This year marks the 65th anniversary of the publication of George Orwell’s novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four,1 which, in the contortions and déjà vus of history, may bring us to Henry Kissinger and his latest book, published September 2014. Kissinger’s name, presiding over the bold and simple title, World Order, presents upon a pristine, white cover.
This year also marks the 225th year since the U.S. Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation (1789; first session, First Congress).
So what, you may ask, is the connection between these facts?
It’s hard to know for sure, but let’s consider: “We the People” and World Order.
But first, let us acknowledge that Mr. Kissinger undoubtedly reveals some insightful and important things in his World Order for there are huge global problems that only seem to be getting worse. However, in reading World Order, let us also be aware of the grand illusion / delusion that manifests in the very first pages of his book.
Without any apparent cognitive dissonance, he writes:
“… an American consensus—an inexorably expanding cooperative order of states observing common rules and norms, embracing liberal economic systems, forswearing territorial conquest, respecting national sovereignty, and adopting participatory and democratic systems of governance. American presidents of both parties have continued to urge other governments, often with great vehemence and eloquence, to embrace the preservation and enhancement of human rights.” (pp. 1-2)These head-spinning words are so un-tethered to the real (forgotten / ignored / hidden) history of U.S. involvement in other nations, it staggers credulity. Not to mention what the U.S. government, its corporate bosses and banks, and other hidden handlers are presently foisting upon U.S. citizens. When one reads the many voices of warning and exposés, it becomes apparent that Kissinger’s book may just be the latest whitewash in a long laundry list of offenses against the Constitution and the subsequent Bill of Rights.
“In the American view of world order, peace and balance would occur naturally, and ancient enmities would be set aside—once other nations were given the same principled say in their own governance that Americans had in theirs. The task of foreign policy was thus not so much the pursuit of a specifically American interest as the cultivation of shared principles. In time, the United States would become the indispensable defender of the order Europe designed. Yet even as the United States lent its weight to the effort, an ambivalence endured—for the American vision rested not on an embrace of the European balance-of-power system but on the achievement of peace through the spread of democratic principles.” (p. 6)
“The United States has alternated between defending the Westphalian system and castigating its premises of balance of power and noninterference in domestic affairs as immoral and outmoded, and sometimes both at once. It continues to assert the universal relevance of its values in building a peaceful world order and reserves the right to support them globally.” (p. 8)
When one considers:
▪ his words: “Our age is insistently, at times almost desperately, in pursuit of a concept of world order.” (p. 2)shouldn’t these give us pause—if not paranoia?
▪ his awareness that “The modern era announced itself when enterprising societies sought glory and wealth by exploring the oceans and whatever lay beyond them.” (pp. 17-18)
▪ his observation that “A man of the cloth steeped in court intrigue, Richelieu was well adapted to a period of religious upheaval and crumbling established structures.” (p. 21)
▪ his view that Machiavelli’s, The Prince is “a work on statesmanship” and that it “systematically analyzed the requirements of power and survival”3;
Is this book just one more trial balloon to further normalize the “idea” of (One) World Order? Though perhaps, it will never get below two or even three because, as we all know from experience and history—war and the threat of war can go a long way to achieving ways, ends, and mean$.
What would George Orwell say about this latest World Order? Perhaps he would lament: “Lucky—but unlucky you. My timing was only slightly off.”
---------------------/
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
2. Many believe it; particularly those of faith, and especially Mormons, referencing their scripture: Doctrine and Covenants | Section 101:77-80 ~ According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another. And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood. Doctrine and Covenants | Section 98:4-10 ~ And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.
3. http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/Ideas/ID/2416333338/ (being the words of Mr. Kissinger at min. 1:10-1:27 of the CBC “Ideas” (Paul Kennedy) program entitled, “Machiavelli: The Prince of Paradox,” broadcast 6 November 2013 in commemoration of the 500th anniversary of the writing of The Prince. See also: http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2014/02/niccolo-mockiavelli.html
