traditionalist thinkers such as René Guénon and Julius Evola. Here, Dugin critiques modernity as a metaphysical crisis rooted in the “forgetfulness of Being,” echoing Heidegger’s diagnosis of technological nihilism. For Dugin, multipolarity is not merely a geopolitical necessity but a metaphysical imperative: it represents a return to an authentic, multiplicitous understanding of human existence against the flattening forces of liberal universalism.
Dugin’s work offers a provocative and original contribution to geopolitical theory, but it is not without significant criticisms. One of the central challenges of The Theory of a Multipolar World is its philosophical opacity and the density of its theoretical language. Dugin’s reliance on thinkers such as Heidegger and Schmitt, while intellectually ambitious, often obfuscates his arguments, making the work less accessible to readers unfamiliar with Continental philosophy. This complexity can detract from the book’s practical applicability, as Dugin’s grandiose metaphysical claims often overshadow concrete geopolitical analysis.
Moreover, Dugin’s vision of multipolarity raises ethical and normative concerns. While he frames multipolarity as a defense of diversity and sovereignty, critics argue that his relativistic approach risks legitimizing authoritarian regimes and illiberal practices under the guise of cultural pluralism. The notion of “civilizational poles” can be seen as endorsing a fragmented global order where power politics and regional hegemony dominate, potentially undermining human rights and international cooperation.
Additionally, Dugin’s work is heavily influenced by his Russian nationalist outlook, which raises questions about the universality of his multipolar theory. While Dugin presents multipolarity as a global project, his analysis often privileges Russia as the archetype of a civilizational pole and as a natural counterweight to Western dominance. This bias may limit the book’s appeal to readers seeking a more neutral or balanced analysis of global power structures.
Despite these limitations, The Theory of a Multipolar World is a significant text for scholars of international relations, political philosophy, and geopolitics. It challenges dominant paradigms of global governance and offers an alternative framework that emphasizes cultural and civilizational diversity. Whether one agrees with Dugin’s conclusions or not, his work invites critical engagement with the ideological and philosophical underpinnings of contemporary geopolitics.
In conclusion, Alexander Dugin’s The Theory of a Multipolar World is a bold and provocative exploration of an alternative global order rooted in cultural pluralism and civilizational sovereignty. While its theoretical complexity and normative implications may be contentious, the book provides a compelling critique of unipolarity and a thought-provoking vision of multipolarity as a geopolitical and philosophical project. For scholars and students of international relations, Dugin’s work serves as both a challenge to existing theories and an invitation to reconsider the possibilities of a more diverse and multipolar world.
GPT
The core of Dugin’s thesis is the rejection of unipolarity as the dominant geopolitical structure that emerged following the end of the Cold War. For Dugin, unipolarity—characterized by U.S.-led globalization, neoliberal capitalism, and universalist liberal values—constitutes not merely a geopolitical arrangement but a form of ideological and cultural imperialism. Drawing from Carl Schmitt’s notion of the “political,” Dugin frames the unipolar world as a totalizing order that suppresses cultural, spiritual, and civilizational differences under the pretense of liberal universalism. In response, Dugin advocates for multipolarity, defined as a system of distinct regional centers of power—what he terms “Great Spaces” or “civilizational states”—that operate as autonomous geopolitical and cultural entities.
Dugin’s multipolarity is underpinned by a critique of liberal modernity, which he views as corrosive to traditional identities and rooted in a homogenizing ideology. His appeal to the idea of a “multiplicity of civilizations” resonates with critiques of Western universalism advanced by thinkers such as Samuel Huntington and postcolonial theorists, although Dugin’s emphasis on spiritual and metaphysical dimensions sets his project apart. Drawing on philosophical currents from phenomenology to Traditionalism, Dugin grounds his multipolar theory in a metaphysical understanding of human societies as rooted in distinct cultural and historical lifeworlds that cannot be subsumed under a single global order.
Structurally, the book is divided into theoretical, geopolitical, and philosophical sections, with each layer reinforcing Dugin’s overarching argument. In the theoretical section, Dugin engages with international relations theories such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism, critiquing their Eurocentrism and limitations in addressing a multipolar vision. He introduces his concept of geosophy—a philosophical geopolitics that integrates spatial, cultural, and existential dimensions of human organization. In doing so, Dugin proposes a new theoretical language to challenge the epistemological assumptions of Western political thought.
The geopolitical section applies these ideas to contemporary global politics, analyzing the rise of powers such as Russia, China, and India as potential civilizational poles that resist unipolar dominance. For Dugin, these states are not merely regional powers but the bearers of distinct civilizational projects—each with its own cultural, spiritual, and historical essence. He advocates for a coalition of these poles, united by their shared opposition to Western hegemony, to create a more just and pluralistic global order.
The final, philosophical portion of the book situates multipolarity within Dugin’s broader intellectual project, drawing on Heidegger, Schmitt, and Traditionalist thinkers such as René Guénon and Julius Evola. Here, Dugin critiques modernity as a metaphysical crisis rooted in the “forgetfulness of Being,” echoing Heidegger’s diagnosis of technological nihilism. For Dugin, multipolarity is not merely a geopolitical necessity but a metaphysical imperative: it represents a return to an authentic, multiplicitous understanding of human existence against the flattening forces of liberal universalism.
Dugin’s work offers a provocative and original contribution to geopolitical theory, but it is not without significant criticisms. One of the central challenges of The Theory of a Multipolar World is its philosophical opacity and the density of its theoretical language. Dugin’s reliance on thinkers such as Heidegger and Schmitt, while intellectually ambitious, often obfuscates his arguments, making the work less accessible to readers unfamiliar with Continental philosophy. This complexity can detract from the book’s practical applicability, as Dugin’s grandiose metaphysical claims often overshadow concrete geopolitical analysis.
Moreover, Dugin’s vision of multipolarity raises ethical and normative concerns. While he frames multipolarity as a defense of diversity and sovereignty, critics argue that his relativistic approach risks legitimizing authoritarian regimes and illiberal practices under the guise of cultural pluralism. The notion of “civilizational poles” can be seen as endorsing a fragmented global order where power politics and regional hegemony dominate, potentially undermining human rights and international cooperation.
Additionally, Dugin’s work is heavily influenced by his Russian nationalist outlook, which raises questions about the universality of his multipolar theory. While Dugin presents multipolarity as a global project, his analysis often privileges Russia as the archetype of a civilizational pole and as a natural counterweight to Western dominance. This bias may limit the book’s appeal to readers seeking a more neutral or balanced analysis of global power structures.
Despite these limitations, The Theory of a Multipolar World is a significant text for scholars of international relations, political philosophy, and geopolitics. It challenges dominant paradigms of global governance and offers an alternative framework that emphasizes cultural and civilizational diversity. Whether one agrees with Dugin’s conclusions or not, his work invites critical engagement with the ideological and philosophical underpinnings of contemporary geopolitics.
In conclusion, Alexander Dugin’s The Theory of a Multipolar World is a bold and provocative exploration of an alternative global order rooted in cultural pluralism and civilizational sovereignty. While its theoretical complexity and normative implications may be contentious, the book provides a compelling critique of unipolarity and a thought-provoking vision of multipolarity as a geopolitical and philosophical project. For scholars and students of international relations, Dugin’s work serves as both a challenge to existing theories and an invitation to reconsider the possibilities of a more diverse and multipolar world.
GPT
November 28, 2022
The Theory of Multipolar World could well be considered a supplement to Dugin's previous books on his Fourth Political Theory.
In TMW, Dugin makes the argument contrary to Francis Fukiyama's claim that the end of the Soviet Union ushered in the "end of history" and the formation of a unipolar world focused around Western/American cultural, economic and political hegemony. Instead, Dugin claims that the series of events in geopolitics over the last three decades following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ever growing advances in technology is forming the creation of a Multipolar world with numerous regional powers intent on separating from the Western/American monopoly.
Interestingly enough is the lists Dugin makes for the possible other "great powers" within his TMW;
- Western/American and its proxies
- Russia and its proxies
- China
- The Islamic World
- India and other Hindu nations
- Buddhist nations
In TMW, Dugin makes the argument contrary to Francis Fukiyama's claim that the end of the Soviet Union ushered in the "end of history" and the formation of a unipolar world focused around Western/American cultural, economic and political hegemony. Instead, Dugin claims that the series of events in geopolitics over the last three decades following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ever growing advances in technology is forming the creation of a Multipolar world with numerous regional powers intent on separating from the Western/American monopoly.
Interestingly enough is the lists Dugin makes for the possible other "great powers" within his TMW;
- Western/American and its proxies
- Russia and its proxies
- China
- The Islamic World
- India and other Hindu nations
- Buddhist nations
May 24, 2022
A bit dry as Dugin tends to be in print. He essentially makes the very valid point that each society has the right to exist in and of itself and the west (America) should tend to its own and cease to try to dictate to the rest of the world how to function. I agree with him, but the book is not exactly a compelling read although I grant that his main objective was to be understood and that he achieved.
October 15, 2023
How a guy sees ethnostates as anti- racist, I have no idea. Not that I’ve never had similar ideas though.
May 30, 2022
O conteúdo deste livro pode ser um pouco polémico neste momento em que a Rússia iniciou a guerra, invadindo a Ucrânia, uma vez que se fala de Putin seguir as ideias (ou parte delas) desenvolvidas por este autor. No entanto, sugiro que pelo menos uma das camadas de interpretação não seja influenciada por esta realidade, usufruindo-se da abstração como meio de ter um ponto de vista mais objectivo do conteúdo explorado.
A leitura deste livro torna-se mais fluída após o início da apresentação da Teoria do Mundo Multipolar (TMM). Antes disso, na primeira parte do livro – chamemos-lhe assim –, são-nos dados vários conceitos que, para quem não está familiarizado com estes – como erao meu caso –, devem ser apreendidos para mais facilmente se compreender a teoria central apresentada na segunda metade do livro. Na conclusão é confirmado o papel de "glossário" que este livro tem.
Tal como é realçado no livro, saliento que a aplicação da TMM seria algo bastante complexo. Pode-se dizer que seria cada um por si (cada pólo, cada civilização), tendo uma lógica de "entre marido e mulher não se mete a colher". Mas, num mundo em que cada país é como que um reality show, conseguimos nós, os potenciais espectadores, não assistir ou ignorar sem mandar bitaites?
Outras questões se levantam, sendo a mais geral: Será esta teoria aplicável?
Para ajudar a responder, podemos fazer simulações teóricas, levantar questões, debatê-las e tentar arranjar respostas (ou novas questões que irão prolongar e consolidar este processo). Certamente que serão úteis, para quem fizer este exercício, os próximos volumes que darão continuidade a este livro, aprofundando esta Teoria e tornando-a mais palpável.
Recomendo a quem se interessa por geopolítica.
A leitura deste livro torna-se mais fluída após o início da apresentação da Teoria do Mundo Multipolar (TMM). Antes disso, na primeira parte do livro – chamemos-lhe assim –, são-nos dados vários conceitos que, para quem não está familiarizado com estes – como erao meu caso –, devem ser apreendidos para mais facilmente se compreender a teoria central apresentada na segunda metade do livro. Na conclusão é confirmado o papel de "glossário" que este livro tem.
Tal como é realçado no livro, saliento que a aplicação da TMM seria algo bastante complexo. Pode-se dizer que seria cada um por si (cada pólo, cada civilização), tendo uma lógica de "entre marido e mulher não se mete a colher". Mas, num mundo em que cada país é como que um reality show, conseguimos nós, os potenciais espectadores, não assistir ou ignorar sem mandar bitaites?
Outras questões se levantam, sendo a mais geral: Será esta teoria aplicável?
Para ajudar a responder, podemos fazer simulações teóricas, levantar questões, debatê-las e tentar arranjar respostas (ou novas questões que irão prolongar e consolidar este processo). Certamente que serão úteis, para quem fizer este exercício, os próximos volumes que darão continuidade a este livro, aprofundando esta Teoria e tornando-a mais palpável.
Recomendo a quem se interessa por geopolítica.
August 21, 2024
If I speak I'm in big trouble, very big trouble.
Obviously dugin is bad but it's interesting exploring the mind of a man who feels no emotion besides the burning desire of restoring the Russian empire.
Obviously dugin is bad but it's interesting exploring the mind of a man who feels no emotion besides the burning desire of restoring the Russian empire.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews