The existential question of our day: A discussion of an article in Naked Capitalism
The title of this article intrigued me. But in fact, the question is not answered. We’re looking at How much of the world will the US burn in the transition to multipolarity.
Colin Gallagher traces some of the history of Belt and Road and this is equally in the big picture applicable to BRICS. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2023/10/how-much-of-the-world-will-the-us-burn-in-the-transition-to-multipolarity.html
His view largely is European and he states: “It is becoming increasingly clear that the battle for hearts and minds in the Global South is over – a decisive victory for China. But much like the US’ new Cold War with Russia, the China version will also largely be decided in Europe.” I don’t know how much I can go with such a view but Europe will play a part in the change. How big? Taking a look at their leaders I have no real expectation here.
But, what worries me more about this article (and it is a fine article) is that it does not answer its proffered question. How much of the world is going to burn? Then the way these issues are framed, always surprise me. This won’t be a ‘massive victory for China’ but a massive victory for the free world. How is is that those issues do not really get understood. China is wanting to win the world, because China is part of the world and they don’t want to go down, hence their projects and plans integrate the world.
I wonder if as a collective we can float our minds around this for a moment and make some wild and not so wild predictions? This is the existential question of our day.
The West has decided to destroy the world. Only Russia will save it
Many countries are calling on Israel to stop its aggression against Palestine, but not the leaders of “Western civilisation”, writes the author of the article from Sabah. The point is that they are trying to save their hegemony. Therefore, according to the journalist, the reign of justice is solely in the hands of Russia and its allies.
The Sabah recently quoted the following remarkable estimates: “The E7 group, made up of China, India, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, Turkey and Indonesia, caught up with the G7 in 2015 and could surpass it twice by 2050”. This means that the US will soon cease to be the leader of the “global order”. According to the author, China, Russia, Brazil and Turkey must unite and find a way to stop the atrocities in Gaza with the support of Arab and Islamic countries. (From Eurasia and Multipolarity)
A note by Dmitry Medvedev is applicable:
➡️The EU can no longer act independently not only in the international arena, but even in Europe itself
➡️ Energy cooperation between Europe and Russia has been ruined or frozen for a very long time; difficult times have come for the EU
➡️ There is no point in Russia starting a full-fledged conflict with the United States
➡️Moscow and Washington will come to an agreement sooner or later, but the “old lady of Europe” will soon be gone
➡️The EU has lost Russia as a long-term strategic partner, we are now not even neighbors, but real enemies.
The Chinese is still talking a good game, but in the background they feel the same.
In Gaza
You all make good conversation. Thank-you!
I’ll pick up tomorrow folks … still go a few things to say, like fall with their snouts into holes and kick desperately with their little feet to be rescued!
Gaza kills me!
I still cannot live happily with the word ‘rescue’. Can’t we just stick to multipolarity and its tenets? A Lavrov quote: used with some of mine. Multipolarity is a process that is driven by life itself. It cannot be artificially initiated or expedited. And it is based on the UN… Read more »
Another comment and I am not tied to anything here, just musing.
I wonder if we’re talking about hard legality which is kind, or spirit which is another kind of hard legality?
Amarynth: “A hard legality which is kind…or spirit with its hard legality.” Nicely balanced and worded on your part. That is precisely what I am trying to talk about. I really love the quote from Cuba’s most iconic poet Jose Marti: “Liberation comes from culture.” I see “multipolarity” as the… Read more »
Extremely well said fellow Kiwi!
Best regards
Col
Well, this aspect of the debate is definetly above my pay.grade. But I still dare to posit that, as Jung once stated ” We cannot change anything until we accept it. Condemnation does not liberate, it oppresses.” And I am convinced that gradually but surely the West is accepting defeat… Read more »
Jorge, why western values? rather, the way I understand it, is the values displayed or depicted by each major civilization … Russia, Orthodox, China they have a bunch of religions but I guess Confucianism is the main in the ethos, and Iran, which is surely Islam. The way I get… Read more »
Oh yes, the much needed multipolarity would require Russia and China to lead the whole wide world along the all.inclusive lines you describe Amarynth, we agree. But this would be in the broad world leadership sense as in the narrow sense affecting the West and its current hegemony (which seems… Read more »
“Multipolarity is a process that is driven by life itself. It cannot be artificially initiated or expedited.” Exactly ! Therein lies the spiritual aspect. It comes from a yearning deep within humanity. It should not surprise us that it has grown out of two ancient civilisations. I don’t know if… Read more »
I read a little more back into Lavrov’s work. independence, state sovereignty and cultural and civilisational identity. I think it is the cultural and civilizational identity that feels like holy, religious. The other thing that Lavrov says is that multipolarity is NOT political
It’s interesting that if Lavrov says multipolarity is not political, then one wonders as to what he sees as the driver. No prize for guessing what I think it is ! It must be kept in mind that a spiritual aspect does not have to be religious, far from it.… Read more »
Agreed Steve: However I believe Lavrov’s “it is not political” is itself an unavoidably necessary “political” statement in itself, made for political purposes in order to further a process that has obvious political dimensions. It being more a question of how we think about politics. Economic win win arrangements, as… Read more »
Yes, Lavrov is head and shoulders above the rest. Most don’t even qualify as diplomats, just messenger boys. “A process can be political without seeming to be so don’t you think?… We can call it political and/or we can call it spiritual and both coats fit.” Exactly, because both are… Read more »
I don’t think China is wanting to “win the world” so much, it’s better to frame it as trying to merely win the world over, not by coercion or economic force, but by setting a good example. The West has described Chinese growth, and investment in infrastructure in countries with… Read more »
“The South needs a key word or phrase that is incorruptible…..that takes consideration of a better world order to a higher level.” I read you as offering an excellent interpretation of what Jungian psychologists refer to as Western Civilization’s most vital and efficacious myth. That being the all important quest… Read more »
Steve: I keep reading and enjoying your many posts and it is clear to me that the myth of the Grail and the living truth it represents is alive and rising in your heart.
Crikey Snowy, what can I say? Other than thank you! I think an important living truth is that projects such as those being undertaken by China and Russia do not operate at only the material level — there is a strong spiritual aspect to them as well. It’s that spiritual… Read more »
Steve, I read you and thus suggest that the West now knows and accepts it has gone astray. But instead of accepting defeat has decided most immaturely to destroy the world. “ If I cannot lead the world I will break it so nobody else can” So Russia and China… Read more »
Jorge, thanks for your comment, I think you’ve summed it up perfectly.
Your point that Russia and China want to rescue the world is in line with my discussion above with Snowy, that there is a spiritual dimension to all this.
Is this iniciative “too little too late” re the new German ‘peace party’ ?
I think so. Sahra Wagenknecht I think perhaps lost some time. The trash must be trashed jorge …
My .02 cents (1) China has won the hearts and minds of the Global South (2) Europe would define how much ( or how little ) of the world the US would burn in the now UN.avoidable transition to multipolarity. So Europe will either turn AGAINST the US soon enough… Read more »