this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
154 points (97.5% liked)

World News

40039 readers
2434 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Trump has threatened BRICS nations with 100% tariffs if they attempt to replace the US dollar as the global reserve currency, calling them “seemingly hostile countries.”

BRICS, which includes major economies like China, India, and Russia, has been discussing an alternative reserve currency, especially after Western sanctions on Russia.

The power of the US dollar in the world has strengthened recently. It remains the world's primary reserve currency and there is a huge worldwide reliance on it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 89 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I mean, if he slaps tariffs on everyone, he may just accidentally bring about world peace when everyone just decides to stop dealing with the US.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 hours ago

That's their idea. BRICS know they can't beat USA in a straight on fight. But using a different economic model, set up alternative trade, USA can be made irrelevant in the long. USA really likes to play for short term gains, what is a weakness that can be exploited, especially with a "it hurt itself in its confusion" leader.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Idk, honestly one of the larger selling points to global trade was that you'd be much less likely to want to go to war with someone you relied on. If there is literally nothing connecting you then war is a much "easier" option to choose. :/

[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

In a world United against the US, there's no war the US can wage effectively. There's only so much power you can project from aircraft carriers, and nukes are essentially off the table.

BRICS was also designed for exactly this scenario; a rogue US finally showing its whole ass to the world. They'll survive regardless of what the US tries, whether it's sanctions, tariffs or invasions.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

BRICS was also designed for exactly this scenario; a rogue US finally showing its whole ass to the world.

It was created to diversify the commercial relations of those countries, decentralizing them from US/Europe.

You can call that "protection against a rogue US", but it was much more of a "we will never get rich if those two control everything we do" thing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago

It's less "we will never get rich", which is objectively incorrect given China is part of BRICS and was rich long before brics was created, and more, "why the fuck is less than 8% of the world entitled to the wealth of over 60%?"

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You appear to be saying that only the US starts wars? That's not the case.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That's not a common interpretation of those words in that order, which would be fantastic if there were a competition for most unique and obtuse construing of sentences; however whether or not such a contest exists, this isn't a part of it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

You said:

In a world United against the US, there's no war the US can wage effectively.

What about the wars that the rest of the world wage?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

If the world is united against the US, why would they go to war with each other? They would all have a common enemy in a belligerent country run by an egotistical maniac.

Nothing unites people like a common enemy. Just look at how the Republicans get voted in and how Trump got elected again.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago

There are more things going on in the world than the United States. Countries can focus on more than one issue at a time.

Besides, if the US goes the "tariff everyone! Yay isolationism!" Route then the rest of the world doesn't need to do anything. The US will have defeated itself for them.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 6 hours ago

...it's not a part of the discussion. Do keep up if you're going to weigh in. I know English sucks, and it really does, but it's the easiest language to learn the basics of for a reason