For Southern and Pettibone, as for many on the far right, Russia represents a conservative haven where, in Southern’s words, “traditionalism is normalized” and liberalism’s destructive tendencies are better understood. Still, she was adamant that they made a point of reaching out to Russians across the political spectrum. Their list of interviewees, which was promised to me by Southern but never received, was compiled ostensibly out of an effort to represent the fullness of the country’s political identity.

Dugin’s role as the star of the series, however, ought to come as no surprise. The ultranationalist philosopher has long advocated for a form of traditionalism and neo-fascism that has appealed to certain segments of the North American far right. His breed of Russian nationalism — known as neo-Eurasianism, which rejects a narrower view of ethno-nationalism in favor of a form of Russophied “manifest destiny” — has made its way into the thought of alt-right leaders, such as Richard Spencer and Matthew Heimbach.

“The ‘White nationalists’ [are] allies when they refuse modernity, global oligarchy and liberal-capitalism.”

Still, Southern was quick to stress that she had only received his email about a year ago, likely from a member of Identity Evropa — an American white nationalist, white supremacist activist organization. Before arranging their meeting in Russia, the three had no prior communication. Dugin’s responses were terse, she recalled, but the interview nevertheless took place mostly without a hitch. In May, Pettibone and Southern headed to the Legendary Hotel Sovietsky in the center of Moscow to record what would become a series of two shorter interviews, paired with one longer, rambling discussion. In a brief video introducing the series, Southern noted that “for those in more esoteric circles, Dugin’s name will certainly ring a bell — maybe some alarm bells, as the man is known to be a very dangerous thinker of sorts.” As evidence of his long-standing pariah status, she observed that some academics and activists had discovered the hard way that “just the fact of translating and reporting on Dugin has just nearly destroyed their intellectual careers.” (Southern, when asked about who in particular this statement referred to, did not disclose.)

Dugin’s comments were broad and often difficult to follow, jumping from transhumanism, to the revival of Orthodoxy in Russia, to Trump and the alt-right, and finally to traditionalism and the importance of “transcending” liberalism. (The latter constitutes the bedrock of what he has deemed “the fourth political theory,” which effectively envisions a form of “National Bolshevism” — a political ideology that has its roots in 1970s and 1980s Soviet Russia — that excludes “materialism, atheism, progressivism, and modernism.”) His comments ranged from the perplexing to the banal. He praised Trumpism as evidence that Americans could still exercise free will, while adding in a perplexing side note that Trump’s base didn’t actually consist of conservatives — Dugin’s worldview classifies traditional American conservatives as slaves to classical liberal ideology anyhow — but, rather, “the last human beings . . . because the other half is preparing to be transformed into something different, something post-human beings.” He advocated for a “return to the roots of our identity,” wherein all come to “rediscover [the] European logos, the axis of our spiritual tradition.”

Curiously, Dugin expressed some hesitation regarding his white nationalist, white supremacist fans, and in so doing, attempted to distance himself from the charges that his own ideology represented a form of modified fascism. When it comes to the alt-right, “[t]here are many interesting and positive points, for example,” he said, “I don’t like at all the kind of ironical Nazism and the use of some jokes that are not so funny for myself. I don’t accept third political theory. . . . This kind of ironical fascism is kind of, as well, a tool of liberalism, of the first political theory.” His comments, while updated for the political conditions of 2018, are hardly new. As he argued in an essay in Eurasian Mission: An Introduction to Neo-Eurasianism, “the ‘White nationalists’ [are] allies when they refuse modernity, global oligarchy and liberal-capitalism,” but less so when they clash with the central tenets of neo-Eurasianism.

In a video recorded shortly after their interview with Dugin, Southern noted that she came away “enthralled” by his commentary. The influence showed. “Classical liberalism is on the left side of the spectrum — that’s how far the Overton window has moved,” she said on the podcast “Warski Live” in early June. As for how the right would receive this critique, she continued: “I can’t wait for there to be huge think tank pieces on us funded by the Koch brothers on how we’re all shills for Russia or something because we’ve criticized capitalism in a minor manner.” At that point, it’s difficult to argue you’re just there to bring evil to light.