The study dedicates to the genetic problems of geopolitical doctrines associated with the attribution of institutional attributes to space. It analyses the ontological foundations of geopolitics and the possibilities of its effective use. The work demonstrates that the apparent instrumentality of the geopolitical method of research is based on myths taken on faith, that is, it lies outside the boundaries of scientific knowledge. Panideas, thalassocracy and tellurocracy, the concepts of Heartland and Rimland, etc., are used as basic mythologemes. The use of geopolitical argumentation in practical politics only serves as a cover for specific foreign policy actions. And that is why the study of geopolitics is of special interest to science. The article examines the category of additional space, which sometimes complements the concept of imaginary space and subsequently forms an important part of geopolitical theories. Examples of geopolitical constructs that have emerged in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and the South Atlantic are used to explore both their connection to classical geopolitics and the specificity of their own concepts. From this perspective, the Sinocentric concept of the world “Community of Common Destiny,” the geopolitical aspect of the Indian concept of Hindutva, Iranian and Turkish constructs based on panideas, the South African concept of the “Island of Africa,” the Japanese geopolitical projects of the “Great Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” and the “Security Diamond,” axial constructs of Brazilian and Indonesian geopoliticians. The methodological basis of the study is critical analysis, which means correlating the methodological basis of geopolitics with specific concepts and doctrines. As a result, the author concludes that the spread of geopolitical ideas formed in Western countries outside the Old World has only expanded and diversified the scope of their application, without bringing something new to them. In general, geopolitical constructs based on imaginary spaces, despite a certain demand in the world of science and politics, do not give an acceptable effect in both areas.