4 ms·

BRICS nations have simply nothing in common and are united only in opposition to the "west". That is the reason this union had failed before and will fail in fu

by Yizahi 3y ago

BRICS nations have simply nothing in common and are united only in opposition to the "west". That is the reason this union had failed before and will fail in future. The issue compounds by the fact that all of them are in the various financial crises.

LatteLazy 3y ago
Exactly. Brics is more a term used in the west to describe not-us large countries than anything that actually exists for those countries. India and China have an open conflict over their border for fucks sake. They're not uniting any time soon. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/28/india-accuses-china-of-aggressions-amid-border-stalemate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/28/india-accuses-...
- fellowniusmonk 3y ago
  First time I saw BRIC was over a decade ago plastered all over Brasil.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Brics is more a term used in the west to describe not-us large countries than anything that actually exists for those countries. That’s where (as BRIC – without South Africa, though the countries together were sometimes called “the BRICs”) it originated 20+ years ago, but then the countries got together, for their own reasons, and made it an real (or, at least, formally official) bloc. Each of them uses it for their own image puffing, and its been particularly important in that role for Russia lately (especially with CSTO being shown to be worthless.) Still not clear that the bloc (despite having an official organization, membership, summits, etc.) is all that meaningful substantively.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> BRICS nations have simply nothing in common and are united only in opposition to the “west”. I’m not even sure they are aligned in that, either for the countries referenced in the name, or for the countries being added in the 2024 expansion class.
- namaria 3y ago
  There's no meaningful alignment. They were just bonds that were moving together for a while, and some investment banker published a bombastic white paper about it and it stuck.

by Yizahi 3y ago

LatteLazy 3y ago

Exactly. Brics is more a term used in the west to describe not-us large countries than anything that actually exists for those countries. India and China have an open conflict over their border for fucks sake. They're not uniting any time soon. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/28/india-accuses-china-of-aggressions-amid-border-stalemate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/28/india-accuses-...

fellowniusmonk 3y ago
First time I saw BRIC was over a decade ago plastered all over Brasil.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> Brics is more a term used in the west to describe not-us large countries than anything that actually exists for those countries. That’s where (as BRIC – without South Africa, though the countries together were sometimes called “the BRICs”) it originated 20+ years ago, but then the countries got together, for their own reasons, and made it an real (or, at least, formally official) bloc. Each of them uses it for their own image puffing, and its been particularly important in that role for Russia lately (especially with CSTO being shown to be worthless.) Still not clear that the bloc (despite having an official organization, membership, summits, etc.) is all that meaningful substantively.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> BRICS nations have simply nothing in common and are united only in opposition to the “west”. I’m not even sure they are aligned in that, either for the countries referenced in the name, or for the countries being added in the 2024 expansion class.

namaria 3y ago
There's no meaningful alignment. They were just bonds that were moving together for a while, and some investment banker published a bombastic white paper about it and it stuck.