Patreon: patreon.com/IndiaGlobalLeft?Link Guys, we want to work full-time on this. If your wallet allows please drop us some support. We prefer the PayPal method since we don't lose half of the money , but you can also give us a super chat. If you are a large donor, we would obviously get in touch with you to give something back if we can. But if you can't no worries. Please like, share, and subscribe . That means a lot already.
The brilliant idea by Prof. Patnaik of 5 Economic fundamental rights for every citizen of the country 1. Right to food 2. Right to free quality health care 3. Right to employment. If individual fails to get employment he is provided with a wage from government. 4. Right to old age pension. 5. Right to free quality education.
Another excellent Indian economist. These people need to be better known in the West. Good analysis of world trade and the dollar as international currency.
The professor's fundamental economic rights is missing an absolutely key item: housing. Without adequate housing all other aspects of human life fail including health and education. On the right to employment, the government should not pay wages to those who are unemployed. Rather it should employ those people in building infrastructure as well as in the host of other key tasks that are needed to advance society, the economy, services and living standards.
The PTB now controlling the Western dominated Capitalist System still have dominant control over the world in terms of Finance, Economy, Information, Education, Culture etc although this is fast declining especially in the face of a rising China and Russia. This overbearing System impinges on the sovereignty of most nations in terms of national security and economic affairs. What you suggested is basically what economists called Modern monetary theory (MMT) and most nations do not have the freedom to issue their own currency for national development without being attacked by International Capitalists.
Prabhat Patnaik is a good Marxist. BRICS arrangement can't challenge imperialism for imperialism doesn't care if the hegemon currency is a dollar or a yuan. Investments will move where there's more profit to be made that is the fastest growing economies. Even if capitalists leave the dollar that doesn't challenge capitalism. For there to be an international socialist world the surplus nations must pay their due, but even if the BRICS nations become big powers they won't care about deficit countries as long as there's capitalism, just how USA emerged as the only creditor nation post 2nd World war surpassing UK and others as the new power and then pushing Bretton woods to literally change the constitutions of wars destroyed Germany and Japan Only International communism can create a just world Laal Salam.
Firstly, China has shown the way in terms of enacting policies subjecting Capitalists under government control, which is a very important initial step to change the dominance of the Capitalist system. Secondly, BRICS is creating an alternative system to weaken the hegemony of the Western Capitalist which caused the underdevelopment of the developing countries. Thirdly, how feasible is the Idealist Socialist Movement in challenging the established system? Except for a few countries like Cuba and North Korea, communism had not made any inroads into most countries, especially those of the developed West, so how will communism change or create a just world? It's more feasible to get behind BRICS and dismantle the unfair Western dominated Capitalist System before we talk about creating a just world, don't you think?
Right Communism is long way to go First destroy us hegemony Like European colonialism was destroyed by USSR and stalin colluded with us hegemony to dismantle british empire. Us hegemony is much progressive compared to European colonialism. Similarly cpc led chinese dominated world will be better than us hegemony. @@adamiskandar5107
@@adamiskandar5107 I dont doubt that getting behind BRICS will be on the whole better for the global south as it gives the countries alternative within the capitalist frame work But in none of these BRICS nations will the capitalist elite answer China's call for world socialism, unless a workers revolution overthrows the system first. A shift from US dominated uni polar world to a multipolar world must not be confused for being a shift from a capitalist world to a, lets says, 'closer to communist world'. This shift only takes us closer to pre WW1 multipolar capitalist powers fighting for global dominance. The Soviet Union was not born because the Russian Tsar was all of a sudden a challenger to European empires, but because of class struggle and revolutionary spirit of the Bolsheviks. Without class consciousness a shift of power in geopolitics merely serves nationalist ambitions. Therefore, to imagine a just world for the working class, a global class consciousness that gives rise to class struggles globally is pivotal and must not wait for a nation's rise. As Yanis Varoufakis said, the first force that will stop you from destroying US hegemony, are not US drones or it's sanctions, it will always be the capitalists of your own country who send their profits to wall street to reinvest in their stocks and boost their surpluses even further. Stalin's idea that world powers will never unite against socialism for their nationalist differences of interest that collide with each other was true for it's time. But sadly thats not how global financial capitalism works today. I will suggest you to read Technofeudalism by Yanis Varoufakis to better understand it.
@@adamiskandar5107 I dont doubt that getting behind BRICS will be on the whole better for the global south as it gives the countries alternative within the capitalist frame work But in none of these BRICS nations will the capitalist elite will answer China's call for world socialism, unless a workers revolution overthrows the system first. A shift from US dominated uni polar world to a multipolar world must not be confused for being a shift from a capitalist world to a, lets says, 'closer to communist world'. This shift only takes us closer to pre WW1 multipolar capitalist powers fighting for global dominance. The Soviet Union was not born because the Russian Tsar was all of a sudden a challenger to European empires, but because of class struggle and revolutionary spirit of the Bolsheviks. Without class consciousness a shift of power in geopolitics merely serves nationalist ambitions. Therefore, to imagine a just world for the working class, a global class consciousness that gives rise to class struggles globally is pivotal and must not wait for a nation's rise. As Yanis Varoufakis said, the first force that will stop you from destroying US hegemony, are not US drones or it's sanctions, it will always be the capitalists of your own country who send their profits to wall street to reinvest in their stocks and boost their surpluses even further. Stalin's idea that world powers will never unite against socialism for their nationalist differences of interest that collide with each other was true for it's time. But sadly thats not how global financial capitalism works today. I will suggest you to read Technofeudalism by Yanis Varoufakis to better understand it.
There are massive difference between a world reserve currency (dollar) that is increasingly generated by financial means that rewards those with capital and a currency that would be based around a basket of commodities that requires the input of labour. There are several proposed mechanisms for handling surpluses such as SDRs, Bancor: static.kremlin.ru/media/events/files/en/RosOySvLzGaJtmx2wYFv0lN4NSPZploG.pdf There's also a discussion of it about an hour into this video but the whole thing (and the channel in general) is well worth watching: th-cam.com/video/X7ejfZdPboo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=WsNiC-hI-B1b8Ttp
India needs revolution in Science and Technological sectors, Industrial sectors, Green Energy sectors, Agro Engineering Sectors & buisness sectors which would be driven by Scientifically advanced and innovative scientific political philosophy, by the virtue of which there would be continuous Growth and Innovation of economy where there would be development of market growth and market share where people would be economically, socially, democratically, scientifically & culturally developed.
Prabhat Patnaik is truly Dharmik person. Shri Krishna and Prophet Muhammad both used an agricultural based strategy because (1) that was the strength of the poorer regions (and it is still so today) (2) the entire empire of the richer regions was based on running deficits and supporting those by surpluses extracted from agricultural countries. I am aware of his various statements on Sanskrit etc but those are erudite and mainly well intentioned. I am not a leftist, more of a follower of Vinoba Bhave. Leftists have a real deep compassion for the poor, and they go through great periods of penance, which is one of the reasons they have sustained in areas with big opposition. This penance is similar to the penance Vinobaji went through for the downtrodden, or which Jesus or our Warkari saints suffered through. This is a dharmic pursuit though an atheist one. Infact in today's time, atheism is a better dharmic route than a religious one
Very interesting but I can't understand a lot of what is being said and therefore lose too much context. Your guest needed to speak slower. English is my first and only language.
Free trade and market economy are fundamental parts of socialism. Planning and command pricing can also be used by socialism. It's wrong to think socialisation of production happens within factory only, it happens through market as well.
*Only a little over 40 minutes in. But I have to sleep and won't be able to circle back until a day or so from now. First, it was nice to see Jyotishman's full self! I was out of luck hoping they would be extremely short so that I wouldn't be as insecure 🤣! Just playing. Anyway, I see the vision with the in person interview. It definitely gives a setting and establishes a feel and all. However, I felt like the audio actually ended up making it quite distracting. I could not necessarily multi-task like usual and still keep up with the interview/discussion. I did find it very interesting how Prof. Patnaik's analysis differs in some ways but also agrees in others with Mr. Rajan, an earlier guest, when it comes to where to focus to develop India. But outside of that, I had a few big critiques of Prof. Patnaik's analysis thus far. Minor, but significant ones imo. One is very very minor, in that he stressed that nations that could not supply through a national health service, free quality healthcare for all citizens. This I believe is just a snipe on the United States, my nation, that he could have directly made as a separate critique instead of lumping into his perspective on "success stories" and the overall conversation, as it is just incorrect BECAUSE of the United States. There is no conceivable way that you cannot view the United States as a success story at points throughout it's national journey. I mean the easiest argument against this is just the immigration to the United States for one and the quality of life comparatively to many other nations. You can levy a criticism that the United States has a major failure in its healthcare access and make a completely valid argument, and that is more productive imo. Next, his evaluation of BRICS and what I believe more to be China's situation etc. was deeply flawed. I am no professor and nowhere near as learned as Prof. Patnaik, I have learned a great deal from him over the past year or so but I draw my understanding on this from my current understanding of Marxist dialectical materialism. We must work within the reality we have in front of us. The inconveniences and all. The leftover remnants of the old world transformed with the new mode of production, the ideas of the old world, transformed, and all. We do not get to "start from scratch" and engaging in the exercises of starting from "what if there was one world government, this is how things would operate" and then from there trying to understand the world of nation states. This was NEVER the reality. We never lived in a world with one government and we will never jump from where we are to then elimination national currency or working to create equity through avoiding the elephant in the room, the United States and its allies. The reason the workers need to seize government and then establish a dictatorship of the workers, to replace the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is because they need to change the relationship so they can suppress the elements of the bourgeoisie. Dictatorships from a purist standpoint are perhaps not "good" or are flawed, but it is necessary in that example. China in having a communist party in the leadership position, is able to maintain a relation with their bourgeoisie that can still benefit all the citizens of their nation, within the greater context of their national journey. Now that that class is not able to exercise the powers they would if they dominated the society. Why do I give this example? I do this to illustrate that China, if it wishes to free itself from the burden of the US dollar, must work within a world where there is a great demand for the US dollar despite its instability, where the US has its hands around global financial systems. And so it's best option, in a world of nation states who will not simply, out of individual nationalistic moral awakenings, and are instead keen on exploiting existing systems to their benefit, is to weaken the US currency and supply a replacement. It does not matter that it is a national currency at this time, because the world is already operating of a national currency, so it can be done, despite it being very unfavorable to do so. We know it is possible. National currencies are also deeply tied to the nation states themselves. So Prof. Patnaik is doing a disservice to disconnect the nature of China, a socialist nation led by a communist party, from its currency, in order to draw an equivalence to the US or perhaps even before that, the British Empire, which was more than a nation state. The Communist Party of China is in control of their banks, this is a huge distinction for one. So if the Chinese are able to exploit the instability of the US dollar, take advantage of US's mass spending, excessive use of sanctions, etc. to draw people into an alternative that they are already accustomed to, a national currency from a strong nation with a vast economy, that is able to defend itself and has hands in all world markets, they are good to go. They already present as favorable in that way, to the unstable US, which is war prone, anti-free trade, involved in many countries' domestic affairs, etc. Some of the major issues, is the development of a platform, the need to defend particular shipping lanes if the US steps back, the favorable value of the USD due to financial speculation, etc. China is already advancing their military capabilities and if the US crashes big and can no longer "bounce back" that might spell the end for lots of financial speculation in that regard, the platform is the biggest issue...which BRICS is currently working on. Once the US is unseated from having the necessary currency to trade in the world. It's "dictatorship of trade" is gone with it and replaced with perhaps a "Chinese dictatorship of currency". That puts China in the driver seat for transitioning to a more equitable global, non-national currency, as due to the nature of their economy, they likely would not even want to have their national currency as a long term world reserve currency. But as long as China and its economic allies can use the competitive nature of capitalism to pose a capitalist alternative to the USD that is better to capitalists and those who live in a capitalist world, then they can monopolize and reduce the US share. And from there, they are in the position the US has been in, with that level of influence and power, and as they are NOT the US, this will hopefully give them the opportunity to finally transition the world to an alternative as they or their allies' currency IS the best alternative already. So they are essentially FORCING the world into an alternative through limiting options. Working with the systems we have already to then bring about a transformation. The mistake is seeing the Chinese like the US in any way or relating to it from the context of how other capitalist nations operated, to try and understand or rationalize how they will move in future. The Chinese govt. is not capitalist. They simply operate in a capitalist world. And so in the journey to their destination of becoming a communist society, their leading party, must work with the contradictions they have and take these on, to then eventually transform their society. In the snapshot, the still image, we see several of their movements as capitalist, as moves we have seen from our understanding of capitalist history etc. But what is being removed is the LOGIC that is used behind these decisions. The process DRIVING those movements, which paints the fuller picture. Only then, can we accurately discern the overall process, the journey, they are on. As for the sanctions regime the US operates, I agree with both Jyotishman and Prof. Patnaik, on it being a driving force for dedollarization. This much is obvious. But what I would add, which often is not brought up, is the benefits of sanctions. Everything is wrapped in multiple relations and sanctions are one of those things that are perceived as bad and then the positives get overlooked. And I do not mean the positive of what the US rhetorically states before it places their sanctions or anything like that. Many nations, for one reason or another, do not have the ability to control their capitalists. Some of these capitalists "run" industries that are wrapped up in global supply chains and desperately want there to be no sanctions. These people suffer far less than the average citizen due to sanctions, for sure. But they still are controlled, something that can be quite hard to do for many nations, but the US is doing this for them. And so if nations can establish a deterrent for direct US military conflict, in some rare cases today you have nuclear weapons etc., then they can establish alternatives for the majority within their nation, to aid in decoupling from particular nations' economies, and then draw the US into sanctioning them. Therefore, doing the heavy lifting, and aiding in the development of national industries that aid domestic consumption etc. This puts the US in a dilemma. If they lift sanctions, then every other nation will see this and if they are in the economic position too, they will copy this model so that the US will lift sanctions or not sanction them. And then if the US involves itself in a military conflict with these nations or is pushed to fund others to etc., then it creates instability domestically for us here in the States, which will translate to our leadership and threaten to make the US population increasingly anti-war, which would collapse the current US bipartisan strategy. There can only be so many enormous bubbles into financial crashes in succession or concurrent wars before the people in the States become more and more populist. It's a careful and extremely expensive balancing act.
These so called marxist economists never talked about gujarati rajasthani capitalist domination of indian economy or hindi vote bank domination of indian politics.
Every corporation name is in capitol letters, country, city, institutions and your name on ID's, tax, passport or any paper issued from corporation's. BAR members can use this asset's in their jurisdiction. This "strawman" Dept economy are the same under BRICKS. Take away the banksters and their British Accreditation registry, make human living instead of dead assets
Link for donation: paypal.me/sankymudiar
Patreon: patreon.com/IndiaGlobalLeft?Link
Guys, we want to work full-time on this. If your wallet allows please drop us some support. We prefer the PayPal method since we don't lose half of the money , but you can also give us a super chat. If you are a large donor, we would obviously get in touch with you to give something back if we can. But if you can't no worries. Please like, share, and subscribe . That means a lot already.
The brilliant idea by Prof. Patnaik of 5 Economic fundamental rights for every citizen of the country
1. Right to food
2. Right to free quality health care
3. Right to employment. If individual fails to get employment he is provided with a wage from government.
4. Right to old age pension.
5. Right to free quality education.
How is this wonderful program going to be financed and implemented.
It would have been better if this conversation was in a closed confined space ..
For better sound quality
I like the outdoor setting but you need to have the right equipments to get better sound quality. I can barely hear
Production is soo nice, do more outdoor videos, young people love this shit. If we can conquer the youth's imagination, we win half the battle.
Another excellent Indian economist. These people need to be better known in the West. Good analysis of world trade and the dollar as international currency.
The professor's fundamental economic rights is missing an absolutely key item: housing. Without adequate housing all other aspects of human life fail including health and education.
On the right to employment, the government should not pay wages to those who are unemployed. Rather it should employ those people in building infrastructure as well as in the host of other key tasks that are needed to advance society, the economy, services and living standards.
The PTB now controlling the Western dominated Capitalist System still have dominant control over the world in terms of Finance, Economy, Information, Education, Culture etc although this is fast declining especially in the face of a rising China and Russia. This overbearing System impinges on the sovereignty of most nations in terms of national security and economic affairs. What you suggested is basically what economists called Modern monetary theory (MMT) and most nations do not have the freedom to issue their own currency for national development without being attacked by International Capitalists.
Another aspect is that socialistic countries are trading and not fighting
Prabhat Patnaik is a good Marxist.
BRICS arrangement can't challenge imperialism for imperialism doesn't care if the hegemon currency is a dollar or a yuan. Investments will move where there's more profit to be made that is the fastest growing economies. Even if capitalists leave the dollar that doesn't challenge capitalism. For there to be an international socialist world the surplus nations must pay their due, but even if the BRICS nations become big powers they won't care about deficit countries as long as there's capitalism, just how USA emerged as the only creditor nation post 2nd World war surpassing UK and others as the new power and then pushing Bretton woods to literally change the constitutions of wars destroyed Germany and Japan
Only International communism can create a just world
Laal Salam.
Firstly, China has shown the way in terms of enacting policies subjecting Capitalists under government control, which is a very important initial step to change the dominance of the Capitalist system. Secondly, BRICS is creating an alternative system to weaken the hegemony of the Western Capitalist which caused the underdevelopment of the developing countries. Thirdly, how feasible is the Idealist Socialist Movement in challenging the established system? Except for a few countries like Cuba and North Korea, communism had not made any inroads into most countries, especially those of the developed West, so how will communism change or create a just world? It's more feasible to get behind BRICS and dismantle the unfair Western dominated Capitalist System before we talk about creating a just world, don't you think?
Right
Communism is long way to go
First destroy us hegemony
Like European colonialism was destroyed by USSR and stalin colluded with us hegemony to dismantle british empire.
Us hegemony is much progressive compared to European colonialism.
Similarly cpc led chinese dominated world will be better than us hegemony.
@@adamiskandar5107
@@adamiskandar5107 I dont doubt that getting behind BRICS will be on the whole better for the global south as it gives the countries alternative within the capitalist frame work
But in none of these BRICS nations will the capitalist elite answer China's call for world socialism, unless a workers revolution overthrows the system first.
A shift from US dominated uni polar world to a multipolar world must not be confused for being a shift from a capitalist world to a, lets says, 'closer to communist world'. This shift only takes us closer to pre WW1 multipolar capitalist powers fighting for global dominance.
The Soviet Union was not born because the Russian Tsar was all of a sudden a challenger to European empires, but because of class struggle and revolutionary spirit of the Bolsheviks.
Without class consciousness a shift of power in geopolitics merely serves nationalist ambitions. Therefore, to imagine a just world for the working class, a global class consciousness that gives rise to class struggles globally is pivotal and must not wait for a nation's rise.
As Yanis Varoufakis said, the first force that will stop you from destroying US hegemony, are not US drones or it's sanctions, it will always be the capitalists of your own country who send their profits to wall street to reinvest in their stocks and boost their surpluses even further.
Stalin's idea that world powers will never unite against socialism for their nationalist differences of interest that collide with each other was true for it's time. But sadly thats not how global financial capitalism works today. I will suggest you to read Technofeudalism by Yanis Varoufakis to better understand it.
@@adamiskandar5107 I dont doubt that getting behind BRICS will be on the whole better for the global south as it gives the countries alternative within the capitalist frame work
But in none of these BRICS nations will the capitalist elite will answer China's call for world socialism, unless a workers revolution overthrows the system first.
A shift from US dominated uni polar world to a multipolar world must not be confused for being a shift from a capitalist world to a, lets says, 'closer to communist world'. This shift only takes us closer to pre WW1 multipolar capitalist powers fighting for global dominance.
The Soviet Union was not born because the Russian Tsar was all of a sudden a challenger to European empires, but because of class struggle and revolutionary spirit of the Bolsheviks.
Without class consciousness a shift of power in geopolitics merely serves nationalist ambitions. Therefore, to imagine a just world for the working class, a global class consciousness that gives rise to class struggles globally is pivotal and must not wait for a nation's rise.
As Yanis Varoufakis said, the first force that will stop you from destroying US hegemony, are not US drones or it's sanctions, it will always be the capitalists of your own country who send their profits to wall street to reinvest in their stocks and boost their surpluses even further.
Stalin's idea that world powers will never unite against socialism for their nationalist differences of interest that collide with each other was true for it's time. But sadly thats not how global financial capitalism works today. I will suggest you to read Technofeudalism by Yanis Varoufakis to better understand it.
There are massive difference between a world reserve currency (dollar) that is increasingly generated by financial means that rewards those with capital and a currency that would be based around a basket of commodities that requires the input of labour.
There are several proposed mechanisms for handling surpluses such as SDRs, Bancor: static.kremlin.ru/media/events/files/en/RosOySvLzGaJtmx2wYFv0lN4NSPZploG.pdf
There's also a discussion of it about an hour into this video but the whole thing (and the channel in general) is well worth watching: th-cam.com/video/X7ejfZdPboo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=WsNiC-hI-B1b8Ttp
Deng Xiaoping had famously said it does not matter if the cat is white or black as long as it catches mice.
India needs revolution in Science and Technological sectors, Industrial sectors, Green Energy sectors, Agro Engineering Sectors & buisness sectors which would be driven by Scientifically advanced and innovative scientific political philosophy, by the virtue of which there would be continuous Growth and Innovation of economy where there would be development of market growth and market share where people would be economically, socially, democratically, scientifically & culturally developed.
Begins 1:30
Gold is God's money while BTC is man-made. No brainer who will prevail.
Sea of knowledge.
2
The sound is not good
Prabhat Patnaik is truly Dharmik person. Shri Krishna and Prophet Muhammad both used an agricultural based strategy because (1) that was the strength of the poorer regions (and it is still so today) (2) the entire empire of the richer regions was based on running deficits and supporting those by surpluses extracted from agricultural countries.
I am aware of his various statements on Sanskrit etc but those are erudite and mainly well intentioned. I am not a leftist, more of a follower of Vinoba Bhave. Leftists have a real deep compassion for the poor, and they go through great periods of penance, which is one of the reasons they have sustained in areas with big opposition. This penance is similar to the penance Vinobaji went through for the downtrodden, or which Jesus or our Warkari saints suffered through. This is a dharmic pursuit though an atheist one. Infact in today's time, atheism is a better dharmic route than a religious one
Too many audio distractions. Chirping birds and other external noise.
great interview but the recording was not good .
We messed up the mic settings. It will be taken care of in the next ones. Thanks for watching, Stay connected.
It's almost impossible to hear what the professor is saying.
Not clear Audio
Very interesting but I can't understand a lot of what is being said and therefore lose too much context. Your guest needed to speak slower. English is my first and only language.
I'm afraid that speaks very poorly of your comprehension abilities
You can use the subtitles.
Sound sucks. Fire the sound engineer.
Plymouth rock 😂😊
Free trade and market economy are fundamental parts of socialism.
Planning and command pricing can also be used by socialism.
It's wrong to think socialisation of production happens within factory only, it happens through market as well.
*Only a little over 40 minutes in. But I have to sleep and won't be able to circle back until a day or so from now.
First, it was nice to see Jyotishman's full self! I was out of luck hoping they would be extremely short so that I wouldn't be as insecure 🤣! Just playing. Anyway, I see the vision with the in person interview. It definitely gives a setting and establishes a feel and all. However, I felt like the audio actually ended up making it quite distracting. I could not necessarily multi-task like usual and still keep up with the interview/discussion.
I did find it very interesting how Prof. Patnaik's analysis differs in some ways but also agrees in others with Mr. Rajan, an earlier guest, when it comes to where to focus to develop India.
But outside of that, I had a few big critiques of Prof. Patnaik's analysis thus far. Minor, but significant ones imo. One is very very minor, in that he stressed that nations that could not supply through a national health service, free quality healthcare for all citizens. This I believe is just a snipe on the United States, my nation, that he could have directly made as a separate critique instead of lumping into his perspective on "success stories" and the overall conversation, as it is just incorrect BECAUSE of the United States. There is no conceivable way that you cannot view the United States as a success story at points throughout it's national journey. I mean the easiest argument against this is just the immigration to the United States for one and the quality of life comparatively to many other nations. You can levy a criticism that the United States has a major failure in its healthcare access and make a completely valid argument, and that is more productive imo.
Next, his evaluation of BRICS and what I believe more to be China's situation etc. was deeply flawed. I am no professor and nowhere near as learned as Prof. Patnaik, I have learned a great deal from him over the past year or so but I draw my understanding on this from my current understanding of Marxist dialectical materialism. We must work within the reality we have in front of us. The inconveniences and all. The leftover remnants of the old world transformed with the new mode of production, the ideas of the old world, transformed, and all. We do not get to "start from scratch" and engaging in the exercises of starting from "what if there was one world government, this is how things would operate" and then from there trying to understand the world of nation states. This was NEVER the reality. We never lived in a world with one government and we will never jump from where we are to then elimination national currency or working to create equity through avoiding the elephant in the room, the United States and its allies.
The reason the workers need to seize government and then establish a dictatorship of the workers, to replace the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is because they need to change the relationship so they can suppress the elements of the bourgeoisie. Dictatorships from a purist standpoint are perhaps not "good" or are flawed, but it is necessary in that example. China in having a communist party in the leadership position, is able to maintain a relation with their bourgeoisie that can still benefit all the citizens of their nation, within the greater context of their national journey. Now that that class is not able to exercise the powers they would if they dominated the society.
Why do I give this example? I do this to illustrate that China, if it wishes to free itself from the burden of the US dollar, must work within a world where there is a great demand for the US dollar despite its instability, where the US has its hands around global financial systems. And so it's best option, in a world of nation states who will not simply, out of individual nationalistic moral awakenings, and are instead keen on exploiting existing systems to their benefit, is to weaken the US currency and supply a replacement. It does not matter that it is a national currency at this time, because the world is already operating of a national currency, so it can be done, despite it being very unfavorable to do so. We know it is possible. National currencies are also deeply tied to the nation states themselves. So Prof. Patnaik is doing a disservice to disconnect the nature of China, a socialist nation led by a communist party, from its currency, in order to draw an equivalence to the US or perhaps even before that, the British Empire, which was more than a nation state. The Communist Party of China is in control of their banks, this is a huge distinction for one. So if the Chinese are able to exploit the instability of the US dollar, take advantage of US's mass spending, excessive use of sanctions, etc. to draw people into an alternative that they are already accustomed to, a national currency from a strong nation with a vast economy, that is able to defend itself and has hands in all world markets, they are good to go. They already present as favorable in that way, to the unstable US, which is war prone, anti-free trade, involved in many countries' domestic affairs, etc. Some of the major issues, is the development of a platform, the need to defend particular shipping lanes if the US steps back, the favorable value of the USD due to financial speculation, etc. China is already advancing their military capabilities and if the US crashes big and can no longer "bounce back" that might spell the end for lots of financial speculation in that regard, the platform is the biggest issue...which BRICS is currently working on.
Once the US is unseated from having the necessary currency to trade in the world. It's "dictatorship of trade" is gone with it and replaced with perhaps a "Chinese dictatorship of currency". That puts China in the driver seat for transitioning to a more equitable global, non-national currency, as due to the nature of their economy, they likely would not even want to have their national currency as a long term world reserve currency. But as long as China and its economic allies can use the competitive nature of capitalism to pose a capitalist alternative to the USD that is better to capitalists and those who live in a capitalist world, then they can monopolize and reduce the US share. And from there, they are in the position the US has been in, with that level of influence and power, and as they are NOT the US, this will hopefully give them the opportunity to finally transition the world to an alternative as they or their allies' currency IS the best alternative already. So they are essentially FORCING the world into an alternative through limiting options. Working with the systems we have already to then bring about a transformation.
The mistake is seeing the Chinese like the US in any way or relating to it from the context of how other capitalist nations operated, to try and understand or rationalize how they will move in future. The Chinese govt. is not capitalist. They simply operate in a capitalist world. And so in the journey to their destination of becoming a communist society, their leading party, must work with the contradictions they have and take these on, to then eventually transform their society. In the snapshot, the still image, we see several of their movements as capitalist, as moves we have seen from our understanding of capitalist history etc. But what is being removed is the LOGIC that is used behind these decisions. The process DRIVING those movements, which paints the fuller picture. Only then, can we accurately discern the overall process, the journey, they are on.
As for the sanctions regime the US operates, I agree with both Jyotishman and Prof. Patnaik, on it being a driving force for dedollarization. This much is obvious. But what I would add, which often is not brought up, is the benefits of sanctions. Everything is wrapped in multiple relations and sanctions are one of those things that are perceived as bad and then the positives get overlooked. And I do not mean the positive of what the US rhetorically states before it places their sanctions or anything like that. Many nations, for one reason or another, do not have the ability to control their capitalists. Some of these capitalists "run" industries that are wrapped up in global supply chains and desperately want there to be no sanctions. These people suffer far less than the average citizen due to sanctions, for sure. But they still are controlled, something that can be quite hard to do for many nations, but the US is doing this for them. And so if nations can establish a deterrent for direct US military conflict, in some rare cases today you have nuclear weapons etc., then they can establish alternatives for the majority within their nation, to aid in decoupling from particular nations' economies, and then draw the US into sanctioning them. Therefore, doing the heavy lifting, and aiding in the development of national industries that aid domestic consumption etc.
This puts the US in a dilemma. If they lift sanctions, then every other nation will see this and if they are in the economic position too, they will copy this model so that the US will lift sanctions or not sanction them. And then if the US involves itself in a military conflict with these nations or is pushed to fund others to etc., then it creates instability domestically for us here in the States, which will translate to our leadership and threaten to make the US population increasingly anti-war, which would collapse the current US bipartisan strategy. There can only be so many enormous bubbles into financial crashes in succession or concurrent wars before the people in the States become more and more populist. It's a careful and extremely expensive balancing act.
These so called marxist economists never talked about gujarati rajasthani capitalist domination of indian economy or hindi vote bank domination of indian politics.
Every corporation name is in capitol letters, country, city, institutions and your name on ID's, tax, passport or any paper issued from corporation's. BAR members can use this asset's in their jurisdiction. This "strawman" Dept economy are the same under BRICKS. Take away the banksters and their British Accreditation registry, make human living instead of dead assets
😂😂😂😂