The social perspective National-Bolshevism isn’t constituted out of Class, Race, Sex or similar Collective models which is being mythologized by the ideologies with these mentioned aspects as dogma. National-Bolshevism is the total anti-dogmatic theory existing, but isn’t at all ultra-individualistic. Instead of Collective generalizing, the foundation of National-Bolshevism’s social starting-point and world-view is Geopolitics. National-Bolshevism can be described as an idea of ideologizing Geopolitics (which basically is political/military/ethnical theory out of Geographical perspectives), just as National Socialism politized Race, and Marxist theory ideologized the development of the Proletariat. Geopolitic is therefore the core basis of National-Bolshevism.
The ideologized Geopolitic theory that is National-Bolshevism, is that Europa and Asia (where 80% of all Humanity lives) is the heart of the world. During the recent Centuries, this heartland has been transferred from the epicentrum to the periferi, thus giving way for a world order based on ‘Atlanticist’ ideals (Merchantship, Capitalism and Liberalism); ideals which have corrupted the unique cultures of the world and blended them into a single mess, which generally can be described as Materialistic Mammon-worshipping Capitalism and the materialistic culture attached to it. Therefore National-Bolshevik Geopolitics want to revert this trend, thus bringing the heartland (Europa and Asia) into the epicentrum once again with it’s ancient, idealistic and spartan cultures.
This may sound a little Utopian, but National-Bolshevism as an ideology presents a clear path to reach this goal: the union and merging of Europa and Russia into a Geopolitical and economical block – Great Europa/State Eurasia – to oppose America and it’s materialist Cosmopolitanism. The political aim of National-Bolshevism is therefore Revolution on the social, regional, political and economical level in Eurasia (‘Eu’=Europa, ‘rasia’=Russia) on a global scale; the National-Revolutions in all countries in the spectrum from Gibraltar to Vladivostok.
The sociopolitical ideology of National-Bolshevism can be traced to these Geopolitical thoughts. National-Bolshevism isn’t Racist, because Eurasia consists of many different races, nations, religious streams and ethnicites. However; National-Bolshevism is preservant, and opposite to the Liberal mono-cultural agenda, and is therefore pro-preservation of the unique ethnical, national and religious entities in Europa and Russia under the shield of the Eurasian union block. The whole conception National-Bolshevism is based on Nationalism (the national independence and preservation) and Bolshevism (the social, political and economical symbiose of nations in unions) with the European-Russian block in focus.
Because National-Bolshevism is the anti-thesis of Capitalism and all it’s Liberal-materialist values, it’s core values are Socialist and Traditionalist. From this point of origin National-Bolshevism uses the Hegelian triad ‘thesis+anthesis=synthesis’ to formulate a clear, distinctive National-Bolshevik political philosophy. National-Bolshevism isn’t Communist, Fascist, Democratic or anything else, instead it take these anti-thetic ideologies and systems and mix them to form a new Socialist soup. For example, one of these ‘mergings’ is Lenin’s NEP market socialist policy, which very well could be combined with Fascism’s Corporativist idea on an ideological level. National-Bolshevism break the ideological isolationism by combining ideals of opposite ideologies, thoughts and idea traditions, thus forming a synthesis philosophy.
The idea tradition of National-Bolshevism can be traced almost totally to F.W Hegel’s philosophy (and those philosophical schools he was influenced of). Hegel can be said to be the founder of modern political idealism, with his metaphorical idea of a ‘geist’ manifesting itself in Human existing, awaiting the right moment to manifest itself and form the Absolute: the End of History. Hegel developed the modern Dialectics, a metaphilosophical school which teaches that the world is driven by conflicts of different kinds. A thesis (as example the Feudal society) alsters the reaction of an anti-thesis born out of the thesis (in this example, the gathering of merchants in communities [towns]), which in the long term form a synthesis of the thesis and the anti-thesis (a society where landownership isn’t the only wealth, but merchantship and trading too, thus leading way to bourgeousie societies and exploration). At one point in history, there will be a Final Synthesis; when the ‘geist’ has found itself and all factors which form the triad ‘thesis-antithesis-synthesis’ has been nullified. Karl Marx was a Left-Hegelian, and interpret this ‘geist’ as Class struggles through history, with the Absolute as the classless Communist utopia where there would be no more class conflict, thus ending the Dialectic triad. According to Marx, the whole history is driven by the essence of Class struggle – esoteric economical laws manifesting physically. There is however another strait of Hegel’s thoughts except of the Left-Hegelians/Materialistic Marxism. Hegel himself believed that the Prussian state was this Absolute, and he was a traditionalist and conservative opposed to the Enlightment ideals. From this source the Fascists brought much of their ideas, such as pre-Enlightment ideals, worship of the strong state and fixation in technology. The Fascist analogy of the materialistic-economical Dialectical development is technology. Fascism’s fascination with technology (manifested through the proto-Fascist artistic school called Futurism) originates in the belief that it’s technology which drive the history forth. It wasn’t Class struggle which gave way to Man’s Enlightenment emancipation, but the advance of technology and the formation of the Industrial revolution and abolishment of the Feudal anachronism, which in term forced the creation of totally new social and moral values.
Through this thread of relation between Communism and Fascism, National-Bolshevism in turn pick up different thesises from both ideologies, apparently anti-thetic to eachother, and merge them into a up-to-date synthesis on a philosophical level and places them into the basic National-Bolshevik Geopolitical world-view.
This is how National-Bolshevism is formed.