Darya Platonova Dugina Assasinated in Moscow – Her Last Interview May 20, 2022
Last Updated on April 5, 2023
Can you introduce yourself to our readers? Isn’t it sometimes difficult for you to bear Dugin’s name, and thus necessarily be likened to your father?
Darya Platonova: I graduated in the history of philosophy from the Faculty of Philosophy at Moscow State University. My research focused on the political philosophy of late Neo-Platonism, a topic of infinite interest. The main line of thought in late Neo-Platonist political philosophy is the development of the idea of a homology of the soul and the state and the existence of a similar threefold order in both. Just as in the soul there are three bases, so in the state (and the Platonists describe the Indo-European model, later perfectly theorised in Dumezil’s work) there are also three domains – this model manifests itself in antiquity and the Middle Ages. The existential and psychic understanding of politics is in fact lost in many ways today, as we are used to seeing politics only as a technique, but Platonism reveals a deep connection between political and psychic processes. Today there is an urgent need to re-establish a global view of political processes, that is, to examine ‘existential politics’.
I have the honour of being in the same boat as my father (on the same existential ship), being the daughter of a great scholar of the Tradition, author of the 24-volume work Noomachia (‘wars of the mind’ – analysis through the three logos of all the world’s cultures). The fact that we are under sanctions by the US, Canada, Australia and the UK is also a symbol that we Dugin are on the path of truth in the fight against globalism. Therefore, I would say it is an honour to be born into such a family.
Tell us about your current work?
Darya Platonova: I am a political observer of the International Eurasianist Movement and an expert in international relations. My field of activity is the analysis of European politics and geopolitics. In this capacity, I appear on Russian, Pakistani, Turkish, Chinese and Indian television channels, presenting a multipolar world view of political processes. My areas of interest are both the space of European civilisation and the Middle East, where a kind of conservative revolution is taking place – from Iran’s constant confrontation with American hegemony or Syria’s struggle against Western imperialism to Turkey, which is now showing interesting tendencies to move away from NATO and the Anglo-Saxon geopolitical bloc and is trying to build its foreign policy on a multipolar basis, in dialogue with the Eurasian civilisation. I think it is important to follow the processes in the Middle East region, it is one of the stages in the fight against imperialism. On the other hand, I am also very interested in African countries; they represent the ‘other’ for Europe and Russia, from whose analysis we can better understand their civilisation. Africa has always been a dream element for both Europeans and Russians – let us recall Arthur Rimbaud’s Journey to Abyssinia and Harrar, or the Russian poet Nikolai Gumilev who was inspired by Rimbaud (‘African Diary’) and a series of poems about Africa, in which he actually reveals Africa as an unexplored and meaningful civilisation that Western colonialism cruelly tried to undo and destroy. Today, tectonic changes are taking place on the African continent, and the comparison between civilisations: the Western and the authentically African (so different and so unique) is extremely interesting.
For me, a particularly important issue is the development of the multipolar world theory. It is clear that the globalist moment is over, the end of liberalism has come, the end of liberal history. At the same time, it is extremely important to understand that a new phase full of challenges, provocations and complexities has begun. The process of creating multipolarism, of structuring civil blocs and dialogue between them is the main task of all intellectuals today. Samuel Huntington, as a realist in international relations, rightly warned of the risks of a clash of civilisations. Fabio Petito, a specialist in international relations, emphasised that building a ‘dialogue of civilisations’ is the central task and ‘the only way forward’. Therefore, to consolidate the multipolar world, the border (intermediate) areas between civilisations must be treated with care. All conflicts take place at the borders (intermediate zones) of civilisations, where attitudes clash. It is therefore essential to develop a ‘border’ (in-between) mentality if the multipolar world is to function fully and move from a ‘clash’ to a ‘dialogue’ of civilisations. Without this, there is a risk of a ‘clash’.
How do you see the war in Ukraine? What about the reactions in the West and the world?
Darya Platonova: The situation in Ukraine is really an example of a clash of civilisations; it can be seen as a clash between globalist and Eurasian civilisation. After the ‘great geopolitical catastrophe’ (as the Russian president called the collapse of the USSR), the territories of the once united country have become ‘borders’ (intermediate zones) – those spaces on which the attention of neighbours has increased, with NATO and especially the United States interested in destabilising the situation on Russia’s borders. In the 1990s, consistent work was undertaken with the frameworks of the new state governments – Ukraine being no exception. The events of 2014 in Ukraine, the Maya, so fervently supported by both Nuland and the infamous Bernard-Henri Levy soldier of ultra-globalisation, were a turning point, in fact opening the door to the establishment of a direct globalist dictatorship over Ukraine. In addition, liberal and nationalist elements, which before 2014 were more or less neutral, have united into a united front with a globalist and pro-American agenda. For 8 years in Ukraine, Russophobia was cultivated by various agendas and history was rewritten, up to the physical slaughter of Russians: the same 8 terrible years for the Donbass with daily bombardments. The French public will be able to listen to documentary filmmaker Anne Laure Bonnel, a witness to these 8 years in Donetsk, who is not afraid to tell the truth in her films and interviews.
The West’s unanimous support for Ukraine in 2022, the supply of weapons on an unthinkable scale: it all feels like agony. The agony of a globalist regime that is beginning to lose ground to multipolarism. For me, the most important pain is that Europe has succumbed to the influence of globalist propaganda and, instead of remaining neutral, has sided with the war. In many ways, this was certainly the plan of the United States, which systematically and continuously provoked the entire conflict by supplying Ukraine with weapons. From the US alone (according to Transparency International), more than $658 million was invested in aid to Ukraine between 2014 and 2017.
At the same time, countries in Latin America, the Middle East, China and India have not adopted a globalist stance. Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro declared that his country adheres ‘firmly’ to Russia’s position. In Cuba, during a May Day demonstration, people were seen carrying Russian flags and Z symbols, German broadcaster ZDF reported. Argentina accused the West of double standards. The country’s Vice-President Cristina Kirchner said the country was in conflict with London over the Falkland Islands. In Brazil, presidential candidate Lula da Silva in turn said that Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky is responsible for what is happening in his country. China has spoken out against NATO expansion and US provocations. India has tried to maintain its strategic neutrality (in the 1990s, India itself was the target of painful US and Western sanctions for refusing to adhere to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The country, which the West wants to cut off its oxygen and deprive of high technology, has since held out (mainly through cooperation with Russia, which did not join the sanctions and demanded their lifting). Some Middle Eastern countries have supported Russia’s special military operation (Syria, which has always been Russia’s ally, knows better than anyone the battle against globalism), in Turkey there are growing calls for withdrawal from NATO, and the President has refused to approve the admission of Sweden and Finland to NATO. Many African countries, especially those with a strong anti-globalist sentiment, did not support Western criticism of Russia (Mali, Sudan, CAR, Zimbabwe, Republic of Congo, Eritrea). These reactions indicate the end of the myth of a ‘one world space’. Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine accelerated the formation of a multipolar world and catalysed many geopolitical processes.
Don’t you think Russia is isolating itself? What do you think will be the consequences of this?
Darya Platonova: I think it is the opposite. Russia is finding new partners and the processes of sovereignty (e.g. economic de-dollarisation) are starting to accelerate. Russia is trying to be ‘punished’ by Western countries through sanctions, but the effect on the Russian economy is not very noticeable (‘International sanctions against Russia do not seem to have an impact on the daily lives of Muscovites,’ says a journalist in a BFM TV report). The West’s sanctions policy has been a catalyst for the search for new partners and the de-Westernisation of our country. At the same time, these sanctions have hit European countries hard, becoming a kind of ‘harakiri’ for many European economies. This is very worrying news, but apparently it was also part of the American plot to destabilise the European continent. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban stated that Budapest does not support the imposition of reckless sanctions against Russia. “Sanctions against Russia are like an atomic bomb, they could lead us not only not to be able to feed our population, but also to receive a mass of migrants at the border,” said the Hungarian prime minister.
New blocs are emerging. “Developing countries, including China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and others that have refused to take sides in the wake of Western sanctions against Russia, should consider how to strengthen their economic coordination to resist further shocks from the West. It is important to note that developing countries should seek a solution through financial and trade cooperation,’ wrote a journalist from China’s Global Times. These are very interesting geopolitical processes. Russia was thus not a victim of isolation, but a pioneer of a multipolar world order.
How is the Russian population reacting to this war, which has obviously already caused many losses on the Russian side?
Darya Platonova: Any military operation always involves losses. It should be noted that the figures given by Ukrainian sources (and they are the ones circulated by the western media) are not correct and need to be verified. We are facing an information war situation where everything, from military reports to figures, is politicised. In the Western media, unfortunately, there is almost no alternative view of events. In 2016, Ofpra produced a dossier on Pravy Sektor (‘Right Sector’), an ultra-Ukrainian group: ‘Pravy Sektor is the subject of accusations of anti-Semitism and xenophobia, homophobic demonstrations, illegal detentions and other abuses of power. It creates an armed militia, the Ukrainian Volunteer Corps, engaged in the conflict with pro-Russian separatists in the Donbass. Tensions between the Ukrainian Volunteer Corps and the authorities continued until the Corps became an uncomfortable part of the regular armed forces. In 2022, those who were regarded with suspicion in 2016 became heroes: the wives of Azov fighters (a group responsible for the cruel killings of Russians in the Donbass) met the Pope at the Vatican. It is very strange that something that seemed forbidden only two years ago has become commonplace in Europe. Or BHL’s meeting with the former head of the radical Russophobic and xenophobic Aydar battalion (a terrorist organisation banned in Russia) Marchenko. Today liberalism goes hand in hand with xenophobia and Nazism. This is a paradox. But it can be explained if one understands the ‘totalitarian nature’ of modern liberalism. This is the issue of the manipulation of information and figures.
As for the reaction of the Russians, the overwhelming majority supports the special military operation. In their eyes, it is an understandable defence of Russia’s geopolitical interests and a fight against Russophobia, because a regime has been formed in Kiev that denies Russians the right to self-determination (language, culture, identity) and existence. Some elements of society immediately left the country after the outbreak of hostilities, travelling to the United States, Europe and Israel. Significantly, Anatoly Chubais, former head of the Russian presidential administration and one of the ideologists and leaders of economic reforms in Russia in the 1990s, left the country. In the 1990s, the Patriotic Front called him a ‘traitor’ and responsible for Russia’s economic difficulties. This is a symbol. There are certainly such cases.
Everyone I know supports the special military operation not only in words but also, for many, in deeds, by providing humanitarian aid to refugees and the region. Moreover, they have not been doing so for a few months, but for many years. The same eight years that the West knew so little about.
As a journalist, what do you think about the censorship of RT in the EU or Sputnik, and the silence (if not approval) of the majority of European journalists?
Darya Platonova: This is an unprecedented case of violation of ‘freedom of expression’. Freedom of expression implies the possibility of having different points of view, sometimes unwelcome by the authorities. RT and Sputnik were not Russian propaganda tools, but platforms for discussion. I watched many RT France programmes and they were interesting because they included experts with an alternative point of view to that of the system’s media. The fact that journalists in Europe did not react in any way to these blockades demonstrates the ‘totalitarian’ nature of the entire Western media world. This is very sad. Hopefully, the reinformation media will remain active and prolong the destruction of the disinformation blockade.
In France, the economic consequences are already being felt (particularly the increase in petrol prices). How can a vicious circle be avoided?
Darya Platonova: The anti-Russian sanctions are starting to drain the European economy. Le Pen, in her debate with Macron, rightly called them a ‘harakiri’ for the French economy. But let us think, who needs a weakened Europe? Plagued by COVID, weakened by the anti-Russian sanctions, Europe will have to focus all its forces on saving its economy; in such a situation, the beneficiaries are the United States, which is able to establish its control over the continent. An independent Rimland is unacceptable to Anglo-Saxon civilisation, the growing anti-American and anti-NATO sentiment (in France, it should be noted, Mélanchon, Le Pen, Zemmour and many others have actively criticised France’s NATO membership and advocated an almost Gaullist 1966 scenario) is a threat to US global dominance. Therefore, the idea of anti-Russian sanctions was implemented with the selfish aim of weakening the region. The EU elites acted as intermediaries, proxies for the globalists in this attempt, and dealt a severe blow to the welfare of the European peoples and nations.
Any final words?
Darya Platonova: I invite all readers to think critically and question the media reports. If Western liberal elites insist so much on supporting Kiev and demonising Moscow, it is because there is a profit logic behind it. Everything must be questioned. This is an important principle that allows us to keep a sober eye. In the society of spectacle, propaganda and the totalitarian nature of Western systems, doubt is an essential step to come out of the cave…
Published on Breizh-info
Translation by Lorenzo Maria Pacini