BRICS has become eleven countries instead of five.

[yhiaali3]

The irony is that the BRICS alliance politically consists of countries with a low level of democracy, and at the same time it offers a new, more advanced level of democracy in economic interaction. And the G7 countries are politically more democratically developed, but economically they promote an absolutely authoritarian agenda.

Yes, what you say is true, this is a strange paradox indeed, but I expect that the absolute authoritarian policy promoted by the Group of Seven through its absolute control over all aspects of the global economy and keeping all countries of the world under the control of the global economic system controlled by these seven countries, this is the main reason behind The establishment of an alliance of BRICS countries in order to break this system and get out of its control by creating an alliance that is able to compete.

Although the BRICS countries have many political, economic, administrative, and even religious differences, I believe that they agree on one goal, which is to change the political and economic map of the world that was drawn and imposed by force by the United States and its Western allies.

[1714827499]

1714827499

[1714827499]

1714827499

[1714827499]

1714827499

[1714827499]

1714827499

[1714827499]

1714827499

[pooya87]

This will give additional options, especially for poor countries, to get out of American hegemony, which has become hated by the majority of countries.

What's interesting to point out is that majority of countries that you think are "poor countries" are actually super rich but are kept poor as they are the oppressed. For example look at Africa with different nations that keep making the news these days. They have vast amounts of wealth in form of minerals, energy, precious metals, etc. and at the same time they have the highest level of poverty, illiteracy, etc. simply because their wealth is being stolen by the colonizers!

Movements like BRICS have the potential of changing that.

And the G7 countries are politically more democratically developed,

I strongly disagree because the evidence suggests otherwise. The thing is, these countries have been able to reach a stability over the past couple of decades. In a stable society there is no need for authoritarian rule. But let that stability be disrupted a tiny bit and you'll see their true faces.

Take France for instance. Just recently as soon as the stability was threatened after the French police murdered a child they brought out the military to suppress civilians with martial law where nobody was even allowed to exit their homes! Meanwhile there is a media blackout, social media removes anything remotely related to France and the statistics of how many people the military killed is still not allowed to be made public. And they claim to have freedom of speech.

Besides I always say Democracy is a plague since it is just the modern form of dictatorship. The best example is United States with its primitive constitution and election where the population is only forced to choose between two incompetent men one worse than the other to become the new puppet. While the actual decision are made by the regime which they like to call "deep state" to make it sound like conspiracy theory.
Otherwise a senile old man who doesn't remember who he is half the time is not capable of anything or the previous idiot who was literally stripped of of all his powers according to the chairman of joint chiefs of staff.

[yhiaali3]

~Snip~

Thank you for the interesting post. This is the best thing I have read today. You have a very deep reading and insight. I strongly agree with you on both points:

Regarding the first point, yes, as you indicated, poor countries are actually rich countries, as they have enormous resources, but they are not allowed to benefit from these resources like African countries. It is poor because it does not have national sovereignty over its resources.

As for the second point about democracy in developed countries, this is what I call disguised democracy. It is like the beautiful, sexy,  prostitute girl that we see in the movies who seduces a man and then suddenly turns into a vampire and her true, hideous face appears. This is the reality of the so-called developed countries.

[Synchronice]

Although in my eyes BRIC is a poor people's club.

LOL majority of resources are now in the hands of BRICS countries. In energy alone, now 80% belongs to BRICS countries, if you think that's "poor people's club" then review the 70's and how the crazy Arabs sanctioned the West and burnt Europe's economy to the ground.

How are you going to use that energy? Go in European universities to get high quality education to use the resources that you have? Or are these countries going to somehow enlighten themselves and develop?
Who engineered Burj Khalifa? Who engineered Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque? Who engineered Skidmore? Oh my god, west is really very underrated.
I think Europeans and Americans shouldn't expect migrants from BRICS countries from now on, right?

[DrBeer]

The USD will lose it value soon which is because there currency is pegged to oil which is gradually diminishing with time. The BRICS countries will keep increasing and I am very sure that most countries in Asia and Africa will be the major members because that everyone seems to be looking for freedom from the US dominance which could be benefiting the West but others are suffering from it. The USD would no longer be use as international currency for trades like it used to be.

Uhty !!!! Some new theory ! Would you be so kind to share such unique knowledge, for me, and I think others will also be interested !??
Of course it will be interesting to see arguments, data, logical arguments.
I just always thought that resource-based currency pegging can be only for resource countries, which do not have developed industry, technology, influence, etc.

So it will be very interesting to listen to you, really interested

[pooya87]

How are you going to use that energy? Go in European universities to get high quality education to use the resources that you have? Or are these countries going to somehow enlighten themselves and develop?

They go to the outer space aliens who built the European universities and gave them the knowledge and learn it from them

But seriously, which country are you talking about? Each country has its own strengths and weaknesses and each have different tools at their disposal that they can use. There are no general answer for all these questions.
For example some BRICS members already have the knowledge and experience for building infrastructure and already have their own. The most recent member of BRICS, Iran is one of them that already has the technology needed for exploring, extracting and refining oil and gas and not only has its own infrastructure domestically but also is building more for other countries abroad.

I think Europeans and Americans shouldn't expect migrants from BRICS countries from now on, right?

Why do you think that this time the world is going to change overnight?

[dothebeats]

This main currency there have been reports that Russia is trying to come up with their own gold backed currency. I wonder if they will go back to backing on gold if it will be helpful and successful. USD was basically pegged to the dollar before and now the Saudis have followed suit with BRICs due to start in 1 day so I wonder if they would play a crucial role in pegging the main currency to oil or gold or a combination of both?

The USD will lose it value soon which is because there currency is pegged to oil which is gradually diminishing with time. The BRICS countries will keep increasing and I am very sure that most countries in Asia and Africa will be the major members because that everyone seems to be looking for freedom from the US dominance which could be benefiting the West but others are suffering from it. The USD would no longer be use as international currency for trades like it used to be.

This is a big claim, however, I would like to ask for citations or sources supporting your theory. See, despite the current happenings with BRICS, the reality is the US and USD are not going down as easily as everyone thinks they will. First off, a lot of countries have a reciprocal relationship with the U.S. in terms of debts and trade. USD collapsing is highly unlikely due to its stable status both politically and economically. Moreover, many nations hold reserves of USD and the demand for USD is high.

Now, until you cite credible sources that can actually provide great points on why and how USD will soon meets its downfall please let us refrain from just throwing random baseless theories that confuses new members.

[Synchronice]

For example some BRICS members already have the knowledge and experience for building infrastructure and already have their own.

Thanks to western countries and globalization, they gained knowledge and experience.

I think Iran is already a member of the BRICS before now

Technically Iran wasn't a member but even more technically there was first Iran then came BRICS

One of the main reasons for creating BRICS was to challenge the dominance of US dollar and US. That means creation of new payment systems, new trade routes and relations that US can not dictate or prevent, creating a sanction proof economy, etc. Well, Iran as the most sanctions country for the longest time in history has already created all that. Iran already has sanction-proof payment systems, trade routes and partners, and a lot more.

I may be biased but to be honest the way I see it is that BRICS without Iran didn't mean much. Specially when you consider the historical role Iran (or Persia) played in the global economic scene for centuries connecting East and West by being at the heart of Silk Road, and it still is at the heart of the new Silk Road under the new name One Road One Belt.

- Why are you biased?
- Who says I'm biased?
- You are biased!
Just kidding, imagine this dialogue the way they say.

BRICS countries are all poor corrupt countries. Do you think it's west to blame for their high corruption and poverty? Do you think that by creating BRICS they'll be able to get rid of US dollar and American/European influence and once they get rid of it, then there will be a era of rise in these countries? Do you really think it's the United States that keeps them in poverty? No, this is an inner problem, all that exists because of their mentality, work ethics, appreciation towards each other, etc. They need to change it, they need to understand that corruption is bad, they need to understand that you shouldn't only care about improving of your life because by improving overall quality of life for everyone, yours will drastically improve too.
Now, let's talk about the USA/EU. What does the EU do? Gives asylum to people from BRICS countries, lets them to life a normal life. EU universities are free for everyone, doesn't matter where you come from. So, EU taxpayers pay for you, from BRICS countries, to study for free in Europe and let's you to return in your country and use the gained knowledge to develop your country. You shouldn't blame Europeans if lots of people prefer to use that as an advantage to get PR in EU.

It's all an illusion to tell their people that evil America and Europe are keeping their people poor. It's just a traditional brainwashing, that has been always working. You probably have heard that you are. You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with, so, BRICS is not a solution!

[pooya87]

BRICS countries are all poor corrupt countries. Do you think it's west to blame for their high corruption and poverty? Do you think that by creating BRICS they'll be able to get rid of US dollar and American/European influence and once they get rid of it, then there will be a era of rise in these countries? Do you really think it's the United States that keeps them in poverty? No, this is an inner problem, all that exists because of their mentality, work ethics, appreciation towards each other, etc. They need to change it, they need to understand that corruption is bad, they need to understand that you shouldn't only care about improving of your life because by improving overall quality of life for everyone, yours will drastically improve too.
Now, let's talk about the USA/EU. What does the EU do? Gives asylum to people from BRICS countries, lets them to life a normal life. EU universities are free for everyone, doesn't matter where you come from. So, EU taxpayers pay for you, from BRICS countries, to study for free in Europe and let's you to return in your country and use the gained knowledge to develop your country. You shouldn't blame Europeans if lots of people prefer to use that as an advantage to get PR in EU.

It's all an illusion to tell their people that evil America and Europe are keeping their people poor. It's just a traditional brainwashing, that has been always working. You probably have heard that you are. You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with, so, BRICS is not a solution!

You are severely misinformed. Not to mention that your comment is very racist, specially the bold part. You think other people who aren't in EU/US are just some brainless idiots who don't already know corruption is bad and are sitting on their asses blaming US/EU for all their problems!
You also know nothing of history of the things that are going on in the world.

Where or from when should I even begin with the examples!
Across West Asia where once British colonizers infiltrated and split the countries into smaller ones, the maps are designed in a way to cause fundamental problems for centuries. Like water problems that has actually led to water wars like where the source of a strategic river is in one artificially created micro-country but all of the rest of it and its users are in another. Then they start their damn buildings in that micro-country to worsen the issues.
Now water crisis, food crisis, farmers migrating to big cities, sand storms and many other environmental problems are the results of that.

Lets come closer to today. After the US EU coalition destroyed Iraq they intentionally installed the worst governmental system possible by giving each section of it to a minority group instead of letting everyone participate in a democratic way in every aspect of governance. So now Iraq president is from one minority group while the prime minister is from another that are at each others' throats and all the rest of the administration is just as terrible.
Why? Because while they were all busy fighting each other, US was stealing all their resources, literally! Oil tankers kept going to US; the US back separatist/terrorist groups had control of the gas rich northern Iraq and were literally selling the gas and pocketing the money after giving US it's cut. This alone damaged Iraq's economy of roughly $33 billion before they shut it down.
It is not going to be solved until they kick the remaining occupiers out and fix this system. Until then even their electrical grid remains an entangled mess after it was destroyed by US. Until then they will have to also fight terrorists as US keeps reviving them, like these days that they are attempting to free the ISIS terrorists from prisons across the region.

Don't get me started on Afghanistan where another US EU coalition invaded and destroyed the country then after years of destruction they handed over the rule to a bunch of cavemen extremists by donating about $100 billion worth of weapons to help them in their rule and to start wars with their neighbors (surprise surprise their neighbors are China, Iran and by proxy Russia).
Maybe you think people of Afghanistan like living in ruins created by US/EU or like leaving their homes and wash dishes in Europe.

Let's take Niger. A country with large amounts of resources including minerals, Uranium, gold, etc. has 10 million living in absolute poverty just because all these resources are practically being stolen by France. And all their money goes to French banks which they can not even spend majority of it. IIRC 10% of it is given to Niger!
After they kick out the French colonizers they can regain full control of their country, their government, their resources and their money. Then they can spend 100% of that money to focus on eliminating poverty and other issues.

Last but not least let me give a much more detailed example of a corruption that is only caused by United States actions.
It is the case of a big issue in Iran with embezzlement cases. Iran is a country that has been at a cold/hybrid war with United States for the past 5 decades. Because Iran is under both US sanctions and financial and medical terrorism, certain imports have become "complex". That has led to a lot of corruption and specifically embezzlement.
Despite the self sufficiency in medical sector certain things still need to be imported like during the COVID pandemic with ventilators. But the problem is due to US economic war on Iran, it becomes impossible to import them through any "normal" channels (like using SWIFT or the $100 billion that used to be blocked in it).
The alternative is to make this private and classified and use "individuals". That means going to some private sector, giving them privileged information and ultra cheap dollars (80% discount to be exact) to try and import these needs. But none of it can become public because that would prevent it from taking place. Now 3 things can happen:
1- The individual successfully goes around the sanctions and import what was needed, then they can pay back the loan
2- US finds out and basically shuts down the individuals' bank accounts and steals the money
3- The individual steals the money but claims that US has stolen it
When the individual fails to pay back the money, it is nearly impossible to prove if it were case 2 or 3 hence the corruption grows are more individuals are now stealing the money.
Without sanctions or US, like using BRICS bank that corruption is automatically eliminated since there is no reason for any of it to be hidden or secretive and they won't have any excuse to not pay back the money they borrowed for imports.
That also means that like a chain a lot of other things will change. The government will no longer need to waste its finite resources on such things (like importing ventilators through back channels) > There is no need to pay the difference (the discount I mentioned above) or the extra costs that stem from having more middle men > There won't be any budget deficits > There won't be any need to print money like madmen > Without money printing there won't be inflation and the fiat exchange rate stops dropping > Without inflation product lines can work better and will actually use the loans they took to produce > employment goes up > Economy is strengthened > Quality of life improves
As a matter of fact over the past 2 years Iran has been focusing heavily on dedollarisation even before BRICS and with the world changing fast and US losing its strength and hegemony the chain of events I explained are happening slowly but surely. Not to mention that large number of embezzlement cases were automatically eliminated before they could even happen, as I said before.

Like it or not the history of the world is like a sinusoidal wave. Empires shape and that empires fall then from their ashes there may be another empire. Sometimes the empires rule for a thousand years, sometimes a hundred and sometimes only for 30 years. But there is always one constant and that is change. The tables always turn. Not so long ago millions were jobless in the biggest EU economy and even more people despite working their asses off couldn't fill their bellies. Or the 4th biggest G7 economy used to be a big empire and a hegemony with colonies around the globe, today it is at best an average geopolitical player and is a shadow of that empire where the sun does set.

[coupable]

Where or from when should I even begin with the examples!
Across West Asia where once British colonizers infiltrated and split the countries into smaller ones, the maps are designed in a way to cause fundamental problems for centuries. Like water problems that has actually led to water wars like where the source of a strategic river is in one artificially created micro-country but all of the rest of it and its users are in another. Then they start their damn buildings in that micro-country to worsen the issues.
Now water crisis, food crisis, farmers migrating to big cities, sand storms and many other environmental problems are the results of that.

Lets come closer to today. After the US EU coalition destroyed Iraq they intentionally installed the worst governmental system possible by giving each section of it to a minority group instead of letting everyone participate in a democratic way in every aspect of governance. So now Iraq president is from one minority group while the prime minister is from another that are at each others' throats and all the rest of the administration is just as terrible.
Why? Because while they were all busy fighting each other, US was stealing all their resources, literally! Oil tankers kept going to US; the US back separatist/terrorist groups had control of the gas rich northern Iraq and were literally selling the gas and pocketing the money after giving US it's cut. This alone damaged Iraq's economy of roughly $33 billion before they shut it down.
It is not going to be solved until they kick the remaining occupiers out and fix this system. Until then even their electrical grid remains an entangled mess after it was destroyed by US. Until then they will have to also fight terrorists as US keeps reviving them, like these days that they are attempting to free the ISIS terrorists from prisons across the region.

Don't get me started on Afghanistan where another US EU coalition invaded and destroyed the country then after years of destruction they handed over the rule to a bunch of cavemen extremists by donating about $100 billion worth of weapons to help them in their rule and to start wars with their neighbors (surprise surprise their neighbors are China, Iran and by proxy Russia).
Maybe you think people of Afghanistan like living in ruins created by US/EU or like leaving their homes and wash dishes in Europe.

Let's take Niger. A country with large amounts of resources including minerals, Uranium, gold, etc. has 10 million living in absolute poverty just because all these resources are practically being stolen by France. And all their money goes to French banks which they can not even spend majority of it. IIRC 10% of it is given to Niger!
After they kick out the French colonizers they can regain full control of their country, their government, their resources and their money. Then they can spend 100% of that money to focus on eliminating poverty and other issues.

Last but not least let me give a much more detailed example of a corruption that is only caused by United States actions.
It is the case of a big issue in Iran with embezzlement cases. Iran is a country that has been at a cold/hybrid war with United States for the past 5 decades. Because Iran is under both US sanctions and financial and medical terrorism, certain imports have become "complex". That has led to a lot of corruption and specifically embezzlement.
Despite the self sufficiency in medical sector certain things still need to be imported like during the COVID pandemic with ventilators. But the problem is due to US economic war on Iran, it becomes impossible to import them through any "normal" channels (like using SWIFT or the $100 billion that used to be blocked in it).
The alternative is to make this private and classified and use "individuals". That means going to some private sector, giving them privileged information and ultra cheap dollars (80% discount to be exact) to try and import these needs. But none of it can become public because that would prevent it from taking place. Now 3 things can happen:
1- The individual successfully goes around the sanctions and import what was needed, then they can pay back the loan
2- US finds out and basically shuts down the individuals' bank accounts and steals the money
3- The individual steals the money but claims that US has stolen it
When the individual fails to pay back the money, it is nearly impossible to prove if it were case 2 or 3 hence the corruption grows are more individuals are now stealing the money.
Without sanctions or US, like using BRICS bank that corruption is automatically eliminated since there is no reason for any of it to be hidden or secretive and they won't have any excuse to not pay back the money they borrowed for imports.
That also means that like a chain a lot of other things will change. The government will no longer need to waste its finite resources on such things (like importing ventilators through back channels) > There is no need to pay the difference (the discount I mentioned above) or the extra costs that stem from having more middle men > There won't be any budget deficits > There won't be any need to print money like madmen > Without money printing there won't be inflation and the fiat exchange rate stops dropping > Without inflation product lines can work better and will actually use the loans they took to produce > employment goes up > Economy is strengthened > Quality of life improves
As a matter of fact over the past 2 years Iran has been focusing heavily on dedollarisation even before BRICS and with the world changing fast and US losing its strength and hegemony the chain of events I explained are happening slowly but surely. Not to mention that large number of embezzlement cases were automatically eliminated before they could even happen, as I said before.

The most important example you did not mention:
During World War II, all African countries were occupied by European colonial powers. This means that the entire continent is made up of colonies (with the exception of Liberia) that provide Europe with natural resources such as minerals, agricultural products, and slaves. It was not in Europe's interest to grant independence to its colonies in a way that would cut off supplies of the resources of those regions in which the colonies were located (Africa). Loyal governments were appointed to assume power in what was called "independence", in which those countries maintained their privileges to benefit from the country's resources. Including border demarcation. Since its independence, no African country has succeeded in achieving economic stability or being the absolute decision-maker on its territory. Imagine that Nigeria and Mali are rich in gold and have zero gold reserves, while France does not have any gold mines and ranks fourth in the world in the list of largest gold reserves. I come from a country that was colonized by France, and despite its alleged independence, France still buys natural products at the price that it set during the colonial period in the 1920s, and these contracts have not even been subject to a mere amendment since they were drafted. The African continent is still colonized, and the imperialist movement that began at the beginning of the 18th century has not ended until today, but has only developed to take other forms, perhaps worse than direct military occupation.

I find it unfortunate the state of complete denial of history, and it is not out of ignorance. It cannot be out of ignorance. I have spoken to many people who do not believe in the idea of colonialism and do not use the word "colonialism" except in what is for the benefit of their countries. These people are always citizens of colonial countries trying to improve the image of their colonial country through a complete denial of history and historical facts.

[STT]

Someone told me the other week that BRICS is a new currency.  Wasnt its origins an investment note from a Goldman Sachs banker.  I realize the term got popular but Im not sure how much strength there is in this declaration besides a conference to discuss common aims.  I hope they find a common link and a greater trade balance between themselves but the old problem of Dollar reserve bias and requirement for liquidity of dollars trade internationally is still there so far as I know.
  I think China and Brazil did a trade agreement recently, an attempt to make sure neither in each trade requires dollars but is it able to tie trade equally between themselves.  The two economies are different enough that its a real challenge to balance that trade and that problem is ongoing for the idea overall behind Brics so far as  I know

[Synchronice]

No, this is an inner problem, all that exists because of their mentality, work ethics, appreciation towards each other, etc. They need to change it, they need to understand that corruption is bad, they need to understand that you shouldn't only care about improving of your life because by improving overall quality of life for everyone, yours will drastically improve too.

You are severely misinformed. Not to mention that your comment is very racist, specially the bold part. You think other people who aren't in EU/US are just some brainless idiots who don't already know corruption is bad and are sitting on their asses blaming US/EU for all their problems!
You also know nothing of history of the things that are going on in the world.

How is this a racism? I re-read my post and still don't understand what made you to write that. Is there corruption in BRICS countries? Yes! Is corruption and nepotism part of mentality? Yes! Do they need to change this mentality? Yes! Do people need to take care of each other and help each other to improve overall quality of life? Yes but how is this a racism? The fact that they have low quality of life and need to improve is a racism?
I really wonder, do you travel? Have you stayed in poor countries for at least up to 6 months? Have you tried to interact with them? Have you seen life outside of your circle?
Am I wrong when I say that throughout the history Europe was the most advanced one? Europe is a place where the democracy was born, Europe is a place where technical inventions and philosophy emerged, isn't it so? The fact that you have electricity, gas heating, computer, smartphone, modern infrastructure it's all because of Europeans. I don't say other countries are stupid but their governance led to atrophy of talented people.
And yes, to be honest, I think, majority of countries (elder population) who aren't in EU/US, are really blaming us for all of their problems.

I don't know much about Iraq (only know that EU didn't participate in it except Poland and UK) but agree with you that the US and allies did absolutely evil and if there is a judge, they should pay! But our life is full of evil, if we dig deep into history,  Btw if you don't mind, I have some questions and wanna hear your opinion. Why isn't Iraq like UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? If there was not the involvement of the USA, would Iraq be peaceful country with high quality of life, high human development index with freedom of speech and freedom of human rights?

Don't get me started on Afghanistan where another US EU coalition invaded and destroyed the country then after years of destruction they handed over the rule to a bunch of cavemen extremists by donating about $100 billion worth of weapons to help them in their rule and to start wars with their neighbors (surprise surprise their neighbors are China, Iran and by proxy Russia).
Maybe you think people of Afghanistan like living in ruins created by US/EU or like leaving their homes and wash dishes in Europe.

It's just my personal opinion but I think the whole world uses Afghanistan for own illegal activities, including illegal selling of weapons, afghan drug imports and money laundering.
By the way, have you seen this photo of Russian priest spraying holy water on weapons of mass destruction? What do you think about that?

Without sanctions or US, like using BRICS bank that corruption is automatically eliminated since there is no reason for any of it to be hidden or secretive and they won't have any excuse to not pay back the money they borrowed for imports.
That also means that like a chain a lot of other things will change. The government will no longer need to waste its finite resources on such things (like importing ventilators through back channels) > There is no need to pay the difference (the discount I mentioned above) or the extra costs that stem from having more middle men > There won't be any budget deficits > There won't be any need to print money like madmen > Without money printing there won't be inflation and the fiat exchange rate stops dropping > Without inflation product lines can work better and will actually use the loans they took to produce > employment goes up > Economy is strengthened > Quality of life improves
As a matter of fact over the past 2 years Iran has been focusing heavily on dedollarisation even before BRICS and with the world changing fast and US losing its strength and hegemony the chain of events I explained are happening slowly but surely. Not to mention that large number of embezzlement cases were automatically eliminated before they could even happen, as I said before.

This probably answers one of my question that I asked above but you don't really understand how and why people become corrupt. Okay, corruption make things easier for corrupt people, you just pay money and things are done, this is very addictive, it's an easy money too.
Okay, let's imagine that US sanctions are eliminated. Do you really think that now corrupt people will say: Okay, now we have no excuse to not pay back the money borrowed for imports? Oh my goodness, no. Corruption has the strongest and deepest routes. Once it's sowed, it's impossible to erase. There is only one way to erase it and it's to grow a new population with the ideology that corruption is bad. Old people, who were corrupt, can't be changed.

Final questions:
Does EU give you asylum protection?
Does EU give you free healthcare even if you are an asylum/refugee?
Does EU give you free high quality education?
Does EU give you free money and housing when you claim an asylum?
Do European taxpayers pay for all of these?
What we get in return? Those who got asylum, our free money, free healthcare and free education, are raping women and children, are killing people in the street, are robbing houses, are shoplifting and so on.

Why don't you wanna talk about these, what we give and what we get? If I visit Iran/Iraq to claim asylum, will they treat me the way we treat refugees in our countries?

[Pierre 2]

This is just Russia trying to portray itself as opposition to greater economies of western league. When you pull out China Brics become nothing more than bricks in my opinion. I am actually surprised to see China and India not going different route but integrate with other lackluster economies. Their labor is enough to make them truly compete with western league. Anyways if joining brics will help regular people in those countries I am happy for them.

[pooya87]

Am I wrong when I say that throughout the history Europe was the most advanced one?

If by history you mean ever since the invasions began where colonizers destroyed other countries to steal their resources, then yes in that short history you are correct but the history is not 200-300 years, it is thousands of years and in most of that time Europe was actually far behind the East. Not to mention that many of what we call country today didn't even exist that long.
Even gun power that was the start of the invasions and pillages by the West was actually invented in the East.

As I already said the history is like a sinusoidal wave.

I don't say other countries are stupid but their governance led to atrophy of talented people.

You are somewhat on the right path here. At the end of the day we have nobody to blame by ourselves. To blame colonizers for colonizing is like blaming water for being wet. For example England is a teeny tiny island and if you remove the non-developed area that leaves it with a measly 11000 km², considering the lack of natural resources and the harsh living environment you can see why they started invading the world starting from their neighbors.

At some point everyone realizes this and learns from their mistakes in the history and start the change. What we see in the New World Order today with new organizations like SCO and BRICS is the result of those who realized this decades ago and started the change.

I don't know much about Iraq (only know that EU didn't participate in it except Poland and UK)

The murderous group that invaded Iraq and killed 1.4 million civilians (40% women and children) was referred to as "coalition of the willing" (you can search it and learn some history) and it included 49 countries according to Whitehouse archives.
To name a few: UK, Denmark, Italy, Japan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey and of course Ukraine. Some countries like Costa Rica went back and forth with their supports, some countries like Solomon Islands didn't send troops officially but mostly as "volunteers" to join the murders.

Why isn't Iraq like UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? If there was not the involvement of the USA, would Iraq be peaceful country with high quality of life, high human development index with freedom of speech and freedom of human rights?

First of all it is absurd to talk about human rights and freedom of speech and mention Saudi regime in the same sentence when the smallest thing they've done was to chop up the Washington Post journalist and dissolve his pieces in acid bath.

As for Iraq, you can't talk about a country with a very narrow view. What we call Iraq today is the result of the British separation of parts of the Ottoman Empire in the 20th century and is again one of those "creations" (like I mentioned above with the water wars) that are designed to be a natural issue for centuries.
The "quality of life" etc that you are talking about today is the result of decades of foreign intervention, stupid decision and finally in recent times the result of rule of the Washington's dearest friend and ally Saddam.
I'd say the beginning of the downfall of Iraq was in early 1980's when Saddam decided to listen to US and start the largest land battles since World War II with his neighbor in an area bigger than Europe for 8 years which he ended up losing. He started it just because he thought the post revolution Iran that was isolated and surrounded by the enemies could be easily defeated specially since he had the support and troops from majority of the world (60+ countries) and this included the two super powers of the time US and USSR!
As he failed to fulfill US interests in overthrowing democracy in Iran to install the same US back dictator, he had lost his usage so the sanctions began, so the US media started to call this once US ally a dictator, hence the bombings began for 10 years until 2003 when the full scale invasion started.

It's just my personal opinion but I think the whole world uses Afghanistan for own illegal activities, including illegal selling of weapons, afghan drug imports and money laundering.

Only in the past couple of hundred years Afghanistan, this once beautiful and modern place, has been the battle field of different empires. Which is where the statement "Afghanistan is the place where Empires die" comes from. The Brits, the Soviets and finally the Americans have all invaded Afghanistan and each have destroyed it in their own ways.

Okay, let's imagine that US sanctions are eliminated. Do you really think that now corrupt people will say: Okay, now we have no excuse to not pay back the money borrowed for imports? Oh my goodness, no. Corruption has the strongest and deepest routes. Once it's sowed, it's impossible to erase. There is only one way to erase it and it's to grow a new population with the ideology that corruption is bad. Old people, who were corrupt, can't be changed.

Corruption is in human nature, if you search about it you will find numerous cases in both US and Europe. In fact many European countries have a very low corruption index (ie high level of corruption) like Ukraine, Albania, Serbia, Turkey (if you count it in Europe!), Moldova, etc.
That's just the very biased CPI, case by case we can find big corruption cases in everywhere. For instance the National Audit Office of UK publishes some censored statistics every now and then and the estimated average of total frauds is over $100 billion in recent years.

The point is that it is racist to think corruption only exist outside of Europe and it exists because people don't know it is bad! If anything corruption in Europe is a lot worse because of the circumstances. eg. EU is not under any sanctions nor is it in any cold war, at least hasn't been until last year.

Final questions:
Does EU give you asylum protection?
Does EU give you free healthcare even if you are an asylum/refugee?
Does EU give you free high quality education?
Does EU give you free money and housing when you claim an asylum?
Do European taxpayers pay for all of these?
What we get in return? Those who got asylum, our free money, free healthcare and free education, are raping women and children, are killing people in the street, are robbing houses, are shoplifting and so on.

They take 470,000 troops and completely destroy 6 countries in 20 years and cause the dislocation of tens of millions of people. Some of which find their way to Europe seeking asylum. Out of those who survive the NATO bombings, many die trying to get into Europe. Specially these days that some EU countries like UK are sinking their ships to get rid of them. A small portion that enter Europe are treated harshly and their belongings are confiscated to cover the "cost of their asylum" (eg. the Jewelry Law in Denmark that lets the police seize anything that costs more than a grand).

Why don't you wanna talk about these, what we give and what we get? If I visit Iran/Iraq to claim asylum, will they treat me the way we treat refugees in our countries?

Considering that how over the past 20 years as US+EU coalition has been directly or indirectly involved in wars in most of Iran's neighbors (Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan) and how Iran has been the gracious host to millions of refugees from these countries providing them with homes, jobs, education, etc. the answer to your question is no you won't be treated the way EU treats refugees.

[DrBeer]

Someone told me the other week that BRICS is a new currency.  Wasnt its origins an investment note from a Goldman Sachs banker.  I realize the term got popular but Im not sure how much strength there is in this declaration besides a conference to discuss common aims.  I hope they find a common link and a greater trade balance between themselves but the old problem of Dollar reserve bias and requirement for liquidity of dollars trade internationally is still there so far as I know.
  I think China and Brazil did a trade agreement recently, an attempt to make sure neither in each trade requires dollars but is it able to tie trade equally between themselves.  The two economies are different enough that its a real challenge to balance that trade and that problem is ongoing for the idea overall behind Brics so far as  I know

It all sounds beautiful, but there are 3 real problems that override everything:
1. India officially recognizes - there is no alternative to the dollar. And yuan, as a Brics currency, India will not accept. India has already started dumping huge reserves of yuan from its economy by buying Russian oil with yuan.
India is smart. see point 2
2. China's cunning attempt to "slip" the BRICS a dollar replacement and a "BRICS domestic currency" is just an attempt to save its economy. There is no dedolarization here. The Chinese economy has a huge problem, and "exporting inflation" is one mechanism. The second is BRICS yuanization makes all participants who will accept yuan as "BRICS currency" donors to China's economy.
3- Both India, China, and the rest of the BRICS members need... to interact with the rest of the world's economy... yes, the dollar. Neither the EU nor the US will sell their technology, equipment, and the like, for yuan.

This is simple, open data, and the reality of the global marketplace

[Synchronice]

You are somewhat on the right path here. At the end of the day we have nobody to blame by ourselves. To blame colonizers for colonizing is like blaming water for being wet. For example England is a teeny tiny island and if you remove the non-developed area that leaves it with a measly 11000 km², considering the lack of natural resources and the harsh living environment you can see why they started invading the world starting from their neighbors.

At some point everyone realizes this and learns from their mistakes in the history and start the change. What we see in the New World Order today with new organizations like SCO and BRICS is the result of those who realized this decades ago and started the change.

England, the land of Anglo-Saxons, i.e. immigrants from Northern Germany and Southern Scandinavia conquered the world. England, such a tiny island, who could imagine.
Okay, my point here is, England was a conqueror but there is a thing that I want you to think about. Every country will be a conqueror if it can to conquer, absolutely every country. What does conqueror want? To expand, to have more lands and to become from tiny island into a big empire.
But there are two types of conquerors:
1. One is technologically/culturally advanced with manpower
2. Second is not technologically/culturally advanced but has manpower.

Now, to explain what I want to say, let's take two modern countries for example:
1. Denmark - Is technologically/culturally advanced, has manpower
2. North Korea - Only has manpower, otherwise this country is brutal.

Let's assume that other countries are typical average countries, aren't developed, have some problems, etc. Also, let's assume that these countries want to conquer other countries.
1. Denmark was to conquer your country. If you let Denmark to conquer it and join it, without any war, then Denmark will share it's technology, education and achievements with you, merge with you under its own leadership and you, that was a bad/average country before, now becomes one of the most successful one as a part of Denmark. If you resist, then definitely it will abandon you, will try to enslave you and rob you.
2. North Korea wants to conquer your country. They are brutal, they don't have educational and technological achievements, they can bring nothing to your country by conquering because they don't have anything for them. If you let them to conquer you, you'll become even worse than you were before. If you don't let them to conquer you, then they'll murder you and enslave you, abandon you, destroy you and everything. They can't steal anything because they lack technological progress.

So, my point is: There is Russia/China and there is US/EU. If you visit these countries, you'll see that people live a wealthy lifestyle, have better quality of life, things go better. If you visit Russia/China, you'll see that in these countries, you have to work a lot and are only getting paid to eat, also, because of corruption and nepotism, your talent wanishes.
Now there is a Brazil, India, South Africa. Let's be honest and say that one of these have to conquer you, you have no other choice because two superpowers want you. If you willingly join Russia/China alliance, what will be benefit for you? Will your quality of life improve? No, because these countries can't take care of their own citizens, so they won't be able to take care of you. But if you willingly join US/EU, you'll gain access to tremendous education, experience, better quality of life, more possibilities and so on.

The British Empire brought modern technology, education and culture. While it's true that it destroyed a lot of lives, it's also true that Britain was advanced and could bring advancement and progress in countries that were willing to accept them. That's all I wanted to say from the very beginning.

Final questions:
Does EU give you asylum protection?
Does EU give you free healthcare even if you are an asylum/refugee?
Does EU give you free high quality education?
Does EU give you free money and housing when you claim an asylum?
Do European taxpayers pay for all of these?
What we get in return? Those who got asylum, our free money, free healthcare and free education, are raping women and children, are killing people in the street, are robbing houses, are shoplifting and so on.

They take 470,000 troops and completely destroy 6 countries in 20 years and cause the dislocation of tens of millions of people. Some of which find their way to Europe seeking asylum. Out of those who survive the NATO bombings, many die trying to get into Europe. Specially these days that some EU countries like UK are sinking their ships to get rid of them. A small portion that enter Europe are treated harshly and their belongings are confiscated to cover the "cost of their asylum" (eg. the Jewelry Law in Denmark that lets the police seize anything that costs more than a grand).

Okay, Europe is evil. Why do they try to claim asylum in Europe?
The UK is sinking their ships to get rid of them, yes, I have heard that but why do they want to go in the UK? Okay, years ago, asylum claimers were treated much better, Sweden was even giving them free housing but what did Sweden got in return? Increased crime, rape, murder. Does the UK want increased crime/rape/murder? No, that's why they are doing that. I know it's cruel but so is when you murder someone's daughter. Refugees from those countries are doing massacres in Europe.

[coupable]

Final questions:
Does EU give you asylum protection?
Does EU give you free healthcare even if you are an asylum/refugee?
Does EU give you free high quality education?
Does EU give you free money and housing when you claim an asylum?
Do European taxpayers pay for all of these?
What we get in return? Those who got asylum, our free money, free healthcare and free education, are raping women and children, are killing people in the street, are robbing houses, are shoplifting and so on.

They take 470,000 troops and completely destroy 6 countries in 20 years and cause the dislocation of tens of millions of people. Some of which find their way to Europe seeking asylum. Out of those who survive the NATO bombings, many die trying to get into Europe. Specially these days that some EU countries like UK are sinking their ships to get rid of them. A small portion that enter Europe are treated harshly and their belongings are confiscated to cover the "cost of their asylum" (eg. the Jewelry Law in Denmark that lets the police seize anything that costs more than a grand).

I do not understand why he wants to link the standard of living in some European countries with the reality of corruption in the countries that were colonized by those countries. It is enough for him to rephrase the questions in another way to obtain more logical and objective answers:
- What if, for example, France stops stealing uranium from Burkina Faso? Will it be able to provide electricity without interruption without its nuclear reactors?
- What if Europe stopped stealing Africa’s resources, would it also be forced to get involved in the migration issue?
- What if Britain was content with its local resources without colonizing its neighbors and distant countries? Would we call it “the empire on which the sun never sets”?
- What if the European powers had not divided Africa and parts of Asia according to their interests, would we have found the Kurds without a state, for example? Or would Pakistan have succeeded in gaining independence from the mother country, India, and the unrest would have begun from then on?
- What if Europe had not exploited “child labor” and “low wages” in poor Asian countries, would it have been able to produce clothes and basics at those low prices for the cost of production?
- what if....?
- what if......?
- What if you reread history and saw how many presidents and resistance fighters were assassinated because they rejected the policies of proxy colonialism and wanted to advance their countries? Would you have continued to cling to the idea of “European justice”?

[Bananington]

For me, I think BRICS should be renamed to fit the inclusion of the countries that has increased her numbers of users.
I like the idea of BRICS and can't wait to see how it will be implemented and effected within these countries. 
The numbers will either increase or decrease with time owning to the success of its adoption and use for trade.

As this is also a new world order play, the USD will have to find a common ground on which it can effectively create room for the BRICS currency, so as not to cause division or create barriers that might result in an ensuing economic war.

[DrBeer]

I do not understand why he wants to link the standard of living in some European countries with the reality of corruption in the countries that were colonized by those countries. It is enough for him to rephrase the questions in another way to obtain more logical and objective answers:
- What if, for example, France stops stealing uranium from Burkina Faso? Will it be able to provide electricity without interruption without its nuclear reactors?
- What if Europe stopped stealing Africa’s resources, would it also be forced to get involved in the migration issue?
- What if Britain was content with its local resources without colonizing its neighbors and distant countries? Would we call it “the empire on which the sun never sets”?
- What if the European powers had not divided Africa and parts of Asia according to their interests, would we have found the Kurds without a state, for example? Or would Pakistan have succeeded in gaining independence from the mother country, India, and the unrest would have begun from then on?
- What if Europe had not exploited “child labor” and “low wages” in poor Asian countries, would it have been able to produce clothes and basics at those low prices for the cost of production?
- what if....?
- what if......?
- What if you reread history and saw how many presidents and resistance fighters were assassinated because they rejected the policies of proxy colonialism and wanted to advance their countries? Would you have continued to cling to the idea of “European justice”?

I have the answers, but it looks like you won't like them

- France is not stealing uranium from Burkina Faso, it has some production in Gabon. There is something to replace it
- Britain gave up all its colonies, giving them freedom, as well as legal and financial system, industry and much more.
- If you look at the division of Africa now - you will be surprised - China is becoming a key player. And its scheme of "partnership" is called "stifling investments" - believe me, soon the countries under the influence of China will remember France, Netherlands and other "empires" with fondness. A perfect example - you can see what China has done in Sri Lanka.
- It is not France or the EU that makes children work. It is done by local "businessmen".  Which I agree with - customers are not averse to cheap production in such countries. But the order in a country is the problems of the government/population of that country.

[pooya87]

England, the land of Anglo-Saxons~

Read my comment again specially the first two lines because you didn't get my point at all. The point isn't to claim nobody else is going to do what the tiny island of England has done. The point was to say as the invaded, the countries have to learn from their mistakes that led to the success of their enemies.

1. Denmark was to conquer your country. If you let Denmark to conquer it and join it, without any war, then Denmark will share it's technology, education and achievements with you, merge with you under its own leadership and you, that was a bad/average country before, now becomes one of the most successful one as a part of Denmark. If you resist, then definitely it will abandon you, will try to enslave you and rob you.

So your argument is that if a country has more advanced technologies everyone else should let them annex their countries or be invaded and murdered! LOL
I wonder where you live because I can bet that at least in two dozen technological fields we are far more advanced than your country can ever dream of. How about we annex your country to share the "technology, education and achievements" with you or as you said in case of resistance we enslave you?

It doesn't sound good when the shoe is on the other foot, does it?

Okay, Europe is evil. Why do they try to claim asylum in Europe?

OK. Europe is not evil then why have 10+ million Europeans from Ukrainian sought asylum in rest of Europe?
It's the same elsewhere, when the West declares war on their countries (be it invasion or cold war or colonizing), they are forced to leave their homes and migrate, some to the same West that ruined their lives.

The fact is that nobody, specially in the East likes to migrate to the West. The cultural difference alone is enough to persuade them not to. Nobody likes leaving their homes, their families and their own rich culture and heritage to go live in an artificial country like US with a primitive governance or EU.
You think anyone in their right mind would like to live in a place where every day 13 children on average become victims of gun violence? Or one out of 3 or 4 women are sexually assaulted? That's US for you. Europe is no better. Take France for instance. They just passed a law that starting from this upcoming school year it mandates female children to wear revealing clothes to school! Funny thing is that we don't hear anything from a single human rights organization in the West...

I do not understand why he wants to link the standard of living in some European countries with the reality of corruption in the countries that were colonized by those countries.

Because if you take away "economy" from the West there is nothing else left. There would be no technology, no advances, no resources, no culture, no society and last but not least no democracy. And worst of all they, specially Europe, would go back to the stone ages where they fight each other for scarce resources like they were doing in years before World War 2 when there was at least a big war every year between different countries in Europe! It would be the same in America. You think for example "country" of Texas (the largest oil-producing state) would freely give its resources to the rest of the 50-60 "countries" after United States becomes Ununited Countries?