From ancient conflicts fueled by territorial and material disputes, humanity has transitioned to modern confrontations driven by ideological disagreements. Modern humanity is perpetually oscillating between opposing extremes: socialism-communism, conservatism-liberalism, patriotism-globalism, autocracy (dictatorship)-democracy, the right-left divide, and so on. Even within a single doctrine, religion, or political party, different factions often emerge, unable to find common ground due to the inherent diversity within any ideology.
Simple calls for cooperation achieve little here, as they fail to address the root causes of conflict. The delicate game of balancing competing interests and perspectives can only delay crises, accumulating problems rather than resolving them. Adherents of opposing sides may endlessly criticize one another, accusing their opponents of every imaginable sin. However, the grim reality is that this kind of politics may one day culminate in the annihilation of all sides, reduced to nuclear ashes.
This work, presented for your consideration, offers a way to transcend ideological disputes, Laying the groundwork for a thriving future for our descendants.
The Importance of This Work for the World
Since the end of World War II, the silhouette of a new global conflict has emerged on the turbulent landscape of international relations. In the era of technological progress, its dangers extend far beyond traditional battlefields. This silhouette occasionally becomes more distinct, then fades from view, but it never disappears entirely. It continually casts shadows in the form of local conflicts, estrangement among nations and blocs, and social, political, and economic instability across various regions.
The nuclear “gun” that has been placed on the stage and hung on the wall will inevitably fire-if not in the current act of the global play, then in one of the subsequent acts, where the performers will be our children and grandchildren. This raises the very real possibility of the destruction of human civilization as we know it.
The danger lies not only in nuclear weapons and conflicts but also in various global trends across many spheres of life-for instance, in environmental issues. One way or another, the trajectory of civilization’s development is bound to shift.. The question is whether we can achieve this transformation while avoiding major crises in various fields or whether humanity will have to endure a more painful transition.
From ancient conflicts fueled by territorial and material disputes, humanity has transitioned to modern confrontations driven by ideological disagreements. Simple calls for peace stand no chance of success here, as they fail to address the root causes of conflict. The act of balancing interests and spheres of influence may only delay crises, accumulating unresolved problems without ever providing a permanent solution.
Continuing polemics among representatives of various competing ideologies also lead nowhere. Adherents of opposing ideologies, locked in perpetual conflict, may endlessly criticize one another, accusing their opponents of every imaginable sin. Yet, the grim reality is that this approach risks ultimately reducing all sides to nuclear ashes.
This underscores the urgent need to rethink global political paradigms and conceptualize a new framework for the development of human civilization. We must transcend the narrow confines of ideological disputes and lay the groundwork for a thriving future for our descendants. This is especially pressing as the fruits of modern technological advancements present opportunities that did not exist when most contemporary ideologies and social systems were first conceived.
This work proposes moving beyond the simple “tug-of-war” of ideologies on a horizontal plane by introducing an additional, vertical dimension to the discussion. The result is the formation of the approach known as Virtuous Pluralism, as well as its theistic counterpart, Spiritual Pluralism, which bear no resemblance to conventional pluralism.
The author of this work is a theologian with no ties to professional politics. This is an advantage, as it frees the author from the constraints of modern political thought, which has exhausted itself and can no longer offer nations a viable path forward. However, as a consequence, the article may contain inaccuracies and significant simplifications in its understanding of certain political, economic, or social details. The author hopes that more experienced political specialists will not focus on these aspects but instead concentrate on the essence of the proposed concept.
The Problem of Universalism
The modern political world presents universalism and individualism as the only two opposing approaches to the right of an individual or a community to an ideology.
In this context, universalism refers to the attempt to universalize a particular idea. Prominent examples of such an approach include efforts to spread communist or liberal-democratic principles worldwide, which their adherents regard as the pinnacle of contemporary human thought.
At the same time, universalists, each exalting their chosen maxims, clash with one another: liberalism versus socialism, globalism versus isolationism, progressivism versus traditionalism, democracy versus autocracy, clericalism versus secularism, patriotism versus cosmopolitanism, the right versus the left, and so on. Even within individual ideologies, factions struggle to find common ground, as each ideology contains countless variations.
When disillusioned by these battles, people often turn to a new principle, believing it to be a synthesis of the previous two. However, this new principle, once again elevated to the status of universal truth, creates its own antithesis, leading to a new dualism and another cycle of ideological conflict.
Some people remain trapped in this perpetual cycle of conflict, while others, disillusioned by such an approach, turn to nihilism. Nihilism entails rejecting the notion that universal truths exist, giving rise to individualism, where each person is free to choose whatever truth they prefer. Ordinary pluralism also falls under this ideology of nihilism.
Modern thought, rooted in Western philosophy, recognizes nothing beyond universalism, individualism, and their combinations in varying proportions. Either there is one universal truth for all, with everything else deemed false, or truth does not exist at all because it is relative. This dichotomy itself is merely another form of dualism, where universalists who believe in universalism clash with universalists who deny it under the guise of individualism.
The inability to analyze anything beyond this binary way of thinking perpetuates eternal conflict. Even in practice, quantum mechanics, with its wave-particle duality, has demonstrated the inadequacy of such binary reasoning. Virtuous Pluralism, however, is based on the premise that objective truth exists but is revealed to each individual in their own unique form. In practice, this is implemented by introducing concepts of the meaning of existence or the Higher Purpose, as well as free will, into politics.
Virtuous Pluralism does not imply nihilistic individualism. Instead, it asserts that a Higher Purpose for humanity exists. Within this framework, an infinite variety of unique ideologies can coexist, provided they share one common trait-they must serve a single Higher Purpose. It is the lack of understanding of the meaning of human civilization’s existence, and consequently, the absence of a shared goal, that elevates individual values and the ideologies built upon them to the status of absolutes, making them ends in themselves. The emergence of a common goal or challenge for human civilization, however, transforms all ideologies from self-serving ends into tools for achieving the true purpose.
Thus, Virtuous Pluralism is not universalism, as this approach accommodates infinite diversity. However, it is also not individualism, as an ideology cannot be chosen arbitrarily-it must serve a common goal. This is the essence of unity in diversity.
The Higher Purpose, or the meaning of existence, represents the Higher Truth, not a universal truth. Unlike universal truth, the Higher Truth does not render everything else false. Instead, it encompasses infinite uniqueness, provided that this uniqueness serves the common goal. In this framework, lower-order truths serve the Higher Truth, fulfilling the common purpose for which they exist.
Some truths fulfill this purpose better than others, enabling a departure from binary thinking of “truth versus falsehood” toward a perspective based on comparative effectiveness, which presents an entire spectrum. However, even their effectiveness is not universal but contextual, as it depends on the cultural and religious codes of a particular group, geographic specifics, historical legacy, and so on. Therefore, the choice of ideology is determined by time, place, and circumstances.
It is easy to observe that throughout history, societies have always included intellectuals, administrators and warriors, merchants, and the proletariat. When these four types of people come to power, they shape the social and economic structures of society based on their inherent values and tendencies.
The rule of the proletariat, driven by a demand for justice, leads to socialism and communism. The rule of merchants, motivated by prosperity, free trade, and social contracts, results in capitalism and democracy. The rule of administrators and warriors, focused on protection and order, leads to autocracy and a police state. Finally, the rule of intellectuals gives rise to technocracy and rationalism. Thus, all these forms of societal organization are merely manifestations of the struggle between the mentalities of different types of people. Ideological battles are nothing more than another form of class struggle.
Instead of universalizing each victorious mentality, this struggle must be transformed into a proper form of cooperation among them within a unified Social Body, similar to how all organs of a single biological body work toward a shared goal-its maintenance. Virtuous Pluralism is precisely about this.
The Problem of Dualism
When examining the spectrum of modern ideologies, we can observe numerous dualistic pairs competing against each other for the minds of people. The recognition, as proposed in the previous section, that every ideology is merely a tool for achieving humanity’s common goal, only partially resolves the issue. Supporters of these “-isms” will continue to fight one another, adhering to an “us versus them” mindset.
This work proposes replacing the confrontation among these “-isms” with cooperation by introducing, once again, an additional vertical dimension. This approach leaves only one dualistic pair: Virtue and Vice.
Let us break down what this means in practice. Every ideology is founded on some value. For example, liberalism emphasizes the value of freedom, while socialism focuses on the value of equality, which, in theory, is also not an end in itself, as the core value behind equality is justice. But is the problem that freedom is undesirable? Or that justice is somehow undesirable? Should the world not be both free and just?
The conflict between these dualistic pairs is an illusion, as their opposition is merely an aspect of a greater harmony, revealing its various facets. The problem with universalism within the framework of duality lies in its attempt to discard part of reality, elevating at best only one half of it to the status of an absolute. This gives rise to various cults hidden behind the corresponding ideologies-cults of personality, money, state, tradition, power, freedom, human life, and so on. All these are methods of substituting the Higher Purpose, driven by its absence. After all, nature abhors a vacuum-when there is no clearly defined Higher Purpose, something of a lower order inevitably takes its place as the absolute.
The question remains: “If the world is meant to be both free and just, and people are actively striving to make it so, why has it not yet become such under either liberalism or socialism?” The answer lies in the fact that, when attempting to realize these virtues in practice, vice enters the picture, distorting them.
To illustrate this clearly, let us define the virtuous values underlying each of the aforementioned ideologies and examine what they lead to when corrupted by either subtle or blatant vice, which is their common adversary.
Analysis of the Pairs
The following is a highly simplified analysis intended to illustrate the general trend.
| Democracy | Autocracy |
| Core values: freedom and awareness | Core values: order and authority |
Is the problem with freedom? Or with order? With awareness? Or with the acceptance of authority? The issue lies in their corrupted implementation.
Both corrupted democracy and corrupted autocracy foster a drive for personal power. Additionally, corrupted democracy leads to the tyranny of the majority, where the winner takes all, and the interests of minorities are no longer seriously considered; to the inability of opposing sides to negotiate with each other; and to endless debates among representatives of different interests. It also leads to politicians pandering to the base instincts of their audience for votes; to corruption; to a focus on short-term benefits rather than long-term goals; to populism and manipulative tactics.
Democracy is meant to be the rule of the people, but corrupted democracy results in various fraudsters coming to power through numerous manipulations. Another issue with the flawed understanding of the rule of the people is “excessively universal” suffrage, as even in developed democracies, individuals deemed incompetent, such as children, are not allowed to vote. This makes suffrage already less than universal. However, concepts of competence or qualifications to vote are highly subjective.
Corrupted autocracy is no better, as it leads to the elimination of dissenters and servility instead of service to the people; the assumption of responsibilities beyond its capacity. For instance, it results in the centralization of the economy in situations where proper organization is impossible-a phenomenon already observed in our national history. Corrupted autocracy also gives rise to nepotism, arbitrariness, and disregard for citizens’ interests, as well as the exclusion of the concerns of those who lack the favor of the leadership. Ultimately, it culminates in unjustified violence, repression, fear of losing power, and conflicts with other autocratic regimes.
Typically, one side of the conflict compares the ideal of democracy with corrupted autocracy, or the ideal of autocracy with corrupted democracy, demonizing the opponent. This implies that the issue lies with democracy or autocracy themselves, rather than with the corruption of both in practice, or with their reliance on only one or two values while universalizing their position and completely ignoring or diminishing other virtues.
A similar analysis can be conducted for other “conflicting” ideological pairs:
| Liberalism | Socialism |
| Core value: freedom | Core value: justice |
Corrupted liberalism leads to societal fragmentation, where individualism overrides collective welfare, often resulting in stark inequalities. With varying starting points in life, freedom becomes skewed, leading to a permissive environment where actions that harm individuals or society are allowed to flourish. In this environment, citizens struggle to balance their rights with the need for protection from external dangers. Furthermore, liberalism’s core value of freedom may, in its most extreme forms, demand the spread of its ideals-whether by persuasion or force-into regions where these ideas have yet to take hold, often disregarding local contexts or consent.
Corrupted socialism often leads to the erosion of fundamental rights and freedoms, masked by promises of temporary benefits. Justice becomes selective, influenced by the biases of those in power, fostering a bureaucratic system that undermines human dignity. This also results in resource shortages, misallocation, and a dampened incentive for personal growth, as basic needs are easily met, and the rewards of hard work may be unjustly redistributed.
| Capitalism | Communism |
| Core value: individuality | Core value: community |
Corrupted capitalism fosters class divisions, with exploitation of the less privileged in favor of monopolies driven by self-interest. It prioritizes short-term financial gains over long-term sustainability, often at the cost of society, the environment, and even animal welfare. This results in financial speculation, the breakdown of social bonds in pursuit of profit, and the corruption of political systems. The true value of goods is obscured by consumerism, while critical social services like education and healthcare become increasingly commercialized and inaccessible.
Corrupted communism generally results in the same challenges as socialism.
| Cosmopolitanism | Patriotism |
| Core value: respect for others | Core value: respect for one’s own |
Corrupted patriotism leads to the division of nations and states, resulting in nationalism, racism, xenophobia, and similar phenomena; to aggression against cultural and other minorities; to blind acceptance of all imperfections and mistakes of one’s country; to a sense of historical injustice, resentment toward other states, and unjustified armed conflicts with them; and to the prioritization of less significant national interests over more meaningful universal human values.
Corrupted cosmopolitanism leads to the loss of identity and the complete dissolution of one’s uniqueness into a collective whole; to the rejection of values accumulated by previous generations in favor of stronger global actors; to the weakening of social ties and the loss of heritage; to the concentration of power in the hands of global elites disconnected from the interests of citizens and their local social communities; and to the spread of corrupted universalism.
| Globalism | Isolationism |
| Core value: cooperation | Core value: independence |
Much of what has been said about the previous pair applies to these as well. It is worth adding that corrupted globalism leads to compromise instead of synthesis; to freeloading, dependency, and the resulting exploitation; to the loss of global diversity; and to the inability to address problems promptly.
Corrupted isolationism leads to stagnation and missed opportunities, difficulties in addressing global issues, and a retreat into corrupted universalism within the country, with all the resulting long-term consequences depending on the chosen ideology. It also leads to tolerating vice on a global scale.
| Individualism | Universalism |
| Core value: the beauty of diversity | Core value: the existence of an ideal |
The effects of their corrupted forms have already been discussed in the section on the problem of universalism, so they will only be addressed briefly here. Corrupted individualism manifests as nihilism, denying any real moral vector, and as corrupted universalism, disguising itself under the guise of pluralism.
Corrupted universalism leads to the denial of diversity and the justification of infringing on others’ freedoms under the pretext of delivering a higher good.
| Progressivism | Traditionalism |
| Core value: advancing toward improvement | Core value: preserving the best |
Much within this pair has already been addressed in the analysis of previous pairs. In addition, it can be noted that corrupted progressivism leads to the spread of ideologies that are outwardly enticing yet based on vice or lead to it, as well as to undesirable and poorly thought-out consequences, harming those who must suffer for the sake of change.
Corrupted traditionalism, often associated, for example, with hierarchical social structures, can lead to the exploitation of some people by others, to corrupted universalism and the corresponding intolerance, and to the justification of immoral practices under the pretext of tradition and sovereignty.
| Clericalism | Materialism |
| Core value: idealism | Core value: rationalism |
In this context, clericalism refers to all forms of religious worldview in their impact on the social lives of people. Religion in itself does not equate to virtue, as corrupted religion in the past has led to religious wars, the Inquisition, slavery, and the infringement of women’s rights, based on the assumption that women and people of other races had no souls. It also gave rise to colonialism and the conquest of other nations, religious persecution, and, ultimately, religious extremism and terrorism.
Corrupted clericalism has often been used to justify personal interests: while preaching asceticism and sacrifice to the people, it simultaneously claimed that kings and clergy could possess immense wealth because the Lord had rewarded them for their obedience to His will.
Corrupted religion also gave rise to the idea that, since a person cannot overcome their fallen state through their own efforts (this is possible only by the grace of God), there is no need to act morally-faith alone is sufficient. Moreover, enjoying this world, no matter how immoral such enjoyment may be, is viewed as a God-given right. Ultimately, this led such religion to utilitarianism-the belief in the necessity of doing what is most practical.
A similar utilitarian stance is held by immoral materialism, as it elevates rationalism above the concept of morality, reducing morality to a mere tool of rationality when it is useful and rejecting it when it conflicts with interests perceived by their proponents as rational. However, virtue determines economic and other social factors, rather than being their consequence.
.
Conclusion
The detailed analysis presented here may seem excessive, and the conclusion that follows from it-obvious. But if that is the case, why does almost the entire world remain under the illusion of fighting the wrong enemy?
The conclusion is that, in practice, the struggle should not be between ideological pairs but between representatives of all ideologies striving for virtue and representatives of all ideologies striving for vice. After all, no matter how one reshapes vice, it will never become virtue.
Vice is exceedingly cunning. It convinces a person afflicted by it that their enemy is not vice itself but another person-a liberal, an autocrat, a communist, and so on. By pitting representatives of different ideologies against one another, vice only multiplies. Therefore, our task is to clearly and firmly identify our primary adversary-vice-and work toward its eradication.
This understanding forms the foundation of Virtuous Pluralism. It advocates for the acceptance of any ideology that is based on virtuous values and remains untainted by vice. Among such ideologies, the choice of the most suitable one may vary depending on the context of the circumstances, with the criterion for selection being the pursuit of a path that is most contextually appropriate for achieving the ultimate universal human goal.
It is important to understand that Virtuous Pluralism is neither a threat nor a competitor to any of the aforementioned ideologies; it serves as an overarching framework for all of them. By incorporating the Higher Purpose and the vector of virtue as the foundation of any ideology, it will gradually purify its practical implementation and even harmonize it with ideologies considered to be its “opposites.”
The Main Question to Resolve
To implement Virtuous Pluralism in practice, three key questions must be addressed:
- Define humanity’s Higher Purpose.
- Determine what constitutes virtue and what constitutes vice.
- Identify who will embody these principles in practice.
This work does not attempt to formulate all possible goals of humanity within the framework of Virtuous Pluralism or to present one answer as the only correct one. These questions should be explored through discussions within communities that have embraced the idea of Virtuous Pluralism.
However, the second part of this article will propose a specific model based on one possible definition of such a Higher Purpose.
Everything else naturally follows from the Higher Purpose, particularly the definitions of virtue as that which leads to this goal, and vice as that which diverts from it.
This is not merely abstract philosophizing detached from reality. It is highly practical, as the description of the Higher Purpose and virtuous values should serve as the foundation for all state laws, including the constitution, if one exists. This is the seed from which society grows, its genetic code.
The essence of the problem lies in the fact that the genetic code of various peoples has become corrupted, with “flaws” and “gaps” that remain unnoticed because their discussion lies outside the scope of political discourse.
But the most important question is: who will implement this? No matter how remarkable the initial idea may be, its realization depends on the people involved. Often, we fight on the level of ideologies, forgetting that their proponents are also human, with their own weaknesses.
Modern civilization is the result of a prolonged lack of virtue among society’s leaders. A person lacking virtuous character cannot distinguish virtue from vice, much like a blind person cannot tell light from darkness. Self-interest and a lack of inner purity distort a person’s perception of reality.
As a result, a leader without inner qualification will often sincerely perceive vice as virtue. Numerous examples of this have already been provided in the analysis of corrupted ideologies. Therefore, the success of any ideology’s implementation depends solely on the virtuous character of the one who carries it out.
Without defining virtue, there is no point in discussing any political ideology. Similarly, without identifying individuals who can embody virtue themselves and guide society back to it, there is no sense in discussing a system of virtue. The question of finding such people, granting them authority, monitoring their actions, and revoking their authority when necessary is a fundamental and critical element of the entire system. Without this, there is no reason to engage in any discourse on social or political topics.
But how can this be achieved? Both democracy and all uncontrolled forms of autocracy have historically had their chances but have discredited themselves. Democracy, in particular, became widespread as a reaction to abuses of power by monarchs and other autocrats. However, even in modern democracy, people vote for governments to serve them, uphold their rights, and improve their welfare.
Democracy is a paradoxical concept in which voters are self-serving while politicians, who come from among these same voters, are expected to be altruistic. Despite the noble intentions of many politicians, under the pressure of distorted democracy’s liberal tendency for everyone to have rights without obligations, everything gradually falls into decline. In practice, self-serving voters inevitably produce self-serving politicians.
Democracy, as an aspect of liberalism, is based on the premise that no Higher Truth exists, as everyone has the freedom to choose their own truth. Autocracy, on the other hand, assumes that the will of the autocrat constitutes the Higher Truth. However, Virtuous Pluralism is founded on the existence of virtue as an objective Higher Truth, which must be safeguarded by individuals possessing the appropriate qualifications.
Thus, our primary task is to empower highly virtuous leaders of society. Without delving into tactical approaches to solving this issue, several general recommendations can be proposed, which are intentionally formulated in an idealistic manner. It is essential to define the desired ideal, knowing that reality will inevitably introduce its own adjustments.
Such empowerment is achievable through the creation of a Council of Virtue, for which, in an ideal scenario, the following principles would hold true:
- It is not a political or governing body. It should not hold powers or responsibilities for making any political or administrative decisions. However, it must have the full right to express its opinions-both to authorized politicians and officials and to the broader public-on any political or administrative matters from the perspective of the principles of virtue, without delving into the tactical mechanisms of its practical implementation.
- It should consist of individuals selected based on their maximum possible alignment with the image of a “saint.” In the context of a secular state, saintly individuals are not limited to representatives of religion (who, on closer examination, may not turn out to be saintly after all) but also include highly moral individuals capable of sacrificing personal interests, whose intellects are able to grasp the idea of Virtuous Pluralism rather than remaining within the confines of old political concepts.
- This body should comprise a group of individuals or even multiple factions, rather than a single person. Otherwise, the risk of deviations in its functioning becomes too great.
- There must be no mechanisms enabling the corruption of Council members or any other means of influencing their opinions through immoral methods. They should voluntarily accept restrictions on their rights, lead extremely simple lives, and maintain a minimal number of deep social connections. They should neither lead any public or religious organizations nor hold similar positions. Essentially, they should live as monk-like ascetics, whether religious or secular.
Historically, we have already experienced the bitter consequences of a similar idea when representatives of religions became corrupted alongside monarchs. Therefore, each member of this body must also face severe limitations on their right to privacy. How to achieve this in the age of the Internet is a tactical question, but every action of such a person should be easily verifiable at virtually any moment by anyone.
Overall, joining such a body should impose a high level of responsibility, rather than granting privileges and power that might attract individuals with false motives.
- This body should be responsible for developing state programs for general, secondary vocational, higher, and additional education, as well as addressing issues related to the representation of various religions within the country. However, it should operate strictly within the moral and intellectual sphere, without interfering in administrative matters.
- Any inappropriate behavior by a council member should result in their immediate exclusion from the body. The selection of new members would be conducted by the council itself. At the same time, citizens monitoring the council must have the ability to express distrust in it. This ensures that power remains with the people, while the council itself is not subject to periodic re-election.
How this is organized is a technical detail. For example, with the use of modern internet platforms, any citizen of the country could at any moment express distrust toward the council, providing reasons. This allows for real-time feedback from society, and if a critical mass of distrust is reached, a mechanism for initiating a vote of no confidence could be triggered.
- Ideally, such a council could have the authority to propose candidates and ultimately approve the country’s highest military-political leadership, regardless of the method by which it is chosen. Conversely, it would also have the power to dismiss this leadership if the ruling elite deviates from the standards of virtue or fails to implement it in practice.
This is not a struggle for power; rather, without this authority, a dishonest head of state who might arise in the future is unlikely to take the council seriously or might turn it into a puppet. This is similar to how the Pope, despite being at the very center of Italy and enjoying high social authority, ultimately became a chess piece in the hands of Italian fascism during the 1920s.
At the same time, the form of government and state structure, as well as many other fundamental characteristics of society, can vary within Virtuous Pluralism. The key is to adapt them so that the council has real authority to advance virtue in the country and focuses specifically on virtue itself, rather than the techniques of its application.
Everything else will naturally fall into place, but the first step in realizing Virtuous Pluralism is the creation of such a council.
The remaining question is where and how to find the council’s initial composition. This is a long process-it cannot be formed immediately. To begin with, we must at least learn how to identify potential candidates. Such individuals can be sought through the creation of relevant national projects, public discussions on virtue, collaboration with religious, spiritual, and social organizations, academies, universities, and institutes, as well as philosophical and cultural communities.
Other approaches include forming committees to search for suitable candidates at the local level, promoting various values through the media and identifying suitable authors for related articles and programs, conducting selection processes within projects and organizations that embody the corresponding values in their activities.
As suitable candidates emerge, society can support them by providing platforms for their collaboration with political bodies and the public. It is crucial for citizens to gradually adopt new role models and internalize corresponding values. No politician, political, or public structure can achieve their desired outcomes unless the citizens of the country are prepared for them. Therefore, various programs must aim to establish new role models among citizens and instill these values within society.
Thus, the discussion of any social or political issue is meaningless outside the context of virtuous values. Defining and implementing these values is equally meaningless without the formation of a body authorized to foster virtue in the country. However, discussing such a body is futile without mechanisms to identify its potential future members and support them during the interim period. Therefore, these mechanisms for identifying and supporting such individuals are the essential first step.
This concept has been presented within a strategic framework; however, practical implementation requires further elaboration. This includes defining the competencies required of such representatives of virtue, devising a more detailed program for their identification, and organizing their collaborative work. And so forth.
The author of this article will not outline their developments on these issues here. However, if anyone has practical suggestions, they are welcome to reach out.
Part 2. Spiritual Pluralism
Difference from Virtuous Pluralism
The formulation of humanity’s Higher Purpose depends on the answers to two questions:
- Whether or not this world has meaning.
- The role of humanity within this world.
Unlike other ideologies that portray reality in a one-sided or corrupted manner, Virtuous Pluralism has the potential to make society thrive. However, for some answers to the above two questions, Virtuous Pluralism will not address matters of spiritual development and will not lead toward it. As such, it may fail to align with certain interests of theists.
The proportion of believers in the world far exceeds that of staunch atheists, and in Russia, the difference is more than tenfold. Furthermore, Article 67 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation mentions that belief in God is one of the traditional values of the peoples of Russia.
Moreover, the idea of a secular state originates from corrupted liberalism. The founders of this concept were John Locke, the progenitor of classical liberalism, as well as Montesquieu and Rousseau. It is important to recognize that the principles of individualism, which were critiqued in the first part of this article, are embedded within the very idea of a secular state.
Therefore, in this part of the work, we will present an alternative model. On one hand, it is a subtype of Virtuous Pluralism. On the other hand, it takes into account the interests of the theistically inclined majority of citizens. Thirdly, its implementation does not require everyone in society to be believers-it accommodates both atheists and individuals striving for spirituality but not affiliated with any church. Fourthly, it is free from the harmful elements of individualism and is built on an entirely different principle.
This specific model of Virtuous Pluralism will be referred to as Spiritual Pluralism.
Faith, Science, and Politics
Spiritual Secularism
It is important to note that Spiritual Pluralism does not contradict secularism, as it does not promote any particular creed but is instead based on principles common to all theists.
The very fact that modern civilization has taken the path of secularism does not indicate that atheism is preferable to spirituality in contemporary society. Rather, it reflects the Western world’s protest against immoral religion. Since moral religion was not available as an alternative-and because immoral religion claimed absolute authority in the realm of spirituality-the idea of moral atheism began to develop, becoming the direction humanity pursued.
In reality, ordinary secularism and secular states serve as tools for the spread of corrupted religion. Materialistic science, for that matter, is also a form of religion, as it is based on faith in its fundamental postulates. The objective reality is that the world is a complex, harmonious system. While some people base their theories on faith in its rational origin, others base theirs on faith in its accidental emergence. In this sense, there is no difference between theism and atheism-they are two forms of belief.
Corrupted secularism, however, is akin to unregulated corrupted capitalism but within the realm of religion. Such secularism does not mean freedom of religion; rather, it implies that stronger and more immoral players in the religious market can use their power to expand their influence, gradually pushing out weaker players.
Spiritual Secularism
Spiritual Secularism operates on a different principle. Its adherent understands that each person is born into a specific body according to their desires, preferences, and life tasks. They also recognize that the Lord Himself granted humanity the right to freedom, including the freedom not to believe in Him. Therefore, although Higher Truth exists, it is not imposed upon anyone against their will. Instead, individuals are offered a broad palette of various relative truths that suit people with different levels of consciousness and help them gradually arrive at the Higher Truth.
Thus, Spiritual Secularism accommodates moral atheism, which is why its political form of social organization-Virtuous Pluralism-was described in the first part of this work.
An analogy with branches and a trunk is appropriate here. The trunk represents the singular Higher Truth, but from it arise many branches, which neither contradict the trunk nor each other, and together form a complete Tree of Life.
Spiritual Secularism also implies Spiritual Pluralism in religion: any religion that leads people to loving service to the Lord is perfect for them. On this platform, Spiritual Pluralism enables a departure from unnecessary dogmatic disputes that divide and weaken theists.
Spiritual Faith and Science
Faith is often regarded as blind and contrasted with the rationalism of science. However, if we separate the concepts of discovering the truth and verifying it, we arrive at a synthesis of rationality and acceptance of higher authority. For example, guessing a computer password could take an infinite amount of time, but if the password is provided, verifying it takes only a few seconds. We do not need to believe the password without verification, but neither does it make sense to think that the only way to “understand the computer” is to guess the password through trial and error. The password can be obtained from an authoritative source and then verified using logic and experience.
Similarly, various teachings presented in sacred scriptures can be subjected to logical scrutiny. For this purpose, unbiased discussions and debates can be arranged among representatives of different religions (including materialism).
Scientific research can be tested empirically. However, beyond the research itself lies its interpretation-this is the scientific worldview. A scientific worldview is not directly verified through experience but must harmoniously and consistently explain the maximum number of already known scientific findings and have the capacity to predict the outcomes of future studies. Thus, a spiritual worldview can equally participate with materialist science in competitive debates aimed at explaining empirically testable phenomena, to determine which perspective offers a more comprehensive and consistent interpretation.
This does not lead to universalism, as typical rationalism does, because Spiritual Secularism upholds the free will of living beings to accept either a higher truth or a lesser truth that ultimately guides them toward the higher one.
Spiritual Practicality
Science and various applied disciplines are commonly associated with practicality in society, while spirituality is often perceived as something detached from real life. However, if we define spirituality as, among other things, adherence to the laws of God-and thus the laws of this world-spirituality becomes highly practical. After all, chemistry, physics, psychology, and all other fields of knowledge attempt to understand the laws of this world. In this context, both science and various applied disciplines are merely parts of spirituality, to the extent that they succeed in uncovering the laws of the world, whereas spirituality also addresses topics beyond the current level of scientific development.
Spirituality also resolves all major modern problems. Many social issues, such as crime, are linked to corruption in people’s character, which spirituality purifies. Health problems are often caused by an improper lifestyle, which spirituality corrects. Environmental issues stem from humanity’s failure to perceive its connection to the natural world, while spirituality fosters living in harmony with it. Similarly, its effects can be observed across all other areas of human life.
Thus, spirituality, understood as adherence to the laws of God, is the quintessence of all practicality.
Spiritual Politics
Democracy, as an aspect of liberalism, is based either on the premise that Higher Truth does not exist-since everyone has the freedom to choose their own-or on the premise that the people must gradually arrive at this Higher Truth. Autocracy, on the other hand, is based on the premise that the will of the autocrat is the Higher Truth. In either case, the concept of the greater good in both systems arises from the speculations of imperfect humans about what constitutes the greater good. Following the password analogy, this process can take an indefinite amount of time, during which billions of people and hundreds of billions of animals will suffer.
Spiritual Pluralism, however, is based on reflection on how God designed this world, drawing on authoritative knowledge and validating it through logic and observation. A perfect action is defined as one that aligns with how God would act in a given situation, or, in other words, what His divine plan entails. As such, all discussions on social, economic, and political matters are ultimately discussions about the nature of God: Who is He? How does He act? And why does He act in a particular way?
In Spiritual Pluralism, scholarly theological discussions provide answers to how divine virtue manifests in the social lives of people under various circumstances. Thus, scientific spirituality influences all aspects of human life, rather than existing as a separate branch of knowledge detached from their daily lives.
Solving the Problem of Duality
In the first part, we partially addressed the problem of duality. However, on the material plane, various values are destined to remain in conflict with one another. Only by transcending into the sphere of the Absolute can we genuinely rise above this conflict, offering a complete unity of opposing parts.
Conflict will persist, as different people will inevitably reflect different facets of virtue, which are diverse qualities of God. Yet, just as all these qualities harmoniously coexist within God Himself, they can also successfully coexist in a life lived in alignment with God. Let us consider a few examples.
Spiritual Capitalism and Communism
Modern ideologies assert that any given asset can belong either to private individuals or to society and the state.
From a philosophical perspective, if someone truly owns something, it cannot, even theoretically, be taken from them against their will. Yet, in reality, we observe the opposite-people sometimes lose everything they “own.” Ultimately, ownership ceases with their death. This occurs because it is God who is the true owner of all things, and it is He who grants or revokes possessions from individuals.
Thus, Spiritual Pluralism asserts that everything belongs to God, while people-whether private individuals, representatives of the state, or entire nations-are temporary users of God’s property. They have been granted temporary stewardship over this property, which must be used in service to Him.
Therefore, Spiritual Capital-Communism manifests in a rejection of the concept of ownership in principle. At the same time, it allows individuals the freedom, within the framework of laws based on spirituality and virtue, to manage the property entrusted to them as if it were their own, since there is no owner but God.
This concept may seem difficult to grasp in practical terms, but it becomes clearer when examining the next dualistic pair.
Spiritual Individualism and Socialism
In conventional societies, there is always a conflict between personal and collective interests. Within the framework of a materialistic worldview, this conflict is unsolvable-only varying degrees of compromise between the two are possible. However, it is effectively resolved when people adopt the concept of Divine or Universal Justice.
Misusing the resources granted to you results in the loss of certain benefits either in this life or after its conclusion. Thus, working for the collective good becomes a key part of one’s personal interests. Accumulating wealth for its own sake is not a virtue; the question is not how much you have, but how correctly you use it. Understanding this leads individuals to desire only what they can properly manage.
Only by adopting such a concept of justice, which synthesizes collective and personal interests, can the conflict between proponents of individualism and socialism be diminished. This is because both are transformed in alignment with the organization of society according to the laws of Divine Justice.
Unlike conventional liberalism (individualism), Spiritual Liberalism does not consider the rights and freedoms of each person as the highest value. The highest value is the alignment of the world with God’s design. At the same time, the Lord, as a loving father, offers us an extensive range of rights and freedoms in co-creation with Him. Therefore, the highest value of Spiritual Liberalism is the rights and freedoms of every individual in co-creation with God, not in opposition to or separation from Him.
Spiritual Interests of the Soul and Body
It is often observed that materialistically inclined people focus on the present life, forgetting about the future, while religiously inclined individuals think about the future life, neglecting the present one.
Spiritual Pluralism reconciles these two approaches to life by viewing the individual as a soul, making spiritual development the key priority. However, the body is a tool given to the soul by God. Moreover, the body itself, like everything else, also belongs to God. In this sense, one must care for the body both as God’s property and as an instrument for serving Him.
Spiritual interests must align with the current state of a person’s body and mind. This means that each individual is provided with a lifestyle tailored to their specific circumstances, allowing them to be happy both in this life and beyond it. Thus, worldly needs and desires are neither dismissed nor considered independently of spiritual ones-they are connected to God.
Spiritual Equality and Class Structure
Can people be both equal and unequal at the same time? Yes, within Spiritual Pluralism, they can. Spiritual equality means that each of us is a soul. Thus, we are equal in, for example, the opportunity for spiritual perfection. This also extends to equality of opportunity for the rights and freedoms of different souls.
At the same time, each soul desires a unique combination of rights and freedoms in its realization. Every right, however, imposes a corresponding responsibility on the individual, limiting them in some way. In alignment with these rights to realize certain desires, a soul is initially granted a body by the Lord, endowed with specific qualities and predispositions for particular activities, which in turn determine its responsibilities to the world.
Therefore, each soul has its own set of duties, which leads to a class structure within society-not based on rights but on responsibilities. Fundamental rights are shared by all, but the responsibilities through which these rights are expressed vary. A duty is not something imposed externally; it is merely the result of one’s own right to choose.
Spiritual Democracy and Autocracy
In conventional democracy, politicians represent the interests of different groups of people who vote for them. However, no one represents the interests of animals or future generations of people who lack voting rights. Nor does anyone represent the interests of God. Therefore, Spiritual Democracy ensures that there are also those who represent these interests. These representatives are not elected, which introduces an autocratic element necessary for achieving true democracy. In Virtuous Pluralism, this role is fulfilled by the Council of Virtue, while in Spiritual Pluralism, it is carried out by the Supreme Spiritual Council. This ensures that the interests of all are respected.
Spiritual Autocracy, recognizing the existence of free will among living beings, does not serve a higher idea in isolation from people. Since each soul is a part of God, such governance serves people by holding regular consultative referendums and similar engagements with the populace. It does not impose a life aligned with Higher Truth upon people with free will but educates them about it and ensures that whatever policies are chosen remain aligned with spiritual development.
The dilemma of serving people or ideas is resolved by recognizing that the ultimate beneficiary of political service is neither people nor impersonal ideas, but God. Thus, a politician does not seek to ingratiate themselves with people. At the same time, since God cares for His children, serving Him, unlike serving an impersonal idea, does not come at the expense of people’s interests.
Spiritual Patriotism and Globalism
We understand that everything in this world belongs to God and that we are all members of God’s one family. Living by the principle that all people are brothers becomes possible only by recognizing our shared spiritual origin. Only this vision of humanity as a united spiritual family can allow us to rise above racial, national, and religious conflicts.
This does not negate Spiritual Patriotism, which entails respecting the spiritual experiences of our predecessors and cherishing the unique culture they created. This culture serves to properly spiritualize the desires of those living beings who, by their own will and the will of God, have taken birth with this genetic code and in this region, shaped by its natural characteristics.
Goals and Ultimate Good of Spiritual Pluralism
If the preceding text established a framework within which various systems could be constructed and outlined general principles, this section offers specifics regarding potential goals for humanity and key virtues. It is important to note that this section serves as a foundational proposal and should be refined through public discourse.
Goals of Spiritual Pluralism:
- Educating people in spirituality as a foundation for balanced development across mental, physical, social, economic, political, scientific, cultural, and other domains.
- Bringing all people, regardless of their beliefs, closer to God.
- Realizing oneself and all other living beings as spiritual entities, inseparable parts of God, qualitatively similar to Him, whose essence lies in their relationship with Him.
- Developing the vision that everything is connected to God and that God manifests in all things.
Ultimate Good and Goal of Humanity:
The ultimate good and goal of humanity is the revival of God consciousness throughout the world, or, in other words, the establishment of God’s kingdom on Earth. This also constitutes the highest virtue. Thus, the definition of all virtuous values stems from this virtue and the theological understanding of reality.
From the aforementioned goals, the objectives of Virtuous Pluralism emerge as a projection of Spiritual Pluralism for those who do not connect their lives with God.
Spiritual Pluralism and Religions
Spiritual Pluralism offers clear, practical, and universally understandable formulations of ideals and practices shared by all theists. Therefore, it is suitable for all individuals striving toward God, regardless of their denominational affiliation or lack thereof.
Within the framework of Spiritual Pluralism, religion is not merely a worldview shaped by belief in the supernatural, nor is it simply a set of moral norms, rituals, or acts of worship. Religion signifies the understanding of God and our connection with Him, as well as a body of laws given by God Himself, either directly or through His authoritative messengers.
The measure of a religion lies in how far it helps a person progress in developing love for God. Any religion that can lead a person to loving and continuous service to the Lord is considered the best religion. Thus, Spiritual Pluralism is intended to teach love for God rather than adherence to any specific religion.
Universal Qualities of Theism’s Followers
The primary and defining quality by which one can measure a person’s progress on the path to God is their unwavering devotion to the Lord. This devotion is externally manifested by their effort to dedicate all their time to serving Him, continually glorifying Him through their actions and words. They do not seek rewards in the form of material wealth, personal fame, or respect for themselves. Moreover, they never doubt God’s care for them or His divine plan, nor are they drawn to the temptations of this world.
In addition, a truly spiritual person naturally exhibits all virtues. In their relationships with others, they are kind to all and work for the welfare of all living beings, treating each one equally. They possess an impeccable character-for example, they are truthful, humble, friendly, and ready to show respect to everyone. Internally, they are always joyful, peaceful, self-controlled, and unmotivated by material desires. At the same time, they strictly adhere to moral and ethical principles and are skilled in their activities, as they view them as service to God. Their lifestyle is virtuous, typically characterized by purity, health, and harmonious relationships with loved ones and society.
These qualities are universally acknowledged by various spiritual traditions and are, to some extent, verifiable and measurable. This means that the effectiveness of a person’s practice and its transformative ability can often be objectively assessed, taking into account the impact that a particular religion has historically had on society in a given region.
Why Are There Many Religions When Truth Is One and God Is One?
If this question is left unanswered, many people may feel that only one form of religion leads to Truth and God, while all others do not.
God is one, but He possesses many different qualities. For example, He is Merciful, the Supreme Ruler, Almighty, Savior, Creator, All-Knowing, All-Good, Just, Punisher, Rewarder, Protector, Best Friend, Receiver of Prayers, Worthy of Praise, Singular, Eternal, Unknowable, Forgiving, Patient, the Source of All Blessings, Magnificent, and so on. Any theist would agree with this.
However, depending on which of these qualities are emphasized in the Holy Scripture given by God Himself, a corresponding worldview emerges, with its subsequent doctrines and practices. Yet all these paths lead to the same God, provided they are based on a scripture genuinely given by Him.
The Universal Worldview of Theism
While various traditions exhibit certain differences in their worldviews, they also share common truths that are universal to all theistic traditions.
For example:
God
God is one, eternal, and infinite. He is omniscient and omnipotent. He is the creator of all existence. He cannot be fully comprehended through logic alone. He is merciful and compassionate. He is righteous and just. He is both immanent and transcendent. He governs all aspects of creation and life. He manifests His will through His representatives and establishes moral laws for humanity.
Soul
The soul is immortal, and human life continues after death. It is created by God and represents the true essence of a person, bearing a divine spark or reflecting divine light. The soul possesses free will. It has a moral and spiritual purpose and is accountable for its actions and their consequences. It can experience spiritual states of joy and suffering. The soul requires purification from sins and imperfections. It has an innate knowledge of God or an inclination toward knowing Him. It is endowed with conscience, enabling it to discern good from evil, and with an inherent capacity for love and compassion, with love for God being the highest purpose of its existence.
Material World
The world we currently live in was created by God. It is temporary and finite in nature. It is a manifestation of divine will and wisdom, serving as a place of trials and development for the soul. It is governed by divine laws and order. While created good, it is subject to corruption and evil due to sin. It is intended to enable humans to know God through His creation. The material world is under God’s constant observation and control. It reflects divine beauty and greatness and serves as a field for the manifestation of divine providence.
The worldview of Spiritual Pluralism is based on such universal truths.
Universal Practices of Theism
Similarly, Spiritual Pluralism proposes universal practices. A universal principle for all theists, regardless of their denomination, is serving the Lord. The essence of all spiritual practices is to always strive to remember God and selflessly serve Him, with the ultimate goal of awakening love for the Lord.
Below is a list of various universal practices of theism. It is not exhaustive but provides a sufficient understanding of these practices.
Other People
- Communicating with Spiritually Elevated Individuals:
Serve them, listen to them, ask questions, and learn from them. - Selflessly Giving to Others:
Dedicate your strength, time, and possessions to others as members of God’s unified family, and selflessly accept the love others express through similar aspirations. - Helping Others Get Closer to God:
Assist others in their journey toward God, but respect their right to maintain their worldview if they do not wish to change it. - Avoid Causing Unnecessary Harm:
Strive not to disturb any living being unnecessarily. - Avoid Unhealthy Dependencies:
Refrain from becoming unhealthily dependent on atheistically-minded individuals and avoid engaging in worldly conversations without specific need.
Lord
- Reflecting on and Remembering God:
Contemplate His qualities and strive to embody some of them (e.g., justice, mercy, kindness, etc.) in this world. - Offering Prayers:
Individually or collectively, offer personal prayers to Him and recite the prayers of saints from the past. - Glorifying the Lord Through Words and Deeds:
Praise the Lord and avoid blasphemy against Him or His sincere devotees. - Connecting Enjoyment to God:
Associate everything we enjoy with God as its Source in our consciousness. - Dedicating Efforts and Results to God:
Offer your efforts and their outcomes to God, striving to do everything in the best possible way and sacrificing something for His sake.
Daily Life
- Respect Daily Responsibilities:
Treat your everyday duties toward your body, family, loved ones, society, and the environment with respect. - Live a Virtuous Life:
Maintain a moral lifestyle and strive to avoid engaging in sinful activities. - Perform All Activities With Devotion:
Whatever you do, do it meticulously and with great devotion to God. - Use Only What is Necessary:
Be content with what God has allocated to you, avoiding the accumulation of excess possessions or money beyond your needs. - Engage Everything in Service to God:
Utilize all resources in service to Him.
Inner Attitude
- Accepting God’s Providence Fully:
Trust God in all aspects of life, remain calm in the face of losses, and avoid craving worldly success. - Understanding Spirituality Beyond External Religious Practices:
Recognize the essence behind external religious practices, the construction of places of worship, and reading sacred texts. - Acknowledging That Nothing is Truly Ours:
Understand that everything belongs to God, entrusted to us temporarily for care and use in serving Him and His world. - Feeling Dependence on God’s Mercy:
Await His grace, express gratitude to God for everything, and trust in His guidance. - Striving to Be a Co-Creator of God’s Will on Earth:
Endeavor to align personal actions with the divine will, contributing to its realization in the world.
Confessional Practices
- Reflecting on the Lives of Saints:
Contemplate the lives of holy people and strive to follow in their footsteps. - Visiting Sacred Places:
Spend time in consecrated spaces, live in them if possible, and transform your own home into a place of devotion. - Studying Sacred Scriptures:
Read and meditate on them with the proper mindset, striving to understand their teachings and follow the commandments given by God. - Surrounding Yourself With Reminders of God:
Wear clothing and accessories and furnish your life with items that remind you of God. Show respect for objects associated with serving Him. - Engaging in diverse spiritual ceremonies:
Engage in rituals that either remind you of the appropriate mindset for serving God (worship services), connect you to Him (sacraments), or instill spiritual discipline, such as fasting, abstinence, and other practices.
Spiritual Pluralism and Atheism, Agnosticism, Legislation
Each spiritual practice can also be translated into an atheistic worldview as a set of moral guidelines. For example:
- The practice of “Visiting sacred places, living in them, and transforming your home into such a place” translates into maintaining cleanliness and order. Cleanliness here can manifest in various aspects, including physical cleanliness, psychological integrity, honesty, kindness, gratitude, and so on.
- The practice of “Engaging everything in service to God” transforms into an individual’s effort to care for the well-being of everything around them, from their own body to the entirety of creation, encompassing ecology, humanity, and so on.
- The practice of “Communicating with spiritually elevated individuals, serving them, listening to them, asking questions, and learning from them” transforms into corresponding social respect toward various representatives of virtue and extends to educational institutions, among other domains.
Thus, all people, regardless of their worldview beliefs, can be united into a society based on virtue. The definition of these virtues stems from a spiritual worldview and spiritual practices; however, atheists and agnostics are not required to engage directly with these concepts. They can live within the frameworks of morality, ethics, and virtue, guided by the Council of Virtue or the Supreme Spiritual Council.
Regarding legislation, it should be structured to encourage spirituality without penalizing its absence. Disciplinary measures should apply only when moral, ethical, and virtuous principles are violated.
In this way, both theists and atheists can coexist-not merely within a secular state, but specifically within the framework of spiritual pluralism.
Virtues of Moral and Spiritual Pluralism
Based on various philosophical and religious traditions filtered through the lens of the values of moral and spiritual pluralism outlined above, an approximate list of virtues can be compiled. Undoubtedly, the final composition should emerge through public discourse, but as a draft foundation, this work offers the following list of virtues:
- Tranquility
- Self-Control
- Honesty
- Wisdom
- Gratitude
- Patience
- Justice and Impartiality
- Forgiveness
- Compassion
- Respect
- Kindness
- Purity
- Humility
- Simplicity
- Determination
- Independence
- Generosity
- Courage
- Magnanimity
- Enthusiasm and Resourcefulness
- Protection of the Environment, People, and Animals
- Cooperation
- Service to Others
- Acceptance of Authority
- Politeness
- Beauty
- Strength
- Renunciation
- Well-Being
- Knowledge
- Honor
- Sacrifice
- Sense of Duty
- Enthusiasm
- Creativity
- Skillfulness
- Freedom from Vice (Pride, Greed, Lust, Envy, and Hatred)
- Pursuit of Truth
- Aspiration for Perfection
- Surrender to God
- Happiness
- Love
- Order
- Freedom
- Diversity
- Unity
- Balance
- Reality
- Progress
- Sustainability
This list is not an amorphous set of general Words. Each value must be elaborated with detailed definitions, characteristics, and methods of practical implementation. However, this goes beyond the scope of this concise work; only a general framework is provided here.
A hierarchy of these virtues can be established. In different worldviews, this hierarchy will vary, making it subjective. These differences in the prioritization of values will lead to different social, political, and cultural forms of societal organization. Moreover, this list can serve as the foundation for legislative frameworks and other structures that regulate and shape public life.
Conclusion
The above presents a strategic framework for a new socio-political system, one that, on the one hand, has never existed before and, on the other hand, aligns with Russia’s core traditional values, purging all foreign elements from the genetic code of our nation.
Undoubtedly, this requires a structural overhaul of the modern societal order. Therefore, the intellectual, political, and spiritual elites of various countries must first recognize the dead-end nature of the current trajectory of modern civilization. Instead of attempting cosmetic improvements in a house built without a foundation on sand and facing an approaching tsunami, we must begin contemplating how to cultivate virtue and spirituality-not through superficial fixes to the existing lifestyle but by transforming its very foundations.
However, this work does not call for an immediate and radical shift in lifestyle. Instead, it offers a direction and a gradual movement toward it by cultivating new values in society and gradually enshrining them in legislation as society becomes ready. The first step in this process must be the establishment of a properly authorized council composed of individuals who embody virtue and/or spirituality in their own lives. Without this, nothing else is possible. This is the first and most crucial step. And the first action toward creating such a council is developing the ability to identify and promote such individuals to society.
This concept is not meant to exist in abstraction. While this work provides only a general direction, much remains to be detailed and refined. The author of this article is open to collaboration and joint efforts; if you have ideas or proposals, you are always welcome to contact him.
Author: Tikhon Aleksandrovich Makarov.
Korean 
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Chinese 
Nepali 
Hindi 
Persian 
Arabic