The article examines the ideas of the XXI century traditionalism and assesses their significance for analysing the problems of modern state administration. It substantiates the natural appeal to tradition as a source of stability and continuity in the context of globalisation, digitalisation, crisis of trust in institutions, and fragmentation of cultural space. Drawing on the Russian Federation’s historical experience and global philosophical thought, the authors argue that periods of crisis and geopolitical instability encourage the return to traditional foundations that can serve as integrative and legitimising elements in the political order. The focus is on the works of the classics of traditionalism, such as R. Génon, J. Evola, F. Schuon, and M. Eliade, who offered a systematic critique of modern and postmodern. They emphasised the destruction of the sacred and cultural foundations of society under the influence of liberalism, secularism, and globalist unification. Modern interpretations of traditionalism, presented by A. de Benoist, D. Venner, and A.G. Dugin, link these ideas to the problems of information sovereignty, cultural identity, and sustainability of states in the context of globalisation. The authors emphasise that traditionalism cannot be considered as a practical programme for state-building, but its analytical potential lies in the ability to critically examine the categories of power, legitimacy, hierarchy, and relationship between tradition and innovation. It allows us to identify the vulnerabilities of liberal-democratic models, analyse the limits of democratic procedures in unstable environments, and explore cultural identity as a resource for political consolidation. In this way, the ideas of traditionalism are not so much an alternative to modern as an intellectual counter-position that expands the methodological toolkit of political science. Their study contributes to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of legitimising power and finding sustainable models of public administration in the face of the global challenges of the XXI century.
Гончарова et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: