Honestly, I wonder if you're overestimating him. With so much ambient noise, who can hear such a singular voice? Plus, there are numerous forces larger than one grumpy ideologue in play. As you say, "Dugin’s appeal lies in his ability to speak to the dispossessed of globalization, the disenchanted of liberalism and modernity." These would be there anyway, without Dugin, no? Even if he's being funded by USAID -And who isn't?- Is his influence really any worse than, say, Andrew Tate's? Who is his audience?
Dugin’s ideas are shitty because they are based on Nazi lies. Ukraine has proved that we are the real ancestors of Kyivan Rus, not that mongoloid multifaked empire built on blood and lies.
Good analysis, I definitely see echoes of Dugin's opinions in some popular figures with bad takes but large followings, such as Candace Owens, Jackson Hinkle and other significantly dumber Twitter figures whose names I can't remember( but who are also quite popular). While elites choose from a more limited pool of worldviews that are relatively, if not perfectly consistent, a great chunk of people in Western societies today harbors feelings that are not fully right or left-leaning, but rather incongruously combine elements of both ideologies and simply stem from a sense of opposition to the Western-NATO order and the alienation of modern society. The idea of Russia, Iran and others as benevolent actors is too dumb for most intelligent people, although I recognize the U.S. order is also opportunistic, if perhaps slightly more evolved.
So we're to tow the neolib/con establishment line just so a Russian doesn't score any rhetorical points? We're supposed to worry about him sowing division when our own political establishment does nothing but drive wedges between us?
You might as well be honest about the real "threat" you're addressing: free speech. Free speech, and indeed free thought, is what you are really objecting to. Dugin is the least of our worries.
Honestly, I wonder if you're overestimating him. With so much ambient noise, who can hear such a singular voice? Plus, there are numerous forces larger than one grumpy ideologue in play. As you say, "Dugin’s appeal lies in his ability to speak to the dispossessed of globalization, the disenchanted of liberalism and modernity." These would be there anyway, without Dugin, no? Even if he's being funded by USAID -And who isn't?- Is his influence really any worse than, say, Andrew Tate's? Who is his audience?
Dugin’s ideas are shitty because they are based on Nazi lies. Ukraine has proved that we are the real ancestors of Kyivan Rus, not that mongoloid multifaked empire built on blood and lies.
Good analysis, I definitely see echoes of Dugin's opinions in some popular figures with bad takes but large followings, such as Candace Owens, Jackson Hinkle and other significantly dumber Twitter figures whose names I can't remember( but who are also quite popular). While elites choose from a more limited pool of worldviews that are relatively, if not perfectly consistent, a great chunk of people in Western societies today harbors feelings that are not fully right or left-leaning, but rather incongruously combine elements of both ideologies and simply stem from a sense of opposition to the Western-NATO order and the alienation of modern society. The idea of Russia, Iran and others as benevolent actors is too dumb for most intelligent people, although I recognize the U.S. order is also opportunistic, if perhaps slightly more evolved.
So we're to tow the neolib/con establishment line just so a Russian doesn't score any rhetorical points? We're supposed to worry about him sowing division when our own political establishment does nothing but drive wedges between us?
You might as well be honest about the real "threat" you're addressing: free speech. Free speech, and indeed free thought, is what you are really objecting to. Dugin is the least of our worries.