by ralfy » Wed 26 Jul 2023, 20:51:56
When U.S. conventional oil production peaked with real wages during the 1970s, the effects of the Triffin dilemma, which was starting during the 1960s as economic growth started to slow down, became more pronounced as trade deficits became more chronic. A few years later, Reagan would counter this through deregulation, which lead to increasing debt to cover increasing spending.
The catch is that increasing debt cannot be indefinite unless the world continued relying on the dollar for trade. That's where the twin ideologies of neoliberalism and neoconservatism came along, with the first meant to force countries to open up to trade liberalization and let market forces prevail, and the second meant to "rescue" countries plagued by "tyranny" in order to promote "freedom and democracy," which is the sibling of free market capitalism.
In reality, the goal was to keep countries weak and thus open for exploitation by the U.S., as stronger countries can prey on weaker ones in such markets, and politicians working for the rich and their foreign partners (which just happen to be politicians and businessmen from the U.S. and the rest of G-7), and at the same time make them permanently dependent on the dollar.
The problem is that the U.S. did not succeed, as Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan industrialized, followed by the "tiger" economies, and now the "tiger cubs". Add to that the Chinese "dragon" and the Vietnamese "little dragon," and now points about increasing growth in parts of South Asia and even Africa. At best, the richest in industrialized countries can earn by investing in them, but most in industrialized countries can only gain through domestic business.
De-dollarization was predicted, but it was assumed that it would go very slowly. With the employment of both ideologies in countries like Ukraine and leading to blowback, which is the invasion by Russia, that move away from the U.S. has appeared to have accelerated.
Meanwhile, the U.S., G-7, and the rest of the EU have begun to realize the hypocrisy of their views concerning the two ideologies, as seen in many current examples. For example, the U.S. keeps talking about Taiwanese democracy but refuses to call for Taiwanese sovereignty because it doesn't want to upset its main trading partner China. The EU talks about human rights in various countries, like several in Asia, but continues to trade readily with Saudi Arabia, which is also a trading partner and military ally of the U.S.
The implication, given these, is that the U.S. and the other G-7 members are phonies, and that they only use calls for "freedom and democracy" and narratives of Russia, China, and others having imperialist aspirations in order to protect their own. The fact that they have been working with various authoritarian regimes, and in return for economic and military advantages, shows the duplicity of their views, and has led to strong reaction from the Global South.
In any event, this is the situation that not only Biden (not to mention his son) and Trump find themselves in. In such a world, emphasizing those two ideologies can only lead to more disaster.