Aleksandr Dugin (Norwegian Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Aleksandr Dugin" in Norwegian language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank Norwegian rank
20th place
44th place
849th place
2nd place
7th place
33rd place
5th place
13th place
12th place
35th place
66th place
187th place
low place
low place
1,116th place
1,033rd place
28th place
77th place
346th place
1,996th place
146th place
443rd place
460th place
1,598th place
99th place
311th place
269th place
638th place
1,108th place
1,784th place
84th place
643rd place
1st place
1st place
1,353rd place
1,602nd place
low place
low place

bbc.com

bloomberg.com

cnn.com

elpais.com

english.elpais.com

focus.de

foreignpolicy.com

  • Kovalev, Alexey (26. august 2022). «Putin’s New Martyr for the Russian Cause». Foreign Policy (på engelsk). Besøkt 2. september 2022. «The Kremlin has turned a dead propagandist into a symbol of the war—and a call to kill more Ukrainians.» 

gwu.edu

www2.gwu.edu

  • Aleksandr Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics Dunlop, John B Demokratizatsiya 12.1 2004. web.archive.org fra archive/GWASHU_DEMO_12_1/John Dunlop Aleksandr Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics.pdf original sitat:The ethnic Russian people, in contrast, are seen as "the bearers of a unique civilization." 47 Russians are a messianic people, possessing "universal, pan-human significance" (189). The Russian people, Dugin insists, can serve only as the core ethnos of a vast empire: "[T]he Russian people (i.e. Russia) never made its goal the creation of a mono-ethnic, racially uniform state" (190). Such a distorted view represents "the Atlanticist line masking itself as 'Russian nationalism'" (213). "A repudiation of the empire-building function," Dugin warns sternly, "would signify the end of the Russian people as a historical reality, as a civilizational phenomenon. Such a repudiation would be tantamount to national suicide" (197). Deprived of an empire, Russians will "disappear as a nation" (251). The sole viable course, in Dugin's view, is for Russians to rebound from the debacle of 1989-1991 by recreating a great "supra-national empire," one in which ethnic Russians would occupy "a privileged position" (251-252). The result of such a rebuilding effort would be "a giant continental state in the administration of which they [Russians] will play the central role" (253). This ethnic model, Dugin notes, is quite similar to that of the former Soviet Union. In order to facilitate the recreation of a vast Russian-dominated continental empire, Dugin advocates the unleashing of Russian nationalist sentiment, but of a specific type. "This [Russian] nationalism," he writes, "should not employ state but, rather, cultural-ethnic terminology, with a special emphasis on such categories as 'Narodnost" and 'Russian Orthodoxy'" (255). Religious sentiment, Dugin urges, should be placed front and center: "Russians should realize that they are Orthodox in the first place; [ethnic] Russians in the second place; and only in the third place, people" (255). (...) On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible. Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and Trans-Carpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.

izborsk-club.ru

newstatesman.com

newsweek.com

newyorker.com

  • Gessen, Masha (26. august 2022). «The Mysterious Murder of Darya Dugina». The New Yorker (på engelsk). Besøkt 2. september 2022. «....either the National Republican Army is a new group using terrorist tactics, and it killed Dugina to show what it’s capable of; or this is, in effect, a marketing move, a rush to take credit. In either case—whether the National Republican Army is real or fictional—this version is probably inching closer to the truth. Dugina likely died at the hands of non-state actors, probably a newly created group or a newly radicalized person» 

nrk.no

nymag.com

  • Danner, Chas (22. august 2022). «Who Really Killed Darya Dugina?». New York Magazine (på engelsk). Besøkt 23. august 2022. «The bombing has reportedly stunned Moscow’s political elite and raised many eyebrows among Kremlin watchers abroad.» 

nytimes.com

providencemag.com

  • The West Overestimates Aleksandr Dugin’s Influence in Russia providencemag.com George Barros 2019 sitat:Correlation should never be conflated with causation. Many casual Russia observers and armchair Kremlinologists ascribe grand power to the controversial philosopher using speculative evidence based in hearsay. While Dugin does enjoy some publicity in Russia, his personal eccentrics and appearance of influence, coupled with Putin’s aggressive foreign policy, facilitated the plausible narrative in a Western media echo chamber that Dugin is Putin’s strategist. This myth has grown grossly out of proportion. As a result, Dugin is granted far more credibility than deserved. Proponents of the "Dugin the mastermind" argument need to substantiate their claims with evidence and ask themselves how effective, if at all, is Dugin at influencing Kremlin elites and Russian foreign policy.

spiegel.de

theguardian.com

web.archive.org

  • Aleksandr Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics Dunlop, John B Demokratizatsiya 12.1 2004. web.archive.org fra archive/GWASHU_DEMO_12_1/John Dunlop Aleksandr Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics.pdf original sitat:The ethnic Russian people, in contrast, are seen as "the bearers of a unique civilization." 47 Russians are a messianic people, possessing "universal, pan-human significance" (189). The Russian people, Dugin insists, can serve only as the core ethnos of a vast empire: "[T]he Russian people (i.e. Russia) never made its goal the creation of a mono-ethnic, racially uniform state" (190). Such a distorted view represents "the Atlanticist line masking itself as 'Russian nationalism'" (213). "A repudiation of the empire-building function," Dugin warns sternly, "would signify the end of the Russian people as a historical reality, as a civilizational phenomenon. Such a repudiation would be tantamount to national suicide" (197). Deprived of an empire, Russians will "disappear as a nation" (251). The sole viable course, in Dugin's view, is for Russians to rebound from the debacle of 1989-1991 by recreating a great "supra-national empire," one in which ethnic Russians would occupy "a privileged position" (251-252). The result of such a rebuilding effort would be "a giant continental state in the administration of which they [Russians] will play the central role" (253). This ethnic model, Dugin notes, is quite similar to that of the former Soviet Union. In order to facilitate the recreation of a vast Russian-dominated continental empire, Dugin advocates the unleashing of Russian nationalist sentiment, but of a specific type. "This [Russian] nationalism," he writes, "should not employ state but, rather, cultural-ethnic terminology, with a special emphasis on such categories as 'Narodnost" and 'Russian Orthodoxy'" (255). Religious sentiment, Dugin urges, should be placed front and center: "Russians should realize that they are Orthodox in the first place; [ethnic] Russians in the second place; and only in the third place, people" (255). (...) On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible. Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and Trans-Carpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.

worldcat.org