Back in the late 19th century, there were two anthropologists, as it was to be called, who, by all rights were humanist progressives, namely Madison Grant and Arthur De Gobineau, from the United States and France respectively, who wrote two separate treatises on the subject of race. Grant, a New Yorker, who would not be alive to witness what would befall his beloved city a century later, also specialized in zoology and conservationism. De Gobineau, a historian and landed aristocrat of French nobility, was also a novelist and writer of travelogues. Both insisted, by their own admission, that there was a wide gulf between people such as the MENA peoples of the middle east, the black Africans, the East Asians, and the Caucasians of Europe and North America, with Gobineau not being quite fond of the latter. regardless their separate masterworks, The Coming Race, by Grant, and Discourse On The Inequality Of The Races, by Gobineau, set the standard for how people can (and should) view the different races.
Enter Franz Boas, the so-called “Father Of American Anthropology” who suggested, by his own research that cultures had no “higher” or “lower” forms and everything must be presented through the lens of those who lived under their own culture, a very solipsistic view of society. Since race was not determined by biology, in his defense, there was no such thing as “high culture” since every culture interacted with one another at different epochs in history and every day life. This was an issue for people such as Grant and Gobineau who saw that cultures were at their zenith when they were allowed to develop on their own terms, and for conveniences’ sake saw Europeans at the helm of this development. Franz Boas held a very much “noble savage” view of mankind, and while this kind of philosophical development had its roots in the French enlightenment, Jean-Jacques Rousseau had his reasons to criticize the involvement of institutions in the lives of man, his idea that man was completely removed from violence is a bit too utopian, as violence shows its head within the civilized world of the city, the rural farmtown and something as insidious as the African jungle by use of modern fielding techniques, surveys if you will, of on-site empircal observation. Not only did Boas ruin the idea of race having utmost importance in the natural sciences, his students (most notably Margaret Mead) also inflicted damage by insisting that ancient societies even had equality between the genders. How laughable! Now I’m sure matriarchal societies probably existed, but not to the extent that Mead did. Hobbes was right in this regard, go to any underdeveloped country (We’ll pick Congo) and look at the abject carnage! maybe Miss Mead could’ve joined them. Ok, thats pretty morbid but still. To this day anthropology has never fully recovered. Shulamith Firestone, a radical feminist who died of starvation, since she thought the source of all oppression was the family unit, would be having a field day at the amount of degeneracy we deal with today. One that might be fought against by one Alexander Dugin. however…he is not clean of hands.
Alexander Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory not only is full of Heideggerian insight but is marred heavily by its reliance on Boasian anthropology. Going by his approach, man must make his peace with nature, as “being in the world”. Nevermind that deep ecology has been compromised by the elites tracing back to Thomas Malthus all the way to, ahem, Greta Van Thunberg. So its no wonder people like Alexander Dugin hold this man in such high regard, considering his main gripe with America is a race-based issue, namely, that Russia, in his own eyes, is less racist than America. This is a non-sequitur, and lacks an objective purpose as to what he’s trying to achieve with these statements. None of his polemical argumentation has a basis in fact when it comes to this particular subject, other than to look good in the eyes of the (undoubtably) liberal media. Less pandering and more volkisch is what should be desired and its really none of his business what we do with our minorities.
Enter Franz Boas, the so-called “Father Of American Anthropology” who suggested, by his own research that cultures had no “higher” or “lower” forms and everything must be presented through the lens of those who lived under their own culture, a very solipsistic view of society. Since race was not determined by biology, in his defense, there was no such thing as “high culture” since every culture interacted with one another at different epochs in history and every day life. This was an issue for people such as Grant and Gobineau who saw that cultures were at their zenith when they were allowed to develop on their own terms, and for conveniences’ sake saw Europeans at the helm of this development. Franz Boas held a very much “noble savage” view of mankind, and while this kind of philosophical development had its roots in the French enlightenment, Jean-Jacques Rousseau had his reasons to criticize the involvement of institutions in the lives of man, his idea that man was completely removed from violence is a bit too utopian, as violence shows its head within the civilized world of the city, the rural farmtown and something as insidious as the African jungle by use of modern fielding techniques, surveys if you will, of on-site empircal observation. Not only did Boas ruin the idea of race having utmost importance in the natural sciences, his students (most notably Margaret Mead) also inflicted damage by insisting that ancient societies even had equality between the genders. How laughable! Now I’m sure matriarchal societies probably existed, but not to the extent that Mead did. Hobbes was right in this regard, go to any underdeveloped country (We’ll pick Congo) and look at the abject carnage! maybe Miss Mead could’ve joined them. Ok, thats pretty morbid but still. To this day anthropology has never fully recovered. Shulamith Firestone, a radical feminist who died of starvation, since she thought the source of all oppression was the family unit, would be having a field day at the amount of degeneracy we deal with today. One that might be fought against by one Alexander Dugin. however…he is not clean of hands.
Alexander Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory not only is full of Heideggerian insight but is marred heavily by its reliance on Boasian anthropology. Going by his approach, man must make his peace with nature, as “being in the world”. Nevermind that deep ecology has been compromised by the elites tracing back to Thomas Malthus all the way to, ahem, Greta Van Thunberg. So its no wonder people like Alexander Dugin hold this man in such high regard, considering his main gripe with America is a race-based issue, namely, that Russia, in his own eyes, is less racist than America. This is a non-sequitur, and lacks an objective purpose as to what he’s trying to achieve with these statements. None of his polemical argumentation has a basis in fact when it comes to this particular subject, other than to look good in the eyes of the (undoubtably) liberal media. Less pandering and more volkisch is what should be desired and its really none of his business what we do with our minorities.
