«A vision of the future» of multipolar world order: a look through the optics of danilevsky’s civilization philosophy

1. Modern world history is distinguished by the struggle for the establishment of a just multipolar world, and the BRICS countries play a leading role in it. At the current phase of this struggle, the need to develop a theory of multipolarity becomes obvious.

It is not enough to declare that the unipolar world order headed by the United States, which replaced the bipolar one after the breakup of the USSR in 1991, is collapsing. It is necessary to theoretically justify why this process is objective and irreversible. This will allow civilization countries that claim to be new centers of power in the multipolar world order of mankind to stand on a solid scientific and theoretical foundation: more solid than the one on which the USSR stood.

The creative heritage of the great Russian thinker Nikolai Danilevsky can provide us with invaluable assistance in solving this problem, and it has such great scientific potential that its generalization into Civilizational Philosophy naturally arises.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has referred to Danilevsky’s main work, “Russia and Europe”, several times. At a meeting of the World Russian People’s Council in 2018, he emphasized: “… it is impossible to imagine the history of mankind without the unique civilizations as India, China, Western Europe, America and many others… And here I want to remind the words of the outstanding Russian thinker of the 19th century Nikolai Danilevsky: «…No civilization can be proud to represent the highest point of development…». Today, the comprehension of such a complexity of civilizations development serves as a fundamental basis for a multipolar world and for defending the principles of international law.”

Western civilization, which is controlled by the Anglo-Saxons (USA and UK) who have seized hegemony in it, is an obstacle to the establishment of a multipolar world order. It is the West, both in past history and in the present, that is the source of all world crises and wars and leads humanity to the establishment of the dictatorship of liberal-globalist forces seeking to eliminate God-established ethnocultural diversity.

1. Danilevsky’s civilizational philosophy is innovative, since it destroys the mainstream paradigm of the perception of world history as history divided into supposedly universal Ancient, Middle, Modern and Recent histories of one common humanity, that successively passes through primitive communal, feudal, capitalist and other socio-economic forms.

This artificial paradigm is the theoretical basis of the Doctrine of the Unipolar World, of a world dominated by the West. Scientists of the German-Roman civilization misappropriated to their civilization the entire history of Greece and Rome as its Ancient history. At the same time, Europe identified with its history the history of all mankind. The Middle history of mankind supposedly begins from the 5th century, after the conquest of Rome, the New history — from approximately the 15th century, after the fall of Constantinople and the Great Geographical Discoveries, and the Newest history — from the 19th — early 20th centuries.

Danilevsky’s civilizational historiosophy asserts that world history is a set of histories of cultural-historical types (civilizations) developing in different places and at different times — types, each of which has its own Ancient history (Ethnographic grade); Middle history (State grade); New history (Civilization grade) and Contemporary history (Post-civilization grade). At the same time, Progress does not consist in the unilinear movement of all civilizations in one direction (set in practice by Western civilization), but in the original development by each civilization of its own special talents. Thus, the category “Progress” implies originality!

It is to be remarked that that even the Marxist theory, which played such a huge role in world history in the twentieth century, is not innovative, since it proceeds from the artificial paradigm of one common humanity as a subject of world history, which it proposed to consider as the history of a sequential change of the socio-economic formations of this “one humanity” (ignoring that in some countries there was no slavery at the basis of the socio-economic system, for example in China, which perhaps owes it to its enormous historical longevity, according to Danilevsky’s remark).

III. Danilevsky’s civilizational philosophy, as a theory of a multipolar world, is beneficial to absolutely all civilizations except the Western one, since it knocks out from under its feet the ground for theoretical justification of the claim to global leadership and the establishment of a unipolar world order.

No modern civilization has such a claim anymore. The unipolar world order system (or Globalization) began to be established by the West throughout the world in the 15th–16th centuries since the time of the Great Geographical Discoveries and resulted in the cruel world colonial system, which became a colossal resource source of development for it. This is due to determined by the typical features of the Folk Beginnings of Western civilization: individualism of the Main type of western personality manifested itself in the organization of all spheres of People’s life on the principles of competition between individuals (in politics, in culture, in socio-economic sphere) and lies at the basis of capitalism with its market competition, which turned into a commodity even human personality; violence manifests itself in foreign policy as the aggression language and as absolute lack of of the language of peace; materialism manifests itself as the pursuit of unlimited consumption of material goods, as establishing this consumption as a primary development objective.

It must be borne in mind that Western civilization has a coherent National Civilization ideology, although not written down in the form of the “CPSU Program”, but dispersed in various nooks and crannies of domestic legislation and in the so-called “international law”, which, in fact, was formed as an instrument for upholding the interests of Western civilization.

In the 20th century this monopoly was destroyed by Russia, which existed in the legal form of the USSR. With the collapse of the USSR, the unipolar hegemony of the West, led by the United States, was established. Today, before our eyes, processes are underway to establish a multipolar world order.

Danilevsky’s civilizational philosophy consists of several sections: The creation concept of the universe, based on the idea of the Christian teaching (and of other Abrahamic religions) about the world and humanity; The theory of the natural system of science as a new theory of knowledge; Theory of cultural-historical types (Civilization historiosophy); Natural political economy. We will consider some provisions of Civilization historiosophy that can serve as a theoretical justification for the necessity and inevitability of a multipolar world order and formulate the conclusions arising from these provisions.

1. The basic provisions of Civilizational Historiosophy (or the theory of Cultural-historical Types), reflecting objectively existing phenomena, are as follows (in total, we identify more than 100 of these provisions, taking into account the development of Danilevsky’s teaching, but we will name only the 12 most important for revealing the topic of the report):
2. There is no single common humanity as a subject of the Geopolitical period of world history;
3. Cultural-historical types (civilizations) and their civilization- and state-forming peoples are subjects of world history of the Geopolitical period.

These are, arranged in order of their historical age, the existing cultural-historical types, which are the main geopolitical players: Chinese, Indian, Arab, Jewish, Iranian, Turkic, German-Roman, Russian-Slavic and others, the identification of which must be carried out through joint efforts. Despite the fact that the German-Roman type (aka Western) is a mixed cultural-historical type (the ethnogenesis of modern Romance peoples occurred under the influence of German Folk Beginnings), it is still a single cultural-historical type, which includes the Anglo-Saxon countries — USA and Great Britain, since historically their civilization- and state-forming people is the English New Germanic people. The division of Western civilization into two — German-Roman (European) and Anglo-Saxon, already quite often declared — is not scientific, since it has no historical basis, and therefore is counterproductive for the foreign policy of civilization countries that claim to be the new centers of a multipolar world. Only the hypothesis of the separation of part of the Romance peoples of South and Central America into a new cultural and historical type seems to be a justified scientific hypothesis. The study of the history and condition of the peoples of South America, Africa, Indonesia, etc. in order to determine their civilizational identity should be a special topic of research.

3. Civilizations carry out their historical movement under the influence of the Ethnocultural code, embedded in the Ethno-cultural-religious-historical Folk Beginnings of the civilization- and state-forming peoples that determine their identity
4. The Folk Beginnings of each civilization have their own distinctive typical features; their manifestations remain unchanged throughout its history. For example: individualism, violence and materialism of the Popular Beginnings of Western Civilization; collectivism, mercy and contemplation of the Folk Beginnings of Russian civilization;
5. Folk Beginnings can not be transmitted, just as the soul of one person can not be transmitted to another.
6. Peoples form cultural-historical types in event of affinity of their languages, if they have outgrown the state of infancy. But these peoples can reveal all their original talents only upon achieving political independence;
7. 7. The driving force for the development of civilization is the Energy of social creative forces, which is composed of of the energy of passionate creative individuals; The energy of Social creative forces accumulates at the Ethnographic and State grades of development and is spent irrevocably at the Civilization grade;
8. Civilizations and civilization- and state-forming peoples go through a number of grades in their development: Ethnographic grade (with the task of ethnogenesis of affined tribes), State grade (with the task of ethnogenesis of the state-forming people and defending their statehood); Civilization grade (with the task of implementing original Progress in one or another sphere of the People’s life); Post-civilization grade (with the task of parsimonious expenditure of the remaining People’s energy with the aim of preserving historical life for as long as possible); all grades of development can be indefinitely long, but the grade of civilization is short-term and lasts 400-600 years;
9. The state is a form or a condition of the historical movement of a civilization- and state-forming people; the state has been delegated the monopoly right to use force in order to ensure the protection of life, freedom, dignity, property of citizens, including the right to national life (identity), freedom, dignity and national property;
10. Any civilization- and state-forming people becomes a political Nation at a certain grade of historical movement, even if there are no other peoples on its territory. This is required by the sharp complication of civil relations at the State grade and especially at the Civilization grade.
11. The main task of the development of any civilization is the implementation of its Original Progress in a sphere (or in several spheres) of National life for which it has special original abilities (example: The Greeks achieved perfection in art; the Jews — in the religious sphere (Christianity); Romans — in the political sphere; Western civilization — in art, science, industry and political spheres), or ensuring a harmonious combination of various spheres.

At a meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club on October 27, 2022, Vladimir Putin expanded on this provision: “And I want to quote here the words of the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky, who believed that progress does not consist in everyone going in the same direction, to what some of our opponents are pushing us — in this case, progress would soon stop, says Danilevsky, — but in “strolling all over in all directions the entire field that constitutes the arena of historical activity of mankind.”

12. The criterion of the effectiveness of public administration is the organization of the historical movement ensuring parsimonious expenditure of the social creative forces Energy. This task is met by the Principle of Self-Development of the Nation, its essence is in organizing the historical movement of the civilization- and state-forming People-Nation in a way that provides maximum harmonization of the will and desires of the state with the will and desires of the individual citizen and the entire Civil Society, enshrined legally and implemented in practice: at the Civilization and Post-Civilization grades of development, the state form of society must limit itself, giving way to various institutions of Civil Society. At the same time, upholding political independence and cultural and humanitarian sovereignty remains the obvious task of the state. A positive strategy of national development can only be implemented on the basis of the Principle of Self-Development of the Nation. The principle of Self-Development of the Nation is natural for effective development and for achieving the greatest possible Progress in various spheres of life for which the people have special abilities.

As we see, these basic provisions of Civilizational Historiosophy are essentially basic principles of the internal policy of states and determine its natural continuation in foreign policy.

1. The use of Civilizational philosophy as a social theory of a multipolar world (which it is!) will allow new centers of power — original civilization countries — to gain a new face in their foreign policy, powerfully declaring in the international arena, right up to the UN, the demand for the protection of their national-traditionalistic interests and take a consolidated position on a number of topics, the right to deal with which is today monopolized by Western countries.

In the second half of the 20th century, after the end of World War II, the United States became the leader of Western civilization. It is they who structure so-called international law in such a way that it may serve them as an instrument for the implementation of their national interests only.

The most typical example of this is the system of international payments based on the US national currency — the dollar, which gives them enormous competitive advantages and allows them to establish a new type of neo-colonial relations with all countries that are within the US zone of influence. The overall trend of a declining share of the dollar in international calculations is developing naturally today, primarily due to the transition to national currencies.

Let’s see what initiatives can become the face of the public foreign policy of countries defending a new multipolar world order, when using Civilizational Historiosophy as a scientific theory of multipolarity.

5.1. The human rights doctrine is a typical example of the US using international law to its advantage: the US constantly interferes in the internal affairs of indigenous countries using the accusation of human rights violations as a pretext for intervention.

1. The main international document defining “human rights” is the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948. In total, there are about 50 different documents.
2. Basic human rights belong to the so-called Natural human rights: the right to life, freedom, honor, dignity, the right to one’s own property. All other rights written down in the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights derive from these basic rights.
3. The human right to preserve one’s ethnocultural identity (the right to one’s own unique ethnic identity) is not enshrined in a separate article of the Universal Declaration of 1948. Several decades later, the UN recognized this right only for national and ethnic minorities (“Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities» of December 18, 1992) and «indigenous peoples» (UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007).
4. The USSR, which actively took part in the drafting of the Declaration, was not able to lobby for the inclusion of such an article in the Declaration, since, according to its state ideology, it denied the primacy of the ethnocultural division of humanity into distinctive civilizations (cultural-historical types), and saw as the primary division of the world history division into various socio-economic formations and classes. Because of this, the USSR lost the ideological war by the very fact of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (although it apparently contributed to the inclusion in it of a number of social articles and provisions on a person’s duty to society).
5. The Declaration of Human Rights is a striking example of an international document composed on the basis of the Western paradigm of “one humanity” as a subject of world history. Therefore, “international law”, written by Anglo-Saxon scriptwriters, proceeds a priori from the duties of this supposedly whole humanity towards indigenous and small peoples. At the same time, the main screenwriter and director — the United States — arrogated to themselves, in relation to other civilizations, the right to judge on issues of compliance with these “human rights”, naturally, excluding themselves from supervision.
6. In general, the Declaration has become a convenient international document for the United States to use as an instrument for the destruction of undesirable original states. To this end, a number of her ideas were developed into a coherent ideological structure that allows the West, led by the United States, to pursue a policy of depriving peoples and their states of their cultural and humanitarian sovereignty, arbitrarily designating as violators of “human rights,” “freedom and democracy” those whose destruction is demanded by their national interests.

CONCLUSION: The human rights doctrine ignores the original ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity of Civilizations, and in an underhand way proceeds from the assertion of the existence of a certain “universal-globalist” culture. The only beneficiary of this is Western civilization and the promotion of its interests is vigilantly looked out for not only by official state institutions, but also by the top of the national elite, united in such an entity as the “deep state.”

5.2. A natural harmonious form of transformation of the Doctrine of Human Rights in the light of Civilizational philosophy and of the tasks of establishing a multipolar world order.

1. The existing Doctrine of Human Rights does not contain any reference to the main human right – the right to preserve one’s ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity;
2. The rights of various ethnic minorities (indigenous peoples), enshrined in various kinds of documents, are used by the West for one purpose: to create conditions for the weakening of civilization- and state-forming peoples of original Non-Western civilizations;
3. We should talk about the rights of civilization- and state-forming peoples of all existing historical civilizations to preserve their ethnocultural identity, and not just about their responsibilities towards small nations. At the same time, the obligations of these small peoples should appear to study the culture and language of the civilization- and state-forming peoples.

Then, the policy of the PRC in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region would be perceived very differently: first of all — as a legitimate policy of solidarizing the Chinese Nation through educating the Uyghurs on the basis of Chinese culture and the language of the civilization- and state-forming people. It would remain to assess the degree of preservation of the original culture of this Turkic people and their language, which is an absolute requirement of Civilization historiosophy for the preservation of the ethnocultural diversity of humanity.

4. Western civilization, led by the United States, has today already crossed its own border of civilizational security: the constant emphasis primarily on the material rights of the “deethnicized person” has led today to the establishment of new human rights to LGBT identity and to the imposition of it both domestically and to other nations in its foreign policy in the form of the ideology of aggressive LGBT nationalism. If previously claims were made to undesirable countries as accusations of violating human rights to freedom and democracy, today claims are already being made in connection with violations of the rights to public LGBT identity;
5. There is no doubt that the West’s imposition of LGBT identity is a deliberate course of liberal globalists seeking to establish world domination based on the education of a new world LGBT elite and the replacement of the national identity of traditional peoples with LGBT identity, the replacement of the Ideology of Traditionalism with the Ideology of Immoralism, the core of which is LGBT nationalism.
6. The existing Doctrine of Human Rights is a doctrine of the rights of a non-national person. It must be transformed into the DOCTRINE OF RIGHTS OF CIVILIZATION- AND STATE-FORMING PEOPLES of all existing historical civilizations and their states aimed at preserving of their distinctive ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity.
7. Preservation by the state-forming peoples of their distinctive identity is the only way to preserve traditional national states, since the national state is the only possible condition of society of any state-forming people, which can protect both the state-forming people itself and small nations included to his state from violations of basic natural human rights. There is simply no other way.
8. Citizens-representatives of national minorities should have the same rights as representatives of state-forming peoples who created their political Nations. But also they should have duty to study the culture and language of the civilization- and state-forming People-Nation.
9. THE DOCTRINE OF THE RIGHTS OF CIVILIZATION- AND STATE-FORMING PEOPLES is the only true justification for the DOCTRINE OF A MULTIPOLAR WORLD and can be developed and submitted for discussion at the UN for the adoption of the relevant Declaration, which will protect not only all NATION-STATES that today advocate a new multipolar world order, but also A TRADITIONALLY-MINDED PART (we believe that the numerically predominant one) OF THE PEOPLES OF THE WESTERN CIVILIZATION. This will give other civilizations — the new centers of a multipolar world order — powerful arguments for cooperation with the institutions of Civil Society of the German-Roman civilization, bypassing their official state structures, that is, to pursue a policy that is asymmetrical to the one that the West is pursuing today in relation to other countries due to its leadership in developing such called international law. Nation-states today advocating the establishment of a multipolar world order can and must seize the initiative in the international arena just as the USSR sought to do (and achieved significant success in doing so). Only such a policy, a policy based on a new social teaching — Civilizational historiosophy and philosophy, can lead to success in establishing a multipolar world and will push back the END OF HISTORY, towards which we are being rapidly prompted by liberal globalists born in the depths of Western civilization.

5.3. Examples of possible use by the BRICS countries of Civilizational Philosophy as their own theory of a multipolar world, opening up new opportunities for equal dialogue with Western civilization, which strives to establish a unipolar world order.

1. The topic of “democracy” should be addressed not only through the rights of a citizen, but also through his duties towards society and the state;
2. The theme of “human rights” is being supplemented by the rights of an individual belonging to his civilization- and state-forming people to ethnocultural identity (today this norm is valid only for indigenous and small peoples)
3. The climate agenda is supplemented by the criterion of the level of consumption per capita in a particular civilization;
4. The topic of family planning is addressed through the right and obligation to preserve the traditional values of a particular civilization;
5. The topic of LGBT identity and freedom to promote non-traditional values is considered as an ideology of Immoralism and LGBT nationalism, which civilization countries with a traditional way of life have every right to oppose;
6. The topic of “open society” should be addressed through the criterion of harm or benefit to the traditional values of a particular civilization;
7. The topic of indigenous and small peoples should be addressed not only in the context of their right to preserve their ethnic identity, but also in the context of their obligation to study the culture and language of the civilization- and state-forming People-Nation, of which political body they are a part;

And so on …

5.4. The civilizational approach to the transformation of the comprehension of human rights has a special significance for the legal and ideological protection of the Russian People-Nation.

The rights of the Russian people to preserve their ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity have been violated over the past 300 years (during the Romanov period — through the inoculation of Europeanism, which divided the Russian people into two hostile peoples: Russian Europeans and Russian common people. This was the main reason for the revolution of 1917. The task of overcoming the division of the Russian people was solved in in Soviet times, but on the basis of a temporary Soviet form of identity, which had all the signs of evolution, though not completed, into a Russian original form).

This, by the way, is the difference between China and Russia: the success of Deng Xiaoping’s reforms is due primarily to the absence of a similar phenomenon of inoculating a foreign culture, for example, Japanese, and to the absence of “Japanizing” Chinese, while in Russia there was a phenomenon of “Europeanizing” Russians even in Soviet period. This is why the Kosygin reforms of the 1960s, which could have become a precursor to the Chinese reforms, failed: two problems at once had to be overcome. One is a problem of ethnocultural identity, and the other is a common one, associated with a crisis of management and of property relations.

5.5. An opportunity opens up to create a new language of international communication based on categories arising from Civilizational philosophy (historiosophy): these categories should be introduced into scholarly discourse of the countries of “Non-Western civilizations” and used at various levels of communication — from official diplomacy to contacts through the institutions of Civil Society.

The crucial tasks in the struggle for a multipolar world order should be: the revision of the international language of communication configured by Western civilization to suit its national interests, and the use of new categories that meet the interests of all civilization countries interested in implementing the idea of multipolarity. If we do not do this, we will always lose through the usie of the terms embeded in our minds such as “human rights”, “democracy”, “liberalism”, “free market”, “open society”, “family planning” and others, since the political Western elites read into them only meanings that allow them to violate the ethno-cultural and humanitarian sovereignty of countries they do not like, and to prepare the ground to deprive them of their political independence.

The main categories that need to be to be put in the foundation of a new language of equal intercivilizational dialogue should be taken at least from the “Basic Provisions of Civilizational Philosophy” (section IV) and supplemented as the necessary consensus is achieved. The most important categories, the use of which will give impetus to the creation of a new language:

1. “Cultural-historical type”, “Civilization”, “Civilization country”, “Countries of Western civilization”, “Countries of non-Western civilization”;
2. “Civilization- and state-forming People-Nation”;
3. “Ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity of the civilization- and state-forming People-Nation”;
4. “Traditionalism”, “Ideology of Traditionalism”;
5. “Immoralism”, “LGBT identity”, “LGBT nationalism”, “Ideology of Immoralism”;
6. “Self-development of civilizations”;
7. “Indigenous Progress of Civilization”;

5.6. The principles of foreign policy of the countries of Non-Western civilizations — new centers of the multipolar world can be built on the approval of the Basic Provisions of Civilizational Philosophy, can take into account the recent experience of international coexistence in a bipolar world order and comprise:

1. Mutual respect of the history of civilization- and state-forming peoples, precluding the education of new generations on the basis of distrust and hostility towards each other.
2. School textbooks, without avoiding historical truth, should be aimed at instilling feelings of friendship, good neighborliness and peacefulness towards all peoples. This principle is the primary marker for determining policy both at the level of State relations and relations between Civil societies of different countries;
3. Mutually respectful attitude towards declared national interests, with rejection of the diplomatic language of aggression and the desire to achieve satisfaction of one’s interests at the expense of other peoples;
4. Public declaration of vision of one’s geographical security zones with mandatory provision of a rationale based on the history of their original historical movement;
5. The ideology of Traditionalism as a transformation of the ideology of Internationalism: solidarity with the institutions of Civil societies of all civilization- and state-forming peoples-nations in the struggle for their social and political rights, for the preservation of traditional values, for the right to preserve their ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity;
6. Democratism – recognition of the rights of small states to fully equal relations with great powers;
7. The struggle for peace against imperialist wars of all types (using all types of conventional, nuclear, chemical, bacteriological and other weapons): a consistent policy to eliminate all military bases, biological laboratories, military logistics, etc. outside one’s original geographic security zones;
8. Anti-colonialism, the struggle for the freedom of peoples from colonial dependence and from other, neo-colonial forms of dependence. Decisive rejection of the imperialist policy of enslavement of peoples and racial oppression. The struggle for the complete elimination of the Western civilization colonial and neo-colonial system, built today on the dominance of the US dollar in international trade and on the threat of military reprisal;
9. Denial of Progress, perceived as a uniform movement of all humanity towards one global goal and often identified with scientific and technological progress: maintaining interstate relations that contribute to the fullest implementation of the Indigenous Progress of civilization- and state-forming peoples in harmony with the high spiritual nature of man and on the basis of realisation of their original talents for the establishing of one or another sphere of the People’s life and for their most harmonious combination with each other;
10. Smart environmental policy based on the rejection of unlimited and uncontrolled growth of gross domestic product (GDP), smart limitation of risks deriving from uncontrolled scientific and technological progress (STP), the policy of “smart autarky”, etc.: in a word, the transition to a new system of organization of production and consumption, preventing the “squandering away” of the resources of the planet Earth and spontaneous labor migration;
11. Establishing open and truthful relations between Civil societies — both directly between citizens as a result of the right to free movement, and between all institutions of Civil Society (NPOs, NGOs, etc.);
12. Strong denial of “subterraneous diplomacy”— stealthy negotiations and agreements conducted and concluded by governments in secret from their Civil Societies and their institutions, that is, from their peoples;
13. Peaceful coexistence of all existing cultural and historical types (civilizations) — of their states, political systems and unions, civil societies of civilization- and state-forming peoples-nations;
14. Non-interference in the internal affairs of any state;
15. The struggle for the observance of natural human rights: the right to life, freedom, honor and dignity, one’s own property — but supplemented by the human right to one’s national life, freedom, honor and dignity and national property;
16. Supplementation of the Doctrine of Human Rights by the Doctrine of the rights of civilization- and state-forming peoples to preserve their ethno-cultural-religious-historical identity;
17. Mutual responsibilities of civilization- and state-forming peoples on the one hand, and “small and indigenous” peoples, on the other, ensuring participation in the life of the Civil Political Nation on an equal basis of representatives of all “small” and “indigenous” peoples (while ensuring the right to save their culture) and their observance of their obligation to study and know the culture of the civilization- and state-forming Peoples-Nations;
18. Rejection of the Western liberal-globalist project for the development of mankind based on the erasure of the Ethnocultural diversity of peoples and their higher structures – cultural-historical types (civilizations) and on the establishment on Earth of a single deethnicized culture on the basis of the Ideology of Immoralism; preservation of the traditional social system of a person’s location: “person-family” — “society-people” — “nation-civil society-national state”; thereby resisting to the establishment of a new simplified globalist system of human social location: “person-society-state”, bypassing the institutions of family and nationality, with further inevitable evolution into the “person-world state” system, where Civil society itself is also bypassed.
19. The struggle for the preservation of the God-given Ethno-cultural-religious-historical diversity of humanity — humanity, the history of which has always been the history of cultural-historical types (civilizations) developing in different places and at different times;
20. Every possible promotion of civil society institutions that contribute to the implementation of the principle of self-development of nations.

CONCLUSION:

The category “Civilization” and the expression “Civilization approach” derived from it finally shifted from the sphere of scientific discourse to the social and political sphere. Unfortunately, the objective elucidation of this category is often bypassed and, judging by further rhetoric, it is absolutely wrongly perceived as a certain state of universality and sameness of culture, achieved at the present stage of world history by all peoples. As a matter of fact, the term “civilization” is synonymous with the term “cultural-historical type.” Danilevsky’s civilizational philosophy can (which means it must!) become the theoretical basis of the Doctrine of a Multipolar World. Danilevsky’s followers are Western scientists Spengler, Toynbee and others: their works fit into the Civilizational paradigm for explaining world history.

List of attached maps and their explication.

Map No. 1. WESTERN CIVILIZATION BEFORE THE GREAT GEOGRAPHICAL DISCOVERIES (1492).

Map No. 2. GLOBAL (POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, CULTURAL) DOMINANCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION AS THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GENESIS OF THE UNIPOLAR WORLD (1550)

The West begins to establish its global dominance in the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries. Prior to this, the West’s first serious attempt to subjugate the Arab civilization — the Crusades – failed: its resources prouved to be insufficient to provide the conquest of the highly developed Middle Eastern society.

Next objects of colonization were the peoples of Africa, South and Central America. Spain and Portugal became the first European colonial powers. By the middle of the 16th century the Spanish managed to colonize the territories of modern Central America, including Mexico, northern South America (part of the territory of modern Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Western Argentina), and the Portuguese gained a foothold on the east coast of Brazil) and occupied the eastern coast of Africa south of the Horn of Africa and the coast of modern Congo and Angola. In addition, the Portuguese penetrated into China, founding the colony of Ma-kao (Aomen), and into Ceylon.

While colonizing other peoples, the peoples of the German-Roman (Western) civilization not only subjugated them and deprived them of their political independence, but also practiced cultural discrimination and genocide. The West spread its dominance through the destruction of other civilizations and their cultural genocide. Thus, the Aztec and Mayan civilizations in America were completely destroyed.

The brown color shows Europe and its colonies, the lines show the main directions of European colonization.

Map No. 3. GLOBAL (POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, CULTURAL) DOMINANCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION AS THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GENESIS OF THE UNIPOLAR WORLD (1660)

At the end of the 16th — beginning of the 17th centuries England, France and the Netherlands joined the struggle for colonies. By the middle of the 17th century Spain and Portugal retained their colonies in America and Africa, expanding them deeper into the continent. England created colonies in North America (the east coast of the USA, the coast of Massachusetts, Delaware, Virginia, North and South Carolina), France gained territories in Canada (Quebec), the Netherlands — the coast of the modern state of New York, where they founded the city of New Amsterdam (modern New York). In Africa, the Dutch seized the southern coast of the African continent (southern South Africa). In the Asia-Pacific region, the Dutch strengthened their position on the islands Sumatra, Java, and other islands of modern Indonesia, as well as created a colony on the west coast of New Guinea. The Portuguese, Dutch, British and French obtained trading posts on the island of Hindustan.

Politically and economically, the European powers competed with each other, but in cultural and civilizational terms they acted in concert, declaring local traditions, customs, and culture to be backward at best, and at worst barbaric and wild, and therefore were subject to complete annihilation and replacement with European standards of behavior. But even those of local residents who accepted Western civilization were considered by the European colonialists as second-class citizens. It should be noted that the Romance peoples (Spaniards, Portuguese, French), while instilling their customs, culture, religion and forms of behavior did not practice purposeful mass genocide of non-Western peoples, meanwhile the German Protestant peoples, primarily the Anglo-Saxons, the ancestors of modern WASPs, often aimed for the physical destruction of the rebellious peoples, as they did with Indians in North America.

The brown color on the map shows Europe and its colonies; the dotted lines show the main directions of European colonization.

Map No. 4. GLOBAL (POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, CULTURAL) DOMINANCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION AS THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GENESIS OF THE UNIPOLAR WORLD (1750)

By the middle of the 18th century significant changes took place in the balance of might between the colonial powers. Spain and Portugal do not seek to acquire new colonies, but to preserve the old ones. Portugal colonized Brazil, having retained its possessions in Africa, but lost the island Ceylon in Asia, which passed to the Dutch. The Netherlands in the second half of the 18th century became a second-rate European power and retained colonies in Indonesia and New Guinea, but lost all possessions in America and was forced out of India. Spain colonized the southern states of the modern USA — Texas, New Mexico, California, Philadelphia. Important changes occurred as a result of the Seven Years’ War of 1756-1763. England became the number one colonial power. France was ousted from Canada and handed it over to England, India (with the exception of a few small trading factories), and in North America handed over Louisiana to Spain. England gained complete dominance in North America, where it controlled most of the continent? and in India.

At this time, the West begins to practice not only colonial, but also cultural expansion. Thus, as a result of Peter’s reforms, a cultural and civilizational split occurs in Russia: its elite becomes Europeanized, adopts the basic values ​​of Western civilization, actually turns into a people separated from the bulk of the population. As a result, the elite and the people represent separate communities, often hostile to each other.

The West begins to exert a considerable influence, albeit not as big as on Russia, on the Ottoman Empire, whose elite, while not yet Westernized, is nevertheless subject to the gradual cultural influence of the West. At the same time, the Ottoman Empire, unlike Russia, falls into a strong financial, industrial and technological dependence on the West, which has a beneficial effect on the further development of Western cultural and civilizational influence in the country.

Brown color shows Europe and its colonies, dotted lines show the main directions of European colonization. Light brown shows countries that did not fall into political dependence on the West, but were under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, were economically and technologically dependent on it.

Map No. 5. GLOBAL (POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, CULTURAL) DOMINANCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION AS THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GENESIS OF THE UNIPOLAR WORLD (1850)

By the middle of the 19th century the global landscape has changed a lot. Spain and Portugal lost all their American colonies, they became independent states. England had to recognize the independence of the United States. The struggle for colonies concentrated in Asia and Africa. However, the states of Latin America, having received formal political independence, were economically and culturally completely dependent on England and the United States. Political independence was also rather relative, since in fact Spain was replaced by Anglo-Saxon countries and they prevented the formation of a distinctive Latin American civilization. During this period of time, the British completely subjugated India, the French carried out colonial expansion in North Africa (Algeria), and penetrated into Central Africa. The British begin to penetrate the south of the African continent. During the First Opium War, the British entered China. The cultural and civilizational influence on other original civilizations — Russia, Turkey, Iran, China — is increasing.

The brown color shows the West and its colonies; the dotted line shows the main directions of European colonization. Light brown shows countries that did not become politically dependent on the West, but were under strong cultural and civilizational influence and were economically and technologically dependent on it.

Map No. 6. THE ACME OF THE UNIPOLAR WORLD (1914)

The eve of the First World War is the pinnacle of Western global dominance. In the 60-70s of XIX century New European states appeared — Italy and Germany, and actively involved in the acquisition of colonies. By the beginning of the First World War, the whole territory of Asia and Africa was divided between the European powers. Latin America was in complete economic, industrial, technological and cultural dependence on Western countries.

The United States also joined the struggle for colonies and ousted the Spaniards from Cuba and the Philippines. West Africa, Madagascar, Algeria, and Tunisia were taken by France, and Morocco was shared with Spain. France owned part of Indo-China (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia). The Netherlands retained Indonesia and New Guinea. Germany gained colonies in South-West Africa (modern Namibia), West Africa (Cameroon, Togo) and East Africa (Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda). Italy captured Tripoletania and Cyrenaica (modern Libya) and Ethiopia, which were previously part of Turkey. The largest colonial power in the world (over 39 million sq. km) was Great Britain. It owned Canada in North America, Australia, India, part of Indochina (Burma, Thailand, Malaysia), most of New Guinea, in Africa — Nigeria, Sudan, South Africa (modern South Africa).

During this period, new forms of colonial dependence emerged — semi-colonies and protectorates. A semi-colony is a state that has retained political independence, but is economically completely dependent on an European country or group of countries. For example, Türkiye, China and Iran were semi-colonies. A protectorate is a state that lost not only its financial and economic sovereignty, but also the right to conduct an independent foreign policy., For example, Egypt and Afghanistan were British protectors. Before World War II, 1/3 of the world’s population lived in colonies, 1/3 in semi-colonies and protectorates. The only state in Asia and Africa that was never a colony and was not dependent on foreign states was Japan. However, Japan, like Russia, underwent Westernization and was heavily influenced by the West.

The First World War was a civil war of Western countries for dominance within Western civilization, but a number of countries that did not belong to the West were involved in it — Russia, Turkey, Japan, China.

The brown color shows the West and its colonies. Light brown shows countries that did not fall into political dependence on the West, but were under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, were economically and technologically dependent on it.

Map No. 7. THE GENESIS OF THE BIPOLAR WORLD (1917-1950)

The October Revolution in Russia launched the “red” project of globalization. It has engulfed non-Western societies and created a real threat to the global dominance of Western civilization. Before the Second World War, only the USSR and Mongolia were in the communist project and “held the line”, opposing the West with the semi-colonial states dependent on it who besieged them from all sides. Meanwhile, the Soviet communist project was at that time the only alternative to Western expansion and found support in many non-Western societies. At the same time, the Kemalist Westernization of Turkey takes place, which actively acquaints itself with Western civilization.

After the Second World War the collapse of the colonial system began. England, France, the Netherlands and Portugal have so far retained their colonies. In parallel, the formation of a bipolar world system was taking place, representing a global confrontation between the Western and non-Western world based on liberal-bourgeois and communist (and close to it) ideologies, respectively. By the middle of the 20th century the communist project had significant success in Eastern Europe and Asian countries.

The brown color shows Europe and its colonies. Light brown shows countries that did not fall into political dependence on the West, but were under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, were economically and technologically dependent on it. The USSR is shown in crimson as the ancestor country of the communist global project, in red – countries that actively supported communist ideology, in pink – countries that oppose the West and profess an ideology close to communist.

Map No. 8. BIPOLAR WORLD IN THE FORM OF CONTRAPOSITION BETWEEN THE CAPITALIST AND SOCIALIST SYSTEMS (1970-1980)

The collapse of the colonial system lasted almost 4 decades. Most countries in Asia and Africa gained independence in the 50-70s. The last colonial empire, the collapse of which occurred in the mid-70s. Portugal granted independence to Angola and Mozambique in 1974-1975 and is considered the last colonial empire. However, Britain retained its power over a number of colonies until the 80s. Thus, Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia) and Vanuatu gained independence in 1980, and Brunei in 1984. At the same time, the West expands forms of neo-colonial dependence to those territories that, under the bipolar world order, it managed to keep in its sphere of influence.

1970s — first half of 1980s are the years of the utmost confrontation between the West and non-Western societies within the bipolar world.

The brown color shows the West. Light brown shows countries that support the West and are under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, economically and technologically dependent on it. The USSR is shown in crimson as the ancestor country of the communist global project, in red – countries that actively supported communist ideology, in pink – countries that oppose the West and profess an ideology close to communist.

Map No. 9. UNIPOLAR WORLD (REVENGE OF WESTERN GLOBAL DOMINANCE) (1990-2000)

After the USSR’s disintegration and the collapse of the bipolar system, the West made a comeback, establishing global dominance, spreading the idea of ​​the “end of history” — the triumph of liberal-globalist values ​​in the world. Russia and the countries of the former USSR and Eastern Europe fell to the core into the sphere of influence of Western civilization. The Chinese, Indian and Iranian civilizations, as well as Cuba, offered some resistance to the West. Western civilization, led by the United States, outspreads to new territories forms of neo-colonial dependence using hypocritical theses on the introduction of democracy and the final elimination of colonialism. During this period, in 1997, Britain gave back Hong Kong to China, which it had owned since 1841. In December 1999, Portugal returned to China Macau (Maomen), owned by it since 1557.

The brown color shows the West. Light brown shows countries that support the West and are under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, economically and technologically dependent on it. Red and pink show countries that, to the best of their ability and ability, resisted the establishment of a unipolar world and the global dominance of Western civilization.

Map No. 10. MULTIPOLAR WORLD IN THE FORM OF DISTINCTIVE CIVILIZATIONS (2022)

An anti-globalist revolution begins on the basis of countries’ awareness of their civilizational identity, which is incompatible with the idea of ​​global dominance of the West.

The brown color shows the West. Light brown shows countries that support the West and are under its strong cultural and civilizational influence, in economic and technological dependence on it. States that actively support the idea of ​​establishing a multipolar world and oppose the global dominance of Western civilization are shown in white.