Tag Archives: BRIC Nations

The BRICS Agenda

Posted on by

The BRICS (razil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) agenda is not necessarily good news for America–it will mean the death of the American dollar. However, there are actually some good things about it. The BRICS countries are the only countries right now (with very few exceptions) that are willing to stand up to the economic plans of the World Economic Forum.

On July 9th, Elizabeth Nickson posted an article at Substack about the plans of the World Economic Forum.

The article reports:

Earlier this month in St. Petersburg, the BRICS — that is, the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — met to consider the application of nineteen more countries to their number, and in two months they will gather against, in Durban, South Africa, with an eye towards laying out an alternative to the U.S. dollar’s dominion over world trade. Algeria, Egypt, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe, are among those applying to join BRICS. These countries are setting their face against western democracies and their death march into “climate change” degrowth and population reduction. They may save us yet.

That currency will be pegged to the natural resources possessed by each country. This critical shift will mean that financialization of each country’s resources will be unavailable to the world’s oligarchs, who today are acquiring land as fast as they can to set aside as carbon credits on the massive new taxes deemed necessary. The BRICS do not care about “climate change” or species extinction (which they know are based on a falsification of science), they care about growth and using their resources to give their people a better life. They do not want the World Economic Forum telling them what to do. When it comes to the Ukraine conflict, they are on Russia’s side.

The article includes the following quote:

The following is a quote from DeGrowth.org. Here’s a pre-translation: Break Everything That Works

Lastly, the ruptural mode of transformation involves halting, which is a confrontation with existing capitalist structures to the end of harm reduction (e.g. occupying a coal mine) and smashing, which is a break with existing structures (e.g. occupying and overtaking a production facility). Evidently, smashing can enable the strategic logic of building alternatives. Chertkovskaya cautions that rupturalmodes are to be applied deliberately to overcome capitalist structures in specific spatio-temporal contexts rather than in an attempt to overthrow the global capitalist system in one go.

This is a war on capitalism waged by people who are not willing to let anyone else acquire wealth.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is a wake-up call to those who believe the environmental movement is actually about the environment.

What Difference Did It Make?

Posted on by

We are getting a lot of information right now about the censorship operation that Twitter was operating in order to protect the Biden campaign during the 2020 election. The information is not really surprising to those of us who were paying attention, but some of this is actually news to many Americans. On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article about the probable consequences of Twitter’s censorship.

The article notes:

Let’s begin with the premise that suppressing the content of Hunter Biden’s laptop affected the outcome of the 2020 Election. The Media Research Center (MRC) conducted one of the only polls about how the information on the computer would have affected the way people voted. MRC’s analysis found that full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate. This would have flipped all six of the swing states Biden won to Trump, giving the former President 311 electoral votes.

By that analysis, if not for the fateful decision to censor the laptop story, which Gadde and Baker had a hand in, at least five major things would be different.

The article then goes on to list five of the things that would be different:

First and foremost, it is almost certain there would not be a war in Ukraine right now. President Trump placed sanctions on the Nord 2 pipeline during his term, despite German objections. All Biden had to do was stand up to outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel. After all, the entire purpose of NATO is to protect the European continent from Russian aggression. Letting Germany and other western powers become dependent on Russian energy goes directly against the mission.

When the Biden administration inexplicably lifted the sanctions in May 2021, it green-lit the pipeline that would bypass Ukraine, depriving the former Soviet nation of transit revenues and making it more vulnerable to Russian aggression. Even Ukrainian President Voldymor Zelensky knew it.

…Next, the Ukrainian war led to Russia and China becoming closer allies and leading the BRIC nations. This group includes Brazil and India. Many believe these nations will be dominant suppliers of manufactured goods, services, and raw materials by 2050. There have been reports that BRIC nations and their allies want to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The Biden administration seems content to let this happen without a challenge. As the kleptocrats in our government, led by Joe Biden and Wall Street, lead us into managed decline, you can thank Gadde and Baker.

Third, our European allies would not be facing an energy crisis. The war in Ukraine needlessly destroyed Nord 1, which supplied much of the continent. Additionally, the Biden administration’s not-in-my-backyard energy policy leaves the U.S. unable to meet our own energy needs, let alone help Europe.

…The same NIMBY energy policy also makes the United States less safe. In a 2020 debate, Trump explained in about 10 seconds how U.S. energy independence strengthened our foreign policy. Now, Joe Biden begs some of the worst dictators in the world for oil, and they laugh at him. Biden also drains our strategic petroleum reserves to save Democrats from getting obliterated in the midterms, leaving us less prepared.

The article concludes:

Finally, as you struggle with inflation on food and gas, know that it never needed to happen. When Trump left office, the economy was recovering from the pandemic on a V-shaped trajectory. The American Rescue Plan, the infrastructure bill, and the Inflation Reduction Act blew more money into an economy overheated by pandemic relief. When the new administration allowed even more dollars to chase fewer goods, prices rose. So, when you are rolling your eyes over your grocery bill, thank Gadde and Baker. Their manipulation of Twitter helped Joe Biden do that.

The only constitutional solution to a stolen election is the next election. Please keep that in mind. For those of you that hate President Trump, remember the good he did for the average American. You may not like his style, but he accomplished more in four years than the past five presidents. In the interest of fairness and for the good of the country, he needs to be re-elected in 2024.