|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2024-257
Last week's posts on Moon of Alabama:
Color Revolutions:
> The opposition, which has been divided into four main political forces, had claimed victory before preliminary results of exit polls were announced. <
U.S. Election:
Ukraine:
BRICS:
Palestine:
— Other issues:
China:
Zio-Europe:
Miscellaneous:
Use as open (not related to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine) thread …
Posted by: Tom Pfotzer | Oct 27 2024 16:10 utc | 15
Superb !
It is not only fighting to restore and strengthen its democracy, peace, and security, but also to rid itself of some of the most abusive rules of the global economic system.
HERE:
https://globalsouthperspectives.substack.com/p/a-new-international-economic-order
It is not by accident that Africa’s top oil exporters import most of their fuel from international suppliers in the global north, it is by design. Oil companies in the global north control the technologies for prospecting, drilling, and refining fossil fuels. They use a classic play book of economic entrapment to make oil rich countries energy poor, technologically dependent, and at their mercy.
Step 1: Country X gives prospection permits to an oil giant like TotalEnergies because they are told they have the right to use their sovereignty to exploit their natural resources; they are told African countries have “the right to development.”
Step 2: TotalEnergies finds massive oil reserves, and offers to drill and extract said oil reserves to export to international markets. Country X often gets only a small ownership share (maybe 15-30%) in its own oil projects. And because country X has no way of fully controlling how much TotalEnergies is actually exporting, pure theft of crude oil is often not a far fetched possibility.
Step 3: Country X asks TotalEnergies to help it build a refinery to cover all of its domestic needs and to give the country full energy independence. TotalEnergies will say, no way, your economy is too small, refineries are too expensive to build, you’re better off importing refined oil products from international markets…. Maybe in a few years we’ll consider it, but only if you can pay $3.5 billion. Oh, and by the way, we still need you to contribute to the oil extraction upfront cost. Build an airport in the middle of nowhere so we can bring our equipment (in other words, start borrowing a few hundred million dollars now). Figure out a way to clear the path for a pipeline. Help us keep displaced communities and environmental activists out of the way.
Step 4: Country X has no plan B. Its people already know there is a lot of oil money coming, so their expectations are already high, and a long list of development projects and demand for public services is putting pressure on the government to deliver results.
Step 5: The government already walked into a debt trap to cover upfront costs. Oil revenues start to flow, the government gets into debt-financed investments in infrastructure, schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, sanitation, housing… all of which often serving upper class interests and prioritizes more extractive economic activities.
Step 6: Because of the boost in economic activity, Country X starts importing even more fuel to power its grid, the new cars and trucks that people have imported, and to satisfy the higher level of energy demand.
Step 7: Consumers in Country X demand even higher standard of living and start importing even more clothing and gadgets from international brands. The country’s trade deficit is even wider than before the oil discovery.
Step 8: Country X wants to industrialize, but the only “industrialisation” it is allowed to have is bottom of the global value chain manufacturing: import machines, import intermediate components to assemble with low cost labor, import the fuel to power the factories, and even import the packaging.
While Africa does have the complementarity of recourse and capabilities at scale, it does still lack access to the technological manufacturing capabilities for this type of Pan-African industrial policy.
Which global economic powerhouse will be willing to transfer technology for this life-saving transformative climate and development strategy? Is it going to be the US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, or China?
Are they able to address one of the major blindspots about industrialisation, which is the international trade and investment architecture that is dominated by the WTO (especially the TRIPS rules)?
The answers to which will make or break their own efforts to decolonise Africa.
This is where BRICS steps in. They fill that gaping wound and are challenging WTO dominance.
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Oct 27 2024 16:41 utc | 19
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Oct 27 2024 16:44 utc | 20
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Oct 27 2024 16:41 utc | 19
###########
BRICS doesn’t support democracy. You’re projecting Occidental values onto an Oriental enterprise.
BRICS isn’t going to be a West with a different paint job. Fundamentally, spiritually, and philosophically it is different. The West and the Enlightenment have been failures.
@10 doesn’t even mention democracy. It does claim BRICS+ is fighting to oust the WTO. A key aspect of reform and opening up in the PRC was…joining the WTO, so this wasn’t true historically and I’m not sure it’s an agreed future objective of BRICS+ or even an aspiration of the PRC government. The leadership does keep insisting it’s committed to deepening reform and opening up. A democratic reform of WTO may be the goal?
As to projecting Western values onto an Oriental enterprise, I’m not sure it’s wise to deem Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, South Africa and even Russia as “Oriental.” Finding spiritual and philosophical aspects to BRICS+ is equally dubious as I see it, given the inclusion of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran on top of the divergences between the PRC and India. There seems to be some geographical romanticization going on? Given the political heterogeneity of BRICS+, ranging from monarchy to bourgeois democratic (India is still formally one, despite Hindutva,) it is safe to say only BRICS+ as a group is not pro-democracy.
As to the failure of the West, true now, but not historically. “The West” insofar as it is really a thing has gone into failure mode, hence the rising tide of fascism here and elsewhere. But historically, capitalism (presumably what “The West” means here) once advanced the possibilities for humanity, however great the immediate cost. But all things pass, and it’s time is over. Common ruin or socialism is the meaningful choice now.
As to the declaration the Enlightenment is a failure?
First, the Enlightenment was never a wholly “western” much less wholly capitalist phenomenon. White is Enlightenment? Hell no! All parts of the world contributed, despite European insularity, to it.
Second, the Enlightenment was never the guiding spirit of “the West,” capitalist markets and the states defending capitalist markets were. Some of the imperialist ruling classes have always flirted with Enlightenment ideas. Historically, that was sincere, part of the struggle against feudalism.
Third, there is no “West” where Enlightenment values reign, all countries find Enlightenment ideas and ideals to be
foreign,” and many find that to be some sort of imperialist oppression, somehow!
Fourth, one part of the Enlightenment is modern science and technology. Nothing is pure, and many individuals have found ways to compromise the radical implications of Enlightenment to serve their ruling classes. (In particular, castrating Enlightenment to preserve religion—which is always tribal/communal/racial/national/imperial—has deformed actually existing Enlightenment from its ideal. This is not unique to the Enlightenment, no actually existing phenomenon can be judged by its self-image.)
Fifth, Marxism is a project developed from the Enlightenment. That’s why no nation is naturally “Marxist” and why conservatives and fascists universally see Marxism as foreign. Sometimes, repudiating the Enlightenment is more about repudiating Marxism, scientific socialism, rather than repudiating a spiritual tyranny of atheists, materialists, whatever the favored libel is.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 27 2024 17:47 utc | 29
|