VIII. The New World Order II:
America's Unknown Enemy: Beyond Conspiracy
Editorial Staff of the
American Institute for Economic Research
Following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, President Bush
frequently referred to his pursuit of a "New World Order" in
which harmony rather than strife was to govern relations between
nations and peoples. The immediate occasion for the celebration of
this "New World Order" was the presumed victory of
democratic capitalism over communism in the Eastern-bloc nations.
While it seems plain that the vision of a "New World Order"
-- subsequently endorsed by President Clinton -- assumes that the
Western nations henceforth will play the dominant role in
international affairs, it also seems plausible from the earlier
references in Trilateralist and other circles to a "New
International Economic Order," or "New World Order,"
that more may be involved than the recent change of fortunes among the
The intellectual texture of this "New World Order" seems
intentionally vague. But if it is based on the type of thinking that
recently has characterized that of either the academics who inhabit
various "think tanks" in pursuit of solutions to world "problems"
or the State Department policy planning staff itself, then in our view
it is unlikely to produce the desired results, whatever they may be.
It would be impossible to analyze critically a notion that has not
been adequately explicated in the first place. In this respect, the
specific requirements of any "New World Order" remain
unknown to the general public -- and perhaps to its presumed leaders
as well. However, it may be possible to gain some understanding of
what may be involved by reference not only to the tracts of such
organizations as the Council on Foreign Relations or the Trilateral
Commission, but also to the general milieu of "globalist"
thought over the past 2 decades or so that has shaped both popular
attitudes and political policies.
During the past several years, we have commented on a variety of
ideas and events that would seem to relate in one way or another to
the formation of the type of views that are reflected in talk of a "New
World Order." They have included many academic fields -- for
example, development economics, political science, history, foreign
policy studies, anthropology, and environmental science - and have
covered a broad range of topics -- from "Earth Day"
celebrations to the application of Hegelian idealism as a means of
predicting the course of world events.
In the chapters that follow, we have assembled a number of the most
pertinent commentaries. Each was originally drafted as a discrete
essay, and we have elected to reprint them here with minimal editorial
changes, even though they overlap somewhat and even though portions of
them since may have been overtaken by the pace of events.
Although they cover a broad range of topics, the essays have a common
critical thread: that very often both the identification of problems
and approaches to their solutions have been fatally flawed. In some
instances, such as those involving current environmental questions,
special interests that have little regard for scientific procedures
appear to have gained control of the "propaganda" apparatus.
In others, those charged with making policy appear to have relied more
on fantasy than empirical observation in the development of approaches
to foreign affairs, international economics, and the like.
The difficulties that are posed by such flawed prescriptions for
human progress extend far beyond narrow notions of conspiracy. In a
broad sense, they embrace many of the same obstacles to the pursuit of
knowledge that have confronted humans since the dawn of history, and
that have been a principal concern of AIER's research effort
throughout the years. In this respect, the task of defeating some "conspiracy,"
if such were a threat, would seem incalculably easier than promoting
an understanding of human affairs that is grounded in useful
procedures of inquiry that promise to yield solutions to genuine human