The French New Right was born in 1968. It is not a political movement, but a think-tank and school of thought. For more than thirty years—in books and journals, colloquia and conferences, seminars and summer schools, etc.—it has attempted to formulate a metapolitical perspective.
Metapolitics is not politics by other means. It is neither a "strategy" to impose intellectual hegemony, nor an attempt to discredit other possible attitudes or agendas. It rests solely on the premise that ideas play a fundamental role in collective consciousness and, more generally, in human history. Through their works, Heraclitus, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, and Karl Marx all triggered decisive revolutions, whose impact is still being felt today. History is a result of human will and action, but always within the framework of convictions, beliefs and representations which provide meaning and direction. The goal of the French New Right is to contribute to the renewal of these sociohistorical representations.

Fabio Falchi (Italian geopolitist)

Globality and thallasocracy

(inteview for GRA-news by N.Speranskaya)

What is your view of the modern world order/international system? Do you consider the current world order to be ‘just’? If yes, then why? If no, how do you think it might be changed? Is it already changing?

First of all, it’s necessary to consider that in Carl Schmitt’s opinion the empty, neutral and unidentified space which initiated the British thalassocracy, was replaced by new “global” space, designed by modern mass and transport media during the 20^th century. So, British thalassocratic hybris flows into the conquering of infinite air aequor. A logic connection link these different moments. The world power which has comprehended these moments, making them on its own, is the hegemonic world power of our times: United States.

Jure Georges Vujic, french and croatian writter and geopolitolog

MULTIPOLARITY AS THE IDEA

      The premises of the modern world order and international system are already found towards the end of the 1648 Westphalian period of the right of gens and nation, based on the principle of respect for state sovereignty and territorial integrity. The entire concept of modern world order emerging in the wake of the French Revolution and materializing in Wilson’s 1919 League of Nations and the Yalta division is a negation of the principle of “jus publicam europeanum”, and just like the gradual anglosaxonisation of international law  and international relations, serves the purpose of Anglo-American global hegemony. With the fall of the Berlin Wall, the American derivation of the “new world order” is a culmination of such Anglo-American concept of international relations that is setting the stage for the internationalization of regional conflicts, introduction of permanent and emergency ad hoc international law: the right to interference, humanitarian intervention, and a wave of preventive military interventions that we witnessed in the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, as well as in Haiti. 

The only feasible alternative in present circumstances is to found in the context of a multi-polar world. Multi-polarity can grant to any country and civilisation on the planet the right and the freedom to develop its own potential, to organise its own internal reality in accordance with the specific identity of its culture and people, to propose a reliable basis of just and balanced international relations amongst the world’s nations. Multi-polarity should be based on the principle of equity among the different kinds of political, social and economic organisations of these nations and states. Technological progress and a growing openness of countries should promote dialogue amongst, and the prosperity of, all peoples and nations. But at the same time it shouldn’t endanger their respective identities. Differences between civilisations do not have to necessarily culminate in an inevitable clash between them – in contrast to the simplistic logic of some American writers. Dialogue, or rather ‘polylogue’, is a realistic and feasible possibility that we should all exploit in this regard.