Talk:New world order
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Novos Ordo Seculorum appears on the back of the dollar bill (under the pyramid) as part of the Great Seal of the United States, you should probably mention that.
Novus Ordo Seclorum means "New Order of the Ages," not "New World Order." --Cholling 21:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've read in numerous books that bringing about a New World Order is called "The Work of the Ages," so "New Order of the Ages" may still have some relevance.
I wish there were some quotes from the Wilson era. The first time I heard of "New World Order" was a reference that said it came from the Nazis, but there is no reference to those scum bags here any where. Anyone have such references to either era? ShoLobberT 15:31, 28 Dec 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Article on use of the phrase
It may be interesting if someone did an article on uses of the phrase "New World Order" throughout history, either as pro-world government (used by H.G. Wells, Buckminster Fuller, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Nixon, the World Constitution and Parliament Association and others listed here), anti-world government (Graeme K. Howard (Isolationist, pro-Nazi VP of General Motors in the 1930's-40's), Malcom X and numerous conspiracy theorists) or neither (The "Simon" Necronomicon And "Adam" in Superman Family #192.) If someone will start it and include the quotes cited on Wikiepdia right now, I can add all the ones I know about... Orville Eastland 23:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think this article is the best place for that. I notice the phrase also appears in the song Der Fuehrer's Face. It's implied that it was a Nazi slogan. -- Townmouse 23:59, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think the proper place for those usages would be the New World Order (conspiracy) or World government articles.—thames 18:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- That would be the best place for most of them. However, there are some that aren't conspiracy theories or supportive of world government. Where should those go? Orville Eastland 03:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think it depends on the quote itself, whether it explicitly uses the phrase "new world order", and in what context the quote is used by the author. If you have some, I'd love to discuss them here on the talk page to see if we can find an appropriate place to integrate them.—Perceval 17:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- That would be the best place for most of them. However, there are some that aren't conspiracy theories or supportive of world government. Where should those go? Orville Eastland 03:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think the proper place for those usages would be the New World Order (conspiracy) or World government articles.—thames 18:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
why are pro wrestling nwo members on this page like hulk hogan? or was hulk hogan a legitimate member of the cold war political movement... im going to delete that if you want you can put it back in Kfmccart 00:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 'optimism'?
This line in the introduction seems wrong: "...was characterized by nearly comprehensive optimism." I've never heard 'New World Order' used in a positive or optimistic light, but then again, I've pretty rarely heard it - mostly music, online political writing, etc. I think the sentence in not particularly clear. The NWO is considered now or was once considered to be 'optimistic', or was it just the press? etc.
- I agree, that could be worded better. heqs 23:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- If you have a Nexis account you can read through all the newspaper articles from the timeperiod of 1989 through 1991 referencing "new world order". The specific usage of Gorbachev and Bush Sr. was optimistic, as opposed to the conspiracy theorists' usage of a sinister new world order (which I think is what you're recalling). This article is principally about the usage at the end of the Cold War. The conspiracy theory usage has its own separate article.—Perceval 06:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] lead quote
What exactly is that quote doing floating at the top of the article? heqs 23:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it seems pretty clear that the "new world order" was a by-product of the Cold War.—Perceval 06:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- On the face of it, it's clear as mud. The Cold War isn't mentioned until halfway through the intro. That quote in that location is merely confusing and unencyclopedic. heqs 09:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Maybe it's just me, but it seems odd form for an encyclopedia article. Quotes should be given more explicit context in the body, not floating on top of the intro. heqs 15:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I've seen it elsewhere in Wikipedia. There's no prohibition in the Manual of Style.—Perceval 02:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- You might want to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Lead section. heqs 08:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I'm already quite familiar with WP:LEDE, but thanks for the friendly pointer nonetheless. It doesn't really have a prohibition on having a quote, the quote helps establish context, and regardless, you shouldn't have deleted it because it might serve elsewhere in the article. It's generally bad form to delete cited content. That said, I have seen other Wikipedia articles start with a context-establishing quote. There's no rule that an encyclopedia can't be artful as well. Moreover, the quote is clearly distinguished from the lede text proper with use of Template:cquote. Finally, WP:LEDE is a guideline, not policy. If the quote adds in establishing the tone of the topic then it should stay, and the guideline can bend: Wikipedia:Interpret all rules.—Perceval 00:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Conservative opposition
This is important information. Conservative critics like Pat Buchanan are mentioned in the article already, but it could be expanded. Rather than dumping an unsourced list into the current article, I think the best thing would be to see if we can rewrite the list into paragraph form, with sources to attribute for each one. Another important distinction is whether these groups are discussing the "new world order" concept as enunciated by Gorbachev and Bush Sr., or whether they're talking about the more conspiratorial one world government new world order idea. If it's the latter, the information should go into the New World Order (conspiracy) article.—Perceval 02:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Conservative Opposition to New World Order
- Paleoconservatism
- Chronicles (magazine)
- The American Conservative
- John Birch Society
- Middle American News
- VDare
- Russell Kirk
- Paul Craig Roberts
- Pat Buchanan
- Thomas Fleming (author)
- Rockford Institute
- Rod Dreher
- Clyde N. Wilson
- Citizens' Informer
[edit] "The Malta Conference of 2-3 December 1989"
The link to Malta_Conference references an event from 1945. Something's amiss here... Crag 08:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bush's "New World Order" speech?
Someone please write a snippet about George HW Bush's speech on 9/11/91 10 years before 9/11? Am I kidding myself with his State of the Union Address?
"What is at stake is more than one small country; it is a big idea: a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind -- peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. Such is a world worthy of our struggle and worthy of our children's future."
--131.104.250.176 14:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)User:Xinyu
- Bush did make a speech on Sep 11 1990, not 1991. This speech is discussed already in the article text. Bush made another speech on Mar 6, 1991, to a session of the House, when he also discussed the new world order. This is not (yet) treated in the text. I have found the text and will upload it to Wikisource.—Perceval 02:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)