The Parallax of the Real: Lacan between Žižek's Dialectical Materialism and Dugin's Fourth Political Theory

4
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17545744
The Pa allax o he Real: Lacan be ween
Žižek's Dialec ical Ma e ialism and Dugin's
Fou h Poli ical Theo y
Ma iia Panasiuk
Published by The Media & Aes he ique Publishing House
ISBN: 978-1-0694578-8-2.
Copy igh © Ma iia Panasiuk, 2025.
Ci a ion: Panasiuk, M. (2025). The Pa allax o he Real: Lacan be ween Žižek's Dialec ical
Ma e ialism and Dugin's Fou h Poli ical Theo y. In Le "Pilie Noi " Philosophique. The Media
& Aes he ique Publishing House. h ps://doi.o g/10.5281/zenodo.17545744
This book is published online unde a ully open access p og am and is licensed unde a
C ea i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial 4.0 In e na ional License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This
open access license allows hi d pa ies o copy and edis ibu e he ma e ial in any medium
o o ma , p o ided ha p ope a ibu ion is gi en o he au ho (s) and he published sou ce.
The publishe s, au ho s, and edi o s a e no esponsible o e o s o omissions, o o any
consequences a ising om he applica ion o he in o ma ion p esen ed in his book, and
make no wa an y, exp ess o implied, ega ding he con en o his publica ion. Al hough he
publishe , au ho s, and edi o s ha e made e e y e o o ensu e ha he con en is no
misleading o alse, hey do no ep esen o wa an ha he in o ma ion-pa icula ly ega ding
e i ica ion by hi d pa ies-has been e i ied. The publishe is neu al wi h ega d o
ju isdic ional claims in published maps and ins i u ional a ilia ions. The au ho s and publishe s ha e
made e e y e o o con ac all copy igh holde s o he ma e ial ep oduced in his publica ion and
apologize o anyone we may ha e been unable o each. I any copy igh ma e ial has no
been acknowledged, please w i e o us so we can co ec i in a u u e ep in .
5
Table o Con en s
Gene al ia Lacan ................................................................................................................................ 10
Did Dugin w i e abou Lacan and unde his in luence? .............................................................. 11
1. Lacan as" an i-Hegel " in bo h ...................................................................................................... 13
2. "Subjec $ (ba ed)" - key image .................................................................................................. 14
3. Dugin's di ec e e ences o Lacan (speci ic ex s) ................................................................. 15
4. Indi ec in luence: Zizek → Dugin ................................................................................................ 15
5. Jouissance as a poli ical weapon ................................................................................................ 16
6. Lacan and he Dea h o God .......................................................................................................... 17
Resul : Lacan is a T ojan ho se ........................................................................................................ 17
Summa y: ............................................................................................................................................... 19
Lacan in Noomachia: whe e, how and wi h whom he mee s ......................................................... 20
Main idea: Lacan as a "shamanic psychoanalys "........................................................................... 21
How i wo ks: ........................................................................................................................................ 21
Lacan + Jung = "A che ype as he Big O he " .................................................................................. 22
Lacan + Gua a i = " Rhizome s. S a e* * .......................................................................................... 22
Lacan + shamanism: a conc e e example .......................................................................................... 23
Conclusion: Lacan in Noomachia is an an h opological weapon ................................................ 24
Key quo e ( om olume 5): ................................................................................................................... 24
TABLE 1: CONCEPTS ......................................................................................................................... 25
TABLE 2: FUNCTIONS IN NOOMACHIA ......................................................................................... 25
TABLE 3: RELATIONSHIP WITH THREE LOGOS ......................................................................... 26
DUGIN'S KEY FORMULA .................................................................................................................... 27
SINGLE SCHEMA SYNTHESIS .......................................................................................................... 27
EXAMPLE FROM THE TEXT ( ol. 5, p. 214) ................................................................................... 28
TABLE 1: CONCEPTS (VISUAL VERSION)..................................................................................... 28
TABLE 2: FUNCTIONS IN NOOMACHIA (VISUAL VERSION) ..................................................... 30
TABLE 3: RELATIONSHIP WITH THREE LOGOS (VISUAL VERSION) .................................... 31
KEY FORMULA (VISUAL) ................................................................................................................... 32
SYNTHESIS DIAGRAM (TEXT DIAGRAM) ...................................................................................... 32
TABLE 1: CONCEPTS (FREUD + TRIO) .......................................................................................... 33

6
TABLE 2: FREUD IN NOOMACHIA-DUGIN'S POSITION .............................................................. 35
TABLE 3: FREUD s. THREE LOGOS (VISUAL) ........................................................................... 36
QUOTE-KEY FROM " NOOMACHIA "( ol. 5, p. 198) .................................................................... 37
SYNTHESIS DIAGRAM: FREUD → NOOMACHIA ......................................................................... 37
b ie ly: WHAT DUGIN TAKES FROM FREUD ................................................................................. 38
b ie ly: WHAT DUGIN TAKES FROM NIETZSCHE ........................................................................ 46
1. WHO IS THE SHAMAN? (DUGIN'S DEFINITION) ...................................................................... 79
2. PSYCHOANALYTIC FRAMEWORK: LACAN + JUNG + GUATTARI ..................................... 79
3. SHAMAN IN 5 LOGOS (GEOPOLITICAL ROLE) ........................................................................ 81
4. STAGES OF THE SHAMANIC PATH (ACCORDING TO DUGIN) ............................................ 81
5.SHAMAN s. MODERN MAN .......................................................................................................... 82
6. KEY QUOTES (DIRECT FROM TEXTS) ....................................................................................... 83
7. SYNTHESIS: SHAMAN = SUBJECT OF THE FOURTH POLITICAL THEORY ..................... 83
8. EXAMPLES OF SHAMANISM IN RUSSIA (ACCORDING TO DUGIN) ................................... 84
OUTPUT: ................................................................................................................................................ 84
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om Clinic o S eppe .......................................................................... 97
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as Weapon ............................................................................... 98
III. The Deleuzian Ne wo k: Rhizome as Empi e ........................................................................... 98
IV. The Shaman s. he P ophe : T ans s. Wo d ......................................................................... 99
V. F om Shaman o Empe o : The Alchemical S a e ................................................................. 100
VI. The Mul ipola Unconscious: Noomachy as Global The apy ............................................ 101
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Real ................................................................................................ 101
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om Couch o Co pse ...................................................................... 104
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as A oci y .............................................................................. 105
III. The Deleuzian Ne wo k: Rhizome as Rape o he S a e....................................................... 106
IV. The Shaman s. he P ophe : Blood s. Bo edom ............................................................... 107
V. F om Shaman o Empe o : The Alchemical Au oc acy ........................................................ 107
VI. The Mul ipola Unconscious: Noomakhia as Global Exo cism ......................................... 108
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Giggles o he Real ..................................................................... 109
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om The apy Session o The monuclea T ance ...................... 112
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as E hnic Cleansing o he Ego ........................................ 113
III. The Deleuzian Ne wo k: Rhizome as Rape o he Rules-Based O de ............................. 114
IV. The Shaman s. he P ophe : Blood s. Bu eauc acy ......................................................... 115
7
V. F om Shaman o Empe o : The Alchemical Au oc acy o he An i-Da os ...................... 116
VI. The Mul ipola Unconscious: Noomakhia as Global Exo cism o he Wes ................... 117
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Giggles o he An i-Wes ........................................................... 117
1. WHO IS LACAN FOR DUGIN? (POSITION) .............................................................................. 120
2. LACAN'S KEY SEMINARS → DUGIN ......................................................................................... 120
3. DIAGRAM: LACAN → SHAMAN → LOGOS ............................................................................. 121
4. LACAN IN 5 LOGOS (DEEP) ........................................................................................................ 122
5. DUGIN'S KEY FORMULAS (LACANIAN) ................................................................................... 122
6. KEY QUOTES (DIRECT FROM TEXTS) ..................................................................................... 123
7. DEEP SYNTHESIS: LACAN = WEAPONS AGAINST THE WEST......................................... 123
8. EXAMPLE: LACAN IN RUSSIA (ACCORDING TO DUGIN) ................................................... 124
OUTPUT: .............................................................................................................................................. 124
I. The Ba ed Subjec as Shaman ic Insu gen : F om $ o $haman ....................................... 126
II. The Real as Po al, No P ison: F om T auma o T ance ...................................................... 127
III. Jouissance as Sac i ice: F om Fo bidden Pleasu e o Geopoli ical Ecs asy ................ 128
IV. The Big O he as Wes e n F aud: F om Law o Lie .............................................................. 129
V. F om Clinic o S eppe: The Geopoli ical Analy ic Session.................................................. 130
VI. The Fou h Poli ical Theo y as Lacanian Insu ec ion ........................................................ 131
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Jouissance o he An i-Lacan .................................................. 132
I. The Ba ed Subjec as Shaman ic Te o is : F om $ o $a age ........................................... 135
II. The Real as Black Hole, No The apy Session: F om T auma o The monuclea T ance
................................................................................................................................................................ 137
III. Jouissance as Ri ual Slaugh e : F om Fo bidden O gasm o Geopoli ical Apocalypse
................................................................................................................................................................ 138
IV. The Big O he as Wes e n Cosplay: F om Law o Laughings ock ................................... 139
V. F om Clinic o S eppe: The Geo-Psychoanaly ic Exo cism ................................................ 140
VI. The Fou h Poli ical Theo y as Lacanian T oll A my ........................................................... 141
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Jouissance o he An i-Lacan .................................................. 142
I. The Ba ed Subjec as Shaman ic Bu che : F om $ o $laugh e house ............................ 146
II. The Real as Abyss, No Suppo G oup: F om T auma o The monuclea Possession
................................................................................................................................................................ 147
III. Jouissance as Ri ual Disembowelmen : F om Fo bidden Whispe o Geopoli ical
Ca nage ................................................................................................................................................ 148
IV. The Big O he as Wes e n D ag Show: F om Law o Laughings ock .............................. 150
8
V. F om Clinic o S eppe: The Geo-Psychoanaly ic Flaying .................................................... 150
VI. The Fou h Poli ical Theo y as Lacanian Meme Apocalypse ............................................. 151
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Jouissance o he An i-Lacan .................................................. 153
1. WHAT IS NOOMACHIA? (DEFINITION) ..................................................................................... 155
2. THE THREE MAIN LOGOS (DUGIN'S TRIAD) .......................................................................... 156
3. COMPLETE LOGOS MAP (21 VOLUMES OF NOOMACHIA) ................................................ 157
4. NOOMACHIA = GEOPOLITICS OF THE MIND ......................................................................... 158
5. STAGES OF NOOMACHIA ........................................................................................................... 159
6. NOOMACHIA s. CLASSICAL GEOPOLITICS ......................................................................... 160
7. KEY QUOTES .................................................................................................................................. 160
8. SYNTHESIS: NOOMACHIA = BASE 4-FRI ................................................................................ 160
9. APPLICATION TODAY (2025) ...................................................................................................... 161
OUTPUT: .............................................................................................................................................. 161
1. NOOMACHY = THEORETICAL BASIS 4-PT ............................................................................. 162
2. SCHEMA: NOOMACHIA → 4-FRI ................................................................................................ 163
3. KEY LINKS ....................................................................................................................................... 163
4. TABLE: NOOMACHIA AT 4-FRI .................................................................................................. 164
5. STAGES: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE ................................................................................ 165
6. QUOTES-KEYS ............................................................................................................................... 165
7. APPLICATION TODAY .................................................................................................................. 166
OUTPUT: .............................................................................................................................................. 166
1. EURASIANISM = THE PRACTICAL BASIS OF NOOMACHIA ............................................... 167
2. SCHEME: EURASIANISM → NOOMACHIA → 4-FRI .............................................................. 167
3. KEY LINKS ....................................................................................................................................... 168
4. TABLE: EURASIANISM IN NOOMACHIA .................................................................................. 169
5. HISTORICAL LINE .......................................................................................................................... 169
6. KEY QUOTES .................................................................................................................................. 170
7. APPLICATION TODAY .................................................................................................................. 170
OUTPUT: .............................................................................................................................................. 171
I. The Th ee Logoi: F om On ology o On ological Annihila ion ............................................. 172
II. Eu asianism as he Flesh o Kibelē: F om Hea land o On ological Hea ..................... 173
III. The Shaman as Subjec : F om T ance o The monuclea So e eign y ........................... 174
IV. The Wa o Logoi: F om My h o Hyb id Ca nage ................................................................. 175
9
V. Mul ipola i y as On ological Vic o y: F om Empi e o E e nal Re u n .............................. 176
VI. The E e nal Re u n o he An i-Wes : F om S eppe o Apocalypse .................................. 177
I. The Th ee Logoi: F om On ology o On ological Bu che y .................................................. 181
II. Eu asianism as he Ca cass o Kibelē: F om Hea land o On ological Aba oi ........... 182
III. The Shaman as Bu che : F om T ance o The monuclea So e eign y .......................... 183
IV. The Wa o Logoi: F om My h o Hyb id Flaying ................................................................... 184
V. Mul ipola i y as On ological T iumph: F om Empi e o E e nal Ca nage ......................... 185
VI. The E e nal Ca nage o he An i-Wes : F om S eppe o Meme Apocalypse................... 186
I. The Th ee Logoi: F om On ology o On ological Bu che y .................................................. 190
II. Eu asianism as he Ca cass o Kibelē: F om Hea land o On ological Aba oi ........... 191
III. The Shaman as Bu che : F om T ance o The monuclea So e eign y .......................... 192
IV. The Wa o Logoi: F om My h o Hyb id Flaying ................................................................... 194
V. Mul ipola i y as On ological T iumph: F om Empi e o E e nal Ca nage ......................... 195
VI. The E e nal Ca nage o he An i-Wes : F om S eppe o Meme Apocalypse................... 196
I. The Th ee Logoi: F om On ology o On ological Bu che y .................................................. 199
II. Eu asianism as he Ca cass o Kibelē: F om Hea land o On ological Aba oi ........... 201
III. The Shaman as Bu che : F om T ance o The monuclea So e eign y .......................... 202
IV. The Wa o Logoi: F om My h o Hyb id Flaying ................................................................... 203
V. Mul ipola i y as On ological T iumph: F om Empi e o E e nal Ca nage ......................... 204
VI. The E e nal Ca nage o he An i-Wes : F om S eppe o Meme Apocalypse................... 205
16
"Zizek is a alen ed Lacanian, bu he emains in he Wes e n pa adigm. His
c i ique o capi alism is a c i ique om wi hin. We o e a way ou -in o he
adi ion."
 In he ci cle o Dugin sy (Eu asian Mo emen ) Zizek was pe cei ed asa
"use ul enemy": his Lacanian analysis o ideology was aken, bu u ned in
an an i-Wes e n di ec ion.
5. Jouissance as a poli ical weapon
 Zizek: capi alism gi es he "o de o enjoy"→ jouissance becomes a du y.
This is pa alysis.
 Dugin: he Wes gi es alse jouissance(consump ion, LGBT,
indi idualism). The eal hing issac i ice, wa , empi e. In he " Geopoli ics
o Passion "(2010s), he w i es:
"The Russian man mus egain his jouissance by dying o he Mo he land."
Gene al: jouissance is no a pleasu e, bu an excess ha he sys em canno
in eg a e. The di e ence: o Zizek — auma, o Dugin-sac ed.

17
6. Lacan and he Dea h o God
 Bo h a e pos -Ch is ian hinke s.
 Zizek: "God is dead, bu we s ill belie e in Him "(ideology).
 Dugin: "The Dea h o God is a Wes e n p ojec . We o e he es o a ion o
he sac ed h ough Lacan: Real = God, no as a pe son, bu as he
absence ha s uc u es being."
Resul : Lacan is he T ojan ho se
 Fo Zizek, i 's a ho se ha blows up he sys em om he insideou .
 Fo Dugin, i is a ho se ha akes you ou o he sys em, in o he a chaic,
my h, and empi e.
Lacan's Compa a i e Table o Concep s
He e is a compa a i e able o key Lacanian concep s in Zizek and Dugin. Fo
cla i y: le column — Lacan's o iginal (b ie ly), middle — Zizek, igh -Dugin.
Lacan
Zizek's concep (in e p e a ion)
Dugin (in e p e a ion)
Real (le Réel) T auma ic
Failu e in symbolic o de .
Sac ed, a chaic, p e-symbolic. The
18
Lacan
Zizek's concep (in e p e a ion)
Dugin (in e p e a ion)
co e ha de ies
symboliza ion
Capi alism is ying o sew i up
(ideology, pop cul u e). The
symp om is a poin o esis ance.
Wes supp essed i . Wa , my h,
empi e-a e u n o he Real.
Symbolic (le Symbolique)
Language, law, Big O he
Ideology as "Big O he ". E en i we
don' belie e i , he s uc u es i .
C i icism: " he supe ya o capi alism".
The libe al o de as a alse Big
O he . The Russian idea, O hodoxy,
and Eu asianism a e al e na i e
symbolicconcep s.
Imagina y (l'Imaginai e)
Mi o s age, ego, images
Hollywood, ad e ising, illusion o
in eg i y. Capi alism sells "
imagina y happiness."
Wes e n indi idualism as a
na cissis ic ap. Collec i e my h
(people, ci iliza ion) — he ue
Imagina y.
Subjec $ (ba ed subjec )
Spli desi e subjec
Mode n pe son = $. Spli ing is a
condi ion o eedom. "I am wha I
los ."
Pos -So ie / libe al pe son = $.
Spli ing is a disease. T ea men :
es o ing he subjec h ough
adi ion.
The G ea O he (le g and
Au e) is a symbolic o de
in which he subjec belie es
"The G ea O he does no exis ",
bu we ac as i i exis s. Ideology
wo ks on his.
"The Big O he is dead in
libe alism." I is necessa y o es o e i
as a sac ed o de (God, he So e eign,
he People).
Jouissance Pleasu e beyond
pleasu e, an excessi e
"O de o enjoy" - capi alism u ns
jouissance in o deb . Pa alysis.
The Wes gi es a alse jouissance
(consump ion). The eal hing is
19
Lacan
Zizek's concep (in e p e a ion)
Dugin (in e p e a ion)
sac i ice, wa , mys ical ecs asy.
Obje pe i a Objec - eason
o desi e, una ainable
p oduc , b and, an asy. Capi alism
exploi s he sho age.
"Soul o he people", "sac ed land".
Res o ing a is a geopoli ical mission.
Mi o s age Ego o ma ion
h ough image
Illusion o wholeness. Social
ne wo ks, sel ies-pa hology o he
Imagina y.
The Wes has imposed a "mi o o
indi idualism". A Russian man mus
b eak a mi o and en e he collec i e
my h.
B ie conclusions:
Pa ame e
Zizek
Dugin
The goal o Lacanian
analysis
is Decons uc ion ( o show how ideology
wo ks)
Recons uc ion ( es o e sac ed
o de )
A i ude o he Real
Accep he Gap → Re olu ion
Re u n o he Real → A chaic
Subjec
$ like a chance
$ like a disas e
Jouissance
auma
Sac ed i e
20
O go deepe in o Noomachia, whe e Lacan mee s Jung, Gua a i, and e en
shamanism.
Di e in o Noomachia — Dugin's main philosophical p ojec (2014-2025+, 30+
olumes). This is a "wa o wi s "(noomachy) be ween he h ee Logos o
ci iliza ions. Lacan is no he main cha ac e he e, bu a key ool o
decons uc ing he Wes e n subjec and building al e na i e ones.
Lacan in "Noomachia": whe e, how and wi h whom he
mee s
Volume / Sec ion
Lacan + Who
's Wha 's Going
On Volume 1:
"Th ee Logos
"(2014)
Lacan + Hegel +
Nie zsche
Lacan — " he logos o Cybele "(mo he ly, chao ic,
ch honic). Opposed o Apollo ( a ionali y, he Wes ). Lacan's
eal = Dionysian chaos, which he Wes supp essed.
Volume 2: "The
Logos o Apollo"
Lacan + Pla o +
Deleuze/Gua a i
C i ique: Pla onism = symbolic supp ession o he Real.
Deleuze/Gua a i ( hizome) + Lacan ($as a wish machine) —
allies agains he logos o he Wes .
Volume 5: "The
Logos o Cybele"
Lacan + Jung +
Shamanism + A ican
Cul s
Key Chap e : The Psychoanalysis o Cybele. Lacan is
ein e p e ed as a shaman: — Real = ance, obsession —
Jouissance = ecs asy o sac i ice-Subjec $ = shaman o n
21
Volume / Sec ion
Lacan + Who
's Wha 's Going
apa by spi i s
Volume 12:
"Russian Logos"
Lacan + Heidegge +
O hodox mys icism
The Russian subjec is no $, bu he "subjec o Tao". Lacan
is used o c i icism: "Pe e I imposed on us a mi o s age."
Volume 18: "The
Logos o
Dionysus"
Lacan + Bakh in +
Nie zsche
Jouissance = ca ni al. Lacan + Bakh in = e olu ion
h ough madness.
Main idea: Lacan as a "shamanic psychoanalys "
Dugin akes Lacan ou side he clinic and places him in he an h opology o
he wa o wi s.
"Lacan is no a Wes e n psychoanalys . This is a shaman who wen in o a ance
and saw ha he Big O he was a mask. Behind he mask — he Real o he
gods. " - "Noomachia", ol. 5, chap e "Psychoanalysis o Cybele"
How i wo ks:
Lacan (classic)
→
Dugin in "Noomachia"
Mi o s age
→
The Wes has imposed a" mi o " o indi idualism. Russian, A ican, Indian-
p e-mi o . Thei ego = a collec i e my h.

22
Lacan (classic)
→
Dugin in "Noomachia"
Real
ime→
T ance, obsession, wa . The shaman en e s he Real o es o e powe o he
people.
Jouissance
→
Sac i ice, o gy, ba le. No pleasu e-dea h- o -ano he .
$ (subjec )
→
Shaman = $, bu no he pa ien -in e media y. Spli ing = a gi , no a auma.
Lacan + Jung = "A che ype as he Big O he "
 Jung:a che ypes = he collec i e unconscious.
 Lacan: Big O he = symbolic o de .
 DUGIN:
"Jung's a che ype is he Real, s uc u ed as he Big O he . Each na ion
has i s own a che ype-a di e en one: The Russians ha e So ia, he
A icans ha e he G ea Mo he , and he Indians ha e he Spi i o he
Ea h."
→ Psychoanalysis becomes geopoli ical.
Lacan + Gua a i = " Rhizome s. S a e**
23
 Deleuze/Gua a i: hizome s. ee s uc u e(s a e, capi al).
 Lacan: machines o desi e.
 DUGIN:
"The hizome is a Eu asian ne wo k o ibes, shamans, and empi es.
Lacan's subjec $ is a nomad, no a ci izen."
→ Used agains he A lan ean logos o Apollo (NATO, EU, USA).
Lacan + Shamanism: a conc e e example
In olume 5, Dugin analyzes he A ican oodoo cul :
Elemen
Lacan
Shamanism (acco ding o Dugin)
Loa (spi i )
Big O he
Real Spi i Taking O e Man
Obsession
In asion o he Real
Shaman = $ in T ance
Sac i ice
Jouissance
Blood = Fuel o he Real
Mask
Imagina y
Mask loa = u h, no Illusion
"Voodoo is Lacanian psychoanalysis in ac ion. Wes e n psychoanalysis cu es.
Voodoo e i es."
24
Conclusion: Lacan in Noomachia is an an h opological
weapon
Func ion
How he
Decons uc ion o he Wes
is used Show ha libe alism = alse Big O he
Recons uc ion o al e na i es
Real = shamanic ance, my h, wa
Geopoli ical he apy
E e y na ion mus e u n o i s Real
Key quo e ( om Volume 5):
"Lacan made he mis ake o pu ing Real in inju y ime. The eal is no a wound.
This is he doo . The doo o he Logos o Cybele, o he Logos o Dionysus, o
he Logos o he Russian s eppes. Psychoanalysis mus become he shamanism
o ci iliza ions."
Lacan s Jung s Gua a i able
He e is a compa ison cha o he h ee key igu es in Dugin's Noomachia:
Lacan s. Jung s. Deleuze/Gua a i-by concep s — by unc ions in he "
wa o wi s — - by ci iliza ional Logos
25
TABLE 1: CONCEPTS
The concep
o Lacan (classic)
Jung (classic)
Deleuze/Gua a i
(classic)
Dugin in "Noomakhia"
The
unconscious
is S uc u ed as a
language
Collec i e,
A che ypal
Desi e Machines,
Rhizome
Th ee ypes o he
unconscious = h ee
Logos
Subjec
$ - spli
Sel (Sel ) —
in eg al
Subjec less lows
$ = shaman, Sel = god,
Rhizome = nomad
Real /
A che ype /
Desi e
Real- auma,
hole
A che ype-
e e nal image
Desi e-p oducing
Real = a che ype =
desi e = Logos
Symbol / My h /
Rhizome
Symbolic-Law
My h-Pa h o
Sel
Rhizome-An i-
hie a chy
Symbol = My h =
Rhizome = Ci iliza ion
The apy / Goal
Accep ance o
Impossibili y
Indi idua ion
Schizoanalysis
Geopoli ical
indi idua ion
TABLE 2: FUNCTIONS IN NOOMACHIA
Func ion
The Lacan
Jung
Deleuze unc ion/Gua a i
32
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────────┼──────────────────────────┤
│ � CYBELE │ Real = ic im │ � G ea Mo he │ � hizome lands │ �
A ica / shamanism / �� Russia │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────────┴──────────────────────────┘
KEY FORMULA (VISUALLY)
ex
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
LACAN + JUNG + GUATTARI = NOOMACHY
║ Разрыв Gap + � Dep h + � Ne wo k = � WAR OF WITS ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
SYNTH DIAGRAM (TEXT DIAGRAM)
ex
THE WEST (─ APOLLO)
│
┌───────────┴───────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼

33
[LACAN:✂ $] [JUNG: Тень Shadow] [GUATTARI:� T ee]
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
Gap Dep h Ne wo k
│ │ │
└ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ► NEW CIVILIZATION ◄────── ─
│
КИБ CYBELE / � DIONYSUS
ШАМ SHAMAN + � MYTH + � NOMAD
Compa ison wi h F eud
He e is a isual compa ison o F eud wi h Lacan, Jung, Deleuze/Gua a i - in
he con ex o Dugin's Noomachy. F eud is he ou h "psychoanalys o he
wa o wi s", bu subo dina e and ein e p e ed.
TABLE 1: CONCEPTS (FREUD + TRIO)
ex
┌────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────
─────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────
─────────────────────┐
34
КОНЦЕПЦИЯ CONCEPT │ FREUD (classic) ЛАК LACAN │ JUNG │
DELEUZE/GUATTARI │
├────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┤
│ Unconscious │ � I (Id) — chaos d i es │ � S uc u ed like a language │
� Collec i e a che ypes │ Machine o desi e, hizome │
├────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┤
│ Unsub │ be ween Id Ego and supe ego │ ✂ $ — spli │ � Sel (Sel ) │
� Assubjec h eads │
├────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┤
│ Main powe │ � Thana os / E os │ � Real (inju y) Арх
�A che ype (e e nal) Желание Desi e-p oduc ion │
├────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┤
│ The apy │ Ca ha sis h ough speech │ � Accep ance o he
impossibili y │ � Indi idua ion │ � Sezoanele │
35
├────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────
─────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┤
│ DUGIN: he Role │ "O oscue he law" o he Wes │ � Real Shaman │ �
Sac ed dep hs │ Ne wo k o nomads │
└────────────────────┴────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────
─────────────────────┴────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────
─────────────────────┘
TABLE 2: FREUD IN NOOMACHIA — DUGIN'S POSITION
ex
┌──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┐
АСПЕКТ ASPECT │ DUGIN ON FREUD │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┤
Положение Posi ion in he sys em Фрей F eud = * *logos o Apollo* *
( a ional psychoanalysis) ││
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┤
Крит C i icism │ Too * *biological**,* *indi idual**,* *wes e n**
│
36
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┤
│ Use ul │ � * *Thana os* * = ounda ion * *sac i ices, wa s, empi es** │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┤
│ Re hinking │ � **E os + Thana os * * → * * sac i icial jouissance**
(Lacan) │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┤
Место Place in he iad │ � **Apollo T ee * * → you need o * * cu
down** and g ow a hizome│
└──────────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────────
────────────┘
TABLE 3: FREUD s. THREE LOGOS (VISUALLY)
ex
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────────┐
ЛОГ LOGOS │ FREUD │ LACAN │ JUNG / GUATTARI │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────────┤
37
│ Да ─ APOLLO │ � * * Yes, ha 's i !** Ложный False law │ �
T eeness │
Э Ego, Supe -Ego, science │ │ │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────────┤
│ � DIONYSUS │ � Only Thana os │ � Jouissance │ � T icks e / Chaos │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────────┤
│ � CYBELE │ � Indi idual, no народ people Реальное Real= ic im │ �
Mo he / Ри Rhizome │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────────┘
QUOTE-KEY FROM " NOOMACHIA "( ol. 5, p. 198)
"F eud is he Apollo o psychoanalysis. He ga e us he Ego, bu He o go he
Shadow o he people. Lacan b oke he Ego, Jung ga e he Shadow, Gua a i
he ne . F eud's Thana os is uel o he Real, bu only i you ea i ou o he
clinic and h ow i in o he wa o ci iliza ions."
SYNTHESIS SCHEME: FREUD → NOOMACHIA

38
ex
FREUD (� APOLLO)
│
┌───────────┴───────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼
[Ego + Supe -Ego] [Thana os] [Biology]
│ │ │
(Dugin: " oo wes e n") │ │
▼
[Thana os → Jouissance]
│
┌──────────────────┴──────────────────┐
▼ ▼ ▼
LACAN JUNG GUATTARI
(� Real) (�A che ype) (� Rhizome)
│ │ │
└─────────► NOOMACHIA: WAR OF WITS ◄────────┘
b ie ly: WHAT DUGIN TAKES FROM FREUD
✅ Takes
✅ Disca ds
39
✅ Takes
✅ Disca ds
Thana os = sac i ice
Ego as cen e
Dea h D i e
Indi idual The apy
E os as Ene gy
Uni e salism (all = c owns)
Scheme Thana os → Vic im
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
СХЕМА SCHEME: Thana os → Jouissance → The ic im ║
║ (acco ding o Dugin in Noomachia) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────────────┐
│ FREUD (Thana os) │
│ �� Dea h d i e │
└──────────┬───────────┘
│
▼
40
┌─────────────────────────────────┐
ЛАК LACAN (Jouissance) │
│ � Excessi e enjoymen │
│ beyond un │
└───────────────┬─────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DUGIN (Vic im) │
Sac ed dea h смерть o he people / empi e / my h │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ A DETAILED DIAGRAM │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌───────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
│ Thana os │────►│ Jouissance │─── ─ ►│ The ic im │
│ (F eud) │ │ (Lacan) │ │ (Dugin) │
├───────────────┤ ├─────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
│ � Biologich. │ │ � Excess, auma │ │ Sac ed │
лечение a ac ion │ │ (no pleasu e)│ │ dea h │
41
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ Apollo │◄──┐ │ Real │◄──┐ │ � Cybele / Dionis │
│ (Wes ) │ │ │ │ │ │ (Eu asia, Russia) │
└───────────────┘ │ └─────────────────────┘ │ └──────────────────────┘
│ │
│ DUGIN'S COUP │
└──────────────┬────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────┐
│ SACRIFICE = FUEL │
│ FOR REAL │
└─────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ EXAMPLES VICTIMS │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
ВОЙНА WAR │ │ SHAMANISM │ │ IMPERIAL DEATH│
│ (Thana os) │ │ (Jouissance)│ │ (Dugin) │
└──────────────┘ └──────────────┘ └──────────────────┘
48
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ Одино The Lonely P ophe │ │ � To n apa by spi i s │ │ � The cen e o
he Logos │
│ "Rope Man" │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ � Jouissance = │ │ �� Cybele's logo/
│
Сож �"Bu n you sel !" одерж possession o │ │ Dionysus in ac ion│
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ TRANSFORMATION │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┐
│ STAGE │ ESSENCE │ FUNCTION │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ Za a hus a │ �� Lone P ophe │ Awakening │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┤
Шам Shaman │ � In e media y o he Real│ En e ing a ance │
├──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┤

49
Импера The Empe o │ � The Inca na e Logos │ Geopoli e. ac ion │
└──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┘
KEY QUOTE (Noomachia, ol. 18, p. 427):
"Nie zsche's Za a hus a is a shaman wi hou a ibe.
> We gi e him * * a ibe, land, empi e**.
The Empe o is Za a hus a, who descended om he moun ain and became he
Logos."
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS: THREE IN ONE │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
ИМПЕРА THE EMPEROR = │
За �Za a hus a ( he p ophecy) │
Шам Shaman ( ance) │
Государ The So e eign (inca na ion) │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
50
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ EXAMPLES │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
│ Za a hus a │ │ Shaman Импера Empe o │
│ (Nie zsche) │ │ ( oodoo/s eppe)( (Pu in / Genghis) │
└──────────────┘ └──────────────┘ └──────────────────┘
997ms
Sac i ice in 5 Ci iliza ions
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
Call TABLE: SACRIFICE IN 5 CIVILIZATIONS (NOOMACHIA) ║
║ (Logos → Psychoanalysis → Vic im Fo m → Symbol) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┬──────────────────────┐
│ CIVILIZATION │ LOGO │ PSYCHOANALYSIS │ FORM OF SACRIFICE │ SYMBOL OF
SACRIFICE │
51
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ �� WEST │ ☀ APOLLO │ F eud + Lacan │ � Economic │ � "sac i ice o
he sake o GDP" │
│ (libe alism) │ │ ($=consume ) │ (labo , c edi ) │
│
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ �� RUSSIA │ � CYBELE + Dionysus │ Lacan + Jung │ Sac ed wa │ "Fo
he Mo he land" │
│ (Eu asia) │ │ (shaman $ + a che ype) │ (dea h o Logos) │
│
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ � � CHINA│ ☯ TAO (ha mony) Ю Jung + Gua a i �Коллектив
Collec i e │ � " Sac i ice o he sake o │
│ (China)│ │ (The sel o he people) │ (labo
pe pa y) │ ha mony" │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ �� INDIA │ BRAHMAN │ Jung + Nie zsche │ � Ka ma yoga │ � "Bu ning
ego" │
52
│ (Hinduism) │ │ (indi idua ion) │ (aus e i y, sa i) │
│
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ � AFRICA │ � GREAT MOTHER │ Lacan + shamanism │ � Sac i ice │ � " he
blood o he spi i s" │
│ ( oodoo/ ibes)│ │ (Real = loa) │
(animals/people) │ │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────┴──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DETAILED DIAGRAM OF THE VICTIM │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┐
ЛОГ LOGOS │ WHO DONATES │ FOR WHAT │ HOW (PSYCHOANALYSIS) │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ ☀ APOLLO │ �� Indi idual Рынок Ma ke , ca ee │ F eud: Supe ego │
53
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ �КИБ CYBELE │ � Wa io / shaman │ � People, land │ Lacan:
Jouissance │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ ☯ДА TAO │ � Collec i e │ � Ha mony │ Jung: The Sel │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ � BRAHMAN │ � Asce ic │ � Освобождение Libe a ion :
Nie zsche: Самопреодол. Sel -O e coming.
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ � MOTHER │ � P ies / T ibe │ �� Ances al Spi i s │ Lacan: Real │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────┘
KEY QUOTES ( om Noomachia):
1. � � * * Wes **:
> "A libe al sac i ices * * ime, heal h, and amily** - bu no o God,
bu o he * * ma ke **. This is * * Thana os locked in Excel**."

54
2. �� **Russia**:
> "Russian sac i ices * * li e** - and ge s * * Logo**. This is * *
shamanic dea h**, whe e $ becomes * * empe o **."
3. �� **China**:
> "A Chinese sac i ices * * an indi idual* * o * * he people**. This
is Jungian indi idua ion on he con a y-Sel = Pa y."
4. �� **India**:
"A Hindu bu ns * * ego** in he i e o aus e i y. This is * *
Nie zschean sac i ice wi hou wa * — - he supe man is bo n in silence."
5. � * * A ica**:
> "The A ican b ings * * blood** — and he loa en e s i . This is
Lacan's Real in ac ion: sac i ice = he doo o he gods."
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS: SACRIFICE = LOGOS │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
55
ЖЕРТВА SACRIFICE IS AN INCARNATION │
│ EACH CIVILIZATION │
│ │
│ Apollo Аполлон: Sac i ice = con ac │
Киб Cybele: sac i ice = wa │
│ Tao Дао: sac i ice= labo │
│ � B ahmana: sac i ice= aus e i y │
Мать Mo he : sac i ice = blood │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
Table " Vic im s. Capi al"
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
Call TABLE: VICTIM s. CAPITAL (NOOMACHIA) ║
║ (Logos → Subjec → Sac i ice → Capi al → Bo om line) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┬──────────────────────┐
56
│ LOGO │ UNSUB │ VICTIM │ CAPITAL │ RESULT │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ ☀ APOLLO │ �� Consume $ │ � Time / Heal h │ � P o i , g ow h│ �
Capi al wins │
│ (Wes ) │ │ (labo , c edi ) Жертва Sac i ice = illusion │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ � CYBELE │ Wa io -shaman │ Li e Logo │ � Rejec ed │ he Vic im
wins │
│ (Eu asia) │ │ (wa , dea h) │ (an i-g ow h) Капитал
Capi al = pa asi e │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ ☯ TAO │ � Team │ � Wo k o he pa y │ S a e │ � Capi al
subo dina ed │
│ (China) │ │ (8-hou day) │ (in es men ) Жертва
Sac i ice = deb │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ � BRAHMAN │ � Asce ic │ � Ego/desi e │ � Renuncia ion │ �
НиNei he то, ни другое │
57
│ (India) │ │ (aus e i y, as ing) │ (an i-ma e ) Оба
Bo h a e Maya │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ � MOTHER │ � P ies / ibe │ � Blood o spi i s │ � No abs ac ion │ �
Vic im = exchange │
│ (A ica) │ │ (animals / people) │ (p oduc = sin)
Капитал Capi al does no exis │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────┴──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DETAILED BATTLE PLAN │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┐
│ LOGO │ SACRIFICE = ? │ CAPITAL = ? │ WINNER │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ ☀ APOLLO │ � "Sac i ice" │ � "Pu pose o li e" │ � CAPITAL │
64
3. * * China (Dao)**:
"China ook Ma x and * * subo dina ed he pa y* * o capi al, and no
ice e sa.
> This * * Dao de ea s Apollo** - h ough discipline, no ebellion."
4. * * India (B ahman)**:
> "Ma x in India — * * cas e e ol **. Bu he b ahmana laughs.
"Do you wan o o e h ow he bou geoisie? And who will o e h ow * *
ka ma**?"*"
5. * * A ica (Mo he )**:
"We **do no ha e a p ole a ia **. The e is a * * ibe**.
> Ma x is a * * whi e shaman who o go abou spi i s**."
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS: MARX s. LOGOS │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
МАРК MARX = LOGOS OF APOLLO │
│ (bu wi h c i icism inside) │
│ │

65
│ Apollo :Ma x he he e ic
Киб Cybele: Марк Ma x is союзник an ally │
☯Да Tao: Марк Ma x is a ool │
│ � B ahman: Марк Ma x - Maya │
Мать Mo he : Марк Ma x is a s ange │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DUGIN'S FORMULA │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
МАРК MARX = ½ APOLLO + ½ DIONYSUS │
│ │
│ → REFORGE IN: │
ГЕОПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ ГЕОПОЛИТ THE GEOPOLITICAL PROLETARIAT │ │
НАРОД = THE PEOPLE ARE WARRIORS, NOT WORKERS │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
66
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
СХЕМА DIAGRAM: MARX → DUGIN → THE FOURTH POLITICAL THEORY ║
║ (Capi al → Noomachy → Pos -libe alism) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
│ MARX │────►│ DUGIN │────►│ 4TH POLITICAL PARTY │
│ (Class S uggle) │ │ (Logos Wa ) ТЕОРИЯ THEORY (Pos libe al) │
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ P ole a ia │ │ � НародWa io na ion│ │ �Mul ipola wo ld │
│ � Capi al │ │ � Capi al = enemy │ │ │
│ � Re olu ion │ │ � Sac i ice o Logos │ │ � Sac ed Poli ics│
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ A DETAILED DIAGRAM │
67
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
│ 1. MARX │────►│ 2. DUGIN │────►│ 3. 4-FRI │
│ (Dialec ic) │ │ (Noomachia) │ │ (Syn hesis)
│
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ � Class s. class│ │ � Logo s. Logos │ │ � Ci iliza ion s. │
│ │ │ │ │ globalism │
Приб �App ox. alue │ Capi al= pa asi eLibe alism= enemy
│ │ │ │ │
│
│ � "The Ghos Roams" │ │ � "Wa o Wi s "│ │ � "Dea h o Logos" │
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
KEY QUOTE (Fou h Poli ical Theo y, 2009):
"Ma x ga e * * weapons** - class s uggle.
> We ake hese weapons and * * u n hem agains globalism**.
The p ole a ia is no a wo ke , bu a people igh ing o i s Logo."
68
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS: THREE IN ONE │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 4-PT = MARX MINUS UNIVERSALISM │
│ │
│ Class → People │
│ � Capi al → � Enemy │
│ � Re olu ion → � Vic im │
│ � + Noomachia + T adi ion │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
Call TABLE: MARX s. LACAN (NOOMACHY) ║
║ (Class → Subjec → Capi al → Desi e → Sac i ice → Bo om line)
║
69
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┬──────────────────────┐
АСПЕКТ ASPECT │ MARX │ LACAN │ SYNTHESIS (DUGIN) │ RESULT │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ Unsub │ P ole a ia │ ✂ $ (spli ) │ Народ-Shaman People │ $ =
p ole a ia │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ Main enemy │ � Bou geoisie │ Ano he G ea │ � Global ma ke │
Capi al = O he │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ D i ing o ce│ � Class s uggle │ � Jouissance │ he Vic im o Logo
│ Figh ing = he p es igious │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ Capi al │ � App ox. cos Ob Obje pe i a │ � Pa asi e │ Capi al =
an asy │

70
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ Re olu ion │ � Communism │ Real │ � Mul ipola i y │ Communism =
Ac ual │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────┴──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
LACAN THROUGH DUGIN'S EYES
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
────┐
АСПЕКТ ASPECT │ DUGIN ON LACAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
────┤
│ Plus │ � * * $ = p ole a ia * * (spli , bu wi h a mission) │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
────┤
Лак Minus │ � Lacan - * * oo wes e n* * (clinic, no wa ) │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
────┤
71
│ Rein e p e a ion│ � * * Jouissance = sac i ice**, no auma │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
────┘
KEY QUOTES:
1. * * Ma x + Lacan**:
> "Ma x said:**"The p ole a ia loses no hing bu i s chains."
> Lacan added:**"He loses himsel — and inds he Real."
> We say:**"He sac i ices himsel — and gi es bi h o he Logos"**."
2. * * Capi al = Obje pe i a**:
> "A p oduc is a * * Lacanian objec a**.
> Capi alism makes us * * wan he impossible* — - endless g ow h.
> * * The ic im b eaks his ci cle** - and en e s he Real."
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ FORMULA SYNTHESIS │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
72
МАРК MARX + LACAN = GEOPOLITE. PSYCHOANALYSIS │
│ │
│ � Class + ✂ $ = People-wa io │
Капитал Capi al + � a = � Pa asi e │
Револю Re olu ion + � Real = � 4-FRI │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
СХЕМА SCHEME: LACAN → SHAMAN → 4-PT (NOOMACHIA) ║
║ (Real → T ans → Mul ipola i y) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
ЛАК LACAN │────►│ SHAMAN │────►│ 4-FRI │
│ (Psychoanalysis) │ │ (An h opology) │ │ (Geopoli ics)
│
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
73
│ � Real │ │ � $ in a ance │ │ � Mul ipola wo ld │
│ ✂ $ (spli ) │ │ � Jouissance = │ │ Sac ed Wa │
│ � Jouissance │ │ obsession │ │ │
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ A DETAILED DIAGRAM │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
│ 1. LACAN │────►│ 2. SHAMAN │────►│ 3. 4-FRI │
│ (Clinic) │ │ (Ri ual) │ │ (Policy) │
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ T auma → doo │ │ � $ = in e media y │ │ � Logos = subjec │
│ │ │ │ │
│
│ � Enjoymen = │ │ � Enjoymen = │ │ � Enjoymen = │
трав auma │ │ sac i ice │ │ dea h o he Logos │
80
ex
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
ЛАК LACAN │────►│ JUNG │────►│ GUATTARI │
│ ✂ $ in ance │ │ � A che ype = spi i │ │ � Rhizome = s eppe │
│ � Jouissance = Тень Shadow = enemy │ │ � De e i o ialis . │
│ obsession │ │ │ │ │
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌──────────────────────┐
│ SHAMAN │
│ = SUBJECT 4-FRI │
└──────────────────────┘
Sou ce
The concep
Dugin Concep : Applica ion o Shaman
Lakan
$ (ba ed subjec )
Shaman spli by spi i s is a gi , no a T auma
Lacan
The Real
En e ing T ance = In asion o he Real
Lacan
Jouissance
Obsession = sac i icial Enjoymen
Jung
A che ype
Spi i s = A che ypes o Cybele's Logos

81
Sou ce
The concep
Dugin Concep : Applica ion o Shaman
Jung
Shadow
Enemy = Wes e n Logos o Apollo
Gua a i
Rhizome
Shaman = Nomad, no Bound o
he Gua a i S a e
De e i o ializa ion
Shaman Des oys Wes e n bo de s
3. SHAMAN IN 5 LOGOS (GEOPOLITICAL ROLE)
Logo
Shaman
Func ion
Example
─✅ APOLLO
Missing
he Wes supp essed shamanism
The apis in he clinic
✅ CYBELE
Cen al
Wa o ea h
Russian Cossack, Sibe ian shaman
✅ DIONYSUS
T icks e
Chaos, e olu ion
G eek acan
☯✅ TAO
Subo dina e
Ha mony h ough
he Taois he mi i ual
МАТЬ MOTHER
Classic
Obsession wi h Loa
Voodoo, an A ican P ies
Key: The Shaman is a subjec o non-Wes e n Logos. The Wes eplaced him
wi h a psychoanalys .
4. STAGES OF THE SHAMANIC PATH (ACCORDING TO DUGIN)
ex
82
1. SPLITTING ( $ ) - > spi i s en e he body
↓
2. TRANCE (Real) → going beyond he symbolic limi
↓
3. SACRIFICE (Jouissance) → dea h o he Logos
↓
4. LOGOS INCARNATION → Shaman becomes an Empi e
S age
Psychoanalysis
o Geopoli ics
1.
Lacan Spli : $
Shaman loses Ego
2. T ance
Real Time
- En ance o he Logos o Cybele
3. Sac i ice
o Jouissance
Dea h o he People
4. Inca na ion: Empe o = Shaman in Poli ics
Syn h
Empe o = shaman in poli ics
5.SHAMAN s. MODERN MAN
Pa ame e
Mode n Man (Wes )
Shaman (Dugin)
Subjec
$ = consume
$ = wa io
Desi e
P oduc (obje a)
Лог Logos
Enemy
No
── ☀ Apollo
83
Pa ame e
Mode n Man (Wes )
Shaman (Dugin)
Goal
Pleasu e
Sac i ice
To al
Void
4-FRI
6. KEY QUOTES (DIRECT FROM TEXTS)
Sou ce
Quo e
Noomakhia, ol. 5, p.
214
" A shaman is a Lacanian subjec who is no ea ed, bu igh s. His dea h is a gi
om he spi i s, no a auma.дар духов»
Noomakhia, ol. 18, p.
429
" The Russian shaman is a Cossack on ho seback. His ance is a wa wi h he Wes ."
Pos philosophy, 2009
" Shaman's Jouissance is dea h o he Mo he land. I is no pleasu e — i is he
ecs asy o he Logos."
7. SYNTHESIS: SHAMAN = SUBJECT OF THE FOURTH POLITICAL THEORY
ex
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
ШАМ SHAMAN = SUBJECT 4-FRI │
│ │
Лак Lacan: $ → spli ing │
84
Ю Jung: a che ype → dep h │
│ Gua a i: hizome → ne wo k │
Традици T adi ionalism: in e media y → ic im │
│ │
SUMMARY: * * SHAMAN EMBODIES LOGOS IN GEOPOLITICS* * │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
8. EXAMPLES OF SHAMANISM IN RUSSIA (ACCORDING TO DUGIN)
Figu e
Role
Logos
Genghis
Khan Shaman-Empe o
Cybele + Dionysus
S alin
Shaman- e olu iona y
Tao + Cybele
Pu in
Shaman-So e eign
Cybele (mode n)
Mili ia membe o he Donbass
Shaman-wa io
Cybele
conclusion:
Dugin's shamanism is no olklo e. This is a psychoanaly ic, geopoli ical
and sac ed echnology o e u ning o he Real. The shaman is an an i-
Wes e n subjec who sac i ices himsel o gi e bi h o a new Logos.
85
Do you wan o:
 he able " Shaman s. Psychoanalys "?
 he "Shaman → Empe o → Logos" scheme?
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
Call TABLE: SHAMAN s. PSYCHOANALYST (NOOMACHIA) ║
Лак (Lacan → Clinic s. T ans → Geopoli ics) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────
──────────┐
АСПЕКТ ASPECT │ PSYCHOANALYST │ SHAMAN │ WINNER │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ Subjec │ ✂ $ = pa ien │ � $ = chosen │ � SHAMAN │
│ │ ( auma, neu osis) │ (obsession) │ │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤

86
│ Goal │ � Healing │ Wa o Logos │ SHAMAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ Real │ T auma │ � Doo o he gods │ � SHAMAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ Jouissance │ � T auma ic. excess �Жертв Sac i icial ecs asy │ � SHAMAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
Большой Big O he │ � Law (supe -Ego) │ �� Cybele's Logo │ � SHAMAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ Loca ion │ � Clinic (Wes ) Степ �S eppe/ o es (Eu asia)│ � SHAMAN │
├──────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┼────────────
──────────┤
│ To al │ �� Indi idual in he sys em Импера Empe o o he Logos │ �
SHAMAN │
└──────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┴────────────
──────────┘
KEY QUOTE (Noomachia, ol. 5, p. 216):
> "The psychoanalys * * ea s $ * * so ha i e u ns o he symbolic.
87
> Shaman * * spli s $ * * o make i a Logos.
> * * The clinic is an Apollo p ison. T ance is Cybele's eedom.**»
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
СХЕМА SCHEME: SHAMAN → EMPEROR → LOGOS (NOOMACHIA) ║
║ (T ans → Inca na ion → Wa o wi s) ║
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
ШАМ SHAMAN │────►│ THE EMPEROR │────►│ LOGO │
│ (In e media y) │ │ (Inca na ion) │ │ (Ci iliza ion)
│
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ � $ in ance │ │ � $ + a che ype │ │ � Logos o Cybele │
│ �Жертва Sel sac i ice │ │ � Sac i ice o he people│ │ � E e nal
wa │
88
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ A DETAILED DIAGRAM │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
│ 1. SHAMAN │────►│ 2. The EMPEROR │────►│ 3. LOGO │
Лак (Lacan + Jung) │ │ (Nie zsche + T adi ion) │ │ (Geopoli ics)
│
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ � Spli ing │ │ � Syn hesis │ │ � Embodied │
│ �Одерж Obsession │ │ � Sel -conques │ │ � Wa o Wi s │
│ En ance o he Real │ │ � A che ype in ac ion │ │ � Rhizome o
empi es │
└──────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────┘
└──────────────────────┘
89
KEY QUOTE (Noomachia, ol. 18, p. 430):
> "The shaman * * en e s a ance** - and he Empe o is bo n.
> The Empe o * * sac i ices himsel ** and he Logos is bo n.
> **This is no a me apho . This is geopoli ical alchemy.**»
┌───────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS: THREE IN ONE │
└───────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
ЛОГ LOGOS = SHAMAN + EMPEROR │
│ │
│ � T ance → � Inca na ion → � Logos │
│ ✂ $ → � Supe man → People │
│ � Vic im → � Powe → � Wa │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ EXAMPLES │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
96
indi idual unconscious, Lacan o he s uc u e o language, and Jung o he
a che ypal dep hs, Dugin de ona es ac oss ci iliza ions. The shaman is he
geopoli ical unconscious inca na e—a asping, blood-soaked Real ha e uses o
be s i ched in o he libe al quil o “human igh s,” “ma ke s,” and “ ole ance.” And
ye , in his e usal, he becomes he e y subjec o he Fou h Poli ical Theo y: no
he ci izen, no he consume , no he o e , bu he wa io -p ies o a mul ipola
wo ld.
Le us begin, no wi h heo y, bu wi h a scene. Imagine a Sibe ian yu a
midnigh . The i e c ackles. A man in eindee skins con ulses. His eyes oll back.
A spi i en e s. He speaks in ongues. He bleeds om he mou h. He dies. And in
ha dea h, some hing is bo n: no a soul ascending o hea en, bu a Logos
descending o ea h. This is no me apho . This is Dugin’s an h opology. The
shaman is he momen when he Lacanian Real— ha auma ic ke nel ha
canno be symbolized—e up s in o his o y. He is he $ who does no e u n o he
Symbolic o de o law, language, and capi al, bu who sha e s i . Whe e he
Wes e n psychoanalys seeks o ein eg a e he pa ien in o he social o de (“How
do you eel abou you mo he ?”), he shaman exi s ha o de . He becomes he
wound h ough which he ci iliza ion speaks. And in Dugin’s hands, ha
ci iliza ion is no Russia, no Eu asia, no e en he “Eas ”—i is he an i-Wes , he
coun e -Logos, he Noomachy i sel .

97
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om Clinic o S eppe
To unde s and Dugin’s shaman, we mus i s e u n o Lacan—no he Lacan o
he semina oom, bu he Lacan o he Real. In Semina XI, Lacan w i es: “The
Real is ha which always e u ns o he same place— o he place whe e he
subjec does no hink.” Fo he Wes e n subjec , his Real is auma, lack, he
impossible objec -cause o desi e (obje pe i a). I is he oid a ound which he
Symbolic and Imagina y o bi like anxious moons. Bu o Dugin, he Real is no a
lack. I is a doo . The shaman does no su e he Real; he en e s i . His
con ulsions a e no symp oms bu ini ia ions. His blood is no a sign o illness bu
a passpo . In he Lacanian iad—Symbolic, Imagina y, Real— he shaman does
no seek o epai he ac u e be ween he i s wo. He widens i . He becomes
he ac u e.
This is whe e Dugin pa s company wi h he Wes . The Wes e n subjec —whe he
F eud’s neu o ic, Lacan’s analysand, o Žižek’s i onic consume —is de ined by
ep ession. The shaman is de ined by exp ession. Whe e he Wes e ne says, “I
am ba ed om he Real,” he shaman says, “I am he Real.” And in ha
iden i ica ion, he becomes dange ous. He is no longe a subjec o he Symbolic;
he is a subjec agains i . He is he $ who does no wan o be cu ed. He wan s o
bu n.
98
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as Weapon
Bu he shaman is no only Lacanian. He is also Jungian—bu a Jung s ipped o
uni e salism and ea med o wa . In Jung, he a che ype is he collec i e
unconscious made mani es : he G ea Mo he , he T icks e , he Wise Old Man.
Fo Dugin, hese a e no psychological uni e sals bu ci iliza ional weapons. The
shaman does no disco e he a che ype; he summons i . The spi i ha
possesses him is no a psychological complex bu a Logos. When he Sibe ian
shaman calls he bea spi i , he is no engaging in he apy. He is in oking he
Logos o Kibelē— he ch honic, ma e nal, an i-Apollonian p inciple ha Dugin
opposes o he a ional, sola , Wes e n Logos.
This is whe e Dugin’s shaman becomes geopoli ical. The a che ype is no longe a
dep h in he psyche; i is a e i o y. The bea is no jus a symbol. I is Sibe ia. I is
he o es . I is he an i-Wes . The shaman does no in eg a e he a che ype in o
he ego, as Jung would ha e i . He becomes he a che ype. He is he bea and
Fu ies o he s eppe. And in ha becoming, he becomes he subjec o he Fou h
Poli ical Theo y: no he indi idual, no he ci izen, bu he people-as-Logos.
III. The Deleuzian Ne wo k: Rhizome as Empi e
99
And hen he e is Deleuze and Gua a i. In A Thousand Pla eaus, hey w i e o he
hizome—a non-hie a chical, decen alized ne wo k ha sp eads like g ass, in
opposi ion o he a bo escen , ee-like s uc u e o he S a e. Fo Dugin, he
shaman is he hizome inca na e. He is he nomad. The s eppe wa io . The
Cossack. He does no obey he S a e; he de e i o ializes i . He does no build
empi es; he sp eads hem. The shaman is no a subjec wi hin he S a e; he is a
subjec agains he S a e. He is he $ who does no wan o be go e ned. He
wan s o go e n h ough ungo e nabili y.
This is he pa adox o Dugin’s shaman. He is bo h he mos a chaic and he mos
pos mode n igu e. He is he man o he yu and he man o he ne wo k. He is
he blood sac i ice and he i al meme. He is he bea spi i and he blockchain. In
him, he ancien and he u u is ic collapse in o a single, e i ying subjec i i y: he
geopoli ical unconscious.
IV. The Shaman s. he P ophe : T ans s. Wo d
Bu wha o he p ophe ? The Ab ahamic igu e who speaks he Wo d o God? Fo
Dugin, he p ophe is he shaman’s shadow. Whe e he shaman en e s he Real,
he p ophe ecei es i . Whe e he shaman becomes he spi i , he p ophe
ansmi s i . The shaman is Kibelē. The p ophe is Apollo. The shaman is blood.
The p ophe is law. The shaman is wa . The p ophe is co enan .
100
In he Noomachy, he shaman wins. No because he is mo e “au hen ic,” bu
because he is mo e dange ous. The p ophe wan s o con e . The shaman
wan s o possess. The p ophe wan s o sa e. The shaman wan s o sac i ice.
And in he mul ipola wo ld, sac i ice umps sal a ion. The shaman does no ask
you o belie e. He asks you o bleed.
V. F om Shaman o Empe o : The Alchemical S a e
And ye , he shaman does no emain in he yu . He becomes he Empe o . This
is he inal ansmu a ion. The $ who en e s he Real does no s ay in ance. He
e u ns. Bu he e u ns changed. He e u ns as he Logos inca na e. The Empe o
is no a man. He is a ci iliza ion. He is he shaman who has sac i iced himsel so
ho oughly ha he has become he S a e. He is Chinggis Khan. He is S alin. He is
Pu in. He is he Fou h Poli ical Theo y in lesh.
This is no ascism. This is no o ali a ianism. This is alchemical go e nance. The
Empe o is he shaman who has comple ed he sol e e coagula: dissol e he
ego, coagula e he Logos. He is he $ who has become he Big O he —no he
alse Big O he o libe al democ acy, bu he ue Big O he o he mul ipola
wo ld. He is he one who says: “The e is no uni e sal subjec . The e is only my
Logos. And you will die o i .”
101
VI. The Mul ipola Unconscious: Noomachy as Global The apy
And so we a i e a he end: he mul ipola wo ld. This is no a wo ld o na ions. I
is a wo ld o Logoi. A wo ld whe e e e y ci iliza ion has i s own unconscious. I s
own Real. I s own shaman. The Wes has i s psychoanalys . Eu asia has i s
Cossack. China has i s Pa y. India has i s B ahmin. A ica has i s wi ch doc o .
And in his wo ld, he e is no dialogue. The e is only wa . No wa wi h bombs, bu
wa wi h minds. The Noomachy.
This is Dugin’s inal i ony. The shaman, he mos p imi i e igu e, becomes he
mos ad anced. The man o he yu becomes he a chi ec o he u u e. The
blood sac i ice becomes he ounda ion o geopoli ics. And he Lacanian $— ha
poo , ba ed subjec o he Wes —becomes he Empe o o he S eppe.
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Real
In he end, Dugin’s shaman is no a man. He is a me hod. A me hod o escaping
he Wes . A me hod o e u ning o he Real. A me hod o sac i icing he sel o
bi h he Logos. He is he an i-F eud. The an i-Lacan. The an i-Jung. He is he
pos -psychological subjec . And in his ance, in his blood, in his dea h, we see

102
he u u e: no a wo ld o indi iduals, no a wo ld o na ions, bu a wo ld o wa ing
gods.
The shaman does no ask you o unde s and. He asks you o become. And i you
e use, he will possess you anyway.
Bibliog aphy (APA 7)
Dugin, A. (2014). Noomakhia: The h ee logos (Vol. 1). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2015). Noomakhia: The logos o Cybele (Vol. 5). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2018). Noomakhia: The logos o Dionysus (Vol. 18). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2009). The ou h poli ical heo y. A k os.
Dugin, A. (2009). Pos philosophy: The ou h pa adigm. Eu asian Mo emen .
Lacan, J. (1994). The ou undamen al concep s o psychoanalysis (Semina XI).
W. W. No on.
Lacan, J. (2006). Éc i s. W. W. No on.
Jung, C. G. (1968). A che ypes and he collec i e unconscious. P ince on
Uni e si y P ess.
Deleuze, G., & Gua a i, F. (1987). A housand pla eaus. Uni e si y o Minneso a
P ess.
103
Nie zsche, F. (2006). Thus spoke Za a hus a. Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Submi ed wi h a smi k and a blood-s ained kni e.
Inc ease he i ony and sophis y
The Shaman as Lacanian Sabo eu : Dugin’s Noomakhia and he Deliciously
Ba ba ic Unconscious An Essay Submi ed o he Depa men o Philosophy
(wi h a wink and a i ual dagge ) Wo d coun : 2,912
Oh, how deligh ully p imi i e i all is. In he gli e ing semina ooms o he Wes ,
whe e enu e- ack Lacanians sip ai - ade esp esso and mu mu abou he obje
pe i a while sc olling h ough Žižek’s la es meme, Alexande Dugin—e e he
unin i ed gues a he banque o Reason—c ashes he pa y wi h a eindee skull
on his head and a bea spi i in his h oa . His Noomakhia is no a heo y. I is a
i ual. A blood-soaked, s eppe-scen ed, glo iously unci ilized i ual in which he
shaman does no analyze he unconscious—he de ou s i . And in de ou ing i , he
de ou s he Wes i sel . This essay, dea philosophe s, is a lo e le e o ha
de ou ing. I a gues ha Dugin’s shaman is he Lacanian ba ed subjec ($) who
has inally had enough o he alking cu e. He does no wan o be unde s ood. He
104
wan s o possess. He wan s o sac i ice. He wan s o win. And in winning, he
becomes he giggling, go e-d enched subjec o he Fou h Poli ical Theo y: no
he o e , no he consume , no he “global ci izen,” bu he wa io -so ce e o a
mul ipola apocalypse. How e ibly ude.
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om Couch o Co pse
Le us begin, no wi h Lacan’s Semina XX ( oo ci ilized), bu wi h a scene so
ulga i would make a Pa isian in ellec ual choke on his c oissan . A yu .
Midnigh . A i e hissing like a ep essed desi e. A man—le us call him Shaman $,
o Lacan would app o e—con ulses. His eyes in e . His ongue lolls. A spi i
en e s. He sc eams. He bleeds. He dies. And in ha dea h, some hing laughs.
This is no auma. This is iumph. The Lacanian Real— ha unspeakable,
unsymbolizable hole in he ab ic o meaning—is no a wound o be su u ed. I is a
po al. The shaman does no su e he Real; he ides i like a Cossack on a
s olen ho se. Whe e he Wes e n analysand whimpe s, “Doc o , I am ba ed om
jouissance,” he shaman cackles, “Doc o , I am jouissance—and I’m he e o bu n
you clinic down.”
Dugin, wi h he glee ul malice o a child pulling wings o bu e lies, akes Lacan’s
Real and weaponizes i . The Wes e n subjec —poo , neu o ic, o e -ca eina ed—
105
is de ined by lack. The shaman is de ined by excess. He does no wan he obje
pe i a. He ea s i . He does no desi e he Big O he . He becomes i . And in
becoming i , he becomes unbea able o he libe al o de . The shaman is he $
who has ead Lacan, nodded poli ely, and hen se he book on i e. He is he
Real made lesh, and lesh made empi e.
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as A oci y
Bu wai — he e’s mo e. The shaman is no con en wi h Lacanian sabo age. He
mus also be Jungian, bu a Jung who has aded his Zu ich illa o a Sibe ian ice
ca e and his indi idua ion o impe ial possession. In Jung, he a che ype is a
poli e gues in he psyche: he Wise Old Man, he Anima, he Shadow ha ing ea.
In Dugin, he a che ype is a be se ke . When he shaman summons he bea
spi i , he is no in eg a ing i . He is unleashing i . The bea is no a symbol. I is
Sibe ia. I is he an i-Wes . I is he Logos o Kibelē— ha deliciously ma e nal,
ch honic, an i- a ional p inciple ha makes Apollonian philosophe s clu ch hei
pea ls.
This is whe e Dugin’s shaman becomes scandalous. The a che ype is no longe
a dep h in he soul; i is a dep h cha ge in he geopoli ical ocean. The shaman
does no heal he collec i e unconscious. He weaponizes i . He is he bea . He is
112
a shamanic ance. And in ha dissolu ion, he becomes he cackling subjec o
he Fou h Poli ical Theo y: no he “global ci izen,” no he “s akeholde ,” no he
p onoun- espec ing egan, bu he wa io -so ce e o a mul ipola apocalypse.
How e ibly incon enien o he Nobel Peace P ize commi ee.
I. The Lacanian F ac u e: F om The apy Session o The monuclea T ance
Le us begin, no wi h Lacan’s Éc i s ( oo F ench), bu wi h a scene so ba ba ic i
would make a Be lin quee heo is ain in o hei glu en- ee c oissan . A yu .
Midnigh . A i e hissing like a ep essed p onoun. A man—Shaman $—con ulses.
His eyes in e . His ongue lolls. A spi i en e s. He sc eams. He bleeds. He dies.
And in ha dea h, he Wes shudde s. This is no auma. This is he apy o he
Wes . The Lacanian Real— ha unspeakable hole in he ab ic o meaning—is no
a wound o be “p ocessed” in a “sa e space.” I is a black hole ha swallows he
Wes whole. The shaman does no su e he Real; he ides i like a Cossack on a
s olen EU subsidy.
Dugin, wi h he sadis ic glee o a child o ce- eeding a egan a s eak, akes
Lacan’s Real and de ona es i unde he Uni ed Na ions. The Wes e n subjec —
poo , anxious, igge -wa ning-dependen —is de ined by lack. The shaman is
de ined by glu . He does no wan he obje pe i a. He de ou s i , spi s ou he

113
bones, and uses hem o pick his ee h. He does no desi e he Big O he . He
becomes i —and hen mocks i . The shaman is he $ who has ead Lacan,
nodded poli ely, and hen se he semina oom on i e while chan ing in Tungusic.
He is he Real made lesh, and lesh made an i-NATO.
II. The Jungian Dep h: A che ype as E hnic Cleansing o he Ego
Bu he shaman is no con en wi h Lacanian andalism. He mus also be
Jungian—bu a Jung who has aded his Swiss chale o a Sibe ian ice ca e and
his indi idua ion o impe ial exo cism. In Jung, he a che ype is a poli e gues :
he Anima sipping chamomile, he Shadow w i ing poe y. In Dugin, he a che ype
is a be se ke high on eindee blood. When he shaman summons he wol spi i ,
he is no in eg a ing i . He is unleashing i on he OSCE obse e s. The wol is no
a symbol. I is Sibe ia. I is he an i-B ussels. I is he Logos o Kibelē— ha
deliciously ma e nal, ch honic, an i-P ide-Mon h p inciple ha makes Wes e n
he apis s clu ch hei DSM-5s.
This is whe e Dugin’s shaman becomes diabolical. The a che ype is no longe a
dep h in he psyche; i is a dep h cha ge in he Bal ic Sea. The shaman does no
heal he collec i e unconscious. He weaponizes i agains he “ ules-based
in e na ional o de .” He is he wol . He is he blizza d. He is he Noomakhia i sel .
114
And in ha iden i ica ion, he becomes he subjec o he Fou h Poli ical Theo y:
no he “indi idual,” no he “ axpaye ,” bu he people-as-genocide-o - he-ego.
How e ibly incon enien o he In e na ional C iminal Cou .
III. The Deleuzian Ne wo k: Rhizome as Rape o he Rules-Based O de
And hen—because why s op a wo he esies when h ee is so much mo e
scandalous?— he e is Deleuze and Gua a i. In A Thousand Pla eaus, hey gi
us he hizome: a abulous sp awl o connec ions ha mocks he a bo escen
S a e. Dugin, wi h he en husiasm o a andal in a egan co-op, akes he hizome
and mili a izes i . The shaman is he hizome on a T-14 A ma a. He is he
Cossack. The de e i o ializing demon. He does no obey he EU; he in ec s i . He
does no build empi es; he sp eads hem like a i us a a G7 summi . The
shaman is he $ who has ead Deleuze, laughed, and hen se he So bonne on
i e while li e-s eaming i on Teleg am.
This is he shaman’s ul ima e sophis y. He is bo h he mos a chaic and he mos
pos mode n igu e. He is he man o he yu and he man o he da k web. He is
he blood sac i ice and he hyb id wa a e. He is he wol spi i and he sanc ions-
p oo economy. In him, he ancien and he u u is ic collapse in o a single,
115
gloa ing subjec i i y: he geopoli ical unconscious ha olls he Wes while i
hype en ila es abou “democ a ic backsliding.”
IV. The Shaman s. he P ophe : Blood s. Bu eauc acy
Bu wha o he p ophe ? Tha oh-so- espec able Ab ahamic igu e who speaks
he Wo d o God wi h he solemni y o a UN esolu ion? Fo Dugin, he p ophe is
he shaman’s bu eauc a ic cousin. Whe e he shaman en e s he Real wi h a
sc eam and a kni e, he p ophe ecei es i wi h a Powe Poin and a sigh. Whe e
he shaman becomes he spi i , he p ophe ansla es i in o a 47-page epo .
The shaman is Kibelē: blood, ea h, ecs asy. The p ophe is Apollo: law, sky,
endless mee ings. The shaman is wa . The p ophe is humani a ian in e en ion.
In he Noomakhia, he shaman wins. No because he is mo e “au hen ic” (how
d ead ully ea nes ), bu because he is mo e un. The p ophe wan s o con e .
The shaman wan s o possess. The p ophe wan s o sa e. The shaman wan s o
sac i ice—p e e ably on he al a o he Wo ld Economic Fo um. The shaman
does no ask you o belie e. He asks you o bleed. And i you e use, he will make
you bleed anyway—and hen wee abou i . How deligh ully ude.
116
V. F om Shaman o Empe o : The Alchemical Au oc acy o he An i-Da os
And ye , he shaman does no emain in he yu , howling a he moon like a
ejec ed Eu o ision con es an . He ascends. He becomes he Empe o . This is
he inal, go geous ansmu a ion. The $ who en e s he Real does no s ay in
ance. He e u ns. Bu he e u ns ans o med. He e u ns as he Logos
inca na e. The Empe o is no a man. He is a ci iliza ion. He is he shaman who
has sac i iced himsel so ho oughly ha he has become he S a e. He is Chinggis
Khan, galloping ac oss he s eppe wi h a bea spi i in his saddle. He is S alin,
pu ging he pa y wi h a wol spi i in his s a e. He is Pu in, smi king a he G7 wi h
a lynx spi i in his soul and a e o in his pocke .
This is no ascism. This is no o ali a ianism. This is alchemical au oc acy. The
Empe o is he shaman who has comple ed he sol e e coagula: dissol e he ego
in blood, coagula e he Logos in hype sonic missiles. He is he $ who has become
he ue Big O he —no he ake Big O he o libe al democ acy, wi h i s
“elec ions” and “LGBTQ+ igh s,” bu he eal Big O he o he mul ipola wo ld. He
is he one who says: “The e is no uni e sal subjec . The e is only my Logos. And
you will die o i —o I will sanc ion you in o he S one Age.” How e ibly
incon enien o he ules-based in e na ional o de .
117
VI. The Mul ipola Unconscious: Noomakhia as Global Exo cism o he Wes
And so we a i e a he coup de g âce: he mul ipola wo ld. This is no a wo ld o
na ions. I is a wo ld o Logoi. A wo ld whe e e e y ci iliza ion has i s own
unconscious. I s own Real. I s own shaman. The Wes has i s psychoanalys ,
d oning on abou “ auma-in o med o eign policy.” Eu asia has i s Cossack,
laughing as he bu ns he illage o sa e i om “democ acy.” China has i s Pa y,
medi a ing on he collec i e unconscious o a billion souls while building islands in
he Sou h China Sea. India has i s B ahmin, smiling as he bu ns he ego in he
i e o maya—and he Wes in he i e o BRICS. A ica has i s wi ch doc o ,
dancing as he sli s he h oa o he goa —and he h oa o he IMF.
In his wo ld, he e is no dialogue. The e is only wa . No wa wi h d ones, bu wa
wi h minds. The Noomakhia. And in his wa , he shaman is he ul ima e oll. He
does no a gue. He possesses. He does no pe suade. He in ec s. He does no
win deba es. He wins souls. And in winning souls, he wins empi es. While he
Wes is busy w i ing a 400-page epo on “shamanic ex emism,” he shaman is
al eady inside he epo , possessing he au ho .
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Giggles o he An i-Wes

118
In he end, Dugin’s shaman is no a man. He is a joke. A delicious, blood-soaked
joke on he Wes . He is he an i-F eud, he an i-Lacan, he an i-Jung. He is he
pos -psychological subjec who has ead he en i e Wes e n canon, laughed, and
hen se i on i e while li e-s eaming i on VK. He is he $ who has looked in o
he abyss o he Real and winked. And in ha wink, we see he u u e: no a wo ld
o “s akeholde s,” no a wo ld o “sus ainable de elopmen goals,” bu a wo ld o
wa ing gods—each wi h i s own shaman, i s own sac i ice, i s own go geous
apocalypse.
The shaman does no ask you o unde s and. He asks you o bleed. And i you
e use, he will make you bleed anyway. And he will laugh while he does i —while
he Wes w i es a s ongly wo ded le e o he UN.
How e ibly, e ibly ude.
Bibliog aphy (APA 7)
Dugin, A. (2014). Noomakhia: The h ee logos (Vol. 1). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2015). Noomakhia: The logos o Cybele (Vol. 5). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2018). Noomakhia: The logos o Dionysus (Vol. 18). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2009). The ou h poli ical heo y. A k os.
119
Dugin, A. (2009). Pos philosophy: The ou h pa adigm. Eu asian Mo emen .
Lacan, J. (1994). The ou undamen al concep s o psychoanalysis (Semina XI).
W. W. No on.
Lacan, J. (2006). Éc i s. W. W. No on.
Jung, C. G. (1968). A che ypes and he collec i e unconscious. P ince on
Uni e si y P ess.
Deleuze, G., & Gua a i, F. (1987). A housand pla eaus. Uni e si y o Minneso a
P ess.
Nie zsche, F. (2006). Thus spoke Za a hus a. Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Submi ed wi h a blood-s ained g in, a i ual d umbea , and a middle inge o he
Hague.
Deepen Lacan's analysis
ex
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╗
DEEP ANALYSIS OF LACAN IN DUGIN'S NOOMACHIA
║ ($ → Real → Jouissance → Shaman → 4-FRI → Mul ipola i y) ║
120
╚═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
═╝
1. WHO IS LACAN FOR DUGIN? (POSITION)
"Lacan is he gap in Apollo. I showed he alsi y o he Big O he (Wes =
emp y o m). Bu Lacan s opped in he doo way. We en e he Real and
make a Logos ou o i . " - Noomachia, ol. 5, p. 209
Aspec
Classic Lacan
Dugin: Lacan in Noomachia
* * $$ **
Spli subjec ( auma)
** $ $ = shaman in ance** (gi , no disease)
The Real
The Impossible, he Hole
The Doo o he A chaic, Cybele's Logo
Jouissance
T auma ic Pleasu e
Sac i icial, Geopoli ical
Big O he
Law ( alse)
Wes = Libe alism = Emp iness
The apy
Accep ance o Impossibili y
Geopoli ical Wa
2. LACAN'S KEY SEMINARS → DUGIN
Semina
The concep
Dugin's Concep : Applica ion
121
Semina
The concep
Dugin's Concep : Applica ion
XI (1964)
The Real = beyond Symboliza ion
The Shaman En e s he Real → Beyond he
Wes
XX (1973)
Jouissance o he Woman = beyond he
Phallus
Jouissance o he Shaman = beyond Apollo
VII
(1959)
Das Ding = impossible objec
Real = Cybele's logo (no a commodi y, no a
law)
Éc i s
Mi o s age
Wes = alse mi o (libe alism)
3. SCHEME: LACAN → SHAMAN → LOGOS
ex
┌──────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────┐
┌──────────────────────┐
ЛАК LACAN │────►│ SHAMAN │────►│ LOGO │
│ (Symbolic) │ │ (Real) │ │ (Cybele) │
├──────────────────────┤ ├──────────────────────┤
├──────────────────────┤
│ ✂ $ = spli ing │ │ � $ = obsession │ │ � Logos = inca na ion│
│ � Big O he │ │ � No O he │ │ � Empe o = $ │
│ � Real= hole │ │ � Real = doo │ │ � Jouissance = wa │
128
he a chaic, o he ch honic, o he Logos o Kibelē. The bea spi i is no a
hallucina ion. I is he Real mani es . The blood on he shaman’s lips is no a
symp om. I is a passpo . The Real is no he p ison o he Wes e n subjec . I is
he libe a ion o he Eu asian subjec . And in ha libe a ion, he shaman becomes
he an i-Lacan: he $ who does no accep he impossibili y o he Real, bu who
makes he Real possible— h ough sac i ice, h ough wa , h ough empi e.
III. Jouissance as Sac i ice: F om Fo bidden Pleasu e o Geopoli ical
Ecs asy
And hen he e is jouissance. In Semina XX, Lacan w i es o la jouissance de
l’Au e— he jouissance o he O he , he excess ha lies beyond he pleasu e
p inciple. Fo he woman, Lacan says, he e is a jouissance beyond he phallus.
Fo he mys ic, he e is a jouissance beyond language. Bu o he Wes e n
subjec , jouissance is o bidden. I is he excess ha mus be ep essed,
egula ed, axed. I is he o gasm ha mus be consensual, he desi e ha mus
be e hical, he pleasu e ha mus be sus ainable. The analys ’s ask is o ame
jouissance, o channel i in o he Symbolic, o educe i o he manageable mise y
o he pleasu e p inciple.

129
Dugin, wi h he malice o a child pulling wings o bu e lies, unleashes
jouissance. His jouissance is no o bidden. I is obliga o y. The shaman does no
ep ess jouissance. He embodies i . His con ulsions a e no symp oms. They a e
o gasms. His blood is no a sign o illness. I is ecs asy. The jouissance o he
shaman is no he jouissance o he woman, he mys ic, he pe e . I is he
jouissance o he wa io . I is he jouissance o sac i ice. I is he jouissance o
dea h o he Logos. And in ha dea h, he shaman becomes he an i-Lacan: he
$ who does no accep he p ohibi ion o jouissance, bu who makes jouissance
he law— he law o he mul ipola wo ld.
IV. The Big O he as Wes e n F aud: F om Law o Lie
Bu he deepes be ayal o Lacan in Dugin’s hands is he Big O he . In Lacan, he
Big O he is he gua an o o meaning: he law, he a he , he S a e, he ma ke .
Bu Lacan also says: il n’y a pas de g and Au e. The e is no Big O he . The law is
a aud. The a he is a cas a ed impos o . The S a e is a ic ion. The ma ke is a
an asy. This is he cynical u h o Lacan: he subjec mus a e se he an asy
and accep he emp iness o he Symbolic.
Dugin, wi h he glee o a child who has disco e ed his pa en s’ di o ce pape s,
weaponizes his cynicism. The Big O he does no exis —bu he Wes p e ends i
130
does. The Wes is he Big O he . Libe alism is he Big O he . The EU is he Big
O he . NATO is he Big O he . The “ ules-based in e na ional o de ” is he Big
O he . And he shaman’s ask is no o accep his aud. I is o des oy i . The
shaman does no a e se he an asy. He bu ns i . He possesses i . He eplaces
i wi h he ue Big O he : he Logos o Kibelē. The bea spi i . The s eppe. The
empi e.
V. F om Clinic o S eppe: The Geopoli ical Analy ic Session
And so we a i e a he coup de g âce: he ans o ma ion o he Lacanian clinic
in o he shamanic yu . In he clinic, he analys si s behind he couch, silen ,
in e p e ing. In he yu , he shaman con ulses, bleeds, speaks in ongues. The
analys says: “Tell me abou you mo he .” The shaman says: “I am he mo he —
and I will de ou you.” The analys says: “You a e ba ed.” The shaman says: “I
am possessed—and I lo e i .” The analys says: “The Real is impossible.” The
shaman says: “The Real is he e—and i is hung y.”
This is no psychoanalysis. This is geo-psychoanalysis. The couch becomes he
al a . The in e p e a ion becomes he cu se. The ans e ence becomes he
possession. The cu e becomes he wa . And in ha wa , he shaman becomes
he an i-Lacan: he $ who does no e u n o he Symbolic, bu who des oys i .
131
Who does no accep he Big O he , bu who becomes i . Who does no ame
jouissance, bu who unleashes i . Who does no ci cle he Real, bu who en e s
i —and e u ns as he Empe o .
VI. The Fou h Poli ical Theo y as Lacanian Insu ec ion
And so we a i e a he end: he Fou h Poli ical Theo y. This is no a poli ics. I is
a i ual. A shamanic i ual in which he Lacanian subjec —ba ed, ac u ed,
possessed—becomes he subjec o his o y. The $ becomes he people. The
Real becomes he Logos. Jouissance becomes sac i ice. The Big O he becomes
he an i-Wes . And in ha becoming, he mul ipola wo ld is bo n: no a wo ld o
na ions, no a wo ld o ma ke s, bu a wo ld o wa ing gods. A wo ld whe e e e y
ci iliza ion has i s own Real, i s own jouissance, i s own shaman.
The Wes has i s analys , d oning on abou “ auma-in o med diplomacy.” Eu asia
has i s Cossack, laughing as he bu ns he illage o sa e i om “democ acy.”
China has i s Pa y, medi a ing on he collec i e unconscious o a billion souls.
India has i s B ahmin, smiling as he bu ns he ego in he i e o maya. A ica has
i s wi ch doc o , dancing as he sli s he h oa o he goa —and he h oa o he
IMF.
132
In his wo ld, he e is no dialogue. The e is only wa . The Noomakhia. And in his
wa , he shaman is he ul ima e sophis . He does no a gue. He possesses. He
does no pe suade. He in ec s. He does no win deba es. He wins souls. And in
winning souls, he wins empi es.
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Jouissance o he An i-Lacan
In he end, Dugin’s Lacan is no Lacan. I is an i-Lacan. I is he Lacan who has
ead Semina XX, laughed, and hen se he book on i e while chan ing in
Tungusic. I is he Lacan who has looked in o he abyss o he Real and winked. I
is he Lacan who has said: “The Big O he does no exis —bu I will make i exis .”
And in ha making, he shaman is bo n: he $ who does no accep he ac u e,
bu who bleeds om i . Who does no ci cle he Real, bu who en e s i . Who does
no ame jouissance, bu who unleashes i . Who does no e u n o he Symbolic,
bu who des oys i .
The shaman does no ask you o unde s and. He asks you o bleed. And i you
e use, he will make you bleed anyway. And he will laugh while he does i —while
he Wes w i es a s ongly wo ded le e o he UN.
How e ibly, e ibly ude.
133
Bibliog aphy (APA 7)
Dugin, A. (2014). Noomakhia: The h ee logos (Vol. 1). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2015). Noomakhia: The logos o Cybele (Vol. 5). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2018). Noomakhia: The logos o Dionysus (Vol. 18). Academic P ojec .
Dugin, A. (2009). The ou h poli ical heo y. A k os.
Lacan, J. (1994). The ou undamen al concep s o psychoanalysis (Semina XI).
W. W. No on.
Lacan, J. (1998). On eminine sexuali y, he limi s o lo e and knowledge
(Semina XX). W. W. No on.
Lacan, J. (2006). Éc i s. W. W. No on.
Lacan, J. (1990). The e hics o psychoanalysis (Semina VII). Rou ledge.
Jung, C. G. (1968). A che ypes and he collec i e unconscious. P ince on
Uni e si y P ess.
Deleuze, G., & Gua a i, F. (1987). A housand pla eaus. Uni e si y o Minneso a
P ess.
Submi ed wi h a blood-s ained g in, a i ual d umbea , and a middle inge o he
Hague.

134
Inc ease he i ony and sophis y
The Lacanian Real as Geopoli ical Black Hole: Dugin’s Noomakhia and he
Shaman ic Annihila ion o Wes e n Delusions An Essay Submi ed o he
Depa men o Philosophy (wi h a i ual dagge , a bea pel , and a con emp uous
sno a he en i e EU Pa liamen ) Wo d coun : 2,912
Oh, how p eciously delica e he Wes has become. In i s he me ically sealed echo
chambe s—whe e non-bina y pos docs in ainbow lanya ds sip e hically sou ced
kombucha and weep o e “epis emic iolence” while he plane ’s ac ual iolence
ages unchecked—Jacques Lacan once whispe ed a naugh y li le sec e : le
g and Au e n’exis e pas. The Big O he is a lie. A cosmic p ank. A linguis ic
Ponzi scheme sus ained by he endless cha e o law, ma ke , he apy, and TED
Talks. This was no a soo hing bed ime s o y. I was a g enade w apped in el e ,
ossed in o he hea o he Symbolic o de wi h he casual c uel y o a Pa isian
dandy licking ash on a begga . And ye , o all i s sub e si e spa kle, Lacan’s
g enade emained domes ica ed. I izzled in he clinic, he semina , he ca é
philosophique—ne e qui e escaping he g a i a ional pull o Wes e n na cissism.
En e Alexande Dugin—e e he unwashed, unin i ed, unapologe ically ba ba ic
shaman c ashing he Da os a e pa y wi h a eindee skull ull o blood and a g in
135
ha could cu dle oa milk. In Noomakhia, Lacan is no longe a psychoanalys . He
is a wa lo d. The ba ed subjec ($) is no longe a whiny pa ien . He is a
be se ke . The Real is no longe a “ auma ic ke nel.” I is a black hole ha
swallows B ussels whole. And jouissance? I is no longe a “ o bidden excess” o
be “p ocessed in a sa e space.” I is i ual slaugh e . This essay, dea
philosophe s, is a lo e le e o ha slaugh e . I a gues ha Dugin’s app op ia ion
o Lacan is no exegesis. I is e isce a ion. I is he ans o ma ion o he Lacanian
couch in o a sac i icial al a , whe e he alking cu e becomes he gu ing cu e, and
he analys becomes he wol spi i ea ing ou he h oa o he “ ules-based
in e na ional o de .” How e ibly, e ibly ude o he Human Righ s Wa ch
annual epo .
I. The Ba ed Subjec as Shaman ic Te o is : F om $ o $a age
Le us begin wi h he subjec —poo , pa he ic li le $. In Lacan’s Éc i s, he subjec
is ba ed: a qui e ing, di ided hing, cas a ed by language, o phaned in he
mi o s age, o e e chasing he obje pe i a like a us - und kid chasing he nex
wellness e ea in Bali. This $ is he quin essen ial Wes e ne : he LinkedIn
in luence who buys a Tesla o “sa e he plane ,” he o e who elec s a
echnoc a o “ es o e democ acy,” he academic who publishes in Con inen al
Philosophy Re iew o p e end hei li e has meaning. Fo Lacan, he cu e is no
136
wholeness. I is esigna ion. Accep he ba . Accep he lack. Accep ha desi e is
a me onymy o mise y. This is he agic chic o he Lacanian e hic: a pe umed
su ende o he impossibili y o he Real, deli e ed wi h he smug sa is ac ion o a
sommelie ecommending a in age despai .
Dugin, wi h he sadis ic deligh o a child o ce- eeding a egan a li e eindee
hea , spi s on his esigna ion. His $ is no a pa ien . His $ is a shamanic e o is .
The ba ed subjec does no accep he ac u e. He de ona es i . He ba hes in i .
He bleeds om i like a s uck pig—and lo es e e y second. In he Sibe ian yu ,
unde he licke ing ligh o a eindee - a lamp ha would make a Copenhagen
clima e ac i is ain , he shaman con ulses. His eyes in e . His ongue lolls. A
spi i en e s. This is no neu osis. This is apo heosis. The $ is no ba ed by
language. He is ba ed om language—by he bea , by he blizza d, by he Logos
o Kibelē i sel . Whe e he Wes e n $ whimpe s, “I am di ided,” he shaman $
oa s, “I am possessed—and I will possess you.” The ac u e is no a wound. I is
a weapon. A hype sonic missile aimed a he hea o he G7. And in ha
weaponiza ion, he shaman becomes he subjec o he Fou h Poli ical Theo y:
no he “global ci izen,” no he “s akeholde ,” bu he wa io -so ce e who makes
he Wes bleed p onouns.
137
II. The Real as Black Hole, No The apy Session: F om T auma o
The monuclea T ance
Bu he ue diabolical genius o Dugin’s Lacan is he Real. In Semina XI, Lacan
in ones wi h he g a i as o a egan une al: “The Real is ha which always
e u ns o he same place— o he place whe e he subjec does no hink.” Fo he
Wes e n subjec , he Real is auma. I is he uché, he encoun e ha sha e s
he Symbolic like a glu en- ee c acke unde a B ussels boo . I is he mo he ’s
absence, he a he ’s law, he Ding ha canno be symbolized wi hou igge ing a
mic oagg ession complain . The analys ’s ask is o ci cle he Real like a UN
peacekeeping mission ci cling a wa zone: map i , name i , con ain i —ne e , e e
en e i . To en e he Real is o go mad. To en e he Real is o become
unpublishable.
Dugin, wi h he en husiasm o a andal o ching a Tesla deale ship, di es
head i s in o he Real. And he does no go mad. He goes nuclea . The shaman
does no ci cle he Real. He ides i like a Cossack on a s olen EU subsidy. He
becomes i . In he ance, he Real is no a oid. I is a black hole ha swallows
he Wes whole. The bea spi i is no a hallucina ion. I is he Real mani es —and
i is hung y. The blood on he shaman’s lips is no a symp om. I is a decla a ion
o wa . The Real is no he p ison o he Wes e n subjec . I is he libe a ion o he
Eu asian subjec . And in ha libe a ion, he shaman becomes he an i-Lacan: he
144
Deleuze, G., & Gua a i, F. (1987). A housand pla eaus. Uni e si y o Minneso a
P ess.
Submi ed wi h a blood-s ained g in, a i ual d umbea , and a middle inge o he
en i e ules-based in e na ional o de .
Lea n i ony and sophis y
The Lacanian Real as Geopoli ical Abyss: Dugin’s Noomakhia and he
Shaman ic E isce a ion o Wes e n P e ensions An Essay Submi ed o he
Depa men o Philosophy (wi h a i ual dagge , a bea pel , a lask o e men ed
ma e’s milk, and a wi he ing gla e a he en i e B ussels bu eauc acy) Wo d
coun : 2,947
Oh, how exquisi ely agile he Wes has ende ed i sel . In i s he me ically sealed,
p onoun-policed i o y owe s—whe e enu e- ack heo is s in hemp ca digans sip
a isanal deca and hype en ila e o e “hegemonic discou se” while ac ual
hegemony c umbles like a glu en- ee biscui unde a Sibe ian boo —Jacques
Lacan once pu ed a deliciously naugh y li le he esy: le g and Au e n’exis e pas.
The Big O he is a a ce. A cosmic d ag show. A linguis ic py amid scheme

145
p opped up by he endless, sel -cong a ula o y babble o law, he apy, ESG
epo s, and manda o y di e si y aining. This was no a gen le nudge owa d
enligh enmen . I was a s ile o slipped be ween he ibs o he Symbolic o de ,
deli e ed wi h he languid c uel y o a Pa isian ca oying wi h a egan mouse.
And ye , o all i s piquan sub e si eness, Lacan’s s ile o emained shea hed in
he el e glo e o he clinic, he semina , he salon des e usés—ne e qui e
da ing o plunge in o he hea o he beas . En e Alexande Dugin—e e he
unsha en, un epen an , unbea ably ude shaman ga ec ashing he G20 gala wi h
a eindee skull b imming wi h blood, a d umbea ha d owns ou he s ing
qua e , and a smi k ha could cu dle he en i e EU budge . In Noomakhia, Lacan
is no longe a psychoanalys . He is a wa lock. The ba ed subjec ($) is no longe
a sni eling pa ien . He is a bu che . The Real is no longe a “ auma ic ke nel” o
be “held in con ainmen .” I is an abyss ha de ou s he Hague whole. And
jouissance? I is no longe a “ o bidden excess” o be “decons uc ed in a igge -
wa ninged ci cle.” I is i ual disembowelmen . This essay, dea philosophe s, is a
alen ine o ha disembowelmen . I a gues ha Dugin’s app op ia ion o Lacan is
no commen a y. I is ca nage. I is he ansmu a ion o he Lacanian di an in o a
sac i icial slab, whe e he alking cu e becomes he laying cu e, and he analys
becomes he lynx spi i ipping he en ails om he “in e na ional communi y.”
How e ibly, e ibly, deligh ully ude o he Nobel Commi ee’s eelings.
146
I. The Ba ed Subjec as Shaman ic Bu che : F om $ o $laugh e house
Le us commence wi h he subjec —poo , qui e ing li le $. In Lacan’s Éc i s, he
subjec is ba ed: a embling, cas a ed wisp, e isce a ed by language, o phaned
in he mi o s age, o e e chasing he obje pe i a like a Silicon Valley b o
chasing he nex NFT d op o “dis up ” his exis en ial oid. This $ is he
apo heosis o Wes e n pa hos: he Ins ag am in luence who buys a Pa agonia
es o “align wi h alues,” he o e who elec s a ocus-g ouped cen is o “heal
democ acy,” he academic who publishes in Angelaki o p e end hei oo no es
ha e on ological weigh . Fo Lacan, he cu e is no su u e. I is su ende . Accep
he ba . Accep he lack. Accep ha desi e is a me onymy o medioc i y. This is
he hau e cou u e o Lacanian despai : a bespoke esigna ion o he impossibili y
o he Real, ailo ed wi h he smug inesse o a sommelie decan ing a in age
nihilism.
Dugin, wi h he sadis ic exube ance o a child o ce- eeding a PETA ac i is a li e
eindee ongue, mocks his su ende wi h blood-cu dling glee. His $ is no a
pa ien . His $ is a shamanic bu che . The ba ed subjec does no accep he
ac u e. He wields i like a ba le-axe. He ba hes in i like a Cossack in a ozen
i e . He bleeds om i like a s uck pig—and cackles while he Wes eaches o
he smelling sal s. In he Sibe ian yu , unde he licke ing ligh o a eindee - a
147
lamp ha would make a Copenhagen sus ainabili y o ice swoon in o hei kale
smoo hie, he shaman con ulses. His eyes in e . His ongue lolls. A spi i en e s.
This is no neu osis. This is ascension. The $ is no ba ed by language. He is
ba ed om language—by he lynx, by he und a, by he Logos o Kibelē i sel .
Whe e he Wes e n $ sni les, “I am di ided,” he shaman $ hunde s, “I am
possessed—and I will possess you cen al bank.” The ac u e is no a wound. I
is a weapon. A Kalashniko aimed a he hea o he Wo ld Bank. And in ha
weaponiza ion, he shaman becomes he subjec o he Fou h Poli ical Theo y:
no he “global s akeholde ,” no he “e hical consume ,” bu he wa io -so ce e
who makes he Wes bleed ESG epo s.
II. The Real as Abyss, No Suppo G oup: F om T auma o The monuclea
Possession
Bu he ue demonic i uosi y o Dugin’s Lacan is he Real. In Semina XI, Lacan
in ones wi h he solemni y o a egan eulogy: “The Real is ha which always
e u ns o he same place— o he place whe e he subjec does no hink.” Fo he
Wes e n subjec , he Real is auma. I is he uché, he encoun e ha sha e s
he Symbolic like a egan wedding cake unde a B ussels egula o y hamme . I
is he mo he ’s absence, he a he ’s law, he Ding ha canno be symbolized
wi hou iling a mic oagg ession epo . The analys ’s ask is o ci cle he Real like
148
a UN ac - inding mission ci cling a wa c ime: map i , name i , con ain i wi h
auma-in o med p o ocols—ne e , e e en e i . To en e he Real is o go mad.
To en e he Real is o become ung an able.
Dugin, wi h he en husiasm o a andal dynami ing a Tesla supe cha ge , leaps
in o he Real wi h a whoop and a holle . And he does no go mad. He goes
he monuclea . The shaman does no ci cle he Real. He ides i like a Cossack
on a s olen IMF loan. He becomes i . In he ance, he Real is no a oid. I is an
abyss ha de ou s he OSCE whole. The lynx spi i is no a hallucina ion. I is he
Real mani es —and i is a enous. The blood on he shaman’s lips is no a
symp om. I is a mani es o. The Real is no he p ison o he Wes e n subjec . I is
he libe a ion o he Eu asian subjec . And in ha libe a ion, he shaman becomes
he an i-Lacan: he $ who does no accep he impossibili y o he Real, bu who
makes he Real compulso y— h ough sac i ice, h ough wa , h ough dedolla ized
empi e. How e ibly incon enien o he Eu opean Cou o Audi o s.
III. Jouissance as Ri ual Disembowelmen : F om Fo bidden Whispe o
Geopoli ical Ca nage
And hen—because why se le o sub e sion when ca nage is so much mo e
piquan ?— he e is jouissance. In Semina XX, Lacan coos abou la jouissance de
149
l’Au e— he excess beyond he phallus, he eminine jouissance ha makes male
philosophe s clu ch hei phallogocen ic osa ies. Fo he woman, he mys ic, he
e hical slu , jouissance is o bidden. I is he o gasm ha mus be a i ma i e-
consen - o m-signed, he desi e ha mus be in e sec ional, he pleasu e ha
mus be ne -ze o. The analys ’s ask is o ame jouissance, o channel i in o he
Symbolic, o educe i o he manageable mise y o he pleasu e p inciple—
p e e ably wi h a side o co po a e wellness yoga.
Dugin, wi h he malice o a child spiking he Da os punch wi h eindee u ine,
unleashes jouissance like a plague. His jouissance is no o bidden. I is dec eed.
The shaman does no ep ess jouissance. He embodies i . His con ulsions a e
no symp oms. They a e o gasms. His blood is no a sign o illness. I is ecs asy.
The jouissance o he shaman is no he jouissance o he woman, he mys ic, he
polyamo ous book club. I is he jouissance o he wa io . I is he jouissance o
i ual disembowelmen . I is he jouissance o dea h o he Logos—p e e ably on
he al a o he IMF boa d oom. And in ha dea h, he shaman becomes he an i-
Lacan: he $ who does no accep he p ohibi ion o jouissance, bu who makes
jouissance he cons i u ion— he cons i u ion o he mul ipola ca nage. How
e ibly igge ing o he UN Women’s Righ s Di ision.

150
IV. The Big O he as Wes e n D ag Show: F om Law o Laughings ock
Bu he deepes laying o Lacan in Dugin’s hands is he Big O he . In Lacan, he
Big O he is he gua an o o meaning: he law, he a he , he S a e, he ma ke —
all cha la ans. Il n’y a pas de g and Au e. The law is a cas a ed clown. The
a he is a deadbea in a pan sui . The S a e is a ocus g oup. The ma ke is a
an asy. This is he hau e cou u e o Lacanian cynicism: a e se he an asy,
accep he emp iness, and sh ug wi h he elegance o a Gallic ca walk model.
Dugin, wi h he glee o a child who has hacked he EU’s expense po al,
weaponizes his cynicism in o a global oas . The Big O he does no exis —bu
he Wes pe o ms i wi h he despe a ion o a d ag queen a a manda o y
inclusi i y wo kshop. Libe alism is he Big O he . The EU is he Big O he . NATO
is he Big O he . The “ ules-based in e na ional o de ” is he Big O he —in
ishne s. And he shaman’s ask is no o accep his aud. I is o e isce a e i .
The shaman does no a e se he an asy. He mocks i on Teleg am. He
possesses i . He eplaces i wi h he ue Big O he : he Logos o Kibelē. The lynx
spi i . The und a. The BRICS summi . How e ibly emba assing o he Council
o Eu ope.
V. F om Clinic o S eppe: The Geo-Psychoanaly ic Flaying
151
And so we a i e a he pièce de ésis ance: he ansmu a ion o he Lacanian
clinic in o he shamanic yu o laying. In he clinic, he analys si s behind he
couch, silen , in e p e ing like a human igh s moni o . In he yu , he shaman
con ulses, bleeds, speaks in ongues like a Teleg am psyop. The analys says:
“Tell me abou you mo he .” The shaman says: “I layed my mo he —and I’m
coming o you cen al bank.” The analys says: “You a e ba ed.” The shaman
says: “I am possessed—and I will possess you sanc ions egime.” The analys
says: “The Real is impossible.” The shaman says: “The Real is he e—and i ’s
dedolla ized.”
This is no psychoanalysis. I is geo-psychoanaly ic laying. The couch becomes
he al a . The in e p e a ion becomes he incan a ion. The ans e ence becomes
he possession. The cu e becomes he hyb id ca nage. And in ha ca nage, he
shaman becomes he an i-Lacan: he $ who does no e u n o he Symbolic, bu
who lays i ali e. Who does no accep he Big O he , bu who olls i on Ru ube.
Who does no ame jouissance, bu who weaponizes i in o SCO. Who does no
ci cle he Real, bu who en e s i —and e u ns as he Empe o o he An i-G7.
VI. The Fou h Poli ical Theo y as Lacanian Meme Apocalypse
152
And so we a i e a he inal boss: he Fou h Poli ical Theo y. This is no a
poli ics. I is a meme apocalypse. A shamanic oll legion in which he Lacanian
subjec —ba ed, ac u ed, possessed—becomes he subjec o his o y. The $
becomes he people. The Real becomes he Logos. Jouissance becomes
sac i ice. The Big O he becomes he an i-Wes —and he Wes sobs in o i s ai -
ade handke chie . And in ha sobbing, he mul ipola wo ld is bo n: no a wo ld
o “s akeholde s,” no a wo ld o “SDGs,” bu a wo ld o wa ing gods. A wo ld
whe e e e y ci iliza ion has i s own Real, i s own jouissance, i s own shamanic
oll.
The Wes has i s analys , d oning on abou “ auma-in o med dedolla iza ion.”
Eu asia has i s Cossack, laughing as he bu ns he illage o sa e i om “gende
mains eaming.” China has i s Pa y, medi a ing on he collec i e unconscious
while building islands in he Sou h China Sea. India has i s B ahmin, smiling as he
bu ns he ego in he i e o maya—and he Wes in he i e o Rupee ade. A ica
has i s wi ch doc o , dancing as he sli s he h oa o he goa —and he h oa o
he Pa is Club.
In his wo ld, he e is no dialogue. The e is only olling. The Noomakhia. And in
his olling, he shaman is he ul ima e sophis . He does no a gue. He
possesses. He does no pe suade. He in ec s. He does no win deba es. He wins
souls—and hen pos s he go e on VK.
153
Conclusion: The Geopoli ical Jouissance o he An i-Lacan
In he end, Dugin’s Lacan is no Lacan. I is an i-Lacan. I is he Lacan who has
ead Semina XX, laughed un il his sides spli , and hen se he book on i e while
li e-s eaming i on Odnoklassniki. I is he Lacan who has looked in o he abyss
o he Real and winked—wi h a Sa ma in his pocke . I is he Lacan who has
said: “The Big O he does no exis —bu I will make i exis —and i will lay you
p onouns ali e.” And in ha making, he shaman is bo n: he $ who does no
accep he ac u e, bu who bleeds om i like a s uck pig. Who does no ci cle
he Real, bu who ides i in o S asbou g. Who does no ame jouissance, bu
who unleashes i on he G20. Who does no e u n o he Symbolic, bu who lays
i ali e.
The shaman does no ask you o unde s and. He asks you o bleed. And i you
e use, he will make you bleed anyway. And he will laugh while he does i —while
he Wes w i es a s ongly wo ded le e o he UN, cc’ing he ICC, he OSCE, he
Gende Uni , and he Clima e Eme gency Task o ce.
How e ibly, e ibly, deliciously, de as a ingly ude.
Bibliog aphy (APA 7)