If France agrees not to trade with BRICS using $US, maybe he can join.
BRICS & New World Order Thread
- Thread starter Strangelove
- Start date
If France agrees not to trade with BRICS using $US, maybe he can join.
You are like saying "mathematics" is not science because some students made a huge mistakes when applying it in real life.
It is true that no country left pursuing planned economy. You are mistaken by equating the failed planned economy in USSR and pre 1970s China with Mraxist economy science. Remind you Marx NEVER proposed any form of economy management, he only wrote Das Kapital to reveal how economy works in his time. How to build a new economy order is the work of Lenin, Stalin, Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping etc and is sill evolving. Some of them failed, some of them succeeded. But their failure isn't the fault of Maxism.
Contrary to what you may think, China is still pursuing economy management based on CPC's adhering of Marxism. Also worth to remember, marketing economy isn't exclusive property of capitalism, Marx did not object market, nor did he endorse what Stalin later did. So China practicing market economy means nothing of "leaving" Marxism.
You have bought into the western narritive of China is not Marxism anymore. The west advocate that so they can claim end of history and defeat of communism.
Is 1+1=2 sacred? That is how sacred Das Kapital is, or is not. How could you even compare it with bible? Bible is a collection of hearsay and rumors that is not backed by any archelogical evidence or cross-checked with historical records from the Romans and Egyptians of the same time.
BTW, a true Marxist does NOT treat Karl Marx the person as a holy man, nor treat his works as sacred texts. Just like no physics should treat Einstein as holy man, nor treat "General relativity" like bible. Those texts are treated as "what is proven SO FAR by our observation and experiment", new findings may be ahead of us. That is how science works, and since communist treat Marxism as science that is how Marx's book will be treated by his followers.
Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth (实践是检验真理的唯一标准). Is this pragmatic? Or inflexible Ideology? This statement is in the constitution of CPC. It is up to everyone to decide if pragmatism itself can be part of ideology or not.
I think you have a very negative impression of the word "Ideology". You are equating Ideology with fundamentalism and dogmatism instead of its natural meaning "an idea".
Last edited:
It's off topic, but no, I don't believe that China is still following Marxism. It may be useful to label yourself as something and having a unifying ideology that's uniting the nation, but that doesn't mean that the label still means the same thing as it once did.
China is following the example of the economic rise of Japan, Korea, Singapore and the Taiwanese economy. If you want to define Marxism as learning from practice, then fair enough. But modern China is not communist, it's just Chinese. If you take away all the elements that make up a communist society, then sure you can keep the label but it doesn't describe what's inside anymore. What is communism without communal ownership of assets? Private property is a problem for communist thinking
Personal properties are allowed. Private property like land are still not allowed and all land belongs to the state, they are merely renting the land to you.
broadsword
Brigadier
The BRICS ark is getting more passengers. Hop aboard!
Why India is wary of China’s BRICS expansion push as Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt – and others – seek to join
- Neither India nor Brazil want to lose influence in the bloc, with New Delhi concerned that enlargement would only grow Beijing’s strategic influence
- All current members share a desire to reform the international system, analysts say, but a new world order is mostly in Russia and China’s interest
Published: 9:30am, 5 Jul, 2023 Updated: 9:30am, 5 Jul, 2023
The leaders of South Africa, China, Brazil, Russia and India at the 2022 BRICS summit hosted by Beijing. Photo: Xinhua via AP
Not all members of the bloc of major emerging economies are getting behind the push to expand it, with particularly “wary” of the plan, analysts say, as doubt lingers about whether the grouping could become a counterweight to existing regional alliances.
When the BRICS members – , , India, and – gather for a leadership summit next month in Johannesburg, front runners to join the bloc will include , , , the United Arab Emirates, , Algeria, and .
A three-day meeting involving senior officials began on Tuesday, with the expansion proposal expected to be on the agenda.
Once seen as a loose association of diverse emerging economies, BRICS – aimed at promoting peace, security, development and cooperation – represents 43 per cent of the world’s population, 26 per cent of its land area and about 30 per cent of the global economy.
said last year it wanted the bloc to start working on , but Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said last month that the process was still a “work in progress”, citing the need to deliberate on standards, criteria and procedures of what an expanded grouping would look like.
Oliver Stuenkel, an associate international-relations professor at Fundacao Getulio Vargas, a university in Brazil, said there was some concern within India as to “what extent an expansion is in New Delhi’s interest”.
“I think we’d have to wait and see if there’d be any significant movements in that direction,” Stuenkel said, noting that China was by far the strongest advocate of an enlarged BRICS, followed by Russia. Both India and Brazil, meanwhile, were “a bit wary of losing influence in a large grouping”, he added.
“The new members would largely join to be closer to China and not to Brazil or India,” Stuenkel said, adding that the bloc had already emerged as a counterweight to the West and an alternative model to the powerful comprising Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States.
“Irrespective of whether there will be an expansion, the five BRICS countries [already] have significant influence in their respective regions,” Stuenkel said.
Anu Anwar, a fellow at Harvard University’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, said India’s recent suggested it was an “outlier” in BRICS, which means it “makes sense” for other members to want to expand the bloc.
In recent times, Delhi has strengthened economic, defence and technological cooperation , , and the , and has played an active role in the security grouping, particularly by producing vaccines for the Indo-Pacific region amid .
The Quad – which also includes Australia, Japan and the US – was revived in recent years in response to China’s growing global influence.
Anwar said it was unlikely that BRICS could emerge as an alternative to the G7, as almost all countries in the first-world grouping were members or in other forms of military alliances with the US.
“None of the BRICS members have a military alliance among themselves, and it is highly unlikely to form one in the near future,” Anwar said, adding that such an alliance was key to building a new world order.
“Although expanding members to a few middle powers and regional players could indeed make a significant shift in the global balance of power, it is unlikely to contribute to forming an alternative international order.”
Günther Maihold, deputy director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said creating a new world order was clearly in China and Russia’s interests.
“They are together fostering the enlargement of BRICS in order to legitimise this aspiration,” Maihold said, noting that Brazil, India and South Africa were more interested in maintaining the status quo.
Maihold said China’s interest in enlarging the group and “extending its clout” might be “counterproductive” as it could generate resistance from other BRICS members and the fairly informal group might be even more difficult to manage after expansion.
“[It might also] generate more internal rivalries,” Maihold said, referring not just to poor relations between China and India over , but also the competition for greater regional and international influence.
Shirley Ze Yu, a senior practitioner fellow at Harvard Kennedy School’s Ash Centre, said an enlarged BRICS would reflect the bloc’s strength and Beijing’s growing influence, as China alone represented two-thirds of the BRICS’ gross domestic product.
“As more members subscribe to a common multilateral framework, China will become the rule-setter,” Yu said, noting that any country occupying such a role would carry tremendous influence in the decades to come.
The New Development Bank, formerly the BRICS Development Bank, was established in 2015 with the aim of funding infrastructure developments in emerging economies. Photo: Reuters
See link for entire article.
BRICS should admit members from different regions at a time. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, UAE, Algeria would be too much from one region. Saudi Arabia (MENA), Nigeria (Africa), Argentina (Latam), and Indonesia (Asia), etc. would be better.
I have to say that I agree. I think Indonesia should definitively be in for example.
While the current rule scheme still works to a degree the BRICS organization needs to consider which changes in governance will need to be made if they expand the organization to many countries in the future.
While the current rule scheme still works to a degree the BRICS organization needs to consider which changes in governance will need to be made if they expand the organization to many countries in the future.