The Rhetorical Presidency of George H. W. Bush

5: The New World Order: President Bush and the Post–Cold War Era

C  The New World Order: President Bush and the Post–Cold War Era   Until now, the world we’ve known has been a world divided—a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and cold war. Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a world order in which the “the principles of justice and fair play protect the weak against the strong . . .” A world where the United Nations—freed from cold war stalemate—is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all the nations. The Gulf War put this new world to its first test. And my fellow Americans we passed the test. George Bush to Congress, March ,  For over four decades, the world quivered under the specter of nuclear annihilation .The era of nuclear brinkmanship between the two superpowers, however , lost political fuel as the Soviet Union started imploding under the pressure of its own toppling economy. A world that had been divided by “barbed wire and concrete block,” symbolized by the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall, was receding into the dustbin of history as President Bush saw a “new world coming into view.”1 President Bush conceived the end of the Cold War as a rhetorical opportunity to build a Churchillian vision of a new world in which “the principles of justice and fair play protect the weak against the strong.”2 Against this backdrop, Bush amplified his vision of the New World Order in which the United States “remains an engaged power for positive change.”3 The “New World Order” is a grand locution that promises much but at the same time raises, for some, frightening ogres of one-world government. This chapter explores this polysemic concept, the New World Order.The New World Order is a concept that is associated with an individual, George Bush, and with an era, the post–Cold War period. The key question is, what did George Bush actually mean by the phrase a “new world order,” and why did this locution fail to gain rhetorical traction with the public? The first part of the question can be answered by comparing Bush’s vision of the New World Order with the Charter of the United Nations, and by tracing historical parallels with other American presidents and their visions of world peace. The second part is more difficult to answer. It can best be approached by examining ideological critiques of President Bush from both the left and the right, and demonstrating the vulnerability inherent in a situation in which the leader fails to clearly articulate his ideas.       Rhetoric permeates the realm of public communication. Any political artifact , such as a presidential speech, press conference, or expression of ideology, has rhetorical implications, be they profound or prosaic. The conception of any political reality is impossible without the symbolic evocation of a concomitant rhetoric—one that gives impetus to the vision that is being enacted. Political language becomes rhetorical the moment it is mediated through metaphor and metonymy such that these linguistic utterances begin to evoke “mythic cognitive structures in people’s minds.”4 The particular use of a metaphor or any type of accented syntax evokes in the minds of listeners a whole structure of beliefs and counter-beliefs. The rhetorical dimensions of a political utterance are potent in that they engender a sense of identification or repulsion (through either passive indifference or active rebellion). The line between political doctrine and rhetorical expression becomes wafer-thin, especially in the realm of pubic persuasion. A rhetorical transaction occurs when the leader enunciates the importance of a particular doctrine, with a keen eye on winning public support. In this case, Bush’s enunciation of the New World Order is carried out in an atmosphere in which the president as a political being is transposed into a rhetorical being to persuade his audience about the legitimacy of his doctrine. Presidential discourse is chiefly rhetorical, since it constitutes a rhetorical enactment of the symbolic power of the presidency.The spoken word of the president carries with it a sanctity and evocative power that recursively seek a form of self-validation within the parameters of the office of the presidency. The president is a rhetorical being   [18.117.196.184] Project MUSE...