The choice of geopolitical path demonstrates the choice of metaphysical path, esoteric path, the path of Spirit through the universe. Therefore, no guarantees exist. Therefore, strictly speaking, claiming that Eurasia is good and Atlantis is bad, or that Rome is good while Carthage is evil, and vice versa, is impossible. Everyone called by their Order must take a decisive step and serve precisely their Order. The laws of our world are not determined, but depend on the outcome of the Great Battle, the outcome of the drama of “Eurasia versus the Atlantic,” and depend on the totality of planetary solidarity on the part of all of those called to service, all of the soldiers of geopolitics, and all of the secret agents of Land and Sea. The outcome of this cosmological war of Apollo with the Python depends on each of us, whether we are aware of it or not.
Author: Alexander Dugin
Translator: Jafe Arnold
Translator’s note: Although this piece was apparently first written between February 1991 and January 1992, this text has appeared in numerous versions in both internet and print editions, making it difficult to piece together different fragments and present a “perfect” or “final” edition. This translation was made on the basis of comparing the online texts available at zachetka.rf and arcto.ru, and using the print Serbian edition Konspirologija (Belgrade, Logos: 2008), and the print Russian edition Konspirologiya from 2005. Significant fragments lacking in one of the other texts but which are presented here are inserted as translator notes in italics. All of the footnotes to this text are taken from the 2005 Russian edition. This version has been approved by Alexander Dugin.
Geopolitics and the secret forces of history
“Conspiracy” models are extremely diverse. In this sphere, the most popular is undoubtedly the concept of a “Judaeo-Masonic” conspiracy so widespread today in various circles. In principle, this theory deserves the most serious study, and we must recognize that, despite the hundreds and thousands of works “exposing” this conspiracy and “proving” its non-existence, we do not have a fully scientific analysis of this subject. In this work, however, we will study an entirely different conspirological model which is founded on a system of coordinates differing from the “Judaeo-Masonic” version. We will try, in general terms, to describe the planetary “conspiracy” of two opposing “occult” forces whose secret confrontation and invisible struggle has predetermined the logic of world history. These forces, in our opinion, are characterized above all not by national specificity or belonging to a secret organization of the Masonic or Para-masonic type, but by a radical difference in their geopolitical orientations. And in explaining the most recent “secrets” of these opposing forces, we tend to see that their difference rests precisely in two alternative and mutually exclusive geopolitical projects which stand beyond national, political, ideological, and religious differences, uniting people of the most opposite views and convictions into one group. Our conspirological model is the model of “geopolitical conspiracy.”
The foundations of geopolitics 
Let us recall the basic postulates of geopolitics, the science formerly known as “political geography” whose development is owed mainly to the English scholar and political expert Sir Halford Mackinder (1861-1947). The term “geopolitics” itself was first coined by the Swede Rudolf Kjellen (1864-1922) and then put into circulation in Germany by the German Karl Haushofer (1869-1946). But be that as it may, the father of geopolitics remains Mackinder, whose fundamental model laid the basis for all subsequent geopolitical studies. The merit of Mackinder lies in his ability to isolate and comprehend specific, objective laws of political, geographical, and economic history.
Even if the term geopolitics emerged relatively recently, the reality itself denoted by the term has a very long history. The essence of geopolitical doctrine can be summarized in the following principles.
In planetary history, two opposing and constantly competing approaches to the mastery of the Earth’s space, the “land” and “sea” approaches, have existed. Depending on which orientation (“land” or “sea”) this or that state, people, or nation belongs to, their historical consciousness, their foreign and domestic policies, their psychology, and their worldview accord with entirely separate rules. Given this peculiarity, it is fully possible to speak of a “land”, “continental,” or even “steppe” (“steppe” is land in its pure, ideal form) worldview, and a “sea”, “island”, “oceanic” or “aquatic” one (let us note in passing that we can find the first hints at such an approach in the works of the Russian Slavophiles, such as Khomyakov and Kireevsky).
In the ancient history of “sea” power, Phoenicia (Carthage) became the historic symbol of “sea civilization” as a whole. The land empire opposing Carthage was Rome. The Punic Wars are the clearest example of the confrontation between “sea civilization” and “land civilization.” In modern history, England became the “island” and “sea” pole, the “mistress of the seas” followed by the giant island-continent America.
England, like ancient Phoenicia, used primarily maritime trade and the colonization of coastal areas as the main instrument of its rule. The Phoenician-Anglo-Saxon geopolitical type generated a special “trade-capitalist-market” model of civilization based on economic and material interests and the principles of economic liberalism. Therefore, despite all possible historical variations, the general “sea” type of civilization has always been associated with the “primacy of economics over politics.”
Unlike the Phoenician model, Rome presents itself as a model military-authoritarian structure based on administrative control, civil religiosity, and on the primacy of “politics over economics.” Rome is an example of colonization not by sea, but by land, a purely continental type which penetrated deep into the continent and assimilated conquered peoples, who automatically became “Romans” upon conquest.
In modern history, the epitome of “land” power was the Russian Empire along with the Central European Austro-Hungarian and German empires. Russia, Germany, and Austro-Hungary are essential symbols of “geopolitical land” in the period of modern history.
In the last several centuries, “sea civilization” has tended to be identified with Atlanticism, just as the “sea powers” of today par excellence are England and America, i.e., the Anglo-Saxon countries.
Atlanticism embodies the primacy of individualism, “economic liberalism” and “democracy of the Protestant type,” and opposes Eurasianism which presupposes authoritarianism, hierarchy, and the posing of community-based, nation-state principles against small human, individualist, hedonistic, and economic interests. The Eurasian orientation in character is primarily pronounced in Russia and Germany, the two most powerful continental powers whose geopolitical, economic, and, most importantly, deep ideological interests are fully opposed to the interests of England and the USA, that is, the Atlanticists.
The Atlanticist conspiracy
As an Englishman and Atlanticist, Mackinder pointed out the danger of Eurasian consolidation and from the beginning of the 20th century he prompted the government of England to do everything possible in order to prevent a Eurasian alliance, especially an alliance of Russia, Germany, and Japan (he considered Japan to be a state with an essentially continental and Eurasian worldview). Beginning with Mackinder, it is possible to take account of the clearly formulated and detailed description of the ideology of conscious and absolutized Atlanticism, whose doctrine formed the basis of the Anglo-Saxon geopolitical strategy of the 20th century. Parallel to Mackinder (and even a bit earlier than him), a similar theory was put forth by the American admiral Mahan who prophetically realized the planetary function of the US in the century when this state was destined to become the “Sea Power” on a global scale.
Proceeding from this, we can define the essence of the intelligence work, military espionage, and political lobbying oriented towards England, the US, and Atlanticist ideology, the ideology of “New Carthage” which is common to all the “agents of influence,” all the secret organizations, and all the lodges and semi-closed clubs which have served the Anglo-Saxon idea in the 20th century and whose networks penetrate all the continental, Eurasianist states. First and foremost, naturally, this is directly related to English and American intelligence, especially the CIA, who are not just “guards of capitalism” or “Americanism,” but guards of “Atlanticism” united by the deep and multi-millennial super-ideology of the “oceanic” type. It is possible to call the aggregate of all “networks” of Anglo-Saxon influence “participants in the Atlanticist conspiracy” working not only in the interests of a single country, but in the interests of a particular geopolitical and, in the end of course, metaphysical doctrine representing an extremely multifaceted, diverse, and broad yet nevertheless essentially united worldview.
Thus, generalizing the ideas of Mackinder, it can be said that there exists an historical “Atlanticist conspiracy” which over centuries has pursued the same geopolitical goals oriented towards the interests of “sea civilization” of the neo-Phoenician type. Moreover, it is important to emphasize that Atlanticists can be both “left” and “right,” “atheists” and “believers”, or “patriots” and “cosmopolitans”, since their geopolitical worldview stands aside from all private, national, and political differences.
Therefore, we are in fact dealing with a real “occult conspiracy,” the meaning and metaphysical underpinning of which remain completely unknown to its most immediate participants, and even to its most key figures.
The conspiracy of the “Eurasianists”
The ideas of Mackinder, in exposing certain historical and political patterns which otherwise many had guessed or sensed, opened the way for a clear ideological formulation, the Eurasianist doctrine, to oppose Atlanticism. The first principles of Eurasian geopolitics were formulated by Russian White emigres, known as “Eurasianists” (N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky, N.N. Alekseev , etc.), and the famous German geopolitician Karl Haushofer (and his school Obst, Maul, etc.).
Moreover, the fact of contact between the Russian “Eurasianists” and Karl Haushofer leaves us to assume that German and Russian geopoliticians developed related topics simultaneously and in parallel.
The German school of Haushofer insisted on the necessity of a Eurasian geopolitical alliance of Russia, Germany, and Japan to oppose “Atlanticist” policies seeking to oppose Russia, Germany, and Japan at any price. At the same time, Haushofer attentively followed the development of Eurasianist ideology among the Russian emigration and devoted solid materials to and a review of this topic in his journal “Zetschrift zu Geopolitik.”
Parallel to each other, the Russian Eurasianists and Haushofer’s group formulated certain principles of the continental, Eurasianist worldview, an alternative to Atlanticist positions. It can be said they expressed for the first time that which stood behind all the political history of Europe in the last millennium, tracing the path of the “Roman imperial idea,” which passed from Ancient Rome through Byzantium to Russia, and through the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation to Austro-Hungary and Germany.
The Russian Eurasianists attentively and deeply analyzed the imperial and, to the highest degree, “land” mission of Genghis Khan and the Mongols, emphasizing the continental significance of the Turks in the establishment of the Great Russian imperial ethnic groups in the geopolitical formation of Muscovite Tsardom. Later, this idea was similarly developed by the heir to the Eurasian line and the great Russian historian, Lev Gumilev.
Haushofer’s group, for its part, studied Japan and the continental mission of the Far Eastern states from the perspective of a future geopolitical alliance.
Thus, in response to the frank recognition of Mackinder, who outlined the secrets of the planetary Atlanticist strategy deeply rooted over centuries, in the ‘20‘s the Russian and German Eurasianists uncovered the logic of an alternative continental strategy, the secret of the “imperial land idea” and the baton of Rome which invisibly inspired the politics of states with an authoritarian-idealistic, communal-heroic worldview.
The Eurasianist idea is just as global as the Atlanticist one and has also had a number of “secret agents” in all historical states and nations. All those who worked tirelessly for the Eurasian Union, who for centuries hindered the propagation of individualistic and liberal-democratic concepts (reproducing as a whole the typically Phoenician spirit of the “primacy of economics over politics”) on the continent, all those who strove to unite the great Eurasian peoples under the sign of the East, and not the sign of the West – be it the East of Genghis Khan, the East of Ivan the Terrible, Lenin or the Prussian monarchy – all of them were “Eurasianist agents,” bearers of a special geopolitical doctrine, the “warriors of the continent,” the “soldiers of Land.”
The Eurasian secret society, the Order of the Eurasianists, however did not merely begin with the authors of the manifesto Exodus to the East or the “Geopolitical Journal” of Karl Haushofer. This was, above all, mere discovering and scraping the surface of a certain knowledge which had existed since time immemorial along with corresponding secret societies and a network of “agents of influence.”
The same reveals itself in the case of Mackinder, whose belonging to English “secret societies” has been historically established.
The Order of Eurasia against the Order of the Atlantic.
Eternal Rome against Eternal Carthage.
The occult punic war has been continuing invisibly for thousands of years.
The planetary conspiracy of Land against Sea, Land against Water, Authoritarianism and Idea against Liberalism and the Material.
The conspiracy of the forces of Being against the forces of Oblivion.
Are the endless paradoxes, contradictions, omissions and twists in history clearer, more logical, and more reasonable if we look at them from the position of occult geopolitical dualism? In such a case, do we not get countless victims by which humanity pays the price of strange political projects and deep metaphysical justifications? Would it not be a more noble and respectful gesture to recognize all those fallen on the battlefields of the 20th century as soldiers, heroes of the Great War of Continents, and not puppets of conditional and ever-changing political regimes unstable, transient, fleeting, random, and senseless to such a degree that death itself means something small and stupid for them? It is a different matter if those fallen heroes served the Great Land or the Great Ocean beyond political demagogy and the raging propaganda of ephemeral ideologies, if they served a geopolitical goal in the face of a multi-millennial history of secret confrontation between superhuman powers.
“Blood and Soil” – “Blood or Soil?”
The famous Russian philosopher, religious thinker, and publicist Konstantin Leontyev voiced an extremely important formula: “There is Slavdom, but no Slavism.” One of the main geopolitical conclusions of this wonderful author was contrasting the idea of “Panslavism” to the “Asiatic” idea. If this juxtaposition is carefully analyzed, we discover a common typological criterion which allows us to better understand the structure and logic of the geopolitical occult war of the Order of Eurasia against the Order of the Atlantic.
Despite an eclectic combination of terms in the concept of “Blood and Soil” by the German ideologist of a National-Socialist peasantry, Walter Dare the problem is formulated differently on the level of the occult war of geopolitical forces in the contemporary world, namely, “blood or soil.” In other words, the traditionalist project of preserving a people, state, or nation’s identity is always faced with an alternative: either take the “unity of nation, race, ethnos, and unity of blood” as the main criterion or “unity of geographical space, unity of borders, unity of soil.” The entire drama rests precisely in the necessity of choosing one or the other, and any hypothetical “both” remains but a utopian slogan which does not resolve, but obscures the problem.
The genius Konstantin Leontyev, a traditionalist and radical Russophile by conviction, clearly put forth the dilemma: “Russians need either to insist on the unity of Slavs, on Slavism (“blood”), or appeal to the East and realize the geographical and cultural proximity of Russians to the Eastern peoples connected with Russian territories (“soil”).” In other terms, this question can be formulated as a choice between recognizing the supremacy of “race” (“nationalism”) or “geopolitics” (“statehood,” “culture”). Leontyev himself chose “soil”, “territory,” the peculiarity of Great Russian imperial, religious, and state culture. He chose “Orientalism”, “Asianism,” and “Byzantinism.”
Such a choice implied the prioritization of continental, Eurasian values over narrow national and racial values. The logic of Leontyev naturally led to the inevitability of a Russo-German, and especially Russo-Austrian union and to peace with Turkey and Japan. Leontyev categorically rejected “Slavism” or “Panslavism”, thereby arousing the indignation of many of the late Slavophiles standing on the position of either “blood above soil” or “blood and soil.” Leontyev was neither understood nor listened to. The history of the 20th century repeatedly proved the extreme importance of the problems identified by him.
Panslavism vs. Eurasianism
The thesis of “blood above soil” (in the Russian context, this means “Slavism” or “Panslavism”) first revealed all of its ambiguity during the First World War when Russia, having entered a union with the countries of the Entente, i.e., with the English, the French, and the Americans in an effort to liberate its “Slavic brothers” from the Turks, not only started to fight against its natural geopolitical allies – Germany and Austria – but also plunged itself into the catastrophe of revolution and civil war. The “Slavism” of the Russians in fact turned out to work for the “Atlanticists,” the Entente, and the “neo-Carthaginian civilizational type”, which embodied the trade-based, colonial, and individualist Anglo-Saxon model. It is not surprising that the majority of those among the “patriotic Panslavists” from Tsar Nikolay II’s circle were employees of English intelligence services or simply “Atlanticist agents of influence.”
It is curious to recall an episode from the novel of the Russian patriot Hetman Petr Krasnov, From the Double-Headed Eagle to the Red Flag, where, in the midst of the First World War, the main character Colonel Sablin is asked: “Tell us frankly, who do you believe to be our true enemy?” He unambiguously responds: “England!”, but this conviction does not prevent him from honestly and courageously fighting precisely for English interests against Germany in paying his debt of absolute and unconditional loyalty to the Tsar.
The hero of Krasnov’s article is an ideal example of a Russian Eurasianist patriot, an example of the logic of “land above blood” which was characteristic for Count Witte, Baron Unger-Sternberg, and the mysterious “Balticum” organization consisting of Baltic aristocrats who remained loyal to the royal family to the very end (just as the Tekin Prince and his division, described in Krasnov’s novel, remain loyal to the Tsar amidst widespread betrayal). The extent to which the Asians, Turks, Germans, and other “foreigners” in 1917 faithfully served the Tsar, the Empire, Eurasia, “soil,” and the “continent” can be contrasted with how the “Slavs” and “Panslavists” quickly forgot about “Constantinople” and their “Balkan brothers,” left Russia, abandoned the Fatherland for the countries of Atlanticist influence, the Western Ocean, Water, and betrayed not only the Homeland, but also the great Idea of Eternal Rome, the Russian Third Rome, and Moscow.
The Atlanticists and racism
In Germany, the adoption of the idea of “blood over soil” resulted in equally dire consequences. Against the patriotic German Russophiles and Eurasianists such Arthur Mueller van den Bruck, Karl Haushofer, etc. who insisted on the “supremacy of living space”  in the interests of the continent as a whole and the idea of a “continental bloc”, the leadership of the Third Reich was eventually won by the Atlanticist lobby which exploited racist theses and, under the pretext that “Englishmen are Aryan relatives of the German ethnos”, sought to focus the attention of Hitler on the East and suspend (or at least ease) combat operations against England.
“Pan-Germanism” in this case (like the “Panslavism” of the Russians in the First World War) only played into the hands of the “Atlanticists.” It is entirely logical that the major enemy of Russia, who constantly strove to drag Hitler’s Germany into a conflict with the Russians and the Slavs (for “racial” reasons of “blood above soil”), was the English spy, Admiral Canaris. The extreme importance of the problem of “blood or soil” lies in that the choice of one of these two terms at the expense of the other allows one to identify, whether implicitly or indirectly, an “agent of influence” of this or that geopolitical world view, especially when the matter at hand is the “right” or “nationalist” camp. The essence of the “geopolitical conspiracy” of the Atlanticists (just as the Eurasianists’ one) includes the entire spectrum of political ideologies from the extreme right to the extreme left, while always leaving specific traces of “geopolitical agents of influence.” In the case of the “right,” the signal of potential Atlanticism is the principle of “blood over soil” which, among other things, allows attention to be diverted from fundamental geopolitical problems towards secondary criteria.
Who is whose spy?
The National-Bolsheviks of Germany can be mentioned among the examples of the influence of occult geopolitical ideology on the “left.” The German Communist-Nationalist Ernst Nikisch, the conservative revolutionary Ernst Junger, and the communists of Lauffenberd, Petel, Schultzen-Boysen, Winning, etc. are such examples. Eurasianist National-Bolsheviks certainly existed among Russians as well, and it is a curious circumstance that Lenin himself in emigration sought to converge with German politicians and financiers and, additionally, many of his theses are quite frankly Germanophile. In this case, we do not wish to argue that Lenin was in fact involved in the Eurasian Order, but rather that he was to some extent undoubtedly subject to the influence of this Order. In any case, the opposition of “Lenin as a German spy” to “Trotsky as an American spy” genuinely conforms to this specific typological scheme. At any rate, on a purely geopolitical level, the actions of the government of Lenin bore a Eurasian character , not least of all because the Leninist Joseph Stalin, against the “liberal demagoguery” present in Orthodox Marxism, maintained the united, gigantic Eurasian space of the Russian Empire. (Trotsky , for his part, insisted on exporting the Revolution, on its “mondialization,” and considered the Soviet Union as something transient and ephemeral, as a springboard for ideological expansion which should disappear in the face of a planetary victory of “Messianic communism.” In general, Trotsky’s mission bore the unconditional stamp of “Atlanticism” in contrast to the communist “Eurasianism” of Lenin.)
Bolshevik Leninist “internationalism” itself bore a certain “imperial,” Eurasianist” dimension with the principal of “soil over blood,” although this principle was of course distorted and perverted under the influence of other aspects of Bolshevik ideology and, most importantly, under the influence of Atlanticist “agents of influence” within the bosom of the communist leadership itself.
Summarizing these considerations, it can be said that a distinctive feature of representatives of the Eurasian Order in Russia was an almost “mandatory” Germanophilia (or, at least, Anglophobia) and, vice versa, in Germany Eurasianists were “required” to be Russophiles.
Mueller van den Bruck once made a very true observation: “French conservatives have always been inspired by the example of Germany, and German conservatives by the example of Russia.” In this statement, the entire logic of the geopolitical, continental background of the invisible occult struggle passing through the centuries, the occult War of Continents, is exposed.
Did you say GRU, Mr. Parvulesco?
The only Western conspirologist who consistently stressed the geopolitical character of “global conspiracy” or, more precisely, the two alternative “world conspiracies” (“Eurasianist” and “Atlanticist”) was the genius French writer, poet, and metaphysicist Jean Parvulesco, the author of many literary and philosophical works. 
In his long and extremely eventful life, he was personally acquainted with many prominent figures of European and world history, including representatives of the “occult parallel history”, mystics, prominent Masons, Kabbalists, esotericists, secret agents of various intelligence services, ideologists, politicians, and artists. (In particular, he was friends with Ezra Pound, Julius Evola, Arno Breker, Otto Skorzeny, Pierre de Villemarest, Raymond Abellio, etc.)
Having learned the specifics of our conspirological studies, Mr. Parvulesco gave us for our disposal certain semi-secret documents which allow us to explain many important details of the planetary geopolitical conspiracy. Of particular interest are the materials relating to the activities of secret occult organizations in Russia.
In the following exposition, we will try to present the most interesting points of the conception of Jean Parvulesco.
In Lausanne on February 24, 1989, in front of members of the administrative council of the mysterious “Institute of Special Metastrategic Research ‘Atlantis’”, Jean Parvulesco delivered a report with the intriguing title “The Galaxy of the GRU” with the subtitle “The Secret Mission of Mikhail Gorbachev, the USSR and the Future of the Great Eurasian Continent.” In this report, a copy of which Mr. Parvulesco gave us, he analyzed the occult role of the Soviet military intelligence, the GRU (Main Intelligence Directorate) and the connection between the GRU and the secret Order of Eurasia. As a point of reference, Parvulesco took the book of the renowned expert on Soviet special services, the French counterintelligence officer and leader of the European Information Center, Pierre de Villemarest, who in 1988 released the bestseller The GRU: the Most Secret of Soviet Special Services, 1918-1988 in France.
The GRU vs. the KGB
The conspirological model of Villemarest boils down to the following: “The KGB is the continuation of the party, and the GRU is the continuation of the army. By its very definition, the army defends the state, and the KGB defends the party…the KGB is guided by the principle of ‘patriotism in the service of communism” and the army is guided by the opposite principle of ‘communism in the service of patriotism.’” Proceeding from the logic of the confrontation between the GRU and KGB as the most secret centers of a bipolar government in the USSR (the army and party), Villemarest constructs a fascinating and factual account of the history of the GRU.
The secret meaning behind the invisible history of the USSR from the October Revolution to Perestroika can be found precisely in the rivalry of the “neighbors”: the GRU, the “Aquarium” or “Military Unit 44388” in the Ice Palace, and the KGB, “the office” on Lubyanka street. How do these rival intelligence agencies relate to the two planetary geopolitical Orders, even more secret and hidden than the secret intelligence services themselves?
According to Parvulesco, the Eurasian Order was especially active in Russia in the 20th century. He believes its representatives to be the Saint-Petersburg Doctor Badmaev, Baron Unger-Sternberg, the secret Swedish advisors to Rasputin (who signed their cryptograms with the pseudonym “Green”) and a number of other less known personages. It follows that the special role of the future marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky should be highlighted, who, according to Parvulesco, was initiated into the mysterious “Polar Order” during his imprisonment in the German camp Ingolstadt where during the same period of 1916-1918 we quite surprisingly meet other important figures of modern history: General De Gaulle, General von Ludendorff, and the future Pope Pius the XII, Monsignor Eugenio Paccelli.
It is precisely from this group of Russian geopolitical mystics that the baton was later passed to the Bolshevik regime, but the most fundamental esoterica of the continental orientation  were grouped in the army and army structures where a large number of former Tsarist officers entered the ranks of the Reds in order to alter the nihilistic orientation of the Bolsheviks and create a Great Continental Power by pragmatically using the Messianic ideas of the communists .
On this note, it is significant that among the Reds themselves there were some agents of the Eurasian Order who pursued a secret, continental mission. (It is curious that the famous Red Robber Kotovsky was a left-anarchist occultist and mystic, and certain aspects of his biography suggest that he had contacts with the Eurasian Order).
Thus, there existed an uninterrupted connection between the pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary Russian “Eurasianists.”
The very creation of the Red Army was the work of agents of Eurasia, and it is interesting to recall in this respect the historical fact that twenty-seven days after the establishment of the General Staff of the Red Army on the Eastern Front on July 10, 1918, a brigade of Chekists attacked it and destroyed all of its members, including the commander in chief.
The brutal war between the “Red Eurasianists” from the army and the “Red Atlanticists”  from Dzerzhinsky’s Cheka did not cease for even a moment from the very first days of Soviet history.
But despite their losses, the agents of the Eurasian Order among the Reds never abandoned their mission. The creation of the GRU in the Red Army in 1918 under the leadership of Semen Ivanovich Aralov, a former Tsarist officer associated with military intelligence before 1917, was a triumph. More precisely, Aralov was the head of the Operational Department of the All-Russian Headquarters, one of the components of which was special intelligence. The specifics of Aralov’s activities and the mysterious, almost mystical immunity which this person enjoyed throughout all of his life, even, during the periods of the most thorough “purges” (he died a natural death on May 22, 1969) as well as some other details of his biography lead us to see in him a man of the Continental Order.
White Eurasianists – Red Eurasianists
According to Parvulesco, the Russian branch of the Order of Eurasians settled into the Red Army after the Revolution and, more precisely, in the most secret department, the GRU. But this, naturally, does not concern only “red” Eurasianists.
The Revolution divided Russians into “reds” and “whites”, but beyond this political and conditional division, there existed another, secret geopolitical division of zones of influence by the two secret orders – the Atlanticist and Eurasianist ones. In Red Russia, the Atlanticists were grouped around the Cheka and the Politburo, although up until the appointment of Khruhschev, not a single “Atlanticist” ever occupied the post of General Secretary (Lenin and Stalin were “Eurasianists” or were at least under the strong influence of agents of the Eurasian Order). Among the White emigration, there were fewer Atlanticists than in Russian itself, disregarding the obvious English spies such as the liberals in the likes of Kerensky and other Democrats. Even in the extreme right camp of monarchists, the Atlanticist lobby was extremely strong.
At some point by the beginning of the ’30’s, the GRU’s network of agents in Europe, especially in Germany, penetrated deep into the structures of German and French intelligence services and this GRU network matched the network of agents of the NKVD and later the KGB. GRU agents primarily penetrated army structures and at times the common Eurasian platform rendered people from the GRU and other European intelligence services not so much enemies as allies, collaborators, and in secret they even engaged in preparing a new continental project out of their governments. And here we are not even talking about double agents, but about the unity based on supreme geopolitical interests.
Thus, in Germany the GRU came into contact with Walter Nikolay, the chief of the “Bureau on the Jewish Question.” Thanks to him, the GRU had access to the highest leadership of the Abwehr, the SS, and SD. The central figure of this network was Martin Bormann. (This fact became well known to the Allies after investigations connected with the Nuremberg trials, and many of them were convinced that after 1945 Bormann disappeared in the USSR. It is known that Walter Nikolay himself actually came over to the Russians in 1945).
The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and the subsequent revenge of the Atlanticists
Concerning Martin Bormann, a friend of Ribbentrop and Walter Nikolay, Jean Parvulesco tells one extremely revealing story which discloses secrets of the occult war of the two geopolitical Orders. Arno Breker, the famous German sculptor, told Parvulesco of a strange visit to him in Ackelsberg. On June 22, 1941, immediately after the attack of Hitler’s Germany on the USSR, Bormann came to him without warning and in a state of shock, having left his post at the Chancellery of the Reich. He repeated the same mysterious phrase over and over again: “On this June day, Oblivion won a victory over Being…Everything is over…All is lost…” When the sculptor asked what he meant, Bormann was silent, turned around from the door as if he wanted to say something, but then changed his mind and left, slamming the door.
This was the collapse of the longstanding effort of Eurasian agents. For the Atlanticists, the date of June 22, 1941 was a day of great rejoicing, for an inter-continental war between two powerful Eurasian powers amongst themselves was key to the triumph of the Atlanticist Order, regardless of whatever side might win. June 22, 1941 was a tragic event for the Order of Eurasianists.
It is important to emphasize that the agents of the Eurasianist Order did everything possible in order to prevent such a conflict. Preparation for the concluding of the highly symbolic “Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact” (both of these men, incidentally, were convinced Eurasianists) had been actively carried out for years. Back in 1936, at the turn of the ’30’s, Stalin finally stood on the side of the Order of Eurasia and gave the chief of the GRU, Berzin, the order “to immediate cease any and all activity against Germany.”
In a secret message in 1937, Heidrich and Himmler similarly assured the Fuhrer that “Germany is no longer a target of Comintern activities and other subversive Soviet activities.”
The “Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact” was the culmination of the strategic success of the Eurasianists. But at the last moment the power of the Ocean prevailed. The Eurasianists in the GRU and, more broadly, in the army – Voroshilov, Timoshenko, Zhukov, Golikov, etc. – until the very last moment refused to believe in the possibility of war since the seriousness of the influence of the Eurasian (Russophile) lobby in the Third Reich was well known. (National-Socialist, anti-Slav propaganda was considered by them to be just as insubstantial and superficial as Marxist demagogic rhetoric in the USSR).
General Golikov (concealing his noble origins, his true date of birth, and his true biography which is explainable purely according to the “Eurasianist” Order conspiracy) even yelled at his subordinates upon receiving the information that the Germans crossed the Soviet border: “English provocation! Investigate this!” He could not know at that point what Martin Bormann did: “Oblivion had triumphed over Being.”
Contours of the Atlanticist lobby
Translator’s note: this section does not appear in the 2005 Russian edition nor on Arctogaia, but it appears in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka.
The secret Order of Atlantis has a most ancient history. Some traditionalist authors trace it back to Ancient Egyptian initiate societies and especially to the sect of the worshippers of the god Seth, whose symbols were the Crocodile and the Behemoth (i.e., aquatic animals), as well as the Red Donkey.
The sect of Seth later merged with various Phoenician cults, especially with the bloody cult of Moloch. According to the 19th century French conspirologist Claude Grasse d’Orsay, this secret organization continued to exist many years after the death of Phoenician civilization. It is worth noting that in Medieval Europe it bore the name of the sect “Minstrels of Morvan,” whose emblem was “Dancing Death,” or Dance Macabre. Grasse d’Orsay argued that the Reformation of Luther was carried out on the order of this sect and that Protestants (especially Anglo-Saxon and French ones) remain under its influence to this day. Jean Parvulesco believes that Giuseppe Balsamo, the famous Cagliostro, was one of the most important agents of precisely this secret Order which surfaced at the end of the 19th century under the guise of an irregular “Egyptian” masonry of the Memphis rite, and later the Memphis-Mizraim.
It is precisely this symbolic prehistory of the Atlanticists that characterizes the essence of their geopolitical and cultural and economic strategies. It reduces meaning to the accentuation of “horizontal” values, highlighting the lower aspects of human existence and society as a whole. This does not mean that Atlanticism is identical to vulgar materialism, but rather that the “material,” the purely economic, commercial aspect, occupies the central place in human activity. The reduction of value systems to the purely human level requires such radical individualism and anthropocentrism that is inherent to Atlanticism in all of its manifestations, and parallel to this reduction necessarily arises the characteristically “Atlanticist” skepticism and depressive irony in relation to the ideal, superhuman dimension of life. Indeed, the image of the Red Donkey and Dancing Death perfectly reflect the essence of “Atlanticist” skepticism. By some strange logic of history, the most radical forms of Protestant, individualistic, and socially and religiously critical consciousness after Luther’s reforms “gravitated” like a magnet to the Atlanticist regions, towards England and further West, deeper into the Atlantic towards America, where they found the most fertile ground in the most extreme forms of radical Protestantism in the likes of the Baptists, Quakers, and Mormons. (J.M. Allemand noted a symbolic coincidence: Christopher Columbus was sent off on his Atlantic journey that ended with the discovery of America from the port of Cadiz, which was an historically important center of Phoenician colonies on the Iberian peninsula).
But anchoring the Order of Atlantis in the Far West and the creation of a special, purely Atlanticist civilization in the US as part of the project of the Order was an exclusively interim state in the plans of the “neo-Carthaginian” Atlanticists. The next strategic step was exporting this Atlanticist model to other continents in a geopolitical colonization of the entire planet, transferring the West in its mystical and geopolitical meaning to the whole world, including, naturally, the East itself. Therefore, maintaining a network of Atlanticist agents in the states of Eurasia is not only a defensively pursued goal (the weakening of the alternative geopolitical force), but also an anticipation of offensive activities.
The vanguards of “Atlanticism” in Eurasia were the “leftist” and “anarchist” subversive movements, although an inner Eurasian opposition always existed among them. “Economic socialism” and “communism,” in their theoretical and pure form should be considered a form of “Atlanticist” propaganda, a political and social mask for the secret Order of the Red Donkey. If the specificity of the geopolitical and occult doctrines of the Atlanticist pole is taken into account, it becomes completely understandable why “leftist” subversive movements were encouraged by the Anglo-Saxon powers in continental, European and Euro-Asian countries while in England, and especially in America, “communists” and “social-democrats” make up a minuscule percent of the population. It should be said that the “left” has always been a fifth column in Eurasia for the Atlanticist lobby. Hence the natural harmony between Russian, Atlanticist-minded communists and the Anglo-Saxon capitalists which often bewilders foreign researchers and historians who are perplexed by such a fully mutual understanding between “class enemies,” i.e., the “Messianic” Bolsheviks with their dictatorship of the proletariat and the bankers of Wall-Street with their cult of the Golden Note of Taurus. The secret society of Dancing Death, the Red Donkey, the “Minstrels of Morvan,” and the brotherhood of the Ocean – these images help us to grasp the logic of the worldwide Atlanticist lobby, which seeks not only to protect its “islands,” but also turn the whole planet into “Carthage,” into a united, universal “human market.”
The KGB in service of “Dancing Death”
Translator’s note: this section appears at Zachetka and in the 2008 Serbian edition, but not on Arctogaia. In the 2005 Russian print edition, it is titled “The KGB infiltrated by Atlanticists.”
Pierre de Villemarest defined the Cheka (OGPU, NKVD, KGB) as the “continuation of the party.” It would be still more precise to say that it represented the secret center of the party, its intellect and its spirit. Jean Parvulesco supplemented this definition with an occult, geopolitical dimension.
According to Parvulesco, the KGB was the center of the most direct influence of the Atlanticist Order, and was in fact the cover for this Order . Many have guessed the occult background of this organization. Some even spoke about the presence in the KGB of a secret organization of para-psychological studies, a so-called black-magic “Society of Viya,” where all leading figures of the USSR were allegedly initiated. Rumors of the mysterious “Society of Viya,” of course, are only a simplified and grotesque description of a reality which is much more subtle and deep, as the occult mission of the KGB was not confined to magical or psychic experiences in which, we shall note, this organization always showed some some sort of abnormal, heightened interest.
The KGB was initially established as a purely ideological-punitive structure designed to supervise subordinate communists and social and cultural spaces. In Parvulesco’s scheme, the communists, in their ideological, Messianic, Marxist dimension (= “Trotskyists”) behaved as colonizers and aliens towards the Eurasian population and regions subordinated to them, always maintaining an ideological distance from the needs, requirements, and interests of the indigenous population.
On the level of the purely “ideal,” they sought to impose upon Eurasian people an economic-centered model unnatural to the peoples of Eurasia, and to this end they needed to use a repressive apparatus. The Cheka (NKVD, OGPU, KGB) was initially a parody of the “knight-ideological” order designed to punish indigenous people and suppress their natural soils of existence. The Cheka (and KGB) also professed the thesis of “blood over soil,” but in a totally perverted, blood-sadistic form disturbingly reminiscent of the bloody Phoenician Cult of Moloch to which Atlanticist agents were typologically and genetically linked.
Translator’s note: The following text is an alternative ending to the section found in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka – The Cheka and KGB always served “Dancing Death” and many paradoxes and unreliable histories (due to their inhuman nature) connected with this dark organization become clearer if we take into account not only the metaphorical, but also occult-esoteric connection of this Order with ancient Middle Eastern cults whose agents never ceased to exist in reality, who have continued their secret circus through secret European and Middle Eastern organizations of the Atlanticist type.
The convergence of intelligence services and the “polar mission of the GRU”
The CIA, as an instrument of American Atlanticism, typologically belongs to the same conspirological category. Moreover, at the head of this organization have been prominent leaders of American Freemasonry who, in fact, are considered by European Masons to be heretics and sectarians. (It is worth posing the question of whether or not anything in the sphere of religion or metaphysics in the US exists which has not been heretical or sectarian). The CIA, just like the KGB, was always partial towards magic and para-psychology, and in general its role in modern civilization is fully comparable to that of the KGB, although the blood-sadistic essence is not so obvious in this case. Since the beginning of the century, the CIA (and its predecessors), together with English intelligence services, have layered Eurasia with a network of its agents who constantly influenced the course of historical events in the Atlanticist vein. In this sense, it is perfectly possible to speak of a “convergence of special services” or a “merging” of the KGB and CIA and their lobbyist unity on a geopolitical level. This is precisely what explains such an abundance of so-called “Soviet spies” in the higher spheres of power in America, starting with Hiss and ending with Rutherford who, according to some authors, passed on the hydrogen bomb project to the Soviet nuclear industry. (In fact, it is possible that it is precisely through the Atlanticist lobby of Soviet-American nuclear scientists that the academician Sakharov became acquainted with Mondialist projects of an anti-Eurasian orientation which formed the basis of his socio-political and futurological worldview).
It should be noted that the network of KGB agents in the USA and other Anglo-Saxon countries, duplicating the network of GRU agents, was in constant conflict with the “neighbor” agents to the Lubyanka and, given the divergence of the geopolitical and even metaphysical orientation of these two secret Soviet structures, it would be logical to assume that the main enemy of the CIA were agents of the GRU, and not the KGB.
This convergence of secret services, just as with the convergence of Soviet communists of the highest echelon with American Mondialists  in the case of Perestroika, is based on fundamental unity in geopolitical orientation, on the unity of a secret structure by which the Atlanticists control the West and Atlanticist agents in the East, who sometimes occupy the highest positions in state and political nomenclatures.
But a full and outright merger of these two subsidiaries of the Order of Dancing Death was persistently hindered by the efforts of the alternative Eurasianist lobby connected with the GRU and the Soviet General Staff which included in its network many European and Asian intelligence services (especially German, Arab, and French ones, the latter connected with the secret geopolitical project of General De Gaulle, etc.), united in the service of the alternative Order – the Order of Eurasia.
Translator’s note: The following text is an alternative ending to the section found in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka – [the Order of Eurasia], alternatively called the society of the “Minstrels of Murcia”, the polar “Order of Heliopolis”, the Order of Apollo, the Solar Conqueror of the Serpent-Python, that very Serpent which the Greek tradition identified with the Egyptian god Seth and the Red Donkey.
The Flares and Eclipses of the Eurasian Sun
Let us now follow the general outline of the vicissitudes of the occult war between the Eurasianist Order and the Order of the Atlantic within the Soviet system. As we have said in previous chapters, Lenin overall adhered to the Eurasian orientation. It is characteristic that the Eurasianist Semen Ivanovich Aralov created and headed the GRU. It was Aralov who laid down Eurasian continental principles in the structures of this secret army organization, grouping around itself the most valuable and capable “brothers of Eurasia” who, like himself, came over to the Reds for implementing a special meta-political mission. Interestingly enough, at the beginning of the ’60’s Aralov published a book under the expressive title “Lenin led us to victory.”
One important detail should be clarified here: the so-called “Leninist guard,” despite its political proximity to Lenin, in most cases belonged on a geopolitical level to the alternative, Atlanticist geopolitical orientation. The “closest comrades of Lenin”, and not the “ambitious tyrant Stalin” (as many mistakenly consider him today) stood behind the dismissal of the country’s leadership.
The end of Lenin’s rule marked the transfer of power into the hands of the Atlanticists and, indeed, we observe a significant improvement of relations between the USSR and the Anglo-Saxon countries, and primarily the USA, in the second half of the ’20’s and the first half of the ’30’s. Parallel to this we see the symptomatic reshuffling of cadre in the GRU. In place of the Eurasianist Aralov, the Atlanticist and Chekist Berzin created a structure of agents based on Comintern and communist fanatics, i.e., Atlanticist elements.
But Berzin failed to totally change the orientation of the GRU. The structures established by Aralov were simultaneously too strong and flexible to give up without a fight. Moreover, we note that despite all the attacks of the Cheka and the NKVD on the army, the military enjoyed significant authority and nurtured its intellectual, geopolitical elite in the bosom of the GRU. It is interesting to pay attention to one detail: all the leaders of the GRU until the beginning of the Great Patriotic War who succeeded Aralov were shot. O.A. Stigge, A.M. Nikonov, J.K. Berzin, I.S. Unshlikht, S.P. Uritsky, N.I. Yezhov, and I.I. Proskurov – all of them (except General Proskurov) were non-military cadre and they all worked against the Eurasianist idea, but this did not hinder the GRU from remaining a purely Eurasian organization secretly striving for the realization of a great continental project.
The resignation of Berzin in 1934 after 9-years of tenure as head of the GRU involved a serious fracture in the occult war behind the scenes of the Soviet leadership. Hitler’s rise to power extraordinarily strengthened the position of the “continental lobby” in the Soviet leadership.
In 1934, GRU agents began preparing a strategic German-Russian union which saw its culmination in the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact. Stalin finally revealed his commitment to a Eurasian orientation in believing that the anti-Atlanticist tendencies of National-Socialism would distract the attention of the Anglo-Saxon powers and, in such a situation, it would be possible to finally move to destroy the powerful “Atlanticist” lobby within the USSR. The destruction of the “Leninist guard” began.
All the Stalinist processes, although sometimes seeming absurd and completely unfounded, were in fact grounded on a geopolitical level. All the “right” and “left” conspiracies were pure reality, although Stalin did not decide to call the entire “Atlanticist lobby” by its name and accuse it of operating already for a long time in the Soviet leadership. Apparently, he had his reasons for fearing a terrible and cruel reaction. Therefore he was compelled to mask his claims against this or that group of senior cadres with “conditional” accusations and allegorical labels.
Layer after layer of the agents of influence of “New Carthage” were destroyed by Stalin, but retaliation was unavoidable. It should be noted that a particularly serious blow to the Eurasian lobby was the elimination of the head of the “Polar” lodge within the Red Army, Marshal Tukhachevsky. Although, in this case, the revenge of the Atlanticists on Tukhachevsky and all the accusations presented against him were fully justified, yet this is only so in the perspective of a purely “Atlanticist”, anti-Eurasian context of sabotage.
The Second World Catastrophe
Translator’s note: in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka, this section is titled “After ‘Victory’”
Hitler’s attack on the USSR was a great Eurasian catastrophe. The victory of the USSR in this terrible fratricidal war between two geopolitically, spiritually, and metaphysically close, related peoples, between two anti-Atlanticist oriented regimes, Stalin’s Russia and Hitler’s Germany, was, in fact, tantamount to a strategic defeat. All historical experience shows that Germany never reconciles with defeat, meaning that the victor, by the very fact of victory, ties the knot of a new, emerging conflict, and sows the seeds of a future war. Excluding the above-mentioned, Yalta forced Stalin to solidarity with the Allies, that is, with those states which had always been sworn enemies of Eurasia. Stalin, perfectly understanding geopolitical laws and already making his Eurasianist choice, could not afford to give in.
Immediately after the defeat of Germany, Stalin began to implement a new geopolitical project. The Warsaw Pact and the unification of the countries of Eastern Europe under the sign of Great Soviet Russia should not be forgotten. And then came the first conflicts and disputes with the Atlanticists.
Until 1948, Stalin still concealed his continental intentions and even endorsed the creation of the state of Israel, which was a major strategic action by England (and Atlanticism in general) in strengthening military, economic, and ideological influence in the Middle East. But in 1948, using among other things the strengthening of the political positions of the army (Zhukov, Vasilievsky, Shtemenko, etc.), Stalin returned to orthodox Eurasian geopolitics, resumed anti-Atlanticists purges in the Soviet leadership, and “cursed” Israel as an anti-continental formation generated by “Anglo-Saxon spies.” Strangely enough, the death of Stalin coincided with a most dramatic and intense moment in the realization of his Eurasianist plans, when the prospects of a new continental union between the USSR and China, which would radically change the logic of the planetary alignment of forces and revenge the Order of Eurasia, became viable.
If we take into account these reasons as well as the geopolitical features of the post-Stalin course of the USSR, then the version advanced by many European historians in which Stalin was assassinated is more probable.
The main role of the NKVD and its chief, the sinister Beria, the worst enemy of the GRU, the General Staff, and Eurasia, in the supposed assassination of Stalin is noted by the majority of historians.
In 1953, eight years after the pseudo-Victory, there had been only one step towards real victory (just as in 1939). But instead, the world saw the Fall of the Titan.
(The author’s views on Beria have substantially changed since this paper was written as new elements of historical interpretation have been brought to light by (mostly) Russian historians. Thus, an article by A Potapov (“Eurasia and the Secret Services”) appeared in Elements (no. 9) which presents a completely different view of Beria and his role.)
The “polar” mission of General Shtemenko
According to Jean Parvulesco, from the second half of the ’40’s, General-Colonel Sergey Matveevich Shtemenko (1907-1976) was a key figure in the Eurasian geopolitical lobby in the USSR.
His high sponsors were Marshall Zhukov and General Alexander Poskrebyshev (who, according to some sources, fulfilled a mission under Stalin similar to Martin Bormann’s under Hitler, that is, he was the vehicle of Germanophile ideas).
During the ’60’s, Shtemenko was one of the key figures of the Soviet Army. In different periods, he was commander of the armed forces of the Warsaw Pact countries and Chief of the General Staff of the USSR. But his appointment most relevant to the fundamental line of our conspirological study was his position as head of the GRU in the years 1946-1948 and 1956-1957. Under Shtemenko, the GRU’s “polar”, occult, Order dimension imparted into the structure of the GRU by its founder Aralov were restored.
Pierre de Villemarest called General-Colonel Shtemenko the first and most outstanding Soviet geopolitician in full correspondence with the traditional logic of the Eurasianist Order. In his book, Villemarest wrote: “Shtemenko belonged to that special caste of Soviet officers who, although being “Soviet,” were nevertheless representatives of the Great Russian spirit and expansionist beliefs.” And further: “For this caste, the USSR was an empire called upon to govern the Eurasian continent, not only from the Urals to Brest, but from the Urals to Mongolia, from Central Asia to the Mediterranean.”
The strategic plans of Shtemenko included peaceful economic and cultural penetration into Afghanistan (which he spoke of in the years 1948-1952) and the entry of Soviet troops into Arab capitals, such as Beirut, Damascus, Cairo, and Algiers. Already in 1948 Shtemenko insisted upon the special geopolitical role of Aghanistan, which would allow the USSR to gain access to the ocean and boost the military power of the Soviet fleet in the Black and Mediterranean seas.
It is important to note that the famous Admiral Gorshkov was a close friend of General-Colonel Shtemenko.
Under Stalin, Shtemenko and the occult subdivision revived by him created a powerful and advanced network of Eurasianist influence which, despite all of Beria’s attempts to erase it, was not destroyed even after Stalin’s death (although from 1953 to the middle of the ’60’s the Eurasianist lobby within the army was compelled to maintain a defensive position).
As an unavoidable evil, for 23 years (1963-1986) the GRU had to tolerate as its leader the Atlanticist agent from the Lubyanka, the former “liquidator” of General Petr Ivashutin. This was a necessary compromise. General-Colonel Shtemenko, an agent of the “Polar Order,” the Order of Eurasia, is a key which helps us to understand the secret logic of Soviet history from Khrushchev to Perestroika.
Translator’s note: The following text is an alternative ending to the section found in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka – In fact, this history, as all world history, is the both open and obscured fight of two secret orders, the “Minstrels of Morgvana” and the “Minstrels of Mursia,” devotees of the Egyptian Seth and the Red Ass, and devotees of the northern, polar Apollo, the slayer of the Snake-Python.
Nikita Khrushchev – an agent of Atlanticism
Khrushchev was the first protege of the Atlanticist lobby to become the individual leader of the USSR. Despite his disputes with Beria, Khrushchev leaned on the KGB and at a definite time made the final, opposite choice to that of Lenin and Stalin. Khrushchev’s activity was directed towards destroying the internal structures of the Eurasianists in the USSR and undermining the global continental project of a super-state planetary bloc.
The ascent of Khrushchev represented the ascent to power of the KGB.
Once he had consolidated his position, Khrushchev began to inflict blow after blow upon all the levels of the continental-patriotic blobby. All of his attention was henceforth centered on the Anglo-Saxon countries, especially on the US. Khrushchev’s slogan “catch up with and surpass the West” meant alignment with the Atlanticist powers and the acknowledgement of their social and economic superiority. The thesis concerning “the rapid approach of communism”  was aimed at once again riding the “left-messianic” and “Bolshevik-internationalist” tendencies which had been almost forgotten during the long years of Eurasian, imperial geopolitical Stalinism.
Khrushchev aimed to strike a blow at all of the “soil-based” traditional structures which been saved due to the secret protection of the Eurasian Order even during the most terrible periods of the Red Terror. Khrushchev even wanted to definitively get rid of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Khrushchev was “Americanist” and “Atlanticist” in everything he did ranging from the famous overseas “corn” to his destruction of the Eurasian cult of personality (a typical, Tsarist-Papist, Byzantine feature traditional for the Russian mentality).
[Translator’s note: In the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka, there is no mention of the Eurasian cult of personality. Instead, the following alternative text is presented – [Khrushchev was “Americanist” and “Atlanticist” in everything he did ranging from the famous overseas “corn” to his] military concepts based exclusively on deploying intercontinental missiles to the detriment of all other types of weapons. Khrushchev did not care for the Eurasian continent at all. He was concerned with Latin America, Cuba, etc.]
Between the Atlanticists of Khrushchev’s war cabinet (whose leader was Marshall S.S. Biryuzov) and the Eurasianists of Shtemenko’s group, there was almost an open conflict.
[Translator’s note: In the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka, the following text appears here – Khrushchev insisted on the concept of “nuclear intercontinental blitzkrieg” which, from the continental point of view, is nothing but strategic sabotage which weakened the real military power of continental forces, shattered the economy, and created a planetary, apocalyptic threat.]
After Khrushchev dismissal, “Red Star” quite fairly wrote: “That strategy, which we eventually refused, could only have been born in an ill brain.”
[Translator’s note: In the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka, the following text appears here – Even earlier in the same “Red Star,” Shtemenko warned: “In no way is it possible to base the safety of the USSR only on ballistic intercontinental missiles.” Starting with Khrushchev, there was a final separation of intra-state functions: the “pure party men” and representatives of the Lubyanka joined in solidarity with Khrushchev’s strategy of “nuclear blitzkrieg” (the Soviet Army itself became the first hostage of the “nuclear terrorists” from the CPSS or, more precisely, the Atlanticists wing of the CPSS), while the Eurasianists and GRU lobbyists insisted on the development of conventional arms and attempted to take revenge through military studies of the cosmos.]
In 1958, Khrushchev removed the powerful and extremely popular Eurasianist, Marshall Zhukov, from power. In 1959, he made another offensive move by placing one of the most odious figures of Soviet history, the bloody executioner known under the nickname “the corrupter,” the Chekist Ivan Serov, at the head of the GRU.
This bloody personage, an ideal type for the characteristics of the Order of the Red Donkey as a whole, was hated by the General Staff and, naturally, by the employees of the GRU themselves and the patriots of Eurasia first and foremost. The second “Atlanticist,” General Mironov, became the responsible curator for so-called “administrative organs,” which meant overseeing the army and intelligence units.
Khrushchev’s offensive maneuvers, nonetheless, were met with well-organized occult resistance by the Eurasianists. Konev, Sokolovsky, Timoshenko, and Grechko attempted to throw out Khrushchev at any cost.
Let us note that with each and every passing day with this “Atlanticist” in power, irreparable ideological, strategic, and political damage was done to the USSR, and the interests of continental powers in general.
Let us also note a curious detail: precisely in the period of Khrushchev the predominance of the “totalitarian-Hegelian” line in Soviet “ritually” Marxist philosophy (which assumes the primacy of supra-individual and “objective” factors over the individual and subjective) was replaced by the domination of the “subjective-Kantian”  line (which assumes the primacy of the individualistic and “subjective” over the “objective”).
From this time on began the rapid degradation of civic education and the rise of a new constellation of “Khrushchevite” academicians and scientists who represented a mob of unskilled and arrogant laymen. (Let us recall, for example, the typical “Khruschevite” A.N. Yakovlev, who admitted that he criticized Marcuse without bothering to read him, whereas the Stalinist scientists continued, albeit in their own way, pre-revolutionary academic traditions and, as a rule, were distinguished by their knowledge of the authors which they sincerely or not-so sincerely criticized).
Starting with Khrushchev, an ”Atlanicist” oriented, groundless and cosmopolitan intelligentsia began to spread across society which the KGB “failed” to see even in its most radical and dissident varieties. Themes from the West and the US began to spread through the USSR as “forbidden” yet “alluring” ideals from the beginning of the ’60’s.
The long path to 1977
The removal of Khrushchev was undoubtedly the work of the hands of the Order of Eurasia.
It is telling that eight days after his departure from the post of General Secretary, the plane which had on board two key agents of the “Atlanticist” lobby, Marshall Biryuzov and General Mironov, crashed.
After Khrushchev’s knockout, the Eurasianists gradually began to recover their positions. Leonid Brezhnev was a figure supported by the Eurasianists.
It is indicative that the writer Smirnov wrote in 1965 that “On May 9, 1965, columns of veterans in the victory parade in Moscow were passed by Marshall Zhukov himself, decorated with military awards.”
After seven years of Khrushchevite disfavor, Zhukov was once again rehabilitated. This was a real victory for the GRU.
But the triumph of the Order of Eurasia under Brezhnev was far from complete. The “Atlanticists” from the KGB were not going to surrender. Continental projects were constantly stopped. In the mid ’60’s, there even appeared a paradoxical situation in which the prospects of a continental bloc were discussed without the USSR.
In regards to this, it would be of interest to provide some data about the negotiations between Arthur Axmann, the former head of the “Hitler youth” organization and a member of the Eurasianist lobby within the SS, and Zhou Enlai concerning the establishment of a united continental bloc of Beijing-Berlin-Paris which would bypass the USSR.
General De Gaulle himself wholeheartedly welcomed such a project. Even Bucharest was to join it in the future.
Arthur Axmann told Jean Parvulesco in Madrid about a subsequent episode during his flight to Beijing. On that very plane sat a group of Soviet military men who tried to convince Axmann of the necessity of including the USSR in this Eurasianist project which had long been the dream of Axmann, an opponent of the anti-Slavic racism of Hitler since his time of involvement in the Eurasianist lobby inside the SS (the SS cricle of Gauptman, Alexander Dolezalek, Richard Hilderbrandt, Gunther Kaufmann and others who, of course it shouldn’t be forgotten, were associated with Walter Nicolai and Martin Bormann).
The officers of the GRU also reported to Axmann on the intrigues of the Atlanticist lobby in the USSR which had put insurmountable obstacles before the geopolitical projects designed for the benefit of the continent, and hence all the continental powers, the largest of which was USSR. Using traditional tactics, the Atlanticists from the KGB had forced the army to come to terms with Ivashutin (an old Chekist and highly unpopular figure) as the head of the GRU for 23 years.
But, nevertheless, since 1973 Bezhnev began to promote military men closer and closer to the leadership of the country. In 1973 Marshall Grechkov became a member of the Politburo. His successor Ustinov also joined this body, although it is worth noting that the leaders of the KGB, Andropov and his later successor Chebrikov, had been members of the Politburo since 1967.
But the peak of triumph for the Army and the GRU was in 1977 when the new Brezhnev Constitution established the “Security Council” which became a separate and formally independent legal and political force. This was a victory for the army over the KGB. This was a victory for Eurasia.
It is worth noting that Brezhnev cautiously and deliberately fulfilled his promises to the Eurasianist lobby in changing the Soviet power structure behind the scenes. The army now had full representation at the very top.
Brezhnev’s strategy was overall continentally oriented, although the main sphere of strategic interests was the cosmos and space weapons. In simultaneously developing space war projects, the geopolitics of Brezhnev’s era developed both ideological and political models which took into account the new strategic and military terminology, as well as typology, of the space age.
In this context it is important to recall the ideas of the writer and ideologist of the patriotic movement, A. Prokhanov, who was tightly linked with specific geopolitical groups in the General Staff since the time of Marshall Ogarkov.
Prokhanov ensured that the Soviet-Eurasian military strategists of the late ’70’s and the first half of the ’80’s developed serious projects for a new continental-space civilization founded on a combination of spiritual, soil, and metaphysical traditions of Eurasia with ultra-modern technology, space stylistics, and the global “new communications” system. In Prokhanov’s opinion, this should have been the Eurasianist response to the American model of “star wars,” which presented the future space age as a triumph of Anglo-Saxon ideas not only on Earth but throughout the whole universe.
The ideologues of the General Staff prepared to oppose the American Universe and American Cosmos with the Russian Universe, Eurasian Universe, the image of Great Eurasia projected on boundless regions of stars and planets.
The Lubyanka “neighbors” chose a cosmos in the image of the “island” commercial-colonial civilizations of the extreme West. The American model quite satisfied them.
Thus, in the latest technological guises, we once again encounter the most ancient themes, the voice of many millennia of history, the call of our distant ancestors, which always put forth essentially one problem: “Is it necessary to destroy Carthage?” No matter what the guise, this problem always presents itself.
The geopolitics of Marshall Ogarkov
One of the most direct heirs to the geopolitical mission of Shtemenko was Marshall N.V. Ogarkov, an eminent geopolitician, strategist, and Eurasianist. We should note that he continued the work of the “Polar Order” in the army into the mid ’80’s. Of the three Brezhnev General Staff chiefs, Zakharov, Kulikov, and Ogarkov (all three were staunch Eurasianists), the most striking was Ogarkov, a brilliant master of disguise who many times outplayed external as well as internal Atlanticists. It was Ogarkov who was the organizer of the Prague operation which went so smoothly only because he managed to totally confuse NATO intelligence services and brilliantly, convincingly serve them misinformation.
It is also of interest to note that the “Prague Spring” events ended with a “sad autumn” for the democratic putschists, and these events were in some sense a strategic duel between two personages privy to the deepest secrets of planetary conflict. Today it is well known that the occult author and director of the “Prague Spring” was David Goldstucker. It was Goldstucker who opposed the operation of Ogarkov, and it should be noted that Ogarkov’s victory was not simply a victory by the brute force of Soviet tanks, but a victory of thought, cunning, and the splendid mastering of the art of misinformation, “camouflage,” with the aid of which the NATO leadership was submersed in utter confusion and did not manage to react in time as, of course, Dr. Goldstucker and his proteges (Dubcek, Havel, etc.) generally expected.
Ogarkov was the initiator of the creation of the “Spetsnaz,” which were intended to carry out local and lighting-fast operations in the enemy’s rear which were absolutely essential for the success of purely continental, local military operations. Geopolitically, Marshall Ogarkov always openly (unlike the stealthy and cautious Eurasianist Grechko) defended the “Eurasianist project” and strove to transform the armed forces of the USSR so that they could operate best in a protracted, local war with a predominance of conventional weapons. After Khrushchev, the issue of “nuclear and intercontinental” weapons acquired a symbolic meaning depending on whether the accent of military doctrine was placed on a “global” war or a “local” war. The distinction appeared in army circles between “ours” and “others’”, that is between representatives of the Eurasianist and Atlanticist lobbies, with “local war” (meaning the use of conventional weapons without the use of nuclear weapons) being the slogan of the Eurasianists, and “total nuclear war” being the slogan of the Atlanticists, who never ceased to exercise ideological pressure on the army. Ogarkov’s circle grouped together the military elite of the Eurasianist orientation. First and foremost, his associates were marshals Akhromeev and Yazov. Both of them, especially Akhromeev, were initiated into the secret “Polar Order” founded in the Soviet Army by Mikhail Tukhachevsky in parallel to the similar organization of Aralov which was created immediately after the appearance of the GRU.
The Afghan catastrophe
Translator’s note: This section does not appear in the 2005 Russian edition or at Arctogaia, but appears in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka.
The concentration of huge authority in the hands of Eurasianist military men after 1977 posed a threat to the Atlanticist clan. For the KGB and other servants of the “Dancing Death” within the Soviet leadership, some kind of urgent response became extremely important. It is appropriate to note that some data suggest that the Afghan war was instigated by the KGB in order to discredit the army over the course of a protracted and pointless conflict, and provoke the Atlanticist interference by the United States in the internal political situation [of Afghanistan]. Specialists in occult Sovietology such as Pierre de Villemarest and Jean Parvulesco consider the Afghan conflict to be a provocation against the Soviet army and, more broadly, against the entire Eurasianist lobby. Conscious of the geopolitical projects of General Shtemenko and in particular the geopolitical value of Afghanistan, the people from the Lubyanka decided to provoke an armed and violent intervention in Afghanistan’s internal political situation. (It should be noted that Shtemenko himself ruled out such an intervention and insisted on peaceful integration and the gradual economic penetration of Afghanistan in accordance with the normal logic of any organic and natural economic and cultural expansion along the North-South axis). Not only the very beginning of this senseless war, but also its indecisive, uncertain, and dismal conduct were the results of the KGB’s intervention in the affairs of the army. The Atlanticists needed the USSR to lose a war which would lead to the final destruction of the Eurasianist bloc. Therefore, special divisions of the KGB staged terrorist acts against the peaceful Afghan population, something which would have been a complete absurdity iced Soviet troops genuinely wanted to integrate Afghanistan and turn it into a geopolitical vassal. From the top through the party and the Atlanticist politburo, they strove to restrain the most reasonable military operations, sometimes interrupting them when they started to succeed. Pierre de Villemarest claims that this war was lost only because the highest Soviet leadership wanted it to be lost. Be that as it may, this war was fatal for the army, the GRU, and the Eurasianist Order.
The “Right” in the KGB and the Andropov paradox
Translator’s note: This section does not appear in the 2005 Russian edition or at Arctogaia, but appears in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka.
One very important point emerged during the post-Brezhnev era which is characteristic of the entire history of the invisible struggle of the two Orders. Its meaning lies in the fact that, as we stress before, the Altanticist lobby in Eurasia was based not only among the “left” (although, of course this was given preference due to the typological proximity of their conceptions to Atlanticist ranks), but also among the “right.” For precisely this reason, the post-war NKVD and KGB, remaining essentially Atlanticist, adopted certain ideological traits of a military, conservative, “right” orientation. Although dating back to the ranks of the anti-soil, anti-Russia and anti-statist red punitive bands of the ’20’s, the KGB was all the while subject to the significant influence of the “right” Eurasianists of the GRU and the General Staff during the time of the domination of Stalinist imperialism. Precisely such an ambiguity in the KGB logically led to a certain compromise in the structure of the KGB, and this explains all the political and conspirological “oddities” associated with this organization. Even if the essence and main center of the KGB remained purely Atlanticist and integrated into a single network of planetary Atlanticist intelligence, there was an overall “nationalist” atmosphere which developed on the periphery among its employees and even among its officers. The “nationalism of the Lubyanka” (sometimes coupled with a fairly strong Judeophobia) always accorded with the principal of “blood over soil,” that is, it never possessed a properly continental, imperial, or Eurasian dimension. Such a state of affairs quite suited the figures of the Atlanticist Order insofar that the “naive nationalism” of its employees served as an excellent disguise for the network of anti-soil, “Messianic,” and Mondialist agents. Overall, the post-war KGB was typologically similar to the Pan-Slavic groups in the Tsarist government on the eve of the First World War and the racist, xenophobic organizations of the Reich which served as a cover for Atlanticist “residents”. It is from this perspective that we should consider the ascent to power of Yurii Andropov, the former chief of the KGB, after the death of Brezhnev. The above-mentioned considerations regarding the ambiguity of the KGB help us to understand the duality of Andropov’s role, who was simultaneously believed to be the father of Perestroika and democratization, the “maker” of Gorbachev, as well as an extreme conservative who attempted to restore the totalitarian epoch of Lavrenty Beria. Interestingly enough, two directly opposing assessments of Andropov coexist in the views of ordinary Russian people. One is that “Andropov was a Jew and a Zionist” and the other is that “Andropov was a patriot and an anti-Semite.” (Naturally, both of these definitions should be understood metaphorically). In fact, the mystery of Andropov is simple: he was a typical representative of the KGB, that is, a complete and staunch Atlanticist loyal to his Order of “Dancing Death.” It is worth noting that he might have been a “Jew-Zionist” and a “Patriot-anti-Semite insofar as this pair of opposites is fit into an extremely simplified conspirological model, whereas, in reality, the picture is more complex and its decisive factors were neither national nor political criteria, but only fundamental and often carefully hidden geopolitical orientations. The ascent of Andropov was the second terrible blow against the army after the beginning of the Afghan war. We should note that at the head of the state was now a representative of the organization which for all of its existence strove towards only one goal: the destruction of the Order of Eurasia within the USSR, the destruction of the secret structures created by Aralov, Tukhachevsky, Shtemenko, Ogarkov, Axromeev, and other Eurasianists, the detonation of Eurasia from within, and the final rendering of a continental bloc an unrealizable utopia, a fiction, and seeking final victory for “New Carthage”, the US, and the establishment of a New World Order on the planet, a New Commercial System. The ascent of Andropov, the ascent of the “right wing of the KGB,” meant no more nor less than the beginning of Perestroika.
The double agent Mikhail Gorbachev
The preliminary phase of Perestroika, the preparation of new cadre, the assignment of roles and bringing needed people into the leadership, and the general train of events were all realized by Yurii Andropov along with other analysts from the Atlanticist special services and experts from the Order of “Dancing Death.” But Andropov perfectly understood that the Eurasianists could attempt to take revenge, kick out the Altanticists of the KGB, and that the Politburo’s secret Polar Order could direct the country onto a Eurasianist course at any stage of Perestroika. Therefore, the selection for a main figure for the new policies fell to the most evasive and uncertain of the leaders, who was so cautious, flexible, and “streamlined” that none of the factions knew which Order he was actually working for. On the other hand, due to the ancient tradition of the Atlanticist Order to which Andropov belonged, it was customary to pay special attention to people whose exterior has some sort of expressive defect. Precisely according to this principle the high priests of the cult of the Egyptian god Seth were selected. Gorbachev, with his mark (which one Muslim Traditionalist read as the Arabic inscription of three letters, kaf, fa, and ra, which gives kafir, meaning “godless”) was the most appropriate figure. Zooming in on Gorbachev, Andropov hoped that his candidature would satisfy both geopolitical groupings, as the resolution of internal tensions in the USSR was already long overdue and policy changes should have been logically supported by both the Atlanticists and Eurasianists. As regards the Atlanticists, interest in changes was obvious, and after the beginning of the Afghan War and the ascent of Andropov to power, the Eurasianists were just as uninterested in maintaining the status-quo than the Atlanticists. Thus, transformation would go smoothly. Gorbachev was convenient and beneficial for everyone. Guardians from both conflicting Orders, A.I. Lukyanov and A.N. Yakovlev, were put alongside Gorbachev. Both of these personalities were direct participants in the divided continental conspiracy and represented the two warring sides.
The true face of Anatoly Lukyanov
Since 1987, Anatoly Ivanovich Lukyanov had been the head of the so-called “administrative organs.” From then on, the fate of any appointment or promotion among high-ranking military officials depended on him. While showing loyalty to Gorbachev, Lukyanov nevertheless constantly tried to interpret the ambiguous and vague hints of the new Kremlin leader in a Eurasianist way. Gorbachev’s desire to end the Afghan conflict was the work of the army, and there is reason to believe that Lukyanov was involved in this geopolitical action. Although he was just as flexible and cautious as Gorbachev, Lukyanov differed in that he had a strict and clear geopolitical orientation. His goal, as was the goal of the Polar Order, was a Great Eurasia from Mongolia to the Mediterranean, a Pax Euroasiatica, a great continental union. As a resolute of his post, Lukyanov was obliged to control the GRU and supervise the General Staff. But in reality, this neat and quiet person was not a “supervisor from the Messianic Bolsheviks” over the Eurasianist state within a state, but a messenger of the GRU who kept watch over the Bolshevik-Atlanticists for the army. Under the guise of supposedly standing “left of the center,” Lukyanov realized a special mission in the Supreme Soviet, the meaning of which consisted in forming a parliamentary bloc oriented in favor of the secret Eurasianist mission.
Already since the beginning of the ’70’s, Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev had been one of the main ideologists of open Atlanticism in the USSR. To give credit where it is due, it was him who began to launch more open attacks on the Eurasianist patriots in 1974 when the positions of the GRU were very strong and Grechko had already become a member of the Polar Order in the Politburo. Openly calling for an ideological pogrom against “National Bolshevik” literature, which in those years served as a tribune or exchange of encrypted information, ideas, concepts, and projects of the entire patriotic Eurasianist lobby, Yakovlev put himself at risk. Despite the fact that he had the patronage of Andropov and higher circles of the KGB after the publication of his article “Against Anti-Historicism,” which was a manifesto of Russophobia and anti-patriotic Atlanticism, he still had to be sent outside of Russia. The KGB decided to turn “poison into medicine” and utilize the sending of Yakovlev to Canada in order to activate the Atlanticist spy network. According to information provided by Jean Parvulesco in his report “The Galaxy of the GRU,” in Ottawa, where Yakovlev was send as an ambassador, he came into contact with David Goldstucker who at the time represented the foreign interests of Israel in the US and participated in confidential talks with a Chicago firm associated with nuclear energy. Doctor David Goldstucker who, as is known, was an important personage not only among Israeli special services, but also in the intelligence services of the Anglo-Saxon countries (which in general resembles the typical situation for the Soviet KGB), developed an Atlanticist strategy for future Perestroika together with A. Yakovlev. This fact is so well known in the West that Yakovlev is known as “Mr. Perestroika.” Thus, for the second time in history, the same characters prepared for a desperate, complex, dangerous, and exhilarating geopolitical duel. It is important to note that Goldstucker, an agent of “Dancing Death,” suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the GRU in the Prague Spring on account of the organized, clever, lighting-fast, and courageous servants of the Order of Eurasia, General Shtemenko and Marshal Ogarkov. This same Goldstucker prepared revenge a decade later. This time, however, the GRU and Soviet General Staff were to be attacked on their own territory, and not in “neutral” Czechoslovakia. And this time, Goldstucker did not place his hope on heavy-footed NATO with its huge, terrifying, but useless (in some situations) nuclear arsenal. Now, the main destructive weapon of Goldstucker, this representative of planetary Atlanticism, was the tactical supernova weapon of the Order of the Red Donkey. The hope of Atlanticist battle groups was laid in the captain of the Anglo-Saxon occult “special forces” who left Ottawa to return to the rear of the Eurasianist enemy: puffy “Mr. Perestroika.”
Between false alternatives
The true logic of Perestroika, that is, the logic of Gorbachev’s uncertain, cyclical maneuvering between two poles, which vividly reminds one of what happens with patients with manic-depressive psychosis, actually remained entirely incomprehensible until the August putsch for the same reason that very few actually guessed the true role of Anatoly Lukyanov. Such secrecy eventually resulted in catastrophe for the Eurasian lobby. In this case, the Atlanticist authors of the anti-imperial project of Perestroika resorted to the traditional method of creating a pseudo-opposition, that is, a false substitute for the genuinely “conservative” pole. Since the true enemies of the Atlanticists were not merely nationalists, but “nationalists of an imperial, continental type,” or “continentalists,” it was only natural that the pseudo-opposition to the outright Atlanticism of “Mr. Perestroika” would be anything but genuinely Eurasianist. According to this logic, the people of the Atlanticist Order, with the active participation of the KGB, created parallel and consistently false poles. These poles were: (1) the “conservative communists.” Their symbolic figures were Yegor Ligachev and then Ivan Polozkov (both disappeared like smoke at a certain moment, and it is not surprising that their opposition was not based on any principles besides the fact that it was an original and deliberate hoax); (2) the “patriots and nationalists,” whose movement was created with the active participation of the KGB which projected its chauvinistic Judeophobic positions on marginal groupings of sincere but narrow-minded patriots, and in doing so set a special algorithm for a “patriotic movement” which was insufficiently strong to cause any serious harm to the increasingly “legalized” Atlanticist lobby; and (3) the “National Bolsheviks.” This current was more interesting and stood closest of call to the ideas of the Eurasianist lobby but, thanks to the efforts of the KGB, the movement’s awareness of its limits acquired a repelling, grotesque, and extremist character both in terms of an excessive accent on “Leninism” and an excessive Judeophobia. Finally, there was (4) the supreme cunning of the Atlanticist KGB, as the KGB pretended to represent an opposition of “democrats.” This project served even the honest employees of the Lubyanka, the “patriots” who were treated with a certain degree of confidence and hope.
But, at the same time, KGB detachments arranged Atlanticist revolutions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia, staged repression spectacles in Romania, brought down the Berlin wall, kicked out Zhivkov, and aided separatists in the Baltic states and the Caucasus. Furthermore, as a culmination of their Atlanticist triumph, they prepared the theatrical putsch in August, 1991! The “most streamlined man,” the one with a characteristic mark on his forehead, cruised between “Mr. Perestroika” and Anatoly Lukyanov while it outwardly appeared that his second pole was not Lukyanov, but some kind of other, more odious, more infamous, more catchy, but in fact completely insignificant figureheads. With expectation and anticipation, the GRU and the army looked to Anatoly Lukyanov. Sure, there had been some changes. These included the end to the senseless war in Afghanistan, the reduction of intercontinental weapons, and steps taken towards Germany, Japan, and China in foreign policy. The Eurasianists could not but welcome these. Even the theme of a “common European home” dedicated to the Polar Order could easily have been interpreted in their favor. After all, this doctrine was derived from the geopolitical arsenal of the Eurasianist opposition in the SS (typologically related to the Order of Eurasia in the GRU) to which Axmann, Hilderbrandt, Dolezalek, Kaufmann, etc. belonged. But the collapse of the Union, the attacks against the army, the desire to involve the army in nationalistic and minor-territorial conflicts, self-destructive policies in the Blatic states, the destruction of the last remnants of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact once valuable to the Eurasinaists, and the nomination of uncontrolled mobsters and outright crooks for the political arena left the GRU at a dead end. Anatoly Lukyanov remained in the shadows.
Lukyanov cautiously, consistently, and gradually prepared a responsive, decisive, and final strike. Until the last moment, it seemed to him that all could be saved in a minute, and that the Eurasianist lobby could take advantage of all of the positive geopolitical sides of Perestroika, and kill “Mr. Perestroika” and his accomplices who had had all “stood up” at that time. He expected that a new, great era would begin, an era free of communists, Atlanticists and the servants of “Dancing Death” – an era of Eurasia, Cosmic Eurasia, and an era of the Sacred Sun Continent. But then August of 1991 burst onto the scene.
The Putsch and the culmination of the occult war
Deputy Obolensky, a member of the commission on investigation of the State Committee on the State of Emergency, gave a single, strange statement to the media some time after the putsch: “The truth concerning the events of August, 1991 might only be discovered by our descendants a hundred years from now.” What terrible secret did Obolensky encounter when investigating the history of the putsch? From the point of view of geopolitical conspirology, there can be only one explanation: he encountered some materials related to the occult war of the two Orders behind the scenes of power, the mysterious confrontation between the Order of Eurasia and the Order of Atlantis. Only in this sense does the statement of deputy Obolensky make sense and his confidence in the safety of the secret become clear. The August putsch was (or was meant to be in the minds of its authors) the culmination of geopolitical confrontation, a crucial moment in the invisible war. The Order of Atlantis could not have been unaware that the Eurasianists had prepared a certain operation for the winter of 1991-1992 that was to result in the imposition of military rule over the territory of the USSR under the pretext of stabilizing the socio-political and economic situation. It is worth noting that they also knew perfectly well that the Eurasiainst-oriented military board was ideologically non-communist and patriotically oriented, but without the “anti-Semitism,” xenophobia, and “Pan-Slavism” that was traditional for the KGB. In other words, the military board promised to be stable, liberal in the sphere of economics, geopolitically correct, and devoid of the terrorist excesses inherent to Bolshevik forms of dictatorship. In addition, the Eurasianist Military System, the Roman Imperial System, undoubtedly had all chances to be popular to the greatest extent as it would reject “Communist dogmatism” and “Marxist utopianism” on the one hand and, on the other hand, its natural hierarchy, discipline, centralization, communitarianism, communality, and “integrity’ (in Khomyakov’s conception) would be attractive to all truly Eurasian ethni. The patriotism of the Military System had to be imperial, and not “Russian” and “nationalist” in the narrow sense. All of this rendered this prospect not only unacceptable but fatal for the Atlanticist lobby inside the USSR, as well as for all Atlanticist Mondialism on the planet. Despite the huge destruction done to the country by the agent of the Order of “Dancing Death, “Mr. Perestroika,” along with his associate from the KGB, Shevarnadze (who is in fact the “cursed one” to his own, Georgian people) the Order of Eurasianists knew how to use this negative situation for the benefit of its own position. After all, worthy successors of the great Russian strategists Shtemenko and Ogarkov worked in the secret departments of the GRU. The geopolitical duel with Goldstucker could once again end in defeat for this experienced and astute representative of the Order of Atlantis. The main task of the Atlanticists was preventing the imposition of martial law in the USSR which the very logic of events appeared to be leading to. To this end, the August putsch was organized.
Marshal Yazov’s calculation
The major mistake of the Eurasianists in August, 1991, and especially the personal mistake of Marshal Yazov, was trusting the head of the KGB, Kryuchko. This was a strategic trap. The KGB had already been trying for many years to create agents for itself under the guise of “patriot-nationalists” and using the peripheral mass of “uninitiated” employees who genuinely believed in the “Judeo-Masonic” conspiracy and considered themselves to be “nationalists” or “National-Bolsheviks.” On the other hand, fraudulent maneuvers were made at the very top of the government: both Chebrikov and Kryuchkov strove for solidarity with the military Eurasianists against the “cosmopolitan democrats.” (In fact, the democratic movement was organized by the KGB and was even more artificial and “assembled” than the patriotic movement, since Russians and other true Eurasianist ethni more naturally supported the “right” as opposed to the “left” – this is a historical constant). In order to hide the double play of the Atlanticists from the KGB, they created myths of a “Judeo-Masonic wing of the KGB” (In particular, the Moscow branch was accused of this as a counterweight to the Union-wide and later RSFSR-wide KGB of Yeltsin, etc). In fact, the KGB engaged in anti-Eurasianist activities, destroying the structures of the Eurasianist network in Eastern European countries and overthrowing “soil” and anti-Atlanticist regimes (such as Ceausescu’s regime which, by the way, always focused on a Eurasian continental bloc and hated the Atlanticist “servitude” of the USSR leadership). Be that as it may, the case of the State Committee on the State of Emergency clearly shows that Kryuchkov, in some not so comprehensible ways, managed to convince a few Eurasianists – Marshal Yazov and Oleg Balkanov – to rush the introduction of martial law and accept help from the KGB which, allegedly, had rejected its Atlanticism and come to stand on the side of the army in deciding to act against the “democrats.” It is possible that Kryuchkov stipulated some conditions for this organization, as in the case of instituting a fully military, Eurasianist board structure of the KGB, which would have, of course, destroyed the KGB at least in its old, party-terrorist, mondialist and Atlanticist form. We do not know which arguments the agents of the Order of Eurasia presented to Marshal Yazov. It is obvious that the signing of the Novo-Ogarevo Agreement had nothing to do with this. Everything could have changed, invalidating any “papers” by the pen of those random people in the leadership alongside streamlined “Gorby” who did not understand the geopolitical situation clearly at all and who were put in such positions not for making decisions, but for “masking” and for the sake of being people “chosen” by the mark of the occult. What should Kryuchkov have said to Marshal Yazov? This could have been the last move dedicated to the essence of the Eurasian Order’s strategy which had been struck by the thousand-year old occult confrontation, the destiny of the continent, the destiny of the Eurasian Cosmos, the destiny of the imminent and, as it seemed, close victory. Why did Yazov believe the leader of the anti-Eurasian organ? All that remains is speculating on this. It is obvious that the mistake of Marshal Yazov had some kind of terrible secret behind it, perhaps even the participation of paranormal, “magical”, or psychic effects, or the effects of psychedelic drugs. This is likely if one recalls the testimony of some of the members of the State Committee on the State of Emergency that they were completely unconscious for three fatal days. Only idiots can believe that the people who reached the highest level of a political, military, intelligence, and “conspirological” career could have behaved like irresponsible alcoholics in such a decisive situation, being drunk and hungover in a city full of tanks and “democratic” agitators. The version of Kryuchkov’s poisoning of the other eight members seems to be unlikely since the GRU guarded their leaders more vigilantly than Gorbachev himself. The case of the “mistake of Marhsal Yazov” was apparently a combination of multiple occult-ideological and para-psychological factors which were synchronously triggered. But what kind of “weapon” did the Order of Atlantis use at this point? It is still too early to speak about this.
Mr. Perestroika goes on the attack
Immediately after the members of the State Committee on the State of Emergency were arrested, certain aspects of the conspiracy which usually remained in the shadows, were revealed, as it what happens at any moment of supreme conspirological and ideological tensions. The most candid moment was Mr. Perestroika’s “coming out” in the Russian parliament. Of course, his mission was not warning “naive” deputies of “punks which could once again surround Gorbachev.” This silly speech was uttered by “Mr. Perestroika” to the blind. Yakovlev arrived in the Russian parliament and demanded the arrest of Lukyanov. The Russian parliament, composed of incompetent and random people with no clear geopolitical orientation and who based decisions on random, chaotic, and anarchistic emotions, could have spoiled the entire affair out of cowardly agitation following the shock of the incident in Moscow. Yeltsin, either not receiving all the information on time or having simply forgotten about the most important thing (the mental condition of the Russian president also leaves us to believe that he was under a certain para-psychological influence that not only European conspirologists, but also Western journalists noted, and this explains the inadequacy of Yeltsin’s belonging to the “far right” and forces us to return to the occult war version of psychotropic effects), delivered his crushing polemic against the eight and forgot about the main objective.
Yakovlev arrived at the “white house” (recognized more as the “yellow house” at that time) to demand the arrest of Lukyanov. Yeltsin obediently repeated the famous phrase to “Mr. Perestroika”: “Lukyanov stood behind the conspiracy of the eight; he is the major ideologist of the conspiracy.”
Lukyanov and the ritual Sabbath at the tomb of Marshal Akromeev
In the person of Luykanov lies the secret explanation of the August putsch. Lukyanov was supposed to be ousted at any cost. The threat of Eurasian occult structures was concentrated precisely in his hands. Since 1987, Anatoly Lukyanov had been the protector of the Polar Order, the Eurasianist Order, and the hope of the Eternal Empire of Rome. The putsch was centered precisely around him. It was Lukyanov who was the only one of the Eurasianists, or the only one of those associated with the affairs of the State Committee on the State of Emergency who did not succumb to Kryuchkov’s provocation and remained legally innocent in relation to the coup. Dragging him down had failed more than once, and this was the unplanned and unfortunate miscalculation of the Atlanticists. Therefore Yakovlev, bypassing all legal norms, hurried “in a revolutionary way” to accuse Lukyanov through the tongue of Yeltsin of being the ideologist of the conspiracy. In fact, Lukyanov really was an ideologist, but the ideologist of the other conspiracy of the “Polar” conspiracy, of the saviors of the great Continental Power, the conspiracy of Eurasia against the Western Islands. But despite the end of Lukyanov, presenting him as the head of the conspiracy and destroying the entire network of Eurasian agents and the entire secret structure of the GRU on these grounds did not succeed. The victorious Atlanticists were able to remove only the upper echelon of “party” and military conservatives who did not pose any special danger. Besides the murder of Pugo, the most important blow to the Eurasian lobby was the mysterious death of Marshal Akhromeev and the subsequent events that took place at his grave. Here it is necessary to make a small digression into the history of the Order of Atlantis and especially into the history of the medieval “Order of the Minstrels of Morvan”, whose emblem was the “Dancing Death”, or Dance Macabre. According to Grasse d’Orsay who studied this Order, its adherents used the symbol of the “Risen Dead” or the “Deceased who left the grave” as their hieroglyphic password. In certain branches of the Order which were engaged more in “magic” and “necromancy” than occult politics and geopolitics, there existed the ritual of exhuming corpses with a symbolical and occult purpose. The entire story of the death and subsequence exhumation of Akhromeev’s corpse indicates the involvement of the Atlanticist Order in his death and, perhaps, its darkest, most magical ramifications. In any case, Western conspirologists have detailed the desecration of the marshal’s body and identified it with precisely the “ritual of exhumation” practices even to this day in the West by members of quite dark sects. It is possible that the agents of Atlantis hoped to find some kind of secret documents buried together with Akhromeev or special marks on his body. All of this becomes more than probable if one considers the important role of Akhromeev in the military-based Polar Order and his close ties to Ogaryov, one of the main personalities of the Eurasianist Order. Be that as it may, after the putsch the Atlanticists took some decisive steps in beheading the Eurasianists. Already a month later it became clear that their attack failed and that their hysterical attempts to urgently finish collapsing the state demonstrated their fear and panic. The Order of Eurasia was not completely destroyed, and its turn to strike back had come.
Translator’s note: The following text is an alternative ending to the section found in the 2008 Serbian edition and at Zachetka – It is worth noting that certain signs suggest that this strike was intended to be the last one.
Metaphysics of the Occult War
The confrontation between the Order of Atlantis and the Order of Eurasia, stretching across centuries and millennia, has been veiled in the most different forms and is in some sense the main conspirological content of history, the history of great planetary passions, the history of peoples and religions, races, and traditions, spirit and flesh, war and peace. The confrontation of the two Orders should not be simplified to the moralistic image of a struggle between Good and Evil, Truth and Lies, Angels and Demons, etc. In fact, this struggle between two opposing types of worldviews, two metaphysical pictures of Being, two paths through space, and two great Beginnings is not merely an opposition of one to the other. It is in fact a necessary confrontation between the two in so far as all the cosmogonic and cosmological process of the cyclical course of human history is based on this [dualism]. The Order of Eurasia, the Order of the Male Beginning, the Sun, Hierarchy – this is the projection of Horus, Apollo, Ormuzd, the Solar Christ-in-Glory, the Savior of the Almighty. Eurasia, as the Land of the East, is the Land of Light, the Land of Paradise, the Land of the Empire, the Land of Hope, and the Polar Land. The Order of Atlanticists is the Order of the Female Beginning, the Moon, Orgiastic Equality – this is the projection of the Egyptian Seth, the Python, Ahriman, Suffering Christ, Man immersed in metaphysical despair and the lonely Gethsemane prayer. The Atlantic, as Atlantis in the form of the Land of the West – this is the Land of Night, the Land of the “exiled to wells” (as the Islamic Sufis say), the Center of Planetary Skepticism, the Land of the Great Metaphysical Spleen. Both Orders have the deepest ontological and sacred roots. They have metaphysical reasons to be what they are. To consider one of the Orders to be an historical coincidence means denying the secret logic of human and cosmic cycles. The choice of geopolitical path demonstrates the choice of metaphysical path, esoteric path, the path of Spirit through the universe. Therefore, no guarantees exist. Therefore, strictly speaking, claiming that Eurasia is good and Atlantis is bad, or that Rome is good while Carthage is evil, and vice versa, is impossible. Everyone called by their Order must take a decisive step and serve precisely their Order. The laws of our world are not determined, but depend on the outcome of the Great Battle, the outcome of the drama of “Eurasia versus the Atlantic,” and depend on the totality of planetary solidarity on the part of all of those called to service, all of the soldiers of geopolitics, and all of the secret agents of Land and Sea. The outcome of this cosmological war of Apollo with the Python depends on each of us, whether we are aware of it or not.
The End Times
All traditional religious and metaphysical teachings describe the End Times, the end of the cycle, as the Last Battle, as the final struggle. Different traditions interpret this conflict in different ways and while one party might be presented in one tradition as the “party of Evil,” in other traditions it becomes the “party of Good” and vice versa. For example, for Orthodox Christians Judaism is considered to be the religion of the Antichrist in the End Times, while for Jews themselves the “gentile-Christians from the northern country of the King of Gog” act as the concentration of eschatological Evil. The Hindus believe that the Tenth Avatar, who is to come at the end of the cycle, will destroy the “Buddhists,” and the Buddhists themselves believe that the Buddha of Forthcoming Times, the Savior of Maitreya, will appear among the Buddhist community. And so on. None of this suggests the relativity of the distribution of roles in the Final Battle, nor the impossibility of earlier choosing self-evident Good and securing for oneself participation in the eschatological struggle for the “right” side. On the contrary, as concerns the Final Times, it is said that “even the chosen will be seduced.” The choice between one of the two eschatological “parties” cannot be anything formal. It is a choice of the Spirit. It is the Supreme Risk, the Great Metaphysical Drama. Precisely for this reason, nothing in the reality of the eschatological epoch, as many traditional and religious authorities assert that we are living in such an era, suggests that we can serve absolute negative or absolute positive. It is especially foolish to absolutize any political form and equate it to “Absolute Evil” or “Absolute Good.” Even the beginning of true choice is located far beyond the limits of foreign political ideologies, beyond the conventional division into democrats, fascists, and communists. The true choice begins at the level of geopolitics and ascends further by a “prophetic spiral” (as Jean Parvulesco explained) to the heights of Mysticism, Metaphysics, Gnosis, and the heights of the Incomprehensible Divine Mystery. The Orders of Eurasia and Atlantis form the final external mystery of human, common history. In fact, within these Orders there are many other mysterious and closed spheres associated with Pure Metaphysics. But be that as it may, the true, full, and conscious eschatological struggle begins precisely from the point of the collision between the Order of Eurasia or the Order of the Atlantic. Even if one does not go deep enough into the ultimate secrets, simply working for the Order is sufficient to be an active, called, and chosen participant in the Great Drama.
The German word Endkampf (“final battle,” “battle of the end”) wonderfully expresses the essence of the contemporary planetary situation. Eschatological motives, motives of the End Times, penetrate not only religious and mystical movements but also immediate politics, economics, and everyday life. Since 1962, devout Jews in Israel have lived in a special “End time,” in the “time of the Messiah.” The US is striving to establish a special New World Order on the Planet. The European Mondialist Jacques Attali preaches the coming of the final phase of the special Trade Order. The Islamic peoples (especially Shiites) expect the Madi, the hidden Imam, to arrive soon. The Hindus are sure that the Kali-Yuga, which we note as the Dark Age, is coming soon. The racist eschatologism of the world’s national socialist movement is experiencing a revival. In Christian communities, more and more prophecies are emerging about the Last Pope (Flos Florum) for the Catholics or the Last Patriarch for the Orthodox. Lamaists are sure that the modern Dalai Lama is the last one. China is frozen in mystical expectation. Soviet communism fell suddenly and unexpectedly. All of these signs tell us that the Endkampf is beginning, that the Final Battle is beginning. In an eschatological context, even the words of the Bolshevik song “This is the final and decisive battle” sound like a disturbing revelation, a hint towards the planetary Endkampf.
The Order and “ours”
We should note that the term “ours” in a global geopolitical context is not used often enough. The famous German geopolitician and jurist Carl Schmitt insisted on the need to introduce the concept of “ours” for clarifying geopolitical self-determination of a given nation, state, or ethnic bloc. The famous television reporter Alexander Nevzorov realized this in practice in a series of his reports. In today’s Russian Empire, “ours” has become a clearly Eurasian concept which includes not only Russians and Slavs but also Tatars, Turks, Finno-Ugrians, etc. which recognizes their genetic connection with the imperial space and the imperial idea. In practice, Nevzorov’s “ours” is the total definition of indigenous Eurasians, imperial natives, the owners, by right of culture and birth, of great lands. It is telling that Atlanticists in Russia do not use this word (this is logical since they are here among what is “not theirs”, what is foreign; for them, their “ours” lives beyond the continent, on the distant and ominous “Island”). For Jean Parvulesco, who already made such a term fundamental to geopolitical and conspirological concepts, the concept of “ours” is even more inclusive (although he himself belongs to Nevzorov’s “ours”). Jean Parvulesco identifies the notion of “ours” with the entire network of the Great Continental Bloc’s supported from Japan to Belgium, from China to France, from India to Spain, from Iran to Germany, and from Russia to Italy. “Ours,” for Parvulesco, is a synonym for the Eurasian Order itself with all of its offshoots and groupings which, consciously or not, openly or secretly, are in the zone of its geopolitical, mystical, and metaphysical influence. “Ours” is the united, invisible eschatological front of the Continent, the Front of Land, the Front of the Absolute East, the western province of which is Europe, “our” Europe, a Europe opposed to the “West,” the Europe of Tradition, Soil, and Spirit. “Ours” includes both Catholics and Orthodox, Muslims and Hindus, Taoists and Lamaists, Pagans, and Mystics…but only those of them who are committed to the Continent of the East and its secret and unknown fate. Parvulesco speaks of a “parallel France,” “parallel Romania,” “parallel Germany,” “parallel Russia,” “parallel China,” etc. as spiritual essences, as invisible spiritual dimensions of the real countries that are united in the secret jurisdiction of the united “parallel Eurasia,” “Eurasia of Pure Spirit.” “Ours” are the warriors of “parallel Eurasia,” the heroes of the Absolute East, insofar as they serve, according to occult logic, the “prophetical helix” of the Single Idea, the Single Goal, the Single Hidden Principle. It is important to note that more than once the German Conservative Revolutionary, nationalist, Russophile, and Eurasianist Arthur Muller van den Bruck said in paraphrasing Khomyakov “(the Church is One”): “There is only one Reich (one Kingdom), just as there is only one Church.” This is the Reich of “ours”, the Church of “ours.” This is “our” Kingdom and “our” Church.
The Hour of Eurasia
As long as we are in Eurasia, as long as we speak on its behalf, and as long as we remain linked with its mysterious, mystical flesh, Eurasia belongs to us, to “ours.” Despite all the persecution by the Atlanticists, despite all the effectiveness of their disruptive strategy, despite the severe and deep “dream” of entire regions and entire peoples inhabiting it, and despite all the predominance of agents of the Atlanticist Order in continental politics, continental culture, and continental industry, the process of “decolonization” is inevitable. But we must not fall into archaism by protecting some obsolete cultural, social or political forms. We should not be conservatives by inertia. The Order of Eurasia is the complete Conservative Revolution, the Great Revival of geopolitical consciousness, the path of the Vertical, and not the path of slithering oscillations to the left or right or attempts to stagger backwards. The Order of Eurasia is the harsh and open duel with the strong and clever Opponent, the Order of Seth, the Red Donkey, the Order of “Dancing Death.” We must throw the servants of the Ocean into the ocean. We must send agents of the “Island” back to their “Island.” We should rip those who have betrayed “ours”, betrayed our ideals and our interests, out of the political, cultural, and national flesh of the Continent. Yes, our enemies have their own truth. Yes, we should respect their deep metaphysical choice and we should look closely into their Secret, the secret of the “Wells of the West.” But in doing so we should not lose our resoluteness, our rage, our cold and passionate Cruelty. We will be forgiving only when our Continent will be free, when the last Atlanticist will be thrown into the Salt Walter, into this symbolic element belonging to the Egyptian god with the face of the Crocodile. Judging by certain signs, “the Time is at hand.” The Endkampf, the Final Battle, should break out here and now. Are you ready, gentlemen of the “Polar Order”? Are you ready, soldiers of Eurasia? Are you ready, wise strategists of the GRU? Are you ready, great peoples, having made your bet by the very fact of your birth?
The decisive Hour of Eurasia is already near…
The final point of the GREAT WAR OF CONTINENTS is already nearing…
 The third and most complete edition of my textbook “Osnovy geopolitiki” (Moscow, Arktogeya) was published in 1999, in which this discipline is illuminated in its historical and scholarly aspects with appendices featuring the main, classical texts of the founding fathers of geopolitics, such as H. Mackinder, K. Haushofer, P. Savitsk, C. Schmitt, etc.
 A monograph including the classics of Eurasianism was published in 1997-1998 with my comments and under my editorship by “Agraf” publishing house.
 I devoted an episode from the philosophical and historical radio program, Finis Mundi, to this topic – “Karl Haushofer: Kontinentalnyi blok,” released on CD in 2000.
 It should be noted that in Haushofer’s theory of “living space” or “Lebensraum,” there was no hint at anti-Slav expansionism which which this expression was associated for Hitler and other ideologists of the Reich. See Karl Haushofer’s “De la geopolitique” edited by Fayard (France, 1986).
 Lenin and some of his other concrete steps should be recognized as being Eurasianist. In particular: the Brest-Litovsk peace agreement, and especially the Rapallo agreements. For the young Soviet government, peace with Germany was the main prerequisite for later geopolitical revival and transformation into a socialist empire.
 The formula “Lenin=National Bolshevik” vs. “Trotsky= international Bolshevik” is, of course, somewhat somewhat of an oversimplification. At a certain stage (when he was the commander in chief of the Red Army) Trotsky was interested in the ideas of the Russian National-Bolshevik Nikolai Ustryalov. Trotsky’s position gradually evolved and at a later period he criticized Stalin precisely for “nationalism” and “statism.” The very idea of “World Revolution” is not as straightforward as it might seem at first glance. In a geopolitical context, it can be understood as a force pulling the Soviet, Land East towards the Atlanticist, Liberal West. This is how the geopolitical significance of Bolshevism was understood by the first German “Right” National Bolsheviks – Count von Reventlow and Walter Nicolai. The opposition of Lenin to Trotsky is often understood by geopolitical and political circles in precisely in this reduced form.
 On Jean Parvulesco, see A. Dugin’s “The Russian Thing” – “Star of the Invisible Empire”, the text “Geopolitics of the Third Millennium” by Jean Parvulesco in the third edition of “Foundations of Geopoltiics,” or listen to “Jean Parvulesco: From Simon Magus to Fantomas” (on CD), part of the FINIS MUNDI philosophical and historical radio series.
 Since “Great War of Continents” was written (and not without its influence), Russian researchers such as Oleg Shishkin and Alexander Kollakidi have greatly contributed to knowledge of such “esotericists of a continental orientation,” to which many well-known Russian and Soviet historical figures can be related.
 During the time of working on the text “Great War of Continents” (1991), the author adhered to the opinion that the anti-Eurasian nature of pure Orthodox Marxism partly transformed into National Bolshevism albeit under the influence of specifically Russian elements. Further research on this topic has led the author to the conclusion that socialist doctrine itself (and to a large extent, Marxism) already carries continental elements opposed to Liberal ideology. Consequently, the National-Bolshevik synthesis is a product of the combination of the implicit Eurasianism in Russian culture and the implicit Eurasianism in socialist teachings. This point was noted by George Sorel in his remarks on the 1919 edition of “Reflections on Violence.” This topic was similarly dealt with in A. Dugin’s article “Paradigm of the End” published in the journal “Elements” No. 9 (1998) and in the book “The Russian Thing.”
 The thesis on “red Atlanticists” from the Cheka now seems to the author to be quite inadequate, even more so because it is known that in the Cheka there existed an influential group of “esotericists of a continental orientation”, in particular Gleb Boky, Yakov Blyumkin, Barchenko, etc. But the geopolitical model of Jean Parvulesco, and to n even greater degree that of Pierre de Villemarest, operates with the simplified scheme of “GRU vs. KG.” The rejection of this model would deprive the further narration of any and all meaning. See footnote 
 This position now seems to be too rough of a simplification. The Eurasianist line was undoubtedly present in the KGB. If we accept the Eurasianist underpinnings of Marxism as a doctrine and the fact that the KGB was “the continuation of the Party,” then this can in no way be indicative of any “Atlanticism” of this structure, but rather the contrary. It would be more precise to speak of two types of Eurasianism: the inertial-strategic one (characteristic of the army and the GRU) and the dogmatic-ideological one (characteristic of the Cheka and KGB). Naturally, the dogmatic-ideological side was dynamic and mobile, and therefore a change in geopolitical orientations hear could come significantly easier. Strategic thinking is associated with the problems of defense and war, and is therefore much more stable. See also footnotes  and .
 Now the author would prefer to operate with a slightly different schema. Atlanticism (in New Age) in its ideological sense is identical to Liberalism and capitalism of the Anglo-Saxon type. In Liberalism, everything – both form and content – is “modern” (i.e., anti-traditional). The complete antithesis of liberalism (= “the spirit of the New Age”) is traditionalism or fundamental conservatism (“right Eurasianism”). Socialism (more widely understood as ranging from Marxism to anarchism, corporatism, or syndicalism) is modern in form, but traditional in content. It outwardly matches the “spirit of the New Age,” while internally it is opposed to this spirit.
Applying this model to analyzing the Soviet period in Russian history, we obtain the following picture: the national-statist, patriotic factor in the USSR was the expression of the substantial side of socialism, its undoubtable conservatism embodied in the purely Eurasianist vector. The bearers of this radically conservative Eurasianism were housed in the army and the GRU.
The Party and the Cheka (KGB) operated with the formal ideological side of socialism which possessed certain common features with liberalism (“spirit of the Enlightenment,” faith in “progress”, etc.) To a significant degree, this modern form served the anti-modern content in more effectively confronting liberalism, which is modern in form and content. The Party, in this role, was represented a veiled National Bolshevism and served Eurasia. But purely theoretically, at certain times and in certain sectors of the ideological structure (the form of socialism), a weakening of the formal structure could have happened with opened the opportunity for contacts, dialogue, and even convergence with the liberal camp. In such a case, the ideological weapon of the modern form of socialism drew not from within, against liberalism and against its modern content, but from without, against the anti-modern, traditional, and Eurasianist content of real socialism. Only in this special case does it make sense to speak of Atlanticist sides of communist ideology, the party apparatus, and its most effective weapon, the KGB.
This was most clearly and fatally revealed in the last stages of the Soviet regime, when the great Eurasian state was destroyed from above by renegades of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and by the efforts of some of the USSR’s KGB employees, who en masse defected to serve the geopolitical enemy.
 See footnote 
 This is connected with the separation of socialism’s form from its content, which is discussed in footnote 
 The Hegelian tradition in Marxism corresponds to the traditionalist content of communist ideology. The transition to Kantianism – revisionism in essence – is actually a retreat from the anti-bourgeois, anti-liberal, and anti-Atlanticist line.