The Strategic Israeli New World Economic World Order
Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, the original economic alliance – think EU in 2009-2010. In 2024: Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates became official members. BRICS, conceived as a counterweight to Western dominance in managing the world economy. The population of BRICS – 45% of the global population!
BRICS focuses on political and economic cooperation. Ethiopia and Egypt joined in Jan 1st 2024 along with Argentina & Saudi Arabia. Algeria and Nigeria adds an intriguing dimension to this alliance of BRICS expansion to include African nations.
In 2001, a Goldman Sachs economist named Jim O’Neill had a brilliant idea. He was pondering the future of global economic growth and identified four countries in the Global South that collectively had enormous potential. These countries were Brazil, Russia, India, and China. O’Neill coined the term “BRIC” to encapsulate this quartet of rising economic powers.
Since then, BRICS has become more than just a term—it’s a platform for cooperation, collaboration, and economic muscle-flexing. The group discusses policy issues, shares common challenges, and even established the New Development Bank (NDB) to mobilize resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects. And all of this started with a little acronym cooked up by Goldman Sachs.
BRICS unity was based on the recognition that existing global institutions disproportionately favored Western interests. So, they decided to create their own forum for dialogue and cooperation.
Iran’s inclusion forces us to consider shared security interests that may sometimes run counter to U.S. interests. BRICS members must agree on what that alternative world order should look like. And that’s where the complexities of geopolitics come into play.
So, when people parrot about BRICS, they’re often touching on a fascinating experiment in global governance – Bush’s “New World Order”.
It’s shaping up as a serious challenger to the American-led order? Perhaps. Critics accused early 1990s Bush of political rhetoric and lacking vision. Bush’s “New World Order” aimed at post Cold War stability.
BRICS and the possibility, seeing that Saudi Arabia has abanoned the Nixon era petro-dollar monopoly commodity based oil currency, especially after Biden’s green energy prioritization. Saudi Arabia is gradually moving away from the exclusive use of greenbacks (U.S. dollars) in its oil trade. Instead, it’s exploring alternative markets.
This symbolic win for de-dollarization, the movement seeking to reduce the greenback’s stranglehold on world finance has transformed BRICS as one of the leading voices against the dollar.
The Nixon alliance with OPEC – dead. BRICS works with China on initiatives like mBridge – a cross-border payments system using central bank digital currencies.
President Biden’s focus on green energy and reducing dependence on fossil fuels is reshaping global energy dynamics. It continues the Obama Era downturn of US domination. This Obama/Biden economic strategy has forced Saudi Arabia to recalibrate its economic strategies.
BRICS has a clear oil based currency dominance now with the alliance of Russia with OPEC. The US could counter by returning back to a gold based commodity currency.
If the U.S. were to consider returning to a gold-backed currency system, it would signal a significant shift. A gold-based commodity currency could potentially provide stability and act as an alternative to the current fiat currency system.
The classical gold standard, which prevailed during much of the 19th and early 20th centuries, was a system where currencies were directly convertible into a fixed amount of gold. Under this system, the supply of money was inherently tied to the availability of gold reserves. Countries maintained fixed exchange rates relative to gold. Their currencies were pegged to a specific weight of gold.
Governments could only issue additional currency if they had corresponding gold reserves. This limited the expansion of the money supply. The gold standard aimed for price stability by linking money supply growth to gold reserves.
The fixed convertibility of currency into gold restricted policymakers’ ability to adjust money supply rapidly. In times of economic crisis or recession, flexibility restricted and limited. However, during the Civil War, the United States faced immense financial strain. Traditional gold-backed currency was insufficient to fund the war effort. Enter the “greenbacks”—emergency paper currency issued by the U.S. government. These greenbacks were printed in green ink on the back, hence the name.
Two forms of greenbacks: Demand Notes: Issued in 1861–1862, these bore no interest but were fully redeemable in gold. They were soon at par with gold. And United States Notes: Issued in 1862–1865, these were legal tender for most purposes but not backed by existing gold or silver reserves.
Greenbacks were a form of fiat money—legal tender without direct backing by gold or silver. While they carried varying promises of eventual payment in coin, their value relied on the government’s ability to maintain trust and stability. The greenbacks helped finance the war, even though they weren’t directly tied to gold reserves.
The greenbacks were a pragmatic solution during a time of crisis. They demonstrated the flexibility needed to fund the war effort. Lincoln’s dollar—represented by greenbacks—played a crucial role in financing the Civil War, even though it wasn’t strictly gold-backed.
A gold based commodity currency favors Free Banking policies over a Federal Reserve Central Bank. Closing the Federal Reserve Washington cound negate 90% of all Federal debt in a single day. The U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio was around 97% last year, which is below the critical threshold of 100%. The US spent appoximately $695 billion to service just the interest owed on its debt in the last fiscal year.
The Fed clearly contributes to debt accumulation, a hidden tax upon the American people. While closing the Federal Reserve might not instantly negate 90% of all federal debt, it would indeed have significant implications. The debt-to-GDP ratio remains a critical metric, and the U.S. government’s ability to service its debt relies on investor confidence.
As of the second quarter of 2024, the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio stands at 121.57%. This ratio reflects the relationship between the national debt and the overall economic output. While it’s below the critical threshold of 100%, economists remain concerned about the impact of interest payments on the U.S. economy. The US government, set to spend more than $1 trillion on interest payments in 2024, surpassing military spending for the first time in history.
Factors driving interest payments include deficit spending (especially during the pandemic) and the Federal Reserve’s anti-inflation interest rate hikes. The interplay between monetary policy, debt management, and economic stability continues to shape our financial landscape.
Free Banking refers to a system where banks issue their own currency notes without central regulation. These notes are backed by assets (such as gold) held by the bank. Proponents believe that competition among private banks issuing currency can lead to efficient and stable monetary systems.
The Federal Reserve (often called the Fed) is the central banking system established by President Wilson in 1913 which overthrew the free banking economic model established by President Andrew Jackson in 1825.. It controls monetary policy, interest rates, and the money supply.
“Free Banking”, which allowed state-chartered banks to issue their own currency without strict federal regulation. Each bank’s notes were backed by its assets (often including gold or silver reserves). The Free Banking era was characterized by a multitude of banknotes in circulation, varying in value and reliability. Some banks thrived, while others collapsed, leading to financial instability.
The Fed was designed to address the shortcomings of the Free Banking system. It centralized control over monetary policy, interest rates, and the money supply. Free Banking offered flexibility but lacked stability. It allowed for innovation but also led to frequent bank failures. The Fed too has witnessed major ‘To Big to Fail’ government established Corporate monopoly failures, which includes major Banking monopolies.
Free Banking allowed individual banks to issue their own currency notes without strict federal regulation. This flexibility led to innovation and diversity in banking practices. However, the lack of centralized control meant that some banks were poorly managed or fraudulent. Frequent bank failures and currency fluctuations were common during this era.
The Robber Baron Fed was established in 1913 to address the limitations of Free Banking. It centralized control over monetary policy, interest rates, and the money supply. Post WWI, the Reparation Commission, set Germany’s war reparations – the final bill at 132 billion gold marks. (Appoximately $33 billion at the time.) The purchasing power of modern dollars: about $519 billion today. That’s an increase of inflated Fed fiat currency of $486 billion dollars in about 104 years. Inflation hence exists as a hidden tax upon the people. Which makes it “Taxation without Representation”. By adjusting for inflation concealed taxes $100 in 1920 would equal approximately $1,623! Thank you President Wilson for your Robber Baron IRS and theft of American wealth.
Fed bureaucrats unilateral, independent of Congressional overview, decided to back up the British and French economies during WWI. Hence when Wilson joined the war, he had no other choice but to side with England and France. Robber baron bureaucrats removed the power of Congress to make another 1812 War against the British. Post war, Britain and France imposed war reparations upon defeated Germany, to pay back its war debts owed to the Fed. The 1929 Crash of Wall Street Fed stupidity restricted the currency exchange by 1/3rd and caused the Great Depression, and stopped giving loans to Germany. Causing the economic collapse of Germany and the rise of Hitler’s Fascist Nazism.
Conflict Resolution 