More Nations are joining in with BRICS

[Vambram]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Egypt, and Ethiopia are joining BRICS.
How will this alliance impact the world?

 

[Laodicean60]

How will this alliance impact the world?

This may lead to the loss of reserve currency status which has happened many times in history and our country going broke. We already see these countries unwilling to loan us money through buying Treasuries for our ever expanding debt. More and more countries are joining the BRICS nations because we weaponized the reserve currency, the dollar through sanctions. The sad thing is that sanctions don't work ie. North Korea and Iran, even being sanctioned still do what they do.

Our politician's fiscal policies and ignorance are the cause of this. According to Ray Dalio's video "Changing World Order" usually loss of reserve currency status ends with war. The sad thing is the weapons today aren't like they were yesterday. As a Christian, I understand where the world is headed but it suck s watching it happen.

 

[mindlight]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Egypt, and Ethiopia are joining BRICS.
How will this alliance impact the world?

The aspiration here is to bring about a multipolar world in which the many autocracies (Sorry Brazil and South Africa) and smaller nations in this club will have more freedom to act according to their agendas. That in itself does not sound as bad in theory as it would prove to be in practice. A multipolar world would be more likely to be an unstable one with a greater frequency of bloody wars.

The club is a disparate group of members often in conflict with each other e.g. India and China or indeed Iran and Saudia Arabia who are mortal enemies. There is no shared military alliance as with the G-7 in the background and so their voice is not as powerful as their share of the world economy and trade implies.

The group looks more like an axis of resistance to me than an actual threat to Western hegemony. This could well change and then the key question for me is whether or not autocracy or democracy can better model Christian values in the modern world and which would be better for the church. Currently, the club includes major persecutors of Christians like India and China and so it remains unattractive as an alternative to the USA.

 

[mindlight]

This may lead to the loss of reserve currency status which has happened many times in history and our country going broke. We already see these countries unwilling to loan us money through buying Treasuries for our ever expanding debt. More and more countries are joining the BRICS nations because we weaponized the reserve currency, the dollar through sanctions. The sad thing is that sanctions don't work ie. North Korea and Iran, even being sanctioned still do what they do.

Our politician's fiscal policies and ignorance are the cause of this. According to Ray Dalio's video "Changing World Order" usually loss of reserve currency status ends with war. The sad thing is the weapons today aren't like they were yesterday. As a Christian, I understand where the world is headed but it suck s watching it happen.

Reserve currencies seem to be symptomatic of the bigger economic and military realities in history. The main global reserve currency between C16 and C19 was the Spanish Silver Dollar and this was followed by Pound Sterling until the middle of the C20. The Dollar has only been this since the 1950s. The rate of change appears to be accelerating but the transition from Pound to Dollar was managed by like-minded allies. The kind of dominance that the Spanish, British or Americans have enjoyed is unlikely for any foreseeable competitor in the next half century so the dollar is more likely to remain as the main reserve currency unless America defaults of course in which case everything is up for grabs. One alternative might be some kind of shared euro-dollar alliance and that could be more enduring over the longer term.

A world where there is no clarity on where the "buck stops" is an incredibly uncertain one and indeed unmapped in our experience of much the last 500 years.

Fiscally responsible people must run the American economy. That means a balanced budget just in case you wanted a definition.

 

[Laodicean60]

The aspiration here is to bring about a multipolar world in which the many autocracies (Sorry Brazil and South Africa) and smaller nations in this club will have more freedom to act according to their agendas.

Like I've been saying all along the aspiration you speak of is a result of the West. You have to look at America from an economic point of view, America is going broke and these countries are trying to get away from the dollar. They see our spending and debt (credit rating?) as not sustainable so they want to get away from the petrol dollar and create their currency for commodities. Also, the USA has used what should be a neutral reserve currency and has bullied other countries through sanctions to force them to bend to our will. That is why a lot of countries are not buying our debt.

The group looks more like an axis of resistance to me than an actual threat to Western hegemony.

BINGO! Why does it have to be Western hegemony, our arrogance, Why can't we accept other cultures and beliefs and live in peace?

A world where there is no clarity on where the "buck stops" is an incredibly uncertain one and indeed unmapped in our experience of much the last 500 years.

The problem is we don't learn from history.

 

[mindlight]

Like I've been saying all along the aspiration you speak of is a result of the West. You have to look at America from an economic point of view, America is going broke and these countries are trying to get away from the dollar. They see our spending and debt (credit rating?) as not sustainable so they want to get away from the petrol dollar and create their currency for commodities. Also, the USA has used what should be a neutral reserve currency and has bullied other countries through sanctions to force them to bend to our will. That is why a lot of countries are not buying our debt.

BINGO! Why does it have to be Western hegemony, our arrogance, Why can't we accept other cultures and beliefs and live in peace?

The problem is we don't learn from history.

Western hegemony was originally founded on a combination of technical, industrial, and military advantage and a self-belief that came from a shared Christian faith, that we had a moral right to rule.

The technical and military advantages remain but are far narrower than before. The industrial advantages no longer exist.

The Ukraine war indicates that the motivational factors are probably more important now as this is what is required to succeed in a conflict where neither side is supreme. Individualism is not the foundation of a true warrior ethic and not the basis of the self-sacrificial love of a country that is essential in a war. There are now more Christians outside the Western alliance than inside it. The Western elites who have guided us to the selfish consumerism of the current economic model have seriously miscalculated and have presumed their global advantage would remain despite this or that they were simply managing a transition to a different kind of economic advantage for themselves. But in effect, they have sabotaged our collective advantage by the choices they have made about our culture. They have changed the definition of freedom to one of license and they have atomised our society breaking down the bonds that cause to us live and fight for each other.

You seem to advocate an inclusive tolerance as the solution for our troubles. This will give some victories in the short term, but in the long term, it bleeds away any real basis for the advantage that we once had. When our God is less credible than theirs we have no right to dominate.

Since domination is the currency of peace in a world where unclear supremacy means war with weapons of incredible destructive power the fate of mankind is at stake here. Those who naively believe they are simply managing the transformation to a different kind of more inclusive and tolerant world have no idea of the lessons of history.

 

[Laodicean60]

A NATO member is joining BRICS.

https://www.reuters.com/world/kremlin-welcomes-turkeys-reported-desire-join-brics-2024-06-04/

 

[DennisF]

The aspiration here is to bring about a multipolar world in which the many autocracies (Sorry Brazil and South Africa) and smaller nations in this club will have more freedom to act according to their agendas. That in itself does not sound as bad in theory as it would prove to be in practice. A multipolar world would be more likely to be an unstable one with a greater frequency of bloody wars.

The club is a disparate group of members often in conflict with each other e.g. India and China or indeed Iran and Saudia Arabia who are mortal enemies. There is no shared military alliance as with the G-7 in the background and so their voice is not as powerful as their share of the world economy and trade implies.

The group looks more like an axis of resistance to me than an actual threat to Western hegemony. This could well change and then the key question for me is whether or not autocracy or democracy can better model Christian values in the modern world and which would be better for the church. Currently, the club includes major persecutors of Christians like India and China and so it remains unattractive as an alternative to the USA.

"... the key question for me is whether or not autocracy or democracy can better model Christian values in the modern world and which would be better for the church."

I am wondering if nominal Christians will ever rediscover and recover what God says in scripture about human government. "Democracy" is ambiguous; it can have its Enlightenment meaning of (as Francis Schaeffer aptly stated) the "tyranny of the 51 %" where humans ("We the people") are the highest authority recognized by govt; or its more popular meaning that the people have some say in government. God's govt in scripture affirms the latter but certainly not the former; that's the form of govt that Israel had when Moses was on the mountain, or Adam and Eve in the Garden, who outvoted God 2 to 1. That's democracy.

So instead of wondering which worldly model of govt Christians should favor, why not let Jesus be Lord and start with God's form of govt, then judge humanistic -isms by the word of God?