Eurasianism and geopolitics: Social mythologemes of space

The article considers the origins of Eurasianism as a Russian social doctrine that emerged as an answer to the Western geopolitical concepts, in particular of the Anglo-Saxon and German geopolitical schools. Both concepts serve to justify social institutions and associations based on the difference between the spaces of the Eastern and Western parts of Eurasia. The authors argue that geopolitics of both the Western-European and Eastern-European types is based on mythologemes which claim to be of scientific importance but are not capable of achieving this status. The article shows that both theories claim (1) the invention of an ideal timeless homeland of society on the basis of a mythological interpretation of space; (2) possession of sacred knowledge (through the sacralization of space) which is actually profane. The key difference between Western geopolitical schools (Anglo-Saxon and German) and Eurasianism is the proposed connection between space and a specific society. Geopolitics proceeds from the constant spatial opposition as a factor of social-political competition. The geopolitical assessment of reality is based on the need to attack the ‘alien’ space due to its initial, ‘natural’ hostility. The geopolitical hostility and even aggressiveness contradicts the defensive nature of Eurasianism which declares that space unites peoples with similar values; therefore, their societies should defend their ‘space of development’ from the encroachments of the Western countries. Thus, Atlanticism as a global project of the contemporary Western geopolitics fundamentally contradicts Eurasianism which does not accept hegemonism and supports the principle of a multipolar world; today, the level of conflict between these projects is not high, although there are no prospects for this conflict resolution.