Jump to content

Talk:New world order (politics)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Caregiver (talk | contribs) at 17:37, 17 November 2020 (→"Hitler also used the term in 1928"[5] - Link does not contain the term: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Peer review This article had a peer review that has been archived. It may contain ideas that you can use to improve this article.

Carl Schmitt

Should there be a mention of Carl Schmitt? --Rkos (talk) 18:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why and how you think he should be mentioned in the article. --Loremaster (talk) 18:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Schmitt wrote a book called "The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum". In Part I, Chapter 4, Schmitt defines "nomos" as the spatial constitution of a political order. The thrust of the book is that Europe created a spatially-oriented order in the colonial period of their history (as it emerged from the Respublica Christiana of the Medieval period), but that with the League of Nations and later the United Nations that spatial ordering of international politics/law was lost in an undifferentiated universalism. The question of the "new nomos of the earth" is more or less the same as asking the "new world order," but with a more specific theoretical/historical meaning.—Perceval 18:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weishaupt

Adam Weishaupt advocated a nwo. The entire notion of the new world order was to replace the old world order-holy roman empire. The American and French revolutions were one of the first moves towards this nwo when Napoleon arrested the Pope and seized the Papal States. There are many well referenced books written along this line of history. 72.161.237.209 (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide reliable sources to support your claims. --Loremaster (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No disambiguation?

The term has been used in several cases, as the article shows. I also think they have enough importance to merit at least a redirect to another page. And something under "see also." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.98.244 (talk) 00:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sterile

This article is so absolutely antiseptic in content that I'm scared to even edit it for fear that what I edit will be deleted promptly. Even the quote attributed to Noam Chomsky makes it appear that his view on the subject is less radical than it actually is. I don't understand people who edit articles that only have a dispassionate interest in the subject. It makes me wonder where they're coming from, and furthermore, what their motive is. Not that they'd ever tell me. I choose not to respond to a defense of these statements. Any goading into an argument about what should be done to improve this article seems pointless. I believe that the ones who edit articles like this know how to improve them but for some reason choose not to. It's just a belief. Lighthead þ 02:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wilson's Fourteen Points

Where exactly does he use the phrase "new world order" in that speech? Here is the full text, for reference: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/President_Wilson%27s_Fourteen_Points 67.87.199.20 (talk) 03:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added some explanation on that point in this edit. It doesn't seem that Wilson used the exact phrase "new world order" in any prominent public speech; however, he did use similar phrases, and the exact phrase was being used at that time in the period toward the end of after the First World War. Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 08:32, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on New world order (politics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New World Order

What has caused the wording error in the first paragraph ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.64.15 (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are referring to. What specific wording error in the first paragraph? Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Hitler also used the term in 1928"[5] - Link does not contain the term

The page currently includes "Hitler also used the term in 1928."[5]

The "[5]" links to https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-0IryYbwVIPGFodSS/Hitler%20-%20New%20World%20Order%20%281928%29_djvu.txt That file does not contain the term "New World Order". Nor does it contain the term "New Order" (which Hitler did use elsewhere). There are 168 references to "order".

It does discuss a hypothetical war between France and Germany, stating that France would be "under the protection of a new world coalition", so "Germany would be exposed to the concentrated attacks of all Western Europe."

Hitler did not write "new world coalition" (meaning "Western Europe") with the same meaning as "new world order". Hitler was not idealizing a new world order. The new world order was an impediment to his ambitions.

Should the inclusion of Hitler's 1928 writing be eliminated or stated differently on this page? Readers may think Hitler championed the idea of a New World Order, and for that reason we should fight against the New World Order.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_world_order_(politics)&oldid=989207253"