The rapidly changing world order initiates the formation of a renewed geostrategy by the Russian Federation, one of the conceptual and ideological foundations of which can be Eurasianism. The article describes the initial intellectual and human-geographical prerequisites for the origin, development and subsequent (including in the post-Soviet period) evolution of Eurasian ideas. Their key postulates and positions are highlighted. It is shown that Eurasianism has historically been an intellectual reaction of Russian society to entrenched Eurocentrism and the associated situation of peripherality, complemented by the periodic crisis in the Russia-West system, as well as persistent manifestations of geo-snobbery on the part of «civilized states.» The degree of adequacy of Eurasianism (considered as a special geoideology) to the geopolitical, geo-economic and geocultural realities of the first quarter of the 21st century is assessed. The conceptual duality of Eurasianism, which can simultaneously act as an ideology, is shown: 1) territorial integration (of peoples, countries), «scientifically based», «geographically defined» collection of lands; 2) independence, selfdetermination, distancing from something external and larger (from Europe, the West, the «world community»). The key factors and aspects of the crisis of modern Eurasianism (problematic areas of application of Eurasianism and its conceptual, categorical and meaningful metamorphoses) are emphasized, the possibilities and directions of its overcoming are assessed (including within the framework of the conceptualization of «Greater Eurasia» and «Northern Eurasia»). It is concluded that the entry of the Russian Federation into a period of prolonged conflict with the «collective West» creates the prerequisites for a renaissance of Eurasianism in line with the «national certainty» of their research, which is becoming more clearly recognized by Russian social scientists. It is concluded that in the future development of Eurasian ideas, there will inevitably be a shift in emphasis from the traditional, largely archived understanding of «Eurasia as Russia» to the identification of «Russia in Eurasia» and the understanding of «Russia as Eurasia».