Eurasianism and the Sacred State

Episode Narrative

In 1991, the world witnessed a seismic shift in the landscape of politics and ideology. The collapse of the Soviet Union marked not just a geopolitical restructuring but also opened a profound philosophical vacuum. This was a moment of great uncertainty for the Russian people. With the iron grip of Soviet ideology fading, many sought new frameworks for national identity. In this search, a diverse tapestry of ideas began to emerge. Some turned to Eurasianism, an ideology advocating for Russia's unique position between East and West. Others sought solace in the rich, spiritual heritage of Orthodox Christian thought, seeing it as a sturdy alternative to the encroaching tide of Western liberalism.

Amidst this philosophical backdrop, a figure began to rise: Alexander Dugin. By the mid-1990s, Dugin had emerged as a prominent intellectual force, gaining attention for his radical critique of Western modernity. His writings fused elements of Eurasianism with a vision that advocated for a multipolar world order. For Dugin, Russia was not merely a nation; it was destined to assume a mantle of civilizational leadership, an idea that resonated deeply in a society yearning for clarity and purpose.

At the same time, the echoes of earlier intellectual traditions resurfaced. Ivan Ilyin, a philosopher exiled during the 1920s, saw a revival of his ideas, as his works gained traction among the conservative circles of the 1990s. Ilyin's thoughts on national order, spiritual renewal, and the concept of the sacred state spoke to many in a country grappling with the implications of a newly unshackled identity. His writings were republished and circulated widely, influencing not only academics but also policymakers who were beginning to reshape the political landscape.

The adoption of the Russian Constitution in 1993 marked a key transition, signaling a philosophical shift toward a strong presidency and centralized authority. Scholars observed this move as a deliberate response to the chaos of the early 1990s, a nod to Ilyin’s ideas of order and hierarchy. The political landscape was fast changing, and the search for stability became paramount. In this context, the Russian Orthodox Church began to reassert its influence under the leadership of Patriarch Alexy II. The Church championed the concept of "Russkiy Mir," or the Russian World, envisioning it as a spiritual and cultural sphere unifying Russian-speaking peoples.

As the remnants of the Soviet past faded, a distinct idea of Russian identity began to take shape, echoing the ideas that Dugin had started to outline. When Vladimir Putin rose to power in 1999, he inherited a discourse increasingly focused on Russia's “special path,” or "osobyi put’." This narrative emphasized a historical mission that transcended Western-style democracy, instead celebrating traditional values and spiritual depth. This philosophical undercurrent sought not just to restore order, but to redefine what it meant to be Russian.

In the early 2000s, Dugin’s work "Foundations of Geopolitics" emerged as a controversial text, especially in military academies and conservative intellectual circles. Its call for the creation of a Eurasian empire and rejection of Atlanticism was a radical articulation of a new vision for Russia. The idea that Russia could be a leader amongst nations, particularly in contrast to a unipolar world dominated by the West, held a particular allure.

By 2008, the Russian Orthodox Church further institutionalized these ideas with the launch of the “Russkiy Mir” Foundation, aimed at promoting Russian language and culture abroad. This initiative reflects a broader ambition to position Russia not merely as a country, but as a cultural and spiritual empire that offers a distinct alternative to Western norms.

The subsequent years saw an evolution in the nature of Russian governance. By 2012, the notion of “sovereign democracy” took hold among Russian political thinkers. This concept uniquely blended nationalism with conservatism, underpinned by Ilyin’s philosophy of national self-determination. It was a vision tailored to strengthen state sovereignty, embodying the belief that Russia's identity and values should not merely mimic those of the West.

In 2013, during a key address at the Valdai Discussion Club, Putin articulated a vision of "Civilizational Realism." This rhetoric protested against what he deemed the moral decay of Western liberalism. It resonated with the ideas championed by Dugin and echoed the teachings of the Orthodox Church, framing Russia as a bulwark of traditional values. This ideological synthesis was positioning the nation as a defender of something divine and enduring against an ever-changing, often chaotic modern world.

Fast forward to 2014, the annexation of Crimea represented more than a mere territorial claim; it was a deeply symbolic act. The Church and conservative thinkers framed the event not as an aggression, but as a restoration of Russia’s historical and spiritual unity. This intertwining of national pride and religious duty magnified the sense of purpose that had been building since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In 2016, the Russian government took further steps to institutionalize these ideas, passing laws that banned “non-traditional” religious groups while promoting “traditional values.” This legislative shift underscored the growing influence of conservative philosophy in state policy — a shift highlighting how philosophical discourse had begun to permeate the very fabric of governance.

By 2018, the Russian Orthodox Church had solidified its place as a key player in shaping national identity. The Church’s leaders frequently invoked the "Russkiy Mir" concept in sermons, framing it as not just a cultural ethos but a spiritual obligation. This narrative had become a powerful tool in unifying a diverse population around a shared vision of identity.

In 2020, the Russian Constitution underwent amendments, reflecting the increasing entrenchment of conservative ideals in the governance of the country. References to “faith in God” and “traditional values” marked a formal integration of these philosophies into the legal framework of the state. It was a declaration of intent — a statement that the new Russia was not just a political entity, but a sacred mission rooted in the souls of its people.

The geopolitical landscape shifted dramatically with the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Russian leaders, employing a blend of Eurasianist, Orthodox, and nationalist rhetoric, justified the conflict as a defense of Russia’s civilizational mission. It became evident that the ideas of Dugin, Ilyin, and the Orthodox Church had seeped into the justifications for military action, illustrating how deeply intertwined philosophy and statecraft had become.

Throughout the 2010s and into the 2020s, Dugin’s ideology gained renewed prominence. His calls for a multipolar world were echoed in the corridors of power, shaping Russia's stance on the international stage. The narrative of a Russia set apart from the West became a self-fulfilling prophecy, reinforcing a worldview where Western influence was not only rejected but deemed harmful.

This resurgence of “traditional values” in education and media led to a renaissance of interest in Ilyin’s works. Books once lost in exile found their way into school curriculums and public readings, re-establishing the philosopher’s ideas within the collective consciousness of the Russian people. By 2024, the Russian Orthodox Church launched initiatives to create a network of “spiritual centers,” designed to foster national unity and spiritual renewal.

In these centers, the ideas of a sacred state and a unified Russian identity took root, becoming a living testimony to the influence of conservative philosophy in contemporary society. The philosophical landscape during this period became increasingly characterized by a tension between Western liberal ideals and the burgeoning nationalist, religious thought. The latter began to dominate, shaping public discourse and influencing political life in increasingly profound ways.

As we reflect on this journey, we are left to ponder the impact of this convergence between religion, nationalism, and philosophy. What does it mean for a nation to redefine itself through the lens of history and spirituality? As Russia charts its course in a complex and often hostile global landscape, these questions linger, asking us to consider how identity is not merely forged in the fires of conflict but also in the quiet moments of philosophical contemplation — a mirror reflecting the deepest desires and fears of a people searching for meaning in a world of relentless change.