Paradise in the Fourth Political Theory

_ Yuri Kofner, Chairman of the Eurasian Movement of the Russian Federation. Moscow, September 30, 2017.

“The Eurasianists are striving to create a new social epoch. At the same time, according to their hope, this era will be an age of faith. “

– Peter Savitsky. 1933 [1]

Each political theory has its own “paradise”, i.e. its social and political ideal, for the sake of which the followers of this ideology sacrifice their time, money, and even lives…

In this essay I will use the systematization that divides the political philosophical landscape into four political theories: liberalism, communism, conservatism and the new Fourth Political Theory.

“Paradise”, i.e. the socio-political ideal in each theory represents a certain time category, and also implies certain associations. Moreover, since the three political theories of modernity – liberalism, communism and conservatism (nationalism) – are secular adoptions of the intial Christian doctrine of freedom, equality and fraternity [2], in my brief analysis I will point to the Christian prototypes of the socio-political ideals in these four political theories.


Conservatives urge society to return to the past. It is important for them to preserve and/or restore the old customs and traditions of their culture and history. Conservatives have a kind of “golden age” glittering before their eyes, long since lost, but they would like to restore it. Conservatism, as defined by the Russian researcher Sergei Chernyakhovsky as counter-modernity [3], i.e. since it opposes the departure from traditional values, is against universalism and against the blind faith in historical progress – the phenomena inherent to the logic of modernity. “Against the modern world” by Julius Evola [4] is one of the favorite slogans of many conservatives. By its craving for the customs, teachings and heroes of the past, conservatism can be seen as a metaphysical expression of epic of the Old Testament. The most “pre-Christian” and even even pagan version of conservatism we find in the doctrines of fascism and national socialism. One of the pluses of the conservative socio-political ideal is that it is fairly understandable, since the “ideal” period or institution to which the conservatives strive to return, or which they want to preserve, already existed as one point in history, i.e. it can be referred to. Conservative movements often show attractive aesthetics and style, obtained by combining the achievements of traditional art with modern carriers for their expression (for example, T-shirts with prints of Jeanne D’Arc). The biggest drawback of conservatism is that the revered ideal is excessively mythologized (what one wants to achieve can never be the same as it was once upon a time, and what was supposed to be, in fact, was not as attractive as it seems). Conservatism is nostalgic, and therefore, in its attractiveness for young people will always yield to leftist currents.


Communism looks towards the future. The communists want to build an ideal material paradise For the working class. In their opinion, this paradise, because of the linearity of the historical process, did not exist before, but after the destruction of the bourgeois-capitalist society it will become inevitable in the future. On the wreckage of the old traditional world, the Communists want to build a new social utopia. Communism is a supermodern, a combination of the rationality of enlightenment and the quasi-religious conviction of the sanciry of its social mission. Therefore, it is not by chance that the Russian emigre thinkers saw in communism a perverted form of the New Testament, with Lenin as the (false) messiah and with revolutionaries as pupils and great martyrs of this new atheistic “faith” [5]. The strong point of the communist ideal lies in its revolutionary and socio-liberating pathos, which are especially attractive for the youth. Its weakness lies in its distopian reality, and, of course, quasi-religious atheism.


Unlike conservatism and communism, liberalism lives in the present. Liberals wants a free (unfortunately, more often in the understanding of “free from”), comfortable and full life for the individual here and now. A little exaggerating, we can say that the liberal socio-political ideal resembles an Dante’s inferno from the “Divine Comedy”[6] and John Milton’s “Paradise Lost” [7]. Representing the de-sacralization of the world from the spiritual foundations of Christianity, liberalism that emerged during the European enlightenment epitomizes the essence of modernity. A clear advantage of the socio-political model of liberalism is that it is simple, understandable, attractive and most realistic in its embodiment. The main drawback of liberalism is that it most often denies absolute values, and by that it is characterized by hedonism and individualism.

The Fourth Political Theory

Eurasianism, as Russia’s national version of the Fourth Political Theory, is trying to take the best elements from the three previous political theories (liberalism, communism, conservatism) that have departed from the “sacred” during modernity. In contrast to the satanic horrors of the postmodernity, Eurasianism tries again to justify and illuminate these elements with the light of the absolute values of traditional religions.By doing this, the Eurasianists want to open the new era of neomodernity. It is  called so, because it should replace modernity and at the same time be an alternative to postmodernity. Eurasianism sees its socio-political ideal as a combination and at the same time overcoming of the three above-mentioned temporary categories: “past” in conservatism, “present” in liberalism and “future” in communism. And what does not have an alpha or an omega? What existed in the past, exists in the present and will exist in the future? Eternity! The socio-political ideal of Eurasianism is based on the eternal – the transcendent Truth. The Eurasianists see this in two aspects – internal and external. In the external form they see it as the illumination of political thought by the values of traditional religions. In the internal form it is understood as the conduct of a righteous life directed towards God. Living a righteous lifes and adjusting political theories and socio-economic concepts according to the canons of the traditional religions, the Eurasianists try (in a figurative sense only) to reach “Heavenly Jerusalem”. [8] The earliest precursor of the development of such a social and political ideal we see in the “City of God” by the Christian theologian Augustine of Hippo. In our time, this ideal was described most fully by the Eurasianist thinkers of law Shakhmatov and Alekseev in their writings on the political “Truth state”. [9]


  1. Savitsy P.N. Eurasianism as a historical design. «Przegląd Spoldzielczy». No. 135-136. 1933 //
  2. Kofner Y. Eurasianism and identity. Part 1. Moscow, June 28, 2016 //
  3. Chernyakhovsky S. Tradition, modern and supermodern. June 6, 2016 //
  4. Julius Evola. Rivolta contro il mondo moderno. Milano, 1934.
  5. Berdyayev N.A. Phylosophy of inequality. Berlin, 1923
  6. Dante A. The Divine Comedy. The first publication was in 1555.
  7. John Milton. Paradise Lost. London. 1667.
  8. St. Augustine A. About the City of God (Latin De Civitate Dei). Gipo, 427. And also: Marcus Llanque. Geschichte der Politischen Ideen. München, 2012.
  9. Shakhmatov M.V. The State of Truth (experience on the history of ancient Russian political ideas). The Eurasian Season. Berlin, 1925

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *