Sunset of the empire
US foreign debt puts the state at a crossroads. A prolonged economic crisis may lead to the collapse of the country or the beginning of the Third World War. No one will be able to stay away. Is there a way out of this situation?
Active "help" to the USA to other states
The struggle of the United States of America against world terrorism, which began in the fall of 2001 in Afghanistan and then in Iraq, legalized the right of strong military blocs not only to interfere in the internal affairs of states, but also to overthrow disagreeable governments, thereby putting whole regions on their feet.
The last stage - the struggle of NATO against the Gaddafi regime in Libya, was so little substantiated that it causes some sneer even from the organizers of the attack. And the Italian Prime Minister declared the young overgrown with his party that the uprising in Libya was not popular. According to Silvio Berlusconi, he personally saw during his stay in Libya that Gaddafi was loved by his people.
The fact that, by removing Gaddafi, the pro-American opposition has replaced the military governor of Tripoli by a man who, as is well known, is one of the leaders of the al-Qaida Islamic branch in Libya, Abdelhakim Belhadj, is also alarming. Many of his associates are also on the terrorist list of the UN and the European Union.
Let us recall how the US intervention in the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq ended, both of these countries were mired in a civil war, and the actual control was carried out by terrorist groups, not official governments. The US intervention brought anarchy to countries such as Somalia, Guinea, Haiti, Kyrgyzstan, and a number of other small countries. Over the past spring and summer there was an addition to this series of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, most likely the same will happen in Syria and Iran.
Such interference in the internal affairs of independent states cannot be explained in terms of the export of democracy and the protection of the local population. The bloody massacres to which the overthrow of state institutions has led cannot be justified by anything. Rather, the intervention is associated with the destruction of blocs and individual states that were suspected of anti-American sentiment and the support of competitors on the world stage.
One can cite a great number of examples of the fact that sympathies for the USSR and anti-Americanism led not to the establishment of democracy with the help of the USA, but to the dictatorship of General Franco (Brazil, 1964), General Suharto (Indonesia, 1965), General Pinochet (Chile, 1973) and others.
Despite the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists, such measures are applied to other competing political regimes. And the "fight against international terrorism" is a convenient reason for the United States to get into other people's affairs. Here are the only results achieved are the opposite, instead of sympathy for the United States, in 9 cases from 11 such a policy leads to anti-American sentiment in the “beneficent” countries. These sentiments can lead to more active intervention by the Americans, and the result of this self-spinning spiral will be a big war, and hardly anyone will be able to stand aside. Unless the United States collapses on its own even earlier.
Background to the collapse of the United States
Back in 1981, Joel Garro argued that the differences between parts of North America are so great that the United States and Canada are not two states, but nine. It is easy to agree with him. While Russia allows autonomous republics to individual regions, many of them may invalidate certain federal laws on their territory and adopt their own legislation, contrary to the state constitution. And China calls the outer regions its “autonomous regions” and also gives them some freedom. The US government practices the same attitude towards all. But the United States of America is the union of 50 states, which can break up into separate states in the same way as the Soviet Union did.
Perhaps the prerequisite for this is the very nature of the Americans. Historically, fugitives from Europe have flown to North America. The most active and disgruntled are politicians whose party was defeated, criminals fleeing from justice, simple artisans and peasants wishing to escape from the tyranny of society and the monotony of life, as well as aristocrats who are fed up with social conventions and restrictions. The forefathers of the American people were capricious, enterprising, intolerant of power, but accustomed to deception and violence, perhaps noble and religious, but at the same time hypocrites and hypocrites.
The cause of the collapse of the state could be a growing political schism among the inhabitants. Some Americans are not satisfied with the current president’s regime and are protesting against government intervention in property rights, others want to support close to socialist legislation such as the law on arms, the law on hate speech, and the law on immigration. These people are ready to expand the powers of the government so that the state will receive even more police rights, undermining individual freedoms for the sake of even greater, in their opinion, good for the country.
It is also possible to split the state along the lines of races. Representatives of different ethnic groups find it increasingly difficult to coexist, which is confirmed by the rampant criminality in US cities. Latins in the southeast of the country are increasingly suffering to their Spanish-speaking brothers abroad than to their own country. American Indians who have suffered from the federal government have their reasons for secession from the state. Separatist movements are gaining strength throughout the country.
It is difficult to say exactly how the political map of North America will look after the alleged split, only one thing is clear. Several generations will have to go through violence and social upheaval until stable societies emerge.
The main reason for splitting the USA is the state of the American economy.
The United States began its movement toward an economic crisis as early as 1981, when they were engaged in the construction of "pure capitalism." Over the past thirty years, they have deindustrialized the country to such an extent that they lost several tens of thousands of enterprises and significantly reduced the standard of living of ordinary Americans. Now, when the problem of national debt is so acute, the state will have to re-industrialize, during which a further fall in the standard of living of the population is inevitable by another 20-30%. If this is not done, the United States will not be able to compete with the cheap labor of Asia. In addition, the terrifying system of school education has led to the fact that the US workers have long lost their advantage in qualifying. And without restoring industry, America will never be able to hand out debts, give employment to the population and remain one of the world leaders. The Obama board has only paid back, which means that the price of transformation will be even higher.
The size of the national debt of America is so great that it is impossible to solve the problem only by reducing expenses. If you do not increase the debt and cut the budget, you will have to further reduce high-tech production, infrastructure construction. We should also expect the fall in consumer demand of the majority of the population. That is, the effect will be approximately the same as in Greece: a fall in the economy, an industrial recession, an increase in unemployment, a decrease in the real expenses of residents, and an increase in social and political pressure.
In addition to the problems described above, the problem of the crisis of capitalism is growing. All previous crises only delayed the collapse of the previous model. In 1991, capitalism was saved only by the penetration of the dollar into the territory of the former USSR, now there is no such USSR. In addition, the United States is waiting for problems with China and all of Asia as a whole. America's re-industrialization is tantamount to narrowing markets and Western protectionism for Asian countries. In words, the re-industrialization process was launched in September 2009.
Another upcoming problem is cuts in pensions in the US and EU countries. Now a generation is coming to retire, having come to a sharp increase in the birth rate. Most of the democratic burden can ruin most of the developed countries. And unpopular political decisions, which in this connection will have to be made by the government, will cause protest from the people, a crisis of democracy and a real war between pensioners and youth.
Another problem is the lack of a new technology market. At one time, financiers strangled the scientific and technological revolution, which could bear fruit at the beginning of this century, at the stage of its inception. Instead of real development, there was a shift of production to China, where, instead of the newest robots, numerous workers worked. So the United States themselves have fattened a dangerous competitor in China. And thousands of new technologies related to the development of the ocean and space, new types of energy were not born.
President Obama tried to deal with the crisis, only worsening the situation. It was worth helping the banks, the social and pension system is collapsing. They will take it, banks and healthcare will collapse again. Banks are pumping money up — government debt is growing even more. So this crisis will not be limited to several years.
Many financiers have long said that the US financial well-being is a bubble. In fact, America’s GDP is now approximately equal to GDP at the beginning of the 1980s. Initially, America’s economy was not aimed at developing a scientific and technological base and high rates of economic growth, but at accelerating the redistribution process. This economy is a crisis economy. Everything created by previous generations is exploited to infinity, but practically nothing of its own is created. Now comes the agony of this system.
The United States has only two prospects - to establish the dictatorship of the NTR supporters, or to collapse. If such a dictatorship fails to overcome the resistance of the financiers, the United States will fall into the abyss of social and economic chaos, of the new Middle Ages. Crisis processes have gone too far.
Perhaps the United States will start a war by finding a suitable enemy, the digestion of which will accelerate the transition to a new technological order. Here are just a small country like Afghanistan or Iraq is not enough. The enemy must be a rich prey: natural resources, vast territories, intact ecosystems. The West did this all its history. At first it was the Incas and the Aztecs, then India, China, the Russian Empire and the USSR. And nothing indicates that now the order has changed. If America does fall into chaos, then there will be a war to the redivision of the world.
Most likely, we should expect the onset of bloody events.
Is it possible to do without war?
During the Second World War, it was believed that war favorably affects the economy. Many believe that it was the war that led the United States out of depression, and not spending in the event of a deficit.
The war really caused an increase in labor productivity, but it became the cause of getting out of depression when it opened the floodgates to the deficit. In wartime, deficiencies did not bother anyone. The growth of the economy led to the fact that the national debt rose to 120% of GDP. The machines and infrastructure produced at that time brought the country to the top of productivity, by 1970, the debt was only 40% of GDP.
It was war that became the last resort when politicians allowed the government to go into debt and stimulate the economy in this way. But there are other ways, Keynes offered to force workers to dig ditches in order to pay them for it, thus increasing purchasing power. And the demand itself will generate new jobs and increase the production of goods and services.
For example, the Chinese are building huge houses and shopping complexes that are empty due to the lack of customers. But so managed to fill the wallets of workers, giving them the opportunity to spend. With this approach, do not need a terrible tribute to the war - death and destruction.
But there is a better way. Instead of doing unnecessary work, you need to cope with unmet needs. Restore infrastructure, improve the energy system, education, spend money on research. Such costs would not only help increase purchasing power, but also improve the lives of the general population.
It is the redistribution of part of military spending to a peaceful course that will help create new jobs, improve infrastructure while reducing the national debt, and also balance the state budget by increasing the tax base and state revenues.
The collapse of the global financial system
The Western world has undermined its own financial system. Consciously and simultaneously this was done by the US government and its European allies. The goal was dubious and insignificant - the Libyan “revolution” was transferred to the “self-sufficiency” rail.
Previously, one of the most effective tools of international politics was the blackmailing of bank accounts. The firm grasp of bank balance could make any politician more compliant. This policy was not practiced only in the banks of Old Europe. This is easy to understand, since during the formation of a single European space any instability should have been excluded. Moreover, the EU did not need to get involved in a foreign war.
However, the situation changed dramatically on 6 in May on 2011, when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that part of the country's “Gaddafi assets” (about 3 billion dollars) would be used in the interests of the Libyan people. The German government also decided to transfer part of the Libyan bank fund into the hands of rebels. Thus, Western countries simply appropriated the money and sent part of it to finance the armed uprising in Libya.
So the Western world violated the basic principles of the financial system - the inviolability of capital and their free circulation. And the political conclusion is as follows: The West has openly declared that it can choose not to recognize the international legal personality of any countries.
Now it is difficult to talk about the independence of a united Europe. And the Libyan company has exacerbated tensions within Europe. Particularly difficult to explain such actions to his people would be France and the UK.
Until recently, the main characteristics of the banking system of Old Europe were stability, a guarantee of deposits and anonymity. Now, the entire EU financial system is under threat. Withdrawals from US and European banks have already begun. The relay of the arbitrator and the center of the financial world can now be moved to China, only he has sufficient infrastructure and financial support.
Apparently, the Western world is already preparing for a new strategy related to the denial of the principles of national sovereignty, hoping that such a strategy will justify all the costs of its implementation.
It is not known how Russia will react to this. Only one thing is clear, withdrawing funds from Europe and the United States will be difficult.
The reasons for this will be the lack of a single currency that will replace the euro and the dollar. Yuan is not yet ready for this role. China has not yet developed a mechanism for managing the exchange rate, and its ceiling has not been defined as a universal monetary unit. The leadership of China is quite existing low exchange rate of the national currency, which allows you to keep exports at a consistently high level.
If the yuan nevertheless becomes a world monetary unit, China expects such a powerful financial gain, which is not necessary even to its allies. The main reason is that the levers of control over other people's assets, which are now in other hands, will be transferred to China.
Russia does not conduct systematic work in this direction. Even experts are still considering the situation at the level of 2008 of the year. Perhaps Russia's position will be clear after the March 2012 presidential election. Either Russia will face a tough confrontation with the West, even armed conflicts, or the Russian Federation will no longer exist as a state in its present form.
The deliberate refusal of the United States and its allies to guarantee the integrity of capital and its free flow, which are the basic principles of the banking system of the West, is a consequence of a change in the strategic course. The end of the free market is the denial of the freedoms of states to national sovereignty and self-determination.
The change of the global financial model is a consequence of the emergence of a new geopolitical model of the world. Now we can watch the End of History. The old categories generated by Western civilization — democracy, human rights, people's sovereignty — are leaving the past. Ahead - New Middle Ages.
- Valery Boval
Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter