BRICS wants to expand

[Joij21]

1. how do you arrive at the conclusion that BRICS will control 80% of the worlds oil production? What's your data?
2. Russia tried to blackmail Europe with natural gas export, remember? The result: a year later Russia lost ~70% of its gas exports - Europe now gets natural gas from other suppliers instead.
3. please name an example of a Chinese, Indian, South African, Saudi.... government or business that has refused to accept Dollars as payment for exported goods to the US.

'BRICS intends to back its currency with gold'... WTH are you even talking about? The BRICS currency doesn't exist and no nation on Earth base their currency on gold.

1. Oil reserves, not necessarily production. And it's more a hypothetical for if nations like Venezuela, Nigeria, etc. join.

2. That assumes getting it's gas from other suppliers is long term stable, remember the war is already starting to drag on and Europe has to pay an extended transportation premium for that gas since it's a lot further away to import from North America. Germany has already seen an economic/industrial activity slump as a result. The other main supplier right now is Algeria so it also assumes no hanky panky starts between them and their arch rival Morocco in the region. Plus last year was a mild winter, so for every winter season this drags on for there's a greater risk for a more normal or severe winter to be encountered on top of the current premium Europe is already paying.

3. That could easily change at a moments notice if any of the parties in question decide to do so.

4. The gold is there specifically as a form of collateral to build trust with investors and money traders (because of gold's reputation as a precious metal which holds value because you can't print more of it, so it remains inflation resistant unless a mega deposit is found) if they were to adopt a specific currency to be their standard. That way if you don't trust the currency in question and feel like it may soon devalue you can exchange it as a holder for that said gold to insure that your investments or whatever denominated in that currency will at least have a physical substance that has intrinsic value which you can like pawn away for a currency you do trust at substantial value.

 

[Hygro]

If you don’t have dollars you can’t buy American. Who cares about oil?

 

[Crezth]

Well one could always proclaim those were not true syndicalists but unionists/laborists, and that a party based socialism is a perversion cause it's not libertarian enough and will simply become perverted and imperial (therefore state capitalist no longer socialist).

And well that's kind of what happens everytime socialism decides to go the more centralized route, the revolution ends up always being betrayed.

This is a dialectical process that plays out in these revolutions because of the pressures that occur during revolutions. To the extent socialism is rejecting a more libertarian solution, it's a self conscious rejection. It's that libertarian socialism cannot flourish in this world. If you're serious about fighting capitalism, you can pretty easily talk yourself into a no-compromises approach to socialism that looks like Stalinism no matter how hard you try to preserve democratic organization or cooperative ownership. In the Soviet Union, in fact, the relationship between the local Soviets and the central Soviets were consumed with questions about the overall integrity of the Soviet system as a precise result of these "compromises" that were made early on to "protect it" from reactionaries. In the 80's, during a time of many crises for the Soviet Union, Gorbachev took the approach he did in order to address the great desire for reform that had at that point become endemic throughout the Soviet Union, particularly outside Russia, particularly within the Central Asian SR's, and this reformist period was driven by political activism and debate between the center and the periphery.

Arguably, the central, irresponsible Soviet leadership considered the crises at its feet, realized it was a choice between reforming the Soviet Union to be more a grouping of equals than a Russian-led affair, and responded through Yeltsin's coup by scuttling the whole thing. In the end, the result of the collapse of the Soviet Union was that this reform movement grinded to a halt, conflict between the former SR's sprang into life amidst bloody border conflicts and shock therapy, and the new Russian state still maintains some control over the ex-Soviet empire, but now without any need to pretend like it's a union of equals.

Just because you don't think you're likely to be converted to a citizen of one of the alternative empires via conquest doesn't mean your peers don't think so. Many people therefore find it offensive when you criticize the current empire that they perceive is militaristically protecting them via "containment" through proxy war of the other empires that they deem to be a worse deal to live in.

Oh I realize that, that's why I'm so strident in attacking their faulty assumptions about the world they live in, or the middle class propaganda they cleave to out of desperation to believe the state they identify with is really looking out for their best interests.

More simplistically if Putin isn't contained in the Ukraine then he'll conquer us and take away our LGBTQ+ rights and privileges. Therefore critiquing America's containment style intervention in Ukraine is seen by others as paramount to allowing a global anti LGBTQ+ hyper socially conservative retrograde revolution to take place around the world, and is seen as being complicit in queer genocide.

Yeah... delusional paranoiacs. Speaking as an American, I think the closest route to for me or anyone I know to fall by the way of queer genocide is the 30% of armed and angry conservatives finally deciding to do something about the satanic pedophiles that they think run everything.

 

[Crezth]

If you don’t have dollars you can’t buy American.

Clearly this isn't such a big deal.

 

[Hygro]

Clearly this isn't such a big deal.

It’s not a big deal.

Americans don’t need trade for our currency to have spending power.
We don’t need oil bought in dollars to finance our deficits.
Foreigners will still demand dollars to interact with the highest tech and biggest market.

 

[amadeus]

I don’t think there’s to be that much worry about the $€£¥ going away because when you’re a private investor, do you want the stable, transparent, and predictable currencies? Or do you want the arbitrary, opaque, and wholly political? Money will follow money, that’s why the Russians had to put capital controls on at the start of the war.

 

[Crezth]

It’s not a big deal.

Americans don’t need trade for our currency to have spending power.
We don’t need oil bought in dollars to finance our deficits.
Foreigners will still demand dollars to interact with the highest tech and biggest market.

Yeah but count the beans and see How Much Still and see if you can really swing it without the empire. If so, great! Best start slashing that military because it's a real albatross around the ol' budget.

I don’t think there’s to be that much worry about the $€£¥ going away because when you’re a private investor, do you want the stable, transparent, and predictable currencies? Or do you want the arbitrary, opaque, and wholly political?

You want the profitable. Duh.

 

[Hygro]

No, like, being the reserve currency for oil is negligible.

 

[Joij21]

This is a dialectical process that plays out in these revolutions because of the pressures that occur during revolutions. To the extent socialism is rejecting a more libertarian solution, it's a self conscious rejection. It's that libertarian socialism cannot flourish in this world. If you're serious about fighting capitalism, you can pretty easily talk yourself into a no-compromises approach to socialism that looks like Stalinism no matter how hard you try to preserve democratic organization or cooperative ownership. In the Soviet Union, in fact, the relationship between the local Soviets and the central Soviets were consumed with questions about the overall integrity of the Soviet system as a precise result of these "compromises" that were made early on to "protect it" from reactionaries. In the 80's, during a time of many crises for the Soviet Union, Gorbachev took the approach he did in order to address the great desire for reform that had at that point become endemic throughout the Soviet Union, particularly outside Russia, particularly within the Central Asian SR's, and this reformist period was driven by political activism and debate between the center and the periphery.

Arguably, the central, irresponsible Soviet leadership considered the crises at its feet, realized it was a choice between reforming the Soviet Union to be more a grouping of equals than a Russian-led affair, and responded through Yeltsin's coup by scuttling the whole thing. In the end, the result of the collapse of the Soviet Union was that this reform movement grinded to a halt, conflict between the former SR's sprang into life amidst bloody border conflicts and shock therapy, and the new Russian state still maintains some control over the ex-Soviet empire, but now without any need to pretend like it's a union of equals.

That's a bit of a nihilistic approach to things don't you think? Such bunkerism and close minded militaristic paranoia is what leads to stagnation and eventual death, not to mention corruption and an inability of the party elite to give up their power via reform now that they have essentially been crowned "red princes" with absolute power.

Besides the pressures of revolution/civil war are skipped if it's done the democratic/reform way instead. Hence Democratic Socialism (of the syndicalist kind).

Oh I realize that, that's why I'm so strident in attacking their faulty assumptions about the world they live in, or the middle class propaganda they cleave to out of desperation to believe the state they identify with is really looking out for their best interests.

Because it could be looking out for their best interests if it's the lessor of two evils. A sort of selfish individual "realpolitik" decision.

Yeah... delusional paranoiacs. Speaking as an American, I think the closest route to for me or anyone I know to fall by the way of queer genocide is the 30% of armed and angry conservatives finally deciding to do something about the satanic pedophiles that they think run everything.

Well that's the thing, ever since Putin hacked the DNC after Trump made a public speech inquiring that Russia ought to hack the Democrats to look for Hillary Clinton's lost emails they largely now believe Trump and therefore his Trumplikins are fully backed by Putin's regime and therefore if Putin is allowed unrestricted access to do as he pleases in the world he may end up feeling encouraged to do further subversive hacks, give crypto funding, and even arm those 30% extremists with Kaleshnokovs to go kill off all the American queers.

Therefore Putin must be contained in the Ukraine in order to be discouraged from hacking the DNC ever again and prevent him from arming, aiding, and assisting American radical conservatives. Not supporting Putin's containment over seas is therefore tantamount to supporting American conservatives and LGBTQ+ genocide.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Saudi Arabia is a responsible country that would never spread chaos and destruction throughout the Middle East

The sarcasm there

 

[Caesar of Bread]

I guess you are confusing comunism and socialism. Russia and China never was comunist, but socialist instead.

They were communist. Communism is authoritarian socialism. And China is now state capitalist. You’re the one confusing. And why are you saying that “America will fall?” why are you saying that the Uyghers are being ”only treated as stateless”? The Uyghurs are being GENOCIDED. Like what’s happening to the Palestinians (I support the idea for a Jewish and Palestinian state though), like what happened to the Jews, Armenians, Natives, Africans, so on…

 

[Birdjaguar]

It might be, but history shows that under right circumstances dethroning may happen in just few years.

Here are the shares of everyone except the dollar and the Euro.

The dollar has just under 60% of currency reserves. The Yuan us under 3%.

Chinese yuan accounts for 2.88% of global foreign currency reserves in Q2: IMF report - Global Times

www.globaltimes.cn

 

[Crezth]

That's a bit of a nihilistic approach to things don't you think? Such bunkerism and close minded militaristic paranoia is what leads to stagnation and eventual death, not to mention corruption and an inability of the party elite to give up their power via reform now that they have essentially been crowned "red princes" with absolute power.

No, I just think it's materialistic. Red princes they may be, but in the end the only thing that matters is that the political apparatus can function. Marx may as well be red Macchiavelli for how discussions about the "ethics" of socialism go, in my view. Princes are crowned, and are dethroned. So it has always been.

Besides the pressures of revolution/civil war are skipped if it's done the democratic/reform way instead. Hence Democratic Socialism (of the syndicalist kind).

I don't think this is necessarily true because a democratic (albeit revolutionary) forum doesn't actually have to be revolutionary or reformative. It just has to be democratic in the sense of letting elections happen, regardless of the surrounding circumstance. And there's a whole lot you can do to an election to skew it from the get. If you left it just to the unions, in America anyway, the problem you'd run into is white labor unions crushing the black ones. And then what do you do?

Because it could be looking out for their best interests if it's the lessor of two evils. A sort of selfish individual "realpolitik" decision.

Yeah... done at the cost of their soul, even in some ways their basic humanity. It sickens me.

Well that's the thing, ever since Putin hacked the DNC after Trump made a public speech inquiring that Russia ought to hack the Democrats to look for Hillary Clinton's lost emails they largely now believe Trump and therefore his Trumplikins are fully backed by Putin's regime and therefore if Putin is allowed unrestricted access to do as he pleases in the world he may end up feeling encouraged to do further subversive hacks, give crypto funding, and even arm those 30% extremists with Kaleshnokovs to go kill off all the American queers.

Therefore Putin must be contained in the Ukraine in order to be discouraged from hacking the DNC ever again and prevent him from arming, aiding, and assisting American radical conservatives. Not supporting Putin's containment over seas is therefore tantamount to supporting American conservatives and LGBTQ+ genocide.

I get that, really I do, but I also know that Putin isn't personally or directly responsible for aforesaid 30% of Americans ready and willing to get the queer genocide kicked off, and if Germany is any lesson, he doesn't have to be. It's a homegrown movement.

Say he arms the extremists. What can he really give them? These 30% already have 90% of the guns in America and are selected from the materially higher-ranking classes. The only thing they're waiting for, at this point, is the dam to break on something Biden or the Democrats fumble. The nation is wroth and that's why I personally fled from the interior to California (for all the good that'll do).

 

[EvaDK]

It might be, but history shows that under right circumstances dethroning may happen in just few years.

The Dollar was joined by two emerging strong currencies, the Deutsch Mark and the Yen based on West Germany and Japan becoming industrial powerhouses and huge global exporters. And then there was the oil crisis, which caused investors to place their money in safer options than currency reserves, because they depreciated faster due to inflation.

1. Oil reserves, not necessarily production. And it's more a hypothetical for if nations like Venezuela, Nigeria, etc. join.

2. That assumes getting it's gas from other suppliers is long term stable, remember the war is already starting to drag on and Europe has to pay an extended transportation premium for that gas since it's a lot further away to import from North America. Germany has already seen an economic/industrial activity slump as a result. The other main supplier right now is Algeria so it also assumes no hanky panky starts between them and their arch rival Morocco in the region. Plus last year was a mild winter, so for every winter season this drags on for there's a greater risk for a more normal or severe winter to be encountered on top of the current premium Europe is already paying.

3. That could easily change at a moments notice if any of the parties in question decide to do so.

4. The gold is there specifically as a form of collateral to build trust with investors and money traders (because of gold's reputation as a precious metal which holds value because you can't print more of it, so it remains inflation resistant unless a mega deposit is found) if they were to adopt a specific currency to be their standard. That way if you don't trust the currency in question and feel like it may soon devalue you can exchange it as a holder for that said gold to insure that your investments or whatever denominated in that currency will at least have a physical substance that has intrinsic value which you can like pawn away for a currency you do trust at substantial value.

Are you answering on the behalf of @Moff Jerjerrod, the poster to whom my questions were directed?

1. Well, he clearly claimed 80% of global oil production in his post, but I suppose you agree such a number is factually wrong. Hypothetically or not.

2. Canada and the US alone have known natural gas reserves of around ~2,000 Trillion cf3 / ~56 Trillion m3. That's excluding everyone else that also supplies natural gas to the EU including Norway.
The EU imported around 85 Billion m3 per year from Russia before the war started.
There is plenty of natural gas for +100 years consumption; the problem was the logistics of getting it to the consumer, which has been solved.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/how-much-gas-is-left.php
https://www.cga.ca/natural-gas-statistics/natural-gas-facts/#:~:text=How much natural gas resource,the use of natural gas?

3. Let us know when it happens, since it will be a World first.

4. If gold is your jam, why on Earth would you invest in a currency backed by gold (which doesn't exist) instead of just investing in gold directly and skipping the risk of a currency altogether? As an investor myself, your argument makes no sense.

 

[Joij21]

No, I just think it's materialistic. Red princes they may be, but in the end the only thing that matters is that the political apparatus can function. Marx may as well be red Macchiavelli for how discussions about the "ethics" of socialism go, in my view. Princes are crowned, and are dethroned. So it has always been.

Yes I'm aware of the Machiavellianism. It's just Machiavellianism is SO EVIL that most people find it reprehensible and would prefer a more moral and a less Lucifarian means of progression. Hence the split of Western leftists from Oriental leftists.

Also how would the red princes be overthrown? How would that particular centralized socialist system crumble into communism and not return to a nation state run by an oligarchy like in Russia or even China? When there's no more outward/external alternative in the geopolitical world and the only thing left is for the socialism to cannibalize itself without returning to the outside worlds ways of doing things? In other words socialism has to conquer the world first so the masses including the red princes no longer see any alternatives and see socialism as monolithic and given thus triggering the necessary degeneration into communism via class conflict between them?

Yeah... done at the cost of their soul, even in some ways their basic humanity. It sickens me.

But how can you have concerns for their souls if you believe in EVIL Machiavellianism? Does not your heart seem disingenuous and hypocritical?

I don't think this is necessarily true because a democratic (albeit revolutionary) forum doesn't actually have to be revolutionary or reformative. It just has to be democratic in the sense of letting elections happen, regardless of the surrounding circumstance. And there's a whole lot you can do to an election to skew it from the get. If you left it just to the unions, in America anyway, the problem you'd run into is white labor unions crushing the black ones. And then what do you do?

But EVIL Machiavellianism is too reviled by most people of good conscience to ever be followed, hence the preference for democratic methods of peace and goodliness.

The masses are reviled by Machiavellianism and view it as the perceptions of a sick and twisted mind that only cares about themselves believing the ends justify the means. Very antisocial behavior and human beings are evolved to weed out and exile those who display such antisocial behavior for it is a threat to the tribe that we social animals depend on for our very survival against the outside elements.

Most are therefore genetically predisposed to hate Machiavellianism. It's an Avengers level threat!

Also Unions aren't racist anymore like they were in the 30s and 40s, get with the times man!

I get that, really I do, but I also know that Putin isn't personally or directly responsible for aforesaid 30% of Americans ready and willing to get the queer genocide kicked off, and if Germany is any lesson, he doesn't have to be. It's a homegrown movement.

Say he arms the extremists. What can he really give them? These 30% already have 90% of the guns in America and are selected from the materially higher-ranking classes. The only thing they're waiting for, at this point, is the dam to break on something Biden or the Democrats fumble. The nation is wroth and that's why I personally fled from the interior to California (for all the good that'll do).

Yes but the perception is that he could assist that which is homegrown to make is easier and thus give them a better advantage of winning a civil war and actually succeeding in queer genocide.

Hence containment of Russians in the Ukraine leads to a reduction in the overall chances of queer genocide over here.

A sort of gambling of the odds.

 

[Joij21]

1. Well, he clearly claimed 80% of global oil production in his post, but I suppose you agree such a number is factually wrong. Hypothetically or not.

Yes but production in oil is fluid and declines as reserves decline.

If the other team has the larger reserves, even if they currently don't have the spigot in the ground right now, when the other sides production eventually declines they can then put the spigot in and would then have the majority production in the future. Remember this is all about the future not what is happening now or in the recent past.

2. Canada and the US alone have known natural gas reserves of around ~2,000 Trillion cf3 / ~56 Trillion m3. That's excluding everyone else that also supplies natural gas to the EU including Norway.
The EU imported around 85 Billion m3 per year from Russia before the war started.
There is plenty of natural gas for +100 years consumption; the problem was the logistics of getting it to the consumer, which has been solved.

Solved for that year though regardless Germany still slumped. Again this doesn't mean the supply is secured for the future though, gas declines just like oil and then you have no choice but either go green or be forced to reopen trade with the last few guys who still have reserves remaining.

4. If gold is your jam, why on Earth would you invest in a currency backed by gold (which doesn't exist) instead of just investing in gold directly and skipping the risk of a currency altogether? As an investor myself, your argument makes no sense.

The law of supply and demand. If they end up purchasing most of the worlds supply of gold and stockpile it then they create a shortage elsewhere raising it's price in those other markets that aren't them, meaning it would be harder to purchase from the markets that aren't them because it's more expensive.

However since they now own the lion's share of gold they could give it away cheaper and at a discount meaning it's a better deal, but since they also own it they can then force you to have no choice but to buy their discount gold via their preferred currency which they want to catch on. And the only way you can then receive their currency in bulk to exchange for that discount gold would be to trade goods to them which they then pay you with.

In other words they artificially manipulated the price of gold in order to force global gold investors hands so they comply to their wishes.

 

[EvaDK]

1. The US and Canada (again excluding all other oil producers in the West) have oil reserves to last centuries with present day consumption. The US is self sufficient thanks to the Worlds largest shale oil reserves.

2. It's a logistics problem, not a supply problem. There are 40 other natural gas exporters besides Russia; I think we can figure it out eventually.

4. That's not what a currency based on the gold standard actually means. What you suggest, sounds like the plot of Dr Evil in an Austin Powers film. PS: gold is not a necessity like energy; if gold becomes too expensive or entangled in irrational demands from the seller, guess what - investors will just stop buying gold and invest in something else instead.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Meanwhile Europe is consuming less and less oil since a decade ago, first replacing it for gas and now for solar and others, and the trend will accelerate big time with the mandatory replacement of internal combustion cars by electric and hydrogen, which has been established for 2035 by the European parliament. Of course the BRICS always will be able to use its abundant oil to fry Chinese and Russian potatoes.

 

[Henri Christophe]

why are you saying that “America will fall?”

I'm not that one who are saying America will fall. But I want to other powers to rise power and share pacifically the globe.
Once I was reading a doctor who argue the war with China and US are inevitable... I rly hope he is wrong, and both country can live pacifically side by side.
But US have the problem to believe his way of governement is the better and want to enforce democracy to others nations, what China disaprove, since it isn't a democracy either, China believe each country should bee free to choice their own type of governement, even if it's not democratic.

 

[Verbose]

I'm not that one who are saying America will fall. But I want to other powers to rise power and share pacifically the globe.

What principles do you want to govern that kind of future world?

Btw this has all been tried before. What was wrong with those principles? Or was it just the execution? In which case either what new principles would you like to see instead, or how do you want the same principles differently applied?