Why does Obama keep talking about a “New World Order?” His frequent use of this term makes a lot of people very uncomfortable, and, probably, for very good reason.
Most recently, just this past Sunday, Obama used this disturbing term again, this time while addressing an audience in the country of Peru.
Here, exactly, is what he said:
In terms of reflecting on the United States presidency as I have been traveling, I think the main reflection I have and the main advice that I give to the incoming president is, the United States really is an indispensable nation in our world order.
I say that as somebody who has gone out of his way to express respect for every country and its people and to consistently acknowledge that many of the challenges we face are not challenges that America can solve on our own. But what I also know that the basic framework of the world order coming out of World War II and then on through the end of the Cold War, was shaped by a set of ideals and principles that have worked for the vast majority of people not just in America but around the world.
The notion of democracy. And rule of law. And a free press. And independent judiciary. And open markets. And a social welfare state to moderate some of the sharp edges of capitalism. And, you know, lifting up issues of human rights and investing in public health and development not just in our own borders but elsewhere in the world. And working with multilateral institutions, like the United Nations, making sure we’re upholding international norms and rules.
That’s what has made the modern world. And there have been times when we have not observed some of the norms as well as we should and have been accused of hypocrisy here in Latin America. There have been times when countries have felt disrespected and on occasion have had cause for that. And there were teams when we haven’t observed the values in our own country and have fallen short of our ideals, but that basic structure is the reason why the world is much wealthier, much more secure, and yes, less violent, healthier, and better educated, more tolerant than 50 years ago. That requires constant work. It doesn’t just happen on its own.”
This is not the first time Obama has mentioned a “New World Order.” Earlier this year he said the following during a speech to the United Nations:
“…But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security. And I think that’s not just true for us…”
But it doesn’t stop there. In September of 2015, Obama said:
“…The increasing skepticism of our international order can also be found in the most advanced democracies. We see greater polarization, more frequent gridlock; movements on the far right, and sometimes the left, that insist on stopping the trade that binds our fates to other nations, calling for the building of walls to keep out immigrants.”
Because of Obama’s consistent use of the term “world order,” and statements that Americans need to “[bind] ourselves to international rules,” and “[bind] our [fate] to other nations,” it’s easy to see why a lot of very knowledgeable, informed people are feeling very uncomfortable at this time.