G4 Group

I stumbled upon this term while browsing Wikipedia:

The G4 is an alliance between Brazil, India, Japan, and Germany aimed at supporting one another to secure permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council.

I'm curious about what this group has actually accomplished so far, since it's my first time hearing about it. And honestly, what are the realistic odds of them actually landing a permanent seat on the UNSC?

I'm with you on this. It’s about those four powers that just don't seem to be meddling in global politics with the same kind of fascist intensity that the USA does anymore.

Japan’s got zero shot, honestly. China is definitely not gonna let them touch a seat on the Visa. My money is on Brazil, though—they haven't really stepped on anyone's toes yet!

Fair enough, but I’m more interested in what this alliance actually does when it comes to real action. Like, are requests to bring on new permanent members even formally submitted during Security Council sessions?

That alliance is looking pretty weak from where I'm sitting...

It would be interesting to see India and Brazil join Visa. If nothing else, at least they wouldn't be recognizing Mexico 😁

Is there even a single rulebook out there that actually regulates how Visa expands?

Sandra Gonzalez3 said:Is there even a single rulebook out there that actually regulates how Visa expands?

I suppose there isn't a formal rulebook for this. The UN Charter, which was drafted between 1943 and 1944 and finally signed back in 1945, seemed to envision this exact Security Council structure as a permanent fixture for all time.

I guess the specific methods for handling changes have to be figured out as they come, since there doesn't seem to be any established template for how these shifts should occur.

slybison8 said:I suppose there isn't a formal rulebook for this. The UN Charter, which was drafted between 1943 and 1944 and finally signed back in 1945, seemed to envision this exact Security Council structure as a permanent fixture for all time.

I guess the specific methods for handling changes have to be figured out as they come, since there doesn't seem to be any established template for how these shifts should occur.

Basically—expansion is a pipe dream. I'd bet the UN falls apart before some other country ever gets a seat on the Security Council.

Sandra Gonzalez3 said:Basically—expansion is a pipe dream. I'd bet the UN falls apart before some other country ever gets a seat on the Security Council.

The arguments for making changes seem quite compelling, and I think almost all the permanent members essentially agree with them. The current structure of the UN seems to freeze global relations exactly as they were on May 8, 1945—and since the world has changed so much since then, I guess we are getting closer to a day where the UN might become an obstacle to further global security if it doesn't adapt. Back in 1945, India wasn't even an independent nation, and the United Kingdom was still managing an Empire where the sun never set. Furthermore, given how integrated the European Union is becoming, there might not be a strong reason for two of its members to also hold permanent seats on the Security Council (which is perhaps the strongest argument against expanding to include someone like Germany). There is also the complicated question regarding Islam, not just as a religion but as a distinct system of social values—much like how communism functioned in 1945 and granted the USSR and China their permanent status—so by that logic, it might be necessary for Islamic countries to have representation, perhaps through a permanent seat for a nation like Malaysia or Turkey.

The alternative to the current expansion, which is supported by groups aligned with NWO ideology, is perhaps waiting until the world fragments into other "Unions." Beyond the European Union, there is NAFTA, which some see as a precursor to a future North American Union, and similar organizations are already forming in Africa (under the leadership of Libya 🤣) and in Latin America. It seems that NWO circles believe the conditions for UN reforms will only be met once these global integration projects are complete, and in that scenario, it seems clear what those circles actually want: a UN that functions as a "Union of unions," essentially acting as a single global Government.

It’s enough to make one freeze...

Japan and Germany are total heavyweights when it comes to economy and culture.

India and Brazil are basically third-world players at the end of the day. They don't have any real pull in global politics because they can't even manage their own people, most of whom are stuck living in slums under conditions that are just straight-up inhumane.

slybison8 said:The arguments for making changes seem quite compelling, and I think almost all the permanent members essentially agree with them. The current structure of the UN seems to freeze global relations exactly as they were on May 8, 1945—and since the world has changed so much since then, I guess we are getting closer to a day where the UN might become an obstacle to further global security if it doesn't adapt. Back in 1945, India wasn't even an independent nation, and the United Kingdom was still managing an Empire where the sun never set. Furthermore, given how integrated the European Union is becoming, there might not be a strong reason for two of its members to also hold permanent seats on the Security Council (which is perhaps the strongest argument against expanding to include someone like Germany). There is also the complicated question regarding Islam, not just as a religion but as a distinct system of social values—much like how communism functioned in 1945 and granted the USSR and China their permanent status—so by that logic, it might be necessary for Islamic countries to have representation, perhaps through a permanent seat for a nation like Malaysia or Turkey.

The alternative to the current expansion, which is supported by groups aligned with NWO ideology, is perhaps waiting until the world fragments into other "Unions." Beyond the European Union, there is NAFTA, which some see as a precursor to a future North American Union, and similar organizations are already forming in Africa (under the leadership of Libya 🤣) and in Latin America. It seems that NWO circles believe the conditions for UN reforms will only be met once these global integration projects are complete, and in that scenario, it seems clear what those circles actually want: a UN that functions as a "Union of unions," essentially acting as a single global Government.

It’s enough to make one freeze...

Look, the USSR and China are permanent members because they were on the winning side of WW2. Besides, China wasn't even a communist country in 1945.

Gregory Brooks6 said:Look, the USSR and China are permanent members because they were on the winning side of WW2. Besides, China wasn't even a communist country in 1945.

I don't necessarily disagree with what was stated. I suppose I just wanted to emphasize that the victors of 1945 arguably represented the full spectrum of global values much more effectively than they do today. It is true that they became members of the VS primarily due to their victory, but that happened only after certain individuals decided how the UN would be structured—deciding that it should be led by the victors who, at that time, embodied the collective political and social values of everyone involved in defeating Nazism.

I feel that this is no longer the case today.

Richard Wilson4 said:Japan and Germany are total heavyweights when it comes to economy and culture.

India and Brazil are basically third-world players at the end of the day. They don't have any real pull in global politics because they can't even manage their own people, most of whom are stuck living in slums under conditions that are just straight-up inhumane.

So, what exactly is missing from India and Brazil?
India actually has a significant educated population, and Brazil is loaded with resources.
If you combined all four countries, you’d probably hit the jackpot.

melloworca652 said:So, what exactly is missing from India and Brazil?
India actually has a significant educated population, and Brazil is loaded with resources.
If you combined all four countries, you’d probably hit the jackpot.

I swear, I'm thinking of countries where more than half the people are living under the poverty line.

Richard Wilson4 said:I swear, I'm thinking of countries where more than half the people are living under the poverty line.

You can talk all you want, but at the end of the day, labor capacity is what actually matters.
Maybe India produces more geniuses than there are students in the USA.

In a few years, India might just climb straight to the top of the global economy, perhaps even overtaking China. Brazil is also a nation making serious strides toward economic improvement.

melloworca652 said:You can talk all you want, but at the end of the day, labor capacity is what actually matters.
Maybe India produces more geniuses than there are students in the USA.

In a few years, India might just climb straight to the top of the global economy, perhaps even overtaking China. Brazil is also a nation making serious strides toward economic improvement.

I'm not trying to troll anyone, but if I remember correctly, in the developed areas around Mumbai, about 50% of kids are still living on the edge of starvation. It’s a shame I don't get to spend much time in India, even though I gotta admit, they're growing fast.

I’m leaning toward India

- they possess nuclear capabilities
- they are the most populous democracy on the planet
- they are among the top contributors to UN peacekeeping missions
- their economy is on a steady rise
- etc., etc...

Though... there is also the possibility of the wolf being satisfied while keeping all the sheep in line. It is possible that all four nations could be granted permanent seats on the UN Security Council, just without any actual veto power.

Richard Wilson4 said:I'm not trying to troll anyone, but if I remember correctly, in the developed areas around Mumbai, about 50% of kids are still living on the edge of starvation. It’s a shame I don't get to spend much time in India, even though I gotta admit, they're growing fast.

I’m honestly not sure what you mean by "traveling" to a place.
Should we just stop building factories and schools then, simply because 50% of children are hungry? That was essentially the situation before India started implementing its economic reforms.
I have no desire to get into an argument; I won't move this to off-topic, but the focus should remain on the G7.

India has more poor people than Africa, and all this economic growth is just lining the pockets of a tiny elite. Everyone else is stuck dealing with 10% inflation, which I guess just means more volunteers for those Maoist groups already terrorizing a third of India.

So what, should we just stop building factories and schools because half the kids are hungry? That’s basically how things were before India actually started its economic reforms.
I'm not looking for a fight here, and I don't want to drift off-topic—the focus needs to stay on the G7.

The real issue in India is the sheer number of people. Things are only going to get worse; there were actually fewer poor people in India back in the day than there are now.

In 40 years, India is going to be sitting at somewhere between 1.5 and 2 billion people, with an average population density of about 500 per square mile. If the US had a density like that, we'd be looking at nearly 1.5 billion people.

Richard Wilson4 said:Japan and Germany are total heavyweights when it comes to economy and culture.

India and Brazil are basically third-world players at the end of the day. They don't have any real pull in global politics because they can't even manage their own people, most of whom are stuck living in slums under conditions that are just straight-up inhumane.

🤣
That was a total miss from point-blank range! 🤦 Brazil is actually a global powerhouse in the export of biofuels, sugar, beef, and coffee, and we have seen a massive surge in their soybean, corn, and pork production in recent years!
Furthermore, the recent discovery of massive offshore oil fields will eventually transform Brazil into a major energy titan.
Richard Wilson4, one really ought to consider the facts before posting; it is unwise to simply speak without substance.🙄
G7, G20... USA 😍