The U.S. economy contracted 0.3% in the first quarter of this year, and the Federal Reserve just issued a warning of growing stagflation risks. In the meantime, President Donald Trump is pushing the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates.

The push for low interest rates and monetary inflation benefits Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. These policies disproportionately serve the wealthy by inflating asset prices, boosting disposable income for top earners, and rewarding those with significant debt and investments. Meanwhile, lower-income Americans, who own fewer assets and benefit less from such policies, face rising costs and minimal income gains.

Ryan McMaken notes that Fed Chair Jerome Powell's latest warning is a major red flag, as the Federal Reserve habitually downplays economic risks and misrepresents warning signs.

Ryan McMaken is an economist (Austrian economics), executive editor at the Mises Institute, writer, and the author of “Breaking Away: The Case of Secession, Radical Decentralization, and Smaller Polities" and “Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre”.

Follow Ryan McMaken on X (Twitter): https://x.com/ryanmcmaken.

Read more of his work here: https://mises.org/profile/ryan-mcmaken.

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform. If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, please do so via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Subscribe now

The interview is available on YouTube and Patreon.

Share World Affairs in Context

The recent joint statement issued by China, Japan, South Korea, and the 10 ASEAN member states during the 28th ASEAN+3 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors’ Meeting on May 4th marks a pivotal shift in global economic dynamics. The statement emphasizes a collective move toward strengthening regional economic resilience and reducing reliance on Western-led financial frameworks. This development is part of a broader trend of de-dollarization, which emphasizes a growing trend among countries in the Global South to protect economic sovereignty and mitigate risks associated with reliance on Western-led financial systems.

This momentum has not arisen in isolation. It has been catalyzed by years of increasingly aggressive U.S. economic policy during recent administrations, which resorted to various forms of economic coercion - economic sanctions imposed on non-aligned actors, sweeping tariffs and trade restrictions on key global economies. Trump’s protectionist stance caused deep concern across Asia, pushing even traditionally adversarial nations like China and Japan to find common ground. These actions effectively encouraged regional cooperation as a countermeasure to what many perceive as economic coercion. During my recent interview with a BRICS expert, Dr. Yaroslav Lissovolik, who attended a BRICS meeting in Brazil this spring, he noted that President Trump’s tariffs may ultimately become a “blessing in disguise” for the BRICS+ nations as they are further incentivized to focus on prioritizing regional cooperation and South-South alignment.

Share World Affairs in Context

The U.S. continued use of the dollar as a geopolitical tool through sanctions and restrictive trade policies has not gone unnoticed. This policy continuity has only strengthened the resolve of countries across Asia to forge alternative economic pathways. As a result, the joint statement marks not just an economic agreement but a geopolitical alignment, one that seeks to diminish dependency on Western institutions like the IMF and World Bank and sidestep the U.S.'s economic influence altogether.

One of the most striking features of the joint statement is its denunciation of “escalating trade protectionism,” a veiled reference to U.S. economic policy.

“Escalating trade protectionism weighs on global trade, leading to economic fragmentation, affecting trade, investment, and capital flows across the region.”

Instead of relying on Western-centric trade, the ASEAN nations and China, Japan, and South Korea are promoting intra-regional trade and deepening regional financial cooperation.

“We call for enhanced regional unity and cooperation as we endeavor to weather the heightened uncertainty. Our current policy priority is to reinforce long-term resilience while maintaining flexibility to address near-term challenges, including rising protectionism and volatile global financial conditions. On the fiscal front, this means rebuilding policy buffers while continuing to provide well-targeted support to sustain growth while implementing structural reforms. We will also carefully recalibrate monetary policy based on domestic conditions. We will maintain exchange rate flexibility as a buffer against external shocks.”

Subscribe now

One major initiative in this effort is the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralisation (CMIM), a currency swap mechanism designed to provide liquidity support in times of financial stress without involving Western financial institutions. Will it impact U.S. dollar demand? Absolutely! This regional mechanism allows participating countries to respond to financial emergencies with local and regional resources, reducing the risk of being subject to Western political and economic pressures.

In addition, the statement outlines plans to develop local currency bond markets, which would further insulate regional economies from fluctuations in the U.S. dollar. By doing so, these countries aim to create more stable financial systems that are less exposed to external shocks and the unpredictability of U.S. fiscal and monetary policy. The creation and growth of local bond markets also symbolize a decisive break from the dollar's historic dominance in global finance.

“Given the continued uncertainty in the global financial markets, well-functioning local currency bond markets remain the cornerstone of the region’s financial stability. We celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Credit Guarantee and Investment Facility (CGIF). To date, CGIF has successfully realized 100 bonds guaranteed and sukuks issued by 64 companies across 12 economies in 9 currencies with a total cumulative notional guarantee amount of USD 4,151 million.”

Furthermore, the declaration renews the bloc’s commitment to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the largest trade agreement in the world by population and economic output. Notably, the United States is excluded from RCEP, a clear indication of the shifting center of economic gravity. The agreement represents a powerful regional alternative to U.S.-led trade frameworks and provides a platform for deeper economic integration across Asia.

The scale of regional trade is already massive. In 2024 alone, trade between China and ASEAN reached nearly $1 trillion, underscoring the growing interdependence of Asia’s economies.

When Japan and South Korea are added to the equation, the total economic value becomes even more significant. This bloc of countries is effectively creating a self-sustaining economic ecosystem—one that is less susceptible to external interference.

This joint initiative is more than a response to U.S. policies—it is part of a strategic decoupling. These nations are proactively seeking to safeguard their economic sovereignty and build resilient systems that can endure geopolitical turbulence. It reflects the emergence of a multipolar world order, in which economic and political power is no longer concentrated solely in the West. Countries are exploring new alliances, fostering South-South cooperation, and designing regional financial architectures that support shared growth and independence.

This initiative, while rooted in economic cooperation, is deeply geopolitical in its implications. By aligning their financial and trade strategies, these countries are reshaping the global landscape. If the current trend continues, the world could witness a lasting shift toward a decentralized, multipolar economic order where Asia plays a central and independent role.

Remember to tune in to World Affairs in Context for more news, analysis, and upcoming interviews available on YouTube, Rumble, Patreon, Locals, and now Spotify.

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform. If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, please do so via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Subscribe now

Trump Watch is a new weekly “report card” on all things Trump hosted by Scott Ritter for paid subscribers only. Scott will interview one guest in each 60-minute episode. In the first episode, Scott discusses immigration issues with Prof. Alan Dershowitz.

Give a gift subscription

Donate now

Read more

Dr. Brovkin served as a professor of History at Harvard University and a consultant to various US agencies. His recent book, “From Vladimir Lenin to Vladimir Putin: Russia in Search of Its Identity,” examines how the Russian past influenced and shaped current politics, particularly the East–West divide.

As the 80th Anniversary of the Allies’ Victory over Nazi Germany is approaching, I spoke with Dr. Brovkin about the key turning points in the history of World War II, the Eastern Front vs. the Western Front and the Soviet offensive that broke the Wehrmacht.

Follow Dr. Vladimir Brovkin's fantastic YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@vladimirbrovkin4052.

Check out his latest book, “From Vladimir Lenin to Vladimir Putin: Russia in Search of Its Identity.”

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform. If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, please do so via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Subscribe now

The interview is available on YouTube and Patreon.

Share World Affairs in Context

Scott Ritter kicks off a new podcast that will subject the policies of the Trump administration to unbiased, non-partisan critical analysis, calling out the good, the bad, and everything in between, with the goal of holding President Trump and his administration accountable for their policies—exactly what a good citizen should be doing if he or she wants to make America great again!

In this day and age of overly polarized partisan politics, the notion of unbiased reviews of policy goals and implementation has largely been set aside. As mainstream media increasingly competes with alternative media for viewership, and the economics of reporting what passes for “the news” changes from advertisement-based to viewership interaction algorithms, there is an increasing trend to package information in the most controversial manner possible, putting engagement over sound analysis, and in the process sacrificing objectiveness with entertainment. With Trump Watch with Scott Ritter, the internet engagement model is tossed to the side, with the viewer instead being treated to a structured interview-based format which assesses the policies of the Trump administration with a critical, unbiased lens.

I’ve been doing video content for alternative media since about the time the Russian Special Military Operation against Ukraine kicked off, back in February 2022. Over the course of the past three-plus years, I have participated in just about every format of internet-based video engagement imaginable. I’ve done in-studio interviews, one- on-one interviews, panel interviews, and solo monologues. I’ve been the host, co-host, moderator, and panelist. I’ve interviewed diplomats, soldiers, politicians, scientists, academics, experts, and media personalities, and I have been subjected to every form of video interrogation imaginable, from all corners of the earth.

I’ve come to view every online video engagement I’ve participated in as a crap shoot—you don’t know what you are going to get until you roll the dice. I can say that this holds equally true whether you are the interviewer or interviewee. One of the reasons for this is that most interviews operate in free-form mode, where the host and guest engage in unscripted dialogue about the pressing issues of our time, which usually manifested in the way of breaking news stories. Often the ensuing discussion is based upon incomplete information drawn from unverified “facts.” Sometimes the “breaking news” comes from an area of the world which is less familiar to those who have been called upon to discuss it and its ramifications, live and in public.

One of the main downsides of the free-form interview format is that, given the reality of the engagement algorithms that drive the popularity and—perhaps most importantly, the monetization factors associated with podcasting, a host may not shy away from entering a discussion on a “breaking news” topic he or she is unfamiliar with, and the “expert” who is being interviewed rarely has the integrity to pass on offering an opinion if he or she is not familiar with the events being discussed. “I don’t know” might be an honest answer, but it doesn’t drive engagements and/or subscriptions.

Monetization is an ever-present reality in the alternative media world. Very few of us are independently wealthy, and as such, unless we pursue podcasting as a hobby or labor of love (in which case we would need full time jobs in order to survive), the digital product we produce must be capable of generating income sufficient to pay the bills, either partially or in their entirety, depending on the level of commitment one has made to the alternative digital news business. This can be done through sponsorships, donations, subscriptions, and monetization triggered by engagements.

While alternative media has successfully challenged the mainstream media in terms of viewer percentage, the lack of predictability and issues of viable economic sustainability make for a volatile employment opportunity. This in turn impacts the quality of the production values that go into producing a show. There is a direct correlation between production value and income generation, a visually pleasing, well-structured show doesn’t pay for itself. But given the risks associated with launching any new online digital product, rare is the podcast which, on its own volition, can invest the time and resources into getting it right from the start.

The Trump Watch with Scott Ritter team has been very fortunate to be able to build upon the foundation of success that we have garnered through the Ask the Inspector (ATI) podcasts and Scott Ritter’s Substack. Jeff Norman (the producer) and I (the host) have the luxury to draw upon our combined income streams generated by the ATI podcasts to underwrite the costs associated with starting a new podcast. This provides us with the possibility of generating unique and entertaining graphics and animation, line up talented technical support, and—perhaps most important—to think through the goals and objectives of the podcast, and what format is most conducive to achieving them.

Back in the leadup to the November 2024 presidential election, I spoke about the importance of citizen engagement on the issues of the day, noting that the citizens who exercised their duty to so engage should do so from a foundation of fact-based analysis. American democracy isn’t solely defined by what happens at the election booth, but rather what happens after the vote is cast and counted. Void of constituent accountability, elections become a fruitless exercise in the empowerment of a self-anointed political elite. If the American citizenry, however, can sustain their political engagement into the post-election arena, then politicians would a) be more careful about the policies they promoted on the campaign trail, and b) spend sufficient time to implement the promises made in a manner readily discernible to the American voter.

In planning Trump Watch with Scott Ritter, I thought carefully about what format would best empower a citizen viewer with the knowledge and information necessary to hold their elected representatives, including the President of the United States, to account for what is being done in their name. I came up with four basis categories around which an inquiry into a specific policy topic could be made.

· First, regarding an identified policy, what promises were made by candidate Trump, and how were these promises acted upon by President Trump?

· Second, what has the effectiveness been of the implementation efforts undertaken by the Trump administration in support of a given policy?

· Third, what are the underlying legal questions associated with the policy in question and its implementation, especially as it relates to the Constitution of the United States?

· Four, is the policy as implemented making America “great again?”

To establish a framework of evaluation, the Trump administration will be graded on a scale of A to F on each of the four questions, with the fourth question representing a combined score drawn from the first three grades.

The format of the program has the host leading off with a monologue that introduced the policy in question and provides some historical context to the issues at hand. Following this monologue, the guest will be introduced and engaged in a discussion drawn from specific issues generated by the three leading paths of inquiry. The guests will have been chosen specifically for their experience and expertise regarding the issues being discussed. There will be no “gotcha” questions, but rather a dialogue, discussion, and even debate about the issues at hand.

As the host, my job is to direct the questioning and engage in follow-on questions designed to probe more deeply the issues at hand. I am not trying to force an outcome but rather take the interaction between myself and my guest to whatever logical conclusion is reached by the facts that present themselves through our interaction. If a guest has a certain bias, my job will be to probe that bias respectfully to develop fully the data which will be conducive toward framing the most accurate picture of where we stand on the issues of the day.

The podcast will end with a closing monologue where I draw upon the totality of the discussion to form a final, overarching conclusion which is biased only by the facts presented and the principles and values attached to being an American by the Constitution and the historical legacy of the United States as it has evolved over the course of nearly two and a half centuries of existence.

The podcast will be available to those who have a paid subscription to the Scott Ritter Extra Substack ($7 month/$70 annual) or U.S. Tour of Duty Locals channel ($7 month/$70 annual). We have also submitted the podcast to X as a subscription service. Once approved, Trump Watch will be available to X users for a subscription of $4 month (which works out to $1 per episode.) The X subscription would be for the Trump Watch podcast only; the Substack subscription provides access to the articles and special products published there in addition to Trump Watch.

By placing Trump Watch behind a paywall, we open ourselves to criticism that we are doing this for money, and/or denying those who cannot or will not allocate the resources necessary to pay for a subscription access to vital information.

We are doing this for money—as independent journalists operating in the alternative media universe, our ability to sustain our work and our lives is derived from the product we produce. I have historically kept my Substack available to non-paying subscribers, of which there are some 55,576. My income, Jeff’s income, and the money used to underwrite many of the projects we engage in is derived from the 2,136 paid subscribers we have attracted. I am deeply grateful to every subscriber and follower for showing interest in my work. But the fact is 4% of my followers are shouldering the burden for the remaining 96%. The costs associated with Trump Watch should not have to be born by those 4% alone, and by making Trump Watch available to paid Substack subscribers only, I am hopeful that the overall number of paid subscriptions will increase.

And so here we are, the launch of a new podcast.

One that I hope resonates strongly with an audience rightfully concerned about the state of America, the direction we are headed in, and the policies being implemented by an administration and president who have pledged to “Make America Great Again.”

Trump Watch with Scott Ritter serves as a report card on the work of the Trump administration, and through the analysis that will be brought to light by this podcast, the American people will be empowered to determine whether Donald Trump gets a passing grade or not.

Trump Watch with Scott Ritter will stream on Tuesdays starting May 6.

I look forward to your participation in the grand experiment of digital democracy.

Share

Subscribe now

Donate now

In our conversation, Professor Ivan Katchanovski reveals the truth about the violent Maidan regime change in Ukraine, which enabled the West to use Ukraine as a proxy tool against Russia. Professor Katchanovski notes that after the brutally orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, the West transformed Ukraine into a client state, whose political leaders were selected by the United States and other Western officials to further their geopolitical agenda in Eastern Europe.

Following the Maidan coup, the politics of Ukraine have been dictated by foreign actors at the expense of the national interests of the Ukrainian population. The loss of sovereignty foreshadowed the destruction of Ukrainian statehood and regional peace and stability.

Professor Ivan Katchanovski is a Ukrainian and Canadian scholar specializing in Ukraine's politics and conflicts. Professor Katchanovski spent 11 years researching one of the most pivotal events in the modern history of Ukraine, the Maidan massacre. His latest book, “The Maidan Massacre in Ukraine: The Mass Killing that Changed the World," illustrates the origins of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the decisive role played in it by foreign actors. It’s available to be downloaded for FREE, and it's absolutely a must-read!

Follow Dr. Ivan Katchanovski on X (Twitter): https://x.com/I_Katchanovski.

Download Professor Katchanovski's "The Maidan Massacre" book in open access for FREE: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-67121-0

Support Professor Katchanovski's research via GoFundMe campaigns:

https://gofund.me/173df0ed

https://gofund.me/334b0e98

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform. If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, please do so via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Subscribe now

The interview is available on YouTube and Patreon.

Share