DOCSLIB.ORG

Olavo De Carvalho and Aleksandr Dugin 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Olavo De Carvalho and Aleksandr Dugin 2 THE USA AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER A Debate Between Olavo de Carvalho and Aleksandr Dugin 2 Contents 3 The Structure of the Debate The Debaters 4 FIRST SEGMENT Olavo de Carvalho’s Answer Aleksandr Dugin’s Answer: Global Transition and Its Enemies 25 SECOND SEGMENT Aleksandr Dugin’s Reply: The West Against the Rest Olavo de Carvalho’s Reply 67 THIRD SEGMENT Aleksandr Dugin’s Response Olavo de Carvalho’s Response 143 FOURTH SEGMENT Olavo de Carvalho’s Closing Remarks Aleksandr Dugin’s Closing Remarks: Against the Post-Modern World ◊ Olavo de Carvalho’s answers and replies were translated from the Portuguese by Alessandro Cota. THE INTER -AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PHILOSOPHY , GOVERNMENT , AND SOCIAL THOUGHT 2012 3 The Debaters: Olavo de Carvalho and Aleksandr Dugin On March 7, 2011, Olavo de Carvalho, President of the Inter- American Institute for Philosophy, Government, and Social Thought, and Aleksandr Dugin, leader of the International Eurasian Movement, started a written debate on the topic “The USA and the New World Order.” The debate ended on May 9, 2011. Professor de Carvalho is a philosopher currently residing in the United States who has authored more than a dozen books and has been teaching an online philosophy course to more than 2,000 international students since 2008. His book Aristotle in a New Perspective (1996) has been acclaimed as a highly original contribution to the understanding of the Greek philosopher. Dugin is Vladimir Putin’s geopolitical strategist, leading organizer of the Eurasian Movement and considered the most influential Russian thinker of the post-Soviet era. His book, The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia (1997) has had a large influence on Russian military and foreign policy elites and has been adopted as a textbook in the General Staff Academy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The Structure of the Debate In the first segment, both participants respond to the following question: “What are the historical, political, ideological and economic factors and actors that now define the dynamics and configuration of power in the world, and what is the U.S. position in what is known as New World Order?” In the second, Aleksandr Dugin replies to the answer Olavo de Carvalho offered to the question posed by the organizers of the debate, and Olavo de Carvalho responds to Aleksandr Dugin’s reply. Next, in the third segment, Dugin examines and addresses de Carvalho’s response, and de Carvalho’s, in turn, examines and deals with Dugin’s examination. Finally, the debate ends with each thinker offering his closing statements. THE INTER -AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PHILOSOPHY , GOVERNMENT , AND SOCIAL THOUGHT 2012 4 First Segment THE INTER -AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PHILOSOPHY , GOVERNMENT , AND SOCIAL THOUGHT 2012 5 Olavo de Carvalho’s Answer Words change their meaning, weight and value according to the situations of speech. Upon entering this debate I must clarify from the outset that it is not a debate at all. The very idea of a debate presupposes both an opposite symmetry between the contending parties, from the point of view of their convictions, and some direct symmetry of their respective socio- professional status: intellectuals discuss with intellectuals, politicians with politicians, professors with professors, preachers of religion with preachers of atheism, and so forth. As for convictions, if we understand this term as only general statements about the structure of reality, mine do not differ from Professor Dugin’s in many essential points. Does he believe in God? So do I. Does he think a metaphysics of the absolute is possible? So do I. Does he wager that life has a meaning? So do I. Does he understand traditions, homeland, and family as the values that must be preserved above supposed economic and administrative conveniences? So do I. Does he see with horror the globalist project of the Rockfellers and Soros? So do I. It is not possible to organize a debate between two people who are in agreement. On the other hand, from the standpoint of the actual positions we occupy in society, our differences are so numerous, so deep and so irreducible that the very proposal of putting us face to face has a certain comic incongruity to it. I am just a philosopher, writer, and professor, committed to the search of what seems to me to be the truth and to educating a group of people who are so kind as to pay attention to what I say. Neither these people nor I hold any public job. We do not have any influence on national or international politics. We do not even have the ambition—much less an explicit project—for changing the course of history, whatever it may be. Our only hope is to know reality to the utmost degree of our power and one day leave this life aware that we did not live in illusions and self- delusion, that we did not let ourselves be misled and corrupted by the Prince of this World and by the promises of the ideologues, his servants. In the current power hierarchy of my native country, my opinion is worthless, except maybe as a negative example and an incarnation of absolute evil, which is a source of great satisfaction to me. In the country where I live, the government considers me at worst an inoffensive eccentric. No political party, mass movement, government institution, church or religious sect considers me its mentor. So I can give my opinion as I wish, and change my opinion as many times as it seems right to me, with no THE INTER -AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PHILOSOPHY , GOVERNMENT , AND SOCIAL THOUGHT 2012 6 devastating practical consequences beyond the modest circle of my personal existence. Now Professor Dugin, the son of a KGB officer and the political mentor of a man who is the very incarnation of the KGB, is the creator and guide of one of the widest and most ambitious geopolitical plans of all time—a plan adopted and followed as closely as possible by a nation which has the largest army in the world, the most efficient and daring secret service and a network of alliances that extends throughout four continents. To say that Professor Dugin is at the center and pinnacle of power is a simple matter of realism. To implement his plans, he has at his disposal Vladimir Putin’s strong arm, the armies of Russia and China and every terrorist organization of the Middle East, not to mention practically every leftist, fascist and neo- Nazi movement which today operate under the banner of his “Eurasian” project. As for myself, I not only lack a plan for my own retirement, but my only available war resources are my dog Big Mac and an old hunting shotgun. This tremendous existential difference (fully illustrated by the pictures below) makes our opinions, even where their verbal expressions coincide to the letter, signify entirely different things in the framework of our respective goals. The answers to the questions that inspire this debate will show this, I hope, as clearly as do the photos. Mr. de Carvalho and his two dogs, Mr. Aleksandr Dugin. Big Mac and Missy. There are two questions: who are the actors in the world scene and what is the position of the United States in it? THE INTER -AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PHILOSOPHY , GOVERNMENT , AND SOCIAL THOUGHT 2012 7 As for the first question: aside from Catholic and Protestant Christianity, which I shall address later on, the historic forces that today contend for power in the world array themselves into three projects of global dominance, which I will tentatively call the “Russian-Chinese,” the “Western” (sometimes mistakenly called “Anglo-American”) and the “Islamic” projects. Each of these has a well documented history, which shows their remote origins, the transformations they have gone through in the course of time and the present state of their implementation. The agents that personify these projects today are as follows: 1. The ruling elite of Russia and China, and particularly the secret services of these two countries. 2. The Western financial elite, as represented particularly in the Bilderberg Club, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. 3. The Muslim Brotherhood, the religious leaders of several Islamic countries and the governments of some Muslim countries. Of these three agents, only the first can be conceived of in strictly geopolitical terms, since its plans and actions correspond to well-defined national and regional interests. The second, which is more advanced in the implementation of its plans for world government, places itself explicitly above any national interests, including those of its countries of origin, which serve as its base of operations. In the third, conflicts of interests between national governments and the overarching goal of a Universal Caliphate are always ultimately resolved in favor of the latter, which, though currently existing only as an ideal, enjoys symbolic authority founded upon Koranic commandments that no Islamic government would dare to overtly challenge. The conceptions of global power that these three agents strive to implement are very different from one another because they owe to heterogeneous and sometimes incompatible inspirations. Therefore, they are not similar forces, or as it were, species of the same genus. They do not fight for the same goals and, when they occasionally resort to the same weapons (for example, economic warfare) they do so in different strategic contexts, where employing such weapons does not necessarily serve the same objectives. Although nominally the relationships among them are competitive and antagonistic, sometimes even of a military nature, there are vast areas of fusion and collaboration, as flexible and changeable as they may be.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • As Consequências Do Etnocentrismo De Olavo De Carvalho Na Produção Discursiva Das Novíssimas Direitas Conservadoras Brasileiras
    164 Revista NEP, Núcleo de Estudos Paranaenses, Curitiba, v.4, n.2, dez. 2018 As consequências do etnocentrismo de Olavo de Carvalho na produção discursiva das novíssimas direitas conservadoras brasileiras Pablo Ornelas Rosa1 Rafael Alves Rezende2 Victória Mariani de Vargas Martins3 Resumo: O artigo apresentado resulta de uma pesquisa desenvolvida a partir da utilização do método cibercartográfico que visou analisar os impactos dos discursos proferidos por Olavo de Carvalho nos comportamentos e narrativas produzidas por grupos políticos que estamos chamando de novíssimas direitas a partir do entendimento de Richard Day acerca dos novíssimos movimentos sociais que, em um contexto de emergência daquele verbete que o dicionário Oxford chamou em 2016 de pós-verdade, passou a intensificar muito mais o formato do que o conteúdo das informações que circulam pela internet. O ponto de partida de nossa análise decorre da constatação de certa leitura etnocêntrica encontrada tanto nas análises de Olavo de Carvalho quanto de seus seguidores que atuam como digital influencers, difundindo informações equivocadas, mentiras ou mesmo distorcendo fatos que reiteram aquilo que a analítica foucaultiana chamou de racismo de Estado. Palavras-chaves: pós-verdade, direita, conservadorismo, ursal. The consequences of Olavo de Carvalho’s ethnocentrism in the discoursive production of the newest Brazilian conservative right 1 Pablo Ornelas Rosa é doutor em ciências sociais pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC/SP (2012) com estágio pós-doutoral em sociologia pela Universidade Federal do Paraná – UFPR (2014) e em saúde coletiva pela Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo – UFES (2018), mestre em sociologia política (2008) e bacharel em ciências sociais (2005) pela Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina - UFSC.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com09/29/2021 06:39:09AM Via Free Access
    fascism 4 (2015) 209-212 brill.com/fasc Book Review ∵ Mats Deland, Michael Minkenberg and Christin Mays, ed. In the Tracks of Breivik: Far Right Networks in Northern and Eastern Europe (Berlin/ Vienna: lit Verlag, 2014). Four years have already passed since Anders Behring Breivik, apparently single-handedly, committed the most murderous and destructive terrorist atrocity by the far right in post-war Europe. In 2011–2012, particularly during his criminal trial in Oslo, there was a lively public debate in in the Scandinavian media as to whether Breivik was a fascist, or represented some other permuta- tion of the contemporary European far right – an Islamophobic ‘counter-jihad- ist’; a militant, conservative nationalist; or a Christian extremist.1 Somewhat counterintuitively, since then relatively little scholarly attention has been devoted within comparative fascist studies to the implications of Breivik’s deeds, ideology, and self-proclaimed pan-European revolutionary movement. The title of this anthology – In the Tracks of Breivik – would suggest that its primary purpose is to map the far right networks of northern and eastern Europe in relation to the terrorist acts of July 22, 2011. Even if we realize that this formulation is an unfortunate literal translation of the Swedish phrase ‘i spåren av [Breivik]’ – for which a more idiomatic English rendering would be ‘in the wake of [Breivik]’, the implication would still be that the findings of the book are located in some direct relation to Breivik and his crimes. Even the promotional blurb on the back cover, as well as the opening and closing words of the introduction, reinforce this expectation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pragmatics of Chaos: Parsing Bolsonaro's
    Dossiê THE PRAGMATICS OF CHAOS: PARSING BOLSONARO’S UNDEMOCRATIC LANGUAGE A PRAGMÁTICA DO CAOS: ANALISANDO A LINGUAGEM ANTIDEMOCRÁTICA DE BOLSONARO Daniel N. Silva*, ** ABSTRACT This paper unpacks different layers of Jair Bolsonaro’s pragmatics of chaos – the name I give to a reflexive, ordered and laminated method of producing a permanent sentiment of agitation, murk, and discontent in political audiences while a conservative and free market agenda is radicalized in Brazil. The communicative layers are: history, exemplified by Bolsonaro’s early career in the military: from his union-like activity, to his imprisonment and to evidences of a terrorist plot; persona, indexed by the jocular, non-serious performances that made him famous as a federal representative and that have been mediatized in his executive action as president; text and talk, characterized by a general texture of incendiary framing, smoke screens, backtracking, and avoidance of debate; audiences, seen from the perspective of the digital, pedagogic and performative populism that accrued from his campaign, almost entirely designed for being engendered on the non-public space of WhatsApp groups and in public, algorithmic social media platforms. Keywords: digital populism; smoke screens; incendiary framing; backtracking; avoidance of debate. RESUMO Este artigo analisa diferentes camadas da pragmática do caos de Jair Bolsonaro – o nome que dou ao método reflexivo, ordenado e laminado de produzir um sentimento permanente de agitação, névoa e mal-estar em audiências políticas
    [Show full text]
  • Latin American Societies
    Latin American Societies Current Challenges in Social Sciences Series Editors Adrian Albala Instituto de Ciências Políticas (IPOL) University of Brasília Brasilia, Brasília, Brazil Maria Jose Álvarez Rivadulla Edifcio Franco, Ofcina GB 620 Universidad de los Andes Bogota, Colombia Alejandro Natal Department of Social Processes Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Lerma de Villada, Estado de México, Mexico This series aims at presenting to the international community original contributions by scholars working on Latin America. Such contributions will address the challenges that Latin American societies currently face as well as the ways they deal with these challenges. The series will be methodologically agnostic, that is: it welcomes case studies, small-N comparative studies or studies covering the whole region, as well as studies using qualitative or quantitative data (or a mix of both), as long as they are empirically rigorous and based on high-quality research. Besides exploring Latin American challenges, the series attempts to provide concepts, fndings and theories that may shed light on other regions. The series will focus on seven axes of challenges: 1) Classes and inequalities 2) Crime, security and violence 3) Environmental threats 4) Collective action 5) Cultural change and resistance 6) Migrations 7) Political inclusion and representation Both solicited and unsolicited proposals will be considered for publication in the series. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/16592 Camila Rocha • Esther Solano
    [Show full text]
  • Political Trends in Russia
    russian analytical russian analytical digest 60/09 digest analysis Fascist Tendencies in Russia’s Political Establishment: The Rise of the International Eurasian Movement By Andreas Umland, Eichstaett, Bavaria Abstract Aleksandr Dugin, a prominent advocate of fascist and anti-Western views, has risen from a fringe ideologue to deeply penetrate into Russian governmental offices, mass media, civil society and academia in ways that many in the West do not realize or understand. Prominent members of Russian society are affiliated with his International Eurasian Movement. Among Dugin’s most important collaborators are electronic and print media commentator Mikhail Leont’ev and the legendary TV producer and PR specialist Ivan Demidov. If Dugin’s views become more widely accepted, a new Cold War will be the least that the West should expect from Russia during the coming years. The Rise of Aleksandr Dugin course that must be taken seriously. Dugin’s numerous In recent years, various forms of nationalism have be- links to the political and academic establishments of a come a part of everyday Russian political and social life. number of post-Soviet countries, as well as institutions Since the end of the 1990s, an increasingly aggressive in Turkey, remain understudied or misrepresented. In racist sub-culture has been infecting sections of Russia’s other cases, Dugin and his followers receive more se- youth, and become the topic of numerous analyses by rious attention, yet are still portrayed as anachronis- Russian and non-Russian observers. Several new radi- tic, backward-looking imperialists – merely a partic- cal right-wing organizations, like the Movement Against ularly radical form of contemporary Russian anti-glo- Illegal Emigration, known by its Russian acronym balism.
    [Show full text]
  • Spencer Sunshine*
    Journal of Social Justice, Vol. 9, 2019 (© 2019) ISSN: 2164-7100 Looking Left at Antisemitism Spencer Sunshine* The question of antisemitism inside of the Left—referred to as “left antisemitism”—is a stubborn and persistent problem. And while the Right exaggerates both its depth and scope, the Left has repeatedly refused to face the issue. It is entangled in scandals about antisemitism at an increasing rate. On the Western Left, some antisemitism manifests in the form of conspiracy theories, but there is also a hegemonic refusal to acknowledge antisemitism’s existence and presence. This, in turn, is part of a larger refusal to deal with Jewish issues in general, or to engage with the Jewish community as a real entity. Debates around left antisemitism have risen in tandem with the spread of anti-Zionism inside of the Left, especially since the Second Intifada. Anti-Zionism is not, by itself, antisemitism. One can call for the Right of Return, as well as dissolving Israel as a Jewish state, without being antisemitic. But there is a Venn diagram between anti- Zionism and antisemitism, and the overlap is both significant and has many shades of grey to it. One of the main reasons the Left can’t acknowledge problems with antisemitism is that Jews persistently trouble categories, and the Left would have to rethink many things—including how it approaches anti- imperialism, nationalism of the oppressed, anti-Zionism, identity politics, populism, conspiracy theories, and critiques of finance capital—if it was to truly struggle with the question. The Left understands that white supremacy isn’t just the Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazis, but that it is part of the fabric of society, and there is no shortcut to unstitching it.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Recepção Lusófona De Hermann Broch – Período 1959-2015
    Pandaemonium Germanicum. Revista de Estudos Germanísticos E-ISSN: 1982-8837 [email protected] Universidade de São Paulo Brasil Bonomo, Daniel Recepção lusófona de Hermann Broch – Período 1959-2015 Pandaemonium Germanicum. Revista de Estudos Germanísticos, vol. 19, núm. 28, septiembre-octubre, 2016, pp. 1-19 Universidade de São Paulo São Paulo, Brasil Disponível em: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=386646680001 Como citar este artigo Número completo Sistema de Informação Científica Mais artigos Rede de Revistas Científicas da América Latina, Caribe , Espanha e Portugal Home da revista no Redalyc Projeto acadêmico sem fins lucrativos desenvolvido no âmbito da iniciativa Acesso Aberto 1 Bonomo, D. - Recepção lusófona de Broch Recepção lusófona de Hermann Broch – Período 1959-2015 [Hermann Broch’s reception in Brazil and Portugal between 1959 and 2015] http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/1982-88371928119 Daniel Bonomo1 Abstract: The response, in Brazil and Portugal, to recently published editions of the novels The Sleepwalkers and The Death of Vergil by Hermann Broch shows a growing interest in, or perhaps a rather late response to, the author. One might wonder what events have been shaping the history of his literary presence in the Portuguese speaking world. This paper takes an unprecedented look at how Broch’s fictional and theoretical works have been received, in Portuguese, from the 1950s to the present day and provides a framework of main events – inclusions in the literary historiography, translations, theoretical and artistic utilizations. The objective is to expand the map of Broch’s readings and to offer references which might promote further discussions and advance the research on the author and his work.
    [Show full text]
  • John Rees Interviews Gary Allen
    Popular Historian GARY ALLEN An Exclusive Interview With The Leading Authority On Trilateralism by John Rees • WHILE majoring in history at Stan­ Foreign Relations and the Trilateral ford University, Gary Allen became Commission. Mr. Allen's commentar­ involved in "power-structure research" ies appear regularly in American on the U.S. banking and corporate Opinion magazine, of which he is a elites and their roles in shaping the contributing editor. His nine books in­ course of U.S. political and economic clude None Dare Call It Conspiracy, policies during this century. Over the with more than five million copies in last 20 years he has become the leading print. And his latest, Teddy Kennedy: authority on secretive Establishment In Over His Head, has just been pub­ organizations including the Council on lished by '76 Press (Box 2686, Seal The Review Of The NEWS, February 27, 1980 39 Beach, California 90740) at $4.95. Q. How did you become involved Q. Mr. Allen, you have been in­ in investigating the Trilateral group? vestigating and writing about the A. My interest in power-structure U.S. fm ancia:!, industrial, and polit­ research dates back long before David ical elite for nearly 20 years. In ex­ Rockefeller organized the Trilateral ' amining the inner circles of econom­ Commission in 1972. Its immediate ic power in America, particularly antecedents are the Council on Foreign the Trilateral Commission and the Relations (C,F,R.) and the Bilderber­ much older Council on Foreign Rela­ gers. The former is a secretive group tions, you were pretty much alone of American-based bankers, academ­ until recently.
    [Show full text]
  • (Em) Paralelo: As “Verdades” Da Ditadura E Sua Historicidade Mediada Como Um Empreendimento Político1
    ISSN 2175-6945 Um Brasil (em) Paralelo: as “verdades” da ditadura e sua historicidade mediada como um empreendimento político1 André Bonsanto DIAS2 Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte, Mossoró, RN Resumo Partindo do princípio de que a história está em disputa e sobre ela uma série de agentes e instituições atuam para legitimar as (suas) verdades sobre os acontecimentos no tempo, o presente artigo problematiza os embates travados em torno da ditadura militar brasileira, tendo como exemplo o caso da empresa e produtora de conteúdo Brasil Paralelo. A partir desta análise procuramos analisar como as narrativas sobre o período vêm se inserindo conflituosamente em um embate onde memória, história, verdade e opinião acabam por se confluir e confundir, atuando a partir de empreendimentos políticos bastante evidentes. Palavras-chave: História; Memória; Verdade; Ditadura militar; Brasil Paralelo Introdução A constatação do historiador francês Marc Ferro, proferida há mais de três décadas, nunca nos pareceu tão evidente e atual: a história - e suas utilizações políticas – é uma disputa, pois permanece constantemente “vigiada” pelos atores e instituições que a constituem. Àquele momento, Ferro (1989) - um reconhecido historiador do cinema - estava se referindo ao contexto da grande proliferação de conhecimentos históricos produzidos “por outros meios” que não as narrativas historiográficas tradicionais. Narrativas estas que, sejam elas audiovisuais, informativas e/ou de entretenimento, seriam de suma importância para democratizar o acesso à informação, ao mesmo tempo em que demandavam um olhar mais rigoroso de seus procedimentos de análise. No cerne deste debate se encontra a questão das disputas narrativas em torno de uma “verdade” do/sobre determinado passado, uma verdade que se pretende autorizada pela forma como assume, em sucessivos e particulares presentes, esferas de reconhecimento junto a seu público.
    [Show full text]
  • O Que Não Pôde Ser Dito 145 OTTO MARIA CARPEAUX
    COLFFIELD, Carol. Otto Maria Carpeaux: O Que Não Pôde Ser Dito OTTO MARIA CARPEAUX: O QUE NÃO PÔDE SER DITO OTTO MARIA CARPEAUX: WHAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SAID Carol Colffield Resumo Reconstituir vidas na forma escrita é também navegar sobre os silêncios de seus protagonistas. Neste ensaio, que é parte de um universo de estudo maior focado nos intelectuais judeus perseguidos pelo nazifascismo e refugiados no Brasil, enveredamos pelos silêncios de um desses personagens, Otto Maria Carpeaux (Viena, 1908 – Rio de Janeiro, 1978) e pelas descobertas que resultaram da análise de documentos obtidos em arquivos na Áustria e em Israel, os quais revelam aspectos até então não registrados pela historiografia no que se refere tanto às origens do autor quanto ao seu passado de perseguições na Europa. Além do interesse intrínseco à própria trajetória de Carpeaux, tais descobertas confirmam que, em seu caso, o exílio não significou o fim da violência. Palavras-chave: Otto Maria Carpeaux, Otto Maria Karpfen, Carpeaux, Intelectuais Judeus, Refugiados Judeus. Abstract To reconstitute lives in written form is also to navigate the silences of the protagonists. In this essay, which is part of a larger universe of study focused on Jewish intellectuals who were persecuted by Nazism and took refuge in Brazil, we turn to the silence of one of those Doutoranda do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Judaicos e Árabes (FFLCH-USP). Pesquisadora do Arqshoah-LEER-USP e bolsista do Projeto Vozes do Holocausto, ambos coordenados pela Profa. Dra. Maria Luiza Tucci Carneiro. 145 Cad. Líng. Lit. Hebr., n. 15, p. 145-154, 2017 characters, Otto Maria Carpeaux (Viena, 1908 – Rio de Janeiro, 1978), and to the discoveries that resulted from the analysis of documents obtained from archives in Austria and Israel, which reveal aspects not recorded by the historiography with regard both to the author’s origins and to his past of persecutions in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Olena Semenyaka, the “First Lady” of Ukrainian Nationalism
    Olena Semenyaka, The “First Lady” of Ukrainian Nationalism Adrien Nonjon Illiberalism Studies Program Working Papers, September 2020 For years, Ukrainian nationalist movements such as Svoboda or Pravyi Sektor were promoting an introverted, state-centered nationalism inherited from the early 1930s’ Ukrainian Nationalist Organization (Orhanizatsiia Ukrayins'kykh Natsionalistiv) and largely dominated by Western Ukrainian and Galician nationalist worldviews. The EuroMaidan revolution, Crimea’s annexation by Russia, and the war in Donbas changed the paradigm of Ukrainian nationalism, giving birth to the Azov movement. The Azov National Corps (Natsional’nyj korpus), led by Andriy Biletsky, was created on October 16, 2014, on the basis of the Azov regiment, now integrated into the Ukrainian National Guard. The Azov National Corps is now a nationalist party claiming around 10,000 members and deployed in Ukrainian society through various initiatives, such as patriotic training camps for children (Azovets) and militia groups (Natsional’ny druzhiny). Azov can be described as a neo- nationalism, in tune with current European far-right transformations: it refuses to be locked into old- fashioned myths obsessed with a colonial relationship to Russia, and it sees itself as outward-looking in that its intellectual framework goes beyond Ukraine’s territory, deliberately engaging pan- European strategies. Olena Semenyaka (b. 1987) is the female figurehead of the Azov movement: she has been the international secretary of the National Corps since 2018 (and de facto leader since the party’s very foundation in 2016) while leading the publishing house and metapolitical club Plomin (Flame). Gaining in visibility as the Azov regiment transformed into a multifaceted movement, Semenyaka has become a major nationalist theorist in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • Forschungsprojekt Brasilianische Intellektuelle
    Alemania-Brasil: dinámicas transculturales y ensayos transdisciplinarios. Otto María Carpeaux, la superación del exilio por la transculturación * Ligia Chiappini** Resumen El texto trata de Otto María Carpeaux, en el contexto de un proyecto más amplio sobre ensayistas brasileños y europeos, que tuvieron una relación importante de vida y trabajo con la cultura de lengua alemana o con la propia Alemania. El ensayo, género fundamental en Brasil y en toda América Latina, está en el corazón de ese proyecto. Para Carpeaux, como para Anatol Rosenfeld, el exilio fue el origen de una nueva vida personal y profesional, construida en Brasil. Ambos pertenecen a la generación de intelectuales de lengua alemana que, huyendo del Nacionalsocialismo, quedaron en América, en este caso, en Brasil, que era todavía un país subdesarrollado. Ellos aprendieron el portugués y muchas otras cosas en muy poco tiempo, no apenas para conseguir sobrevivir, sino también para conseguir vivir y trabajar plenamente. De cierto modo, tuvieron que morir un poco para renacer, simultáneamente iguales y diferentes. Palabras clave Carpeaux; ensayo; nazismo; exilio; literatura brasileña. Abstract This paper deals with Otto Maria Carpeaux in the context of a wider project on European and Brazilian essayists who had an important relationship to the culture of the German language or to Germany itself in their lives and work. The essay, a fundamental genre for Brazil and all of Latin America, is at the heart of this project. For Carpeaux, as for Anatol Rosenfeld, exile was the origin of the new life and work that they constructed in Brazil. Both belonged to the generation of intellectuals of the German language who, fleeing from National Socialism, would stay in America, that is, in Brazil in their cases, which was then still an underdeveloped country.
    [Show full text]