New American Explains the New BRICs Order – That's What We're 'Talkin' About!
By Staff News & Analysis - April 04, 2013

BRICS Regimes Forge New World Bank, Call for Global Currency … The governments and dictatorships ruling over the so-called BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — agreed to set up a new world bank that analysts say could further marginalize the increasingly unstable U.S. dollar, possibly helping to eventually dethrone it as the global reserve currency. Meeting in Durban, South Africa, last week at their fifth annual summit, the socialist and communist-minded BRICS regimes also announced their support for creating a new world currency and full-fledged global governance. – New American

Dominant Social Theme: The BRICs, like a thunderbolt hurled from Zeus, are striking at the heart of capitalism with their own brand of economic electricity.

Free-Market Analysis: The New American has done us the favor of pointing out the particulars of the BRICs' recent announcement regarding the formation of a developing world version of the International Monetary Fund.

It turns out in almost every way that the BRICs agenda is an internationalist one, supportive of the UN, a one-world currency, etc. This is not hypothetical anymore. Various BRIC documents make the group's intentions clear. The New American even quotes from some of them.

This is not the story that is making the mainstream media rounds. In fact, the BRICs' announced intention has occasioned much breast-beating in the mainstream media about how the West's dominance is fading while the developing world is taking over.

This alarm, unfortunately, has been evident within the alternative 'Net media as well. At the Golden Jackass, for instance, astute commentator Jim Willie has written a longish piece of note explaining just how China, Brazil, India, etc, are going dominate in the 21st century the way the US did in the 20th.

We are not so sure … In fact, we have written several recent articles on this now pointing out that the global racket always sets up two sides to an argument; the idea the BRICs would do something radical to retard the coming globalism is therefore something of a misconception. They are more likely a controlled opposition.

It is simply logical. If the globalism of the West is being buttressed by the activities of countries represented by the BRICs, then how anti-Western can this growing alternative economic movement actually be? The West, after all, set up the global infrastructure the BRICs are now endorsing. Here are some of our recent articles:

BRICs Plan for New IMF: Trojan Horse for Western Agenda?

Shock: Is Australia Really Falling Under the Orbit of China?

And here is an excerpt from the New American article explaining the totality of the BRICs dedication to fostering an increasingly globalized – and global – economy:

Other top priorities outlined in the final agreement, dubbed the "eThekwini Declaration," include promoting global so-called "sustainable development," which according to the United Nations entails a radical restructuring of human civilization. Also key on the list of BRICS rulers' demands: further centralization of power in the hands of the UN, more government meddling in the economy, ramped up attacks on national sovereignty, increased power for Third World dictators on the global stage, and much more.

In February, the premier alliance of socialist political parties, known as the Socialist International, gathered in Portugal for its "Council meeting." Following the recent Congress held in South Africa amid reports that the ruling communist-oriented regime is involved in genocide, the SI meeting adopted a declaration calling for "a new internationalism, proposing the creation of a new global set of agreements, the restructuring of the WTO to recycle trading profits from severe wage differentials toward authentic global income security, and a new IMF and global currency regime built on the multilateral synthetic 'bancor' system conceived by Keynes himself."

As The New American has been reporting for years, the push for a planetary fiat currency is gaining traction as the privately owned Federal Reserve continues to destroy the dollar. Unsurprisingly, the BRICS regimes agreed with the Socialist International and other powerful forces seeking to build a global central bank with a new world currency. In the final BRICS Durban declaration, signed by all five rulers on March 27, the totalitarian-minded alliance openly called for expanding the role of the International Monetary Fund's proto-global currency known as Special Drawing Rights.

"We support the reform and improvement of the international monetary system, with a broad based international reserve currency system providing stability and certainty," the five regimes said in the declaration, calling for Third World dictators to have a greater say in the IMF and the emerging global monetary regime. "We welcome the discussion about the role of the [IMF's] SDR in the existing international monetary system including the composition of SDR's basket of currencies."

This statement, amply documenting the BRICs' intentions, speaks for itself. There is virtually no difference between the West's globalist agenda and what the BRICs are proposing, and this includes China.

The idea that the world is splitting into two halves and that the future shall be one of West versus East should surely be put to rest if one logically examines the BRICs' real agenda and how it fits together with what the UN (founded and supported by the West) is continually proposing.

The idea that the BRICs and other developing countries are going their own way irrespective of Western wishes is simply untrue. The BRICs and the developing world generally have adopted virtually all of the globalist nostrums peddled by the UN and various socialist-oriented Western regimes including US Democrats.

If the BRICs are working on behalf of Western Money Power than how can one conclude that China and the rest are actually aligned AGAINST the West? Either the BRICs are determined opponents of the West or they are not.

After Thoughts

Of course, we think we know …