How are Poppy's NWO and Junior's PNAC/Pax Amerika related?

I never quite understood what the New World Order referred to. Did it simply mean the ever increasing levels of globalism possible in the aftermath of the Cold War? Was it just a meaningless euphemism providing coverage for the overt and non-overt exercise of American power?

Many of the things Clinton did might be viewed as continuation of policies started under Bush I. However if the elder Bush still believes in some form of World Order it must be different than W's fascism since he opposed his son's adventure in Iraq.

What he MEANT was that with the Cold War ending, there would be a new order to the world. This is true, and common sense. The bipolar system was gone.

It came out really pretty bad, but I don't think he actually meant it the way people read it.

PNAC is about a "new" world order alright - US at the head of the world because we won the Cold War and all the others suck. However, their method of starting wars to enforce this is self-defeating; American power looks better on paper and wars cost money that we have to borrow from the world we want to conquor.

... originated with George H.W. Bush (some say it originally came from Hitler, but it was the title of a tract by H.G. Wells written in 1939, which concerned world government and world democratic socialism).

I don't think there was any deep meaning in the phrase, and I doubt that it was the careful creation of GHWB, pregnant with meaning. Its first use by Bush was in the 1991 State of the Union address. At best, I think it was a speechwriter's attempt to enlarge the notion that there were so many coalition countries united to oust Hussein's troops from Kuwait.

There was so much posturing about this by the elder Bush that I think the phrase was yet more propaganda to disguise the facts (and there was an immense amount of propaganda unleashed in the run-up to that war and beyond).

Conspiracy theorists have made much of the phrase, but my own feeling is that it was a grand rhetorical stroke to conceal the obvious--the US wasn't acting to save a "democratic" country, it was acting principally as a mercenary force to do us and the Saudis a favor (if Iraq regained control of its former province, Kuwait, it might become more powerful than the Saudis). The elder Bush is so motivated by power and money that it was an excellent way to suggest a higher purpose for something that actually was just a bit dirty, in its origins and its execution.

But, certainly, there were people around GHWB who certainly intended it to mean more than that--they are the same people around the younger Bush now--and they mean something quite different by it than did GHWB.

Cheers.