@darkcalling@lemmygrad.ml incidentally, this is a good discussion about the current state of politics and economy in Russia
Speaking of which, 2 weeks ago
Russian Wage Growth Hits 16-Year Peak Amid Race to Find Workers
I love how Bloomberg is working hard to frame this as a negative development.
“but no reserve army of labor”
a true nightmare for the capitalists
Lack of workers forces companies to keep increasing salaries
“Salaries up 9% = Negative. Poor companies!” -Bloomberg AI trained on Charles Dickens.
I do appreciate things like this. It lifts my spirits a bit. That and you know how incredibly arrogant and foolish the US is.
I was not aware of the fact that the sanctions on the USSR were lifted so late only to be replaced by that other act, it does show a history of US hostility and antagonism to Russia that goes beyond what I’d been aware of.
Though it does bring up other questions. Xi has pushed for example for upholding globalism, for global trade and against US protectionism and attempts at decoupling and tariffs. Putin is saying no, that era is over, maybe just for Russia admittedly but that it has happened. That is Russia is an example of a decoupling. Of western capitalists decoupling from an economy. Not as big an economy as China, but it’s an example of that, and an example of sycophant, fanatical liberals in Europe crashing their industry, crushing their profitability in the near-term in order to uphold the line of the western US-led world order.
Which circles back to me, the question of decoupling between China and the west. Something many doubt can happen. Yet many would have doubted Europe would do this so eagerly either or that there wouldn’t be reconciliation.
Russia is not the size of China but I think it looks ever more likely that whether by hook or by crook the western empire planners really want to decouple from China and my money is still betting that they manage to do so to some great degree. Maybe not complete, likely not complete but to a great degree. To such a degree that there will come a point, likely a US instigated fight over Taiwan and that used as a rallying cry and excuse to do this as the Russian response to Ukraine was used as a similar pretext. That after that point you’ll be back to bloc politics. You’ll have the bloc of Russia, DPRK, China, Vietnam, Iran rather tightly knit, then also BRICS a bit more loosely knit with India trying to take as much Chinese business from to replace it with regards to the west as it can which kind of mirrors their cold war non-aligned thing but is really in this case much more clearly aligned IMO with stabbing China and trying to make an Indian miracle off of the destruction of China and its place in the world economy, to usurp that. And you’ll have the NATO bloc of the US, plus EU with a few dissenters perhaps plus its occupied vassals in SK, Japan, British holdings in Australia, etc. And the NATO bloc will be doing everything it can to strangle the non-NATO bloc, to cut off markets, resources, etc.
Which gets back to my thinking about both the grand chessboard and the US destabilization campaigns in the middle east (Iran is sadly the last obstacle, the zionists seem to be succeeding in not only their genocidal intentions but their land grabs to expand their colonial state, Syria has fallen, Yemen resists but has little ability to project power aside from harassing shipping nearby, Lebanon is in a bad state) as well as the US moves under Trump and Biden and earlier to secure the world’s waterways and ports. These two things together in theory allow the US to deny the Russia/China bloc overland routes via west Asia to African markets and resources as well as block them from access to markets in Latin/South America. Thus the US and Europe are not options for this bloc in selling or buying beyond limited quantities and the US aims to deny them most of the rest of the developing world to isolate them from these and to squeeze and attempt to exploit those regions themselves and ultimately engineer a collapse of the Russia/China bloc into either in-fighting or balkanization of one or both or color revolution.
There’s also the fact that climate change wades into this against those parts of the global south and if the US bloc can keep them down and isolated long enough climate change is going to start gut-punching both regions for the US bloc.
It’s worth noting that the US and China champion very different visions of globalism, each reflecting their geopolitical strategies and historical contexts. American globalism is rooted in the hegemony of its financial capital, multinational corporations, and the dollar’s reserve currency status. This model operates through mechanisms like IMF conditionalities, World Bank structural adjustment programs, and unilateral sanctions, enforcing compliance by intertwining economic survival with adherence to US-centric rules. The result is a hierarchical system where Washington sets the terms, gutting sovereignty of other nations and prioritizing the interests of its capital.
In contrast, China’s articulation of globalism emphasizes mutual gain and non-interference, framed through initiatives like the BRI and the Global Development Initiative. Rather than imposing political or economic blueprints, China promotes infrastructure partnerships, trade corridors, and technology transfers structured as equal-state agreements. This approach explicitly rejects conditionalities such as demands for regime change, austerity, or ideological alignment accompany Chinese investments. This flexibility allows partner nations to retain policy autonomy. Russia’s pursuit of autarky aligns seamlessly with China’s non-prescriptive globalism. While US hegemony demands integration into its financial and legal frameworks, China offers trade in local currencies, joint ventures in critical sectors like energy, and access to non-Western markets through BRICS. Thus, Russia is able to benefit from global trade without having to cede its sovereignty to China.
In terms of China decoupling with the west, I’d argue that has largely happened on the Chinese side at this point. China has already diverted much of its trade towards developing economies, and that’s where pretty much all the growth has come from recently. I saw an interview recently where a professor from a Chinese university said that nobody is even worried about US tariffs at this point. The trade with US isn’t even seen as one of top top pressing problems in China. On the other hand, western countries are still deeply dependent on China economically because that’s where much of global production happens. There aren’t any alternatives available at the moment, and setting up supply chains that are independent of China is going to take many years. Given that I think that China is in a far stronger position with regards to the west than most people realize.
I very much agree that we are entering a world of bloc politics with G7 against the BRICS now. Although, it seems like G7 unity is starting to fray now with the US waging an economic war against their vassals. The G7 have another huge problem which is that they’re largely financial and service economies. Most of the resources and commodity production are in the BRICS bloc. The US has now realized this problem and they’re scrambling to try and reindustrialize, but there is no clear path to doing that in the current political and economic climate. It’s going to be very interesting to watch what the US manages to accomplish here in the next few years.
While the US will cause chaos in West Asia, it’s worth noting that doing so requires a huge commitment of resources on the part of the US. Given how strained their economy is already, this could act as a catalyst for an economic crash. Meanwhile, both Russia and China realize the need for self sufficiency. China has been developing its dual circulation strategy for years now, precisely because they see the threat of the US interfering in the global trade. Even if the US managed to prevent trade across West Asia and to Latin America, that would be a temporary inconvenience. Afghanistan and Iraq show that the US eventually ends up having no choice but to withdraw.
The climate change is a big wild card in all this. So far, the US has been one of the countries that’s most affected by it. Disasters like the wild fires, Texas cold snap, and so on, have all caused immeasurable economic damage. There is a good chance that many critical aquifers may dry up in the near future which would cause a massive internal migration within the US and could potentially crash food production that could lead to a famine. And the farming practices in US only make the situation worse because they’re stripping the soil in the process.
Happy to hear this, good on Russia for finally understanding its future doens’t lie with Europe.
I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
