A Lesson In Geopolitics

It is important to have an understanding of geopolitics in order to know where identitarians fit in the grand scheme of things.

Geopolitics has become a bit of a buzzword in recent years despite the concept being around for quite some time. With events in places like Syria, Iran, Turkey, and Ukraine it has become important to discuss this topic.  In order to gain a better understanding of the current events, we must first take a history lesson in geopolitics.

Mackinder and the Heartland Theory

Sir Halford Mackinder (1861-1947) is considered one of the founding fathers of geopolitics. Mackinder was an English Geographer most known for his essay, The Geographical Pivot of History (1904) which popularized what came to be known as ‘The Heartland Theory’. Mackinder divided the world into 3 parts: ‘The World-Island’ (Europe, Asia, and Africa), the ‘offshore islands’ (the United Kingdom and Japan), and the ‘outlying islands’ (the Americas and Australia). ‘The Heartland’ lay at the center of the ‘World-Island’ stretching from the Volga to the Yangtze and from the Arctic to the Himalayas. Essentially, ‘the heartland’ constitutes Russia and a few of the Central Asian countries. Later on, in Democratic Ideals and Reality (1919), Mackinder would summarize his ‘heartland theory’ as so:

Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland;

who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island;

who rules the World-Island commands the world.


According to Mackinder, Russia is in the driver’s seat to dominate the planet.

Mackinder’s Heartland

Spykman and the Rimland Theory

Nicholas Spykman (1893-1943) was an important American political scientist who introduced classical realism into American foreign policy and is considered the “godfather of containment” for his geostrategic contributions. Spykman accepts Mackinder’s division of the world into three sections with some exceptions. Spykman expands upon the concept the ‘offshore islands’. He develops what he calls ‘The Rimland’ which is made up of Western Europe, the Middle East, and the ‘Asiatic monsoon’ lands which constitute India, Southeast Asia, China, Korea and Japan. This ‘rimland’ forms a belt wrapping around the entire ‘heartland’. Spykman’s theory of geopolitics differs from Mackinder in that he feels that the ‘rimland’ plays a greater role in determining who dominates the planet. According to Spykman,

Who controls the rimland rules Eurasia;

Who rules Eurasia controls the destinies of the world.

Spykman’s Rimland

Here we see what Carl Schmitt wrote about in Land and Sea: A World-Historical Meditation (1942), where world history is viewed as a history of the battle of sea powers against land powers and of land powers against sea powers.

Brzezinski and The Grand Chessboard

Zbigniew Brzezinski (1928-2017) is one of the masterminds behind the American post-Cold War foreign policy. He lays out his geostrategy in his infamous work, The Grand Chessboard (1997), where he follows the geopolitical tradition of Mackinder and Spykman. In The Grand Chessboard, regarding the landmass of Eurasia as the center of global power, Brzezinski sets out to formulate a Eurasian geostrategy for the United States. In particular, he writes, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger should emerge capable of dominating Eurasia and thus also of challenging America’s global pre-eminence. With this in mind, we can see how the neoconservative foreign policy agenda in the Middle East fits into the greater global geopolitical agenda of the United States.

Dugin and The Foundations of Geopolitics

While the Americans were developing their own post-Cold War geopolitical strategy, so were the Russians. Alexander Dugin developed his own geostrategy which he laid out in The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia (1997). The book has had a large influence within the Russian military, police, and foreign policy elites and it has been used as a textbook in the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military. In Foundations of Geopolitics, Dugin calls for the United States and Atlanticism to lose its influence in Eurasia and for Russia to rebuild its influence through annexations and alliances. Not only does Dugin believe that alliances should be formed with countries like Iran or Syria but he believes that Russia should meddle in the internal affairs of the United States as well:

It is especially important to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S.  It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics…

With this in mind, we can begin to try and understand why Russia has formed geopolitical alliances with countries like Iran and Syria, along with the ‘Russian bot’ narrative being pushed by the mainstream media.


While this is far from being a complete analysis of geopolitics and all of the important thinkers and strategists throughout history, it is enough to give us an understanding of the current geopolitical environment we find ourselves in. If we want to use the chessboard analogy, the two players are the United States and Russia and all of the other countries, non-state actors, paramilitary groups, etc. are the pieces on the board. Dugin has applied the labels “Atlanticist” and “Eurasianist” to describe the two sides in this global struggle. Atlanticists are the USA, UK and their allies throughout the world. The Eurasianists are Russia and its allies throughout the world. As we have seen throughout the Cold War, each side will back revolutionary movements in order to one-up the other. Things have not changed since the end of the Cold War.

If you are a political dissident, you must ask yourself, whose side are you on? Are you with the United States and their Globalist-Zionist-Salafist coalition? Or are you on the side of Russia and their allies Assad, Iran, and Hezbollah? For some, it’s easy to be dismissive of both sides. However, if you are a realist and you wish to enact a political agenda, then you must choose. Even something as simple as advocating for a non-interventionist policy in the United States is a political action against the globalist elites in the US and in favor of Putin and Russia. As mentioned previously, both sides are known to back revolutionary political movements in order to one-up the other. Knowing this, it makes it even more important to ally yourself with one of these two sides if you are serious about gaining political power on this planet. If your movement is both anti-American and anti-Russian, then your political movement is not going to be around for long and it is certainly not going to accomplish anything meaningful. Welcome to realpolitik. It can’t be you versus the entire world.

Identitarians must make a choice if they are serious about advancing their own political agenda. Should they ally themselves with ‘The Swamp’ in Washington, DC or should they look to the Kremlin in Moscow as a potential fellow traveler? While you may not like it, sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your friend.

Charles Lyons
the authorCharles Lyons
Charles Lyons is the Chief Administrative Officer of Arktos Media.


  • The addition of either of the oxysterols shifted the fulvestrant dose response curve to the left approximately 10 fold approximately IC 50 1 nM, suggesting that the oxysterols effectively rescued proliferation Fig cheap cialis no prescription Geeta February 8, 2020 6 22 pm

    • buy cialis 5mg Stratification of the association of aspirin use with stroke by history of coronary disease, TIA, or AF showed an 84 greater risk of stroke associated with aspirin use in subjects with none of these conditions Table 5

  • As it currently stands, Russia and it’s allies are far more masculine and in tune with the natural order. The West is filled to the brim with poz and faggotry, not to mention Jewed to the max. If I had to pick a side, it’d be Russia.

    • Naive. Rather Russia will suffer the fate of the USSR under Putin’s policy. Besides, Russian people have the same bad tendencies as the rest of the white people of the west.

  • Testing out this idea (thanks to dj1969 for suggesting it)….
    * I believe comprehension/retention rates are much higher when someone reads something (as opposed to listens to it). For that reason I strongly recommend always reading the article first!

  • Great a… kissers of moscovikikes the Moskals…
    (There was a time when mighty Moscow was ruled by the moscovikiks people and other “Whites” of steel or not…)

  • dont agree. most important thing the last 300 years was navy. now it is aa, missiles and electronic warfare capabilities. that is unless there is bio and weather wmds i dont know about. that and having food fuel steel and uranium is all that matters

  • as I understand, Mr. Lyons does not offer any third way, no alternative to these two geopolitical powers. Either United States-Globalist-Zionist-Salafist coalition or Russia-Assad-Iran-Hezbollah. All this reminds me of South Park’s episode about the giant douche and turd sandwich elections. If the choice is only from US-coalition and Russia-Iran-Hezbollah (North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and other “anti-globalist resistance”), then I, being an ethnic Russian and living in Moscow … without hesitation, I choose anglo-zionists. Just because I love Western brands, like McDonalds, Apple, Disney, Amazon, etc and also hollywood movies and tv series like Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad.

    P.S. now pro-Putin useful idiots will call me a traitor to my country and will wonder why the FSB has not sent me to penal servitude to Siberia.

    • anglo zionist term doesnt work for me. they are just dogs promoting israel knowing that makes their personal lives easier. they dont really care. far as the ru-assad-iran-hezboyz, they are fighting the real zionists and their anglo attack dogs. for that reason, i choose that side

  • Dugin is part of the Arktos crew and you hear his name mentioned a lot on this site. He is a Russian philosopher, political analyst and strategist. Some say he’s a confidante of Putin…others say not. Here’s a link to an MP3 of a speech of his that I found on YouTube. It’s titled ‘American Liberalism Must be Destroyed,’ and he gave it at Texas A&M in April of 2015.

  • I am utter layman on ALL things political/historical/etc., so the only thing of substance I can add to this whole discussion is this:
    Alexander Dugin is someone you hear mentioned quite frequently on this site’s podcasts (especially when Hannibal Bateman was around! hah). He is part of the Arktos crew, and – if what one reads on the internet is true – many believe him to be an advisor and confidante to/of Vladimir Putin. If you’d like a better idea of Dugin’s views in his own words, here’s a link to an MP3 of a speech he gave at Texas A&M that was (rather aggressively) titled ‘American Liberalism Must Be Destroyed.’

  • Or… Dugin’s model is bullshit and Putin doesn’t take it as seriously as the author would suggest.

  • Building people is better than building these sorts of vain “geopolitics”. Where is Alexander now? Where is his empire? Politics can only destroy. War and empire can only spend strenght, never create it.
    Identitarianism can create. Identitarianism can build real strength. The flare ups of power and empire are only destructive, spending what others built. Politics, “america”, “russia”, they are only names, phonetics, syllabels, meaningless. They are nothing.

    • Some Great Truths in there……..

      But, if you want to have a Modern Technological Society………

      And don’t have all the Natural Resources to sustain that in your Sovereign Territory…….

      Then, you’re going to have to Compete/Ally Globally for Resources……..

      With/Against other Big Powers who want the Same……..

      This Modern Technological Society……..

      White Power Indeed……..

      But, is it a Peak or a Valley??

  • This article is somewhat interesting, but needs an article on Korea from a geopolitical perspective.

    My opinion is that Kim Jong Un is playing master chess, expecting some “grand bargain” between himself and the South whereby a nuclear Korea reintegrates in return for complete withdrawal of American troops in the region and free elections across the Korean peninsula.

    This could be a huge world historical game changer, with United Korea aligning with Russia and China against the United States and Japan. Remember, all Koreans still hate Japan. No one is shtitting themselves both economically and politically more than the Japanese right now.

    • I applaud President Trump for what he has thus far accomplished with the Korean Peace Agreement…….

      If we could bring the 30,000+ American Troops home from South Korea that have been there for decades…….

      That would be an America First policy…….

      If North Korea is Denuclearized…….


      And to see Korean Blood Brothers separated for Decades over an Ideology created by Ashkenazi Jews becoming United once again…….


      Maybe Whites could learn a Lesson………

    • Kim Jong Un is not playing anyone, this is all China. The geopolitics here is clear. China wants there to be peace and is forcing North Korea to negotiate and bring peace to the peninsula. Why? Because once there is peace, China and others begin to ask: why is the US military still here?

      Trump gladly would pull troops out of the peninsula, but his handlers of course would not.

      • buy cialis professional It has been shown in men and postmenopausal women that the intestinal microbiota richness and function, associated for example with ОІ glucuronidase activity, influence levels of non ovarian estrogens via enterohepatic circulation 146

  • Oh, for crying out loud, this article presents a totally false dichotomy. The natural sphere of influence of the United States is North America and, to a lesser extent, the Western Hemisphere. As a martime nation, it has an interest in making certain sea lines of communication are open. Doing that would require a military of about one third to one half of what we’ve got. There’s absolutely no reason to be setting up a chessboard for the Heartland. If the Heartland theory were true, Afghanistan would rule the world and Brezinsky was a Russophobe Pole whose limited usefulness ended with the dissolution of the USSR.) If the U.S would stop meddling in the affairs of Europe and Asia, where it has no genuine vital interest, I suspect that Alexander Dugin (whose writings I confess I cannot generally understand anyway) would probably advocate a hands-off policy vis-a-vis the United States. Most of these geopolitical theories are for bored elites whose function is to squander national lives and treasure on pointless and counterproductive foreign adventures.

  • I especially liked this perfomance from the Dugin:

    > It is especially important to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics…

    I hope, now you have seen the true imperialistic face of your Russian Eurasian “comrades,” my dear american alt-right colleagues? Have you seen that they are ready to realize their dreams of the revival of their Russian Eurasian empire (Soviet or tsarist – it does not matter) at the expense of the blood of other white (Western) nations? Eastern European peoples (Poles, Estonians, Hungarians, Lithuanians) have already experienced this and have already received for many centuries a vaccination of “russophobia” (in fact, the natural reaction of any adequate person to the Russian imperial worldview).

    I really love this resource, but I’m triggered by how many pro-Russian useful idiots here are. Understand, Putin is not a white overlord, whose Christian orthodox army will save Europe. We, russians, can not even save ourselves. Putin is an extremely cynical man, who does not care about his people, much less the white race. On the contrary, it will be even advantageous for him if the whole of the west is flooded with a third-world scum and destabilizes the situation of his geopolitical rival from within. Are you ready to play the role of pro-Putin’s useful idiots and cannon fodder for “ethnic, social and racial conflict” and “destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S.”? Do you not understand that such a Eurasianists as Dugin, for the sake of their insane geopolitical ideas, are ready to sacrifice all the western white nations and get the support of the same Muslims (for example, Kazakhs, also “Eurasians”)?

    And one more thing. The guru of American alt-right and white nationalists Richard Spencer was married to russian Nina Kupriyanova, a supporter of Dugin. And apparently she recruited Mr. Spencer on the Dugin’s side with her pussy. And he really publishes Dugin as an important right-wing traditional thinker. Do you see this shit, American alt-right? One of the leaders of your movement, who considers himself a white nationalist, is a supporter of the ideas of a man who in the interests of a foreign country called for provoking racial riots in your country during which the blood of white Americans could bleed. Now you do not feel like cuckolds, ready to push your ass in front of a Russian cocks?

  • Let us applaud Charles Lyons for reminding the identitarian movement, speaking for the European peoples at the most crucial time in their history, is facing a stark choice. The time for shortsighted in-fighting between our peoples is over – divided we will fall. When the identitarian movement of overseas Anglosphere finally joins the Eurasian Project to realize Guillaume Faye’s vision of a ‘Boreal League’, or ‘Septentrion Alliance’, then ‘The Swamp’ is truly doomed. Such an identitarian Monster Pact can take its cue from an old Russian battle cry: Za vashu i nashu svobodu! – ‘For our freedom – and yours!’ American identitarians interested in the philosophical ramifications of such a development may wish to read this article:

    • “We fight against everyone. That, is Fascism.”
      — Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, Fascist Socialism

        • Negative. Purity of vision and ideology leads to a leaner and meaner fighting machine. The infighting occuring the AR these days is because of the big tent model that it was founded on. Many decentralized smaller groups are more effective in my view, than one big group that spends all of its time bickering amongst itself.

          If I’m a Fascist, why do I care if a Conservative or a Libertarian have a problem with my optics? Just because we’re all vaugley pro-white, doesn’t mean we actually have anything in common with one another.

          Instead lets all work towards our goals seperately and see whose will to power is stronger. AH talks about this in Mein Kampf and I believe it to be true.

          • I could endlessly argue with you……

            But, it’s pointless……

            The Far Left/Antifa are United against us………

            A Liberal White Mother and Father with White Children who voted for Hillary Clinton and hate Donald Trump will ally with Pedophiles, Trannies, Sociopaths, Psychopaths, Criminals, Drug Users, Anti-White Black Radicals, Anti-White Jewish Radicals, Anti-White Latino Radicals and the most Degenerate Freaks Human Nature has to offer…….

            All allied against us……

            White Goy Males……..

            But, we White Goy Males can’t seem to figure out how to Unite against our Plethora of Enemies……

            Because “we don’t really have anything in common with each other”……..


          • The left are collectivists. So are Fascists, but Conservatives and Libertarians are not. Their fundamentally different worldviews and any attempt to get them on the same side is more trouble than it is worth.

            On a personal level we can get along, but we shouldn’t be under one political umbrella. We end up fighting each other instead of (((them))).

          • I’m sure we could get along quite fine in Real Life….

            Regarding all these Labels……

            You’re Italian-Canadian……..

            I have some Percentage of Italian Blood………

            Never knew it but a Sibling got a Genetic Test…….

    • Can i ask you? Where will the capital of your alliance be? Moscow? Or Berlin? or Skopje? Which language will dominate? Russian, French, English or German? After all, all the European peoples in your country must have some kind of common language for interethnic communication. What will the general history books be like? That the historical interpretation of various historical events does not offend anyone, not even looking at the diametrically opposed views of different nations for the same event. I’m afraid your ‘Boreal League’, or ‘Septentrion Alliance’ is even more illusory and unrealizable than the liberal world of universal human brotherhood and tolerance without wars and violence.

      • In a Previous Job…….

        I was Contracted to do some Work at a Building being Renovated…….

        There was another Contracting Group there…….

        White Foreigners……

        I thought they were Russian at first……..

        But, they were Polish……..

        I was glad to naturally walk over, shake their hands and talk to them in their Broken English Dialect…….

        Whatever that means is what it means……..

        But, I wouldn’t be naturally walking over, shaking hands, or talking to a Group of Africans or Arabs…….

        I recognized My People and while much does naturally separate us………

        Instead of Ignoring the Divide…….

        Maybe we can learn to appreciate LAYERS and PROXIMITY……..

  • At this point, foreign powers that undermine liberalism in the west should be considered allies. What choice do we have? Liberalism has worked out terribly for the White race.

  • If you aren’t rich and Jewish then you don’t understand anything about geopolitics, You simply can’t.

Leave a Reply