Western media always has such a strange way of wording things…
I think it stems from being used to treating the west as the whole world, and now having to grapple with the fact that the rest of humanity exists and can no longer be ignored.
I think this statement from the article bothers me the most:
But despite Russia’s sweeping rhetoric, the leaders meeting in Kazan have a wide range of viewpoints and interests – a reality of BRICS that observers say limits their ability to send a unified message – especially the kind Putin may desire.
The reason why it bothers me is because it makes it seem like Putin in particular is unaware of the fact that other world leaders differ from him. I mean, he’s close with Xi Jinping, so i think he knows this fact. This framing is just very strange to me.
They can’t understand the kind of diversity of thought and respect for national sovereignty that exists in BRICS, the fact that each country first and foremost looks to their own national interests. Because in the Western bloc ideological uniformity is ruthlessly enforced, and dissent from the neoliberal Atlanticist line is absolutely not tolerated (as we are seeing by how they have been treating countries like Slovakia and Hungary), and national interests are totally subordinated to the greater imperialist project (hence why Germany allowed its own critical infrastructure to be obliterated without as much as a protest).
Indeed, it’s the framing that’s the most revealing part here. The west sees the world as being hierarchical with the US being at the centre of it. Seems that the idea of a multipolar world where different countries are able to pursue their own independent interests while cooperating with one another towards common goals is incomprehensible to western propagandists.
They are treating it as if BRICS is trying to be like it’s NATO, where everyone should be subservient to the primary member (i.e. In this care Russia), but it’s not like that so they are considering it a show of weakness.
