• LiberalSocialist [any,they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think it just represented the “emerging” economies of the 2000s, rather than a cohesive socioeconomic/political bloc. It still doesn’t, really.

    • fifthedition [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 years ago

      Oh, it's been around. It just doesn't get reported, for obvious reasons. They don't want anyone thinking it's a viable other-than-America group to belong to. You'll notice this came from South African media, which is the S in BRICS.

      This Ukraine bullshit is really driving other nations into the hands of BRICS. It's a real bloc, with real potential. It's got a ways to go to match the US/NATO bully though. But just watch it grow. It's like saying an 8 year old boy is worthless because he's a skinny beanpole. Wait until he's 18 and is 200 pounds of wiry muscle.

      • LiberalSocialist [any,they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I don't think it's ever going to be a "bloc" like NATO, nor is it going to try to. India, for example, has major beef with China. They're not even in the Belt and Road. While they have good relations with Russia (going back to the Soviet Union), they've been turning more and more towards US since the 2000s. And Brazil's future depends entirely on these elections. South Africa is too small to matter at the global scale. A more useful framework would involve the cooperation between the enemies of the Western order - China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela etc. They also aren't a bloc though.

        I know China is trying to establish its own institutions to oppose the Western ones, and its succeeding, at some levels. That's where the opposition to US/West will come from.

        • fifthedition [none/use name]
          hexagon
          ·
          2 years ago

          NATO wasn't so much about being cooperative, it was about being against the Soviet Union. Likewise BRICS is about being against the US-led tyrannical order.