Bush's Wilsonian Internationalism: How Radical Is President Bush's Globalist Agenda? Establishment Pundits Approvingly Compare Him to President Woodrow Wilson, the Icon of Modern One-Worldism. (Cover Story: False Conservatism)
Jasper, William F., The New American
As the 2000 presidential election campaign was heading into its final weeks, Foreign Affairs, the house organ of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), sent a message to its prestigious readership. Writing in the September/October issue of that journal (which Time magazine has called "the most influential periodical in print"), James M. Lindsay of the Brookings Institution noted that "both Al Gore and George W. Bush are internationalists by inclination." It was an important communication (one of many) signaling to organized one-worlders that, rhetoric notwithstanding, the Democrat and Republican contenders were both reliably in the "internationalist" camp. All except the most obstinately blind recognized Vice President Al Gore as an arch-internationalist, one who embraced all of Bill Clinton's one-world agenda and who supported every United Nations treaty and every UN "empowerment" scheme. But Governor George Bush? Why, he was a strident nationalist, a vociferous "America First" champion, a conservative, and a notorious UN basher.
Now fast forward nearly two years. In a July 1, 2002 column, the Wall Street Journal's editorial features editor, Max Boot (a CFR member), offered an important confirmation of Lindsay's earlier assessment of the Bush "inclination." Boot's title was anything but subtle: "George W. Bush: The 'W' Stands for Woodrow." That's Woodrow as in Woodrow Wilson, of course. Woodrow Wilson, the notoriously liberaleft Democrat. Woodrow Wilson, the U.S. resident who championed world government through the League of Nations. Thanks to the "isolationists"--those who believed in national sovereignty and the Constitution--the U.S. Senate refused to make the United States a party to that misbegotten venture.)
Woodrow Wilson's vision of "world order" under an international government and his relentless zeal in pursuing that objective gave rise to the expression "Wilsonian internationalism." The term describes the worldview, goals, policies, and methods of the network of power elites who dominate globalist bastions like the CFR. Boot unabashedly identifies himself with the Wilsonian camp. More importantly, he identifies President George W. Bush as a Wilsonian. Boot applauds Bush's Wilsonian policies in building a UN posse against terrorism and praises the president's speeches that point toward a forthcoming U.S. attack on Iraq. "These speeches have radical, though as yet unrealized, implications," says Boot, while urging the president onward.
The implications are radical indeed, and fraught with danger for the survival of limited, constitutional government. But Boot's column did not even scratch the surface of George Bush's Wilsonian credentials. In the nearly two years bracketed by the Lindsay and Boot signals, the Bush administration has proven one of the most activist internationalist administrations in our country's history. Yet, George "Woodrow" Bush is still being hailed in Republican circles as the "conservative" godsend that saved America from Al Gore's liberalism and internationalism.
The Bush speechwriters have carefully crafted, at regular intervals, ear-pleasing applause lines for the GOP's conservative core constituency, confident that the applause and cheers will cover the contradictory speeches and policies that George Woodrow delivers to his Wilsonian constituency. Rhetoric and popular delusions notwithstanding, Team Bush has carried forward a full-throttled program of radical Wilsonian internationalism covering the entire globalist waterfront:
* Payment of U.S. "back dues" to the UN;
* Endorsement of and praise for the UN Charter crafted by Soviet spy Alger Hiss;
* Huge funding increases for the IMF and World Bank;
* Support for further empowering the World Trade Organization;
* Support for creating the sovereignty-destroying Free Trade Area of the Americas;
* Strategic disarmament vis-a-vis Russia;
* Signing the UN's Persistent Organic Pollutants Convention;
* Strategic cave-in on the International Criminal Court;
* Embracing Russia, China, Syria, Iran, Libya, and other terrorist-sponsoring states in the bogus UN-led war on terrorism;
* Pushing a "Homeland Security" program that represents, arguably, the most far-reaching assault on American federalism since Franklin D. …