A very interesting thought and a lengthy yet articulate ideological adventure by KRAUTHAMMER. Excellent. However, the central point is that political ideology is not driving the evolution of foreign policy - business is (look at the ideology in light of China for example).

The surge in internet stocks happened to coincide with the clinton admin's policy orientation, as the more mundane issues of energy policy and increasing global competition are facing a more business oriented Bush#2 admin.

The notion that "the New World Order...(was)..an orderly world with orderly rulers living in stable equilibrium" is not an accurate depiction of fact. It is about global capitalism and the profits of international conglomerates and their constituencies which permiate our government. In fact, it is about the Americanization of the world (nothing wrong with that). We want it, are achieving it, yet does the world desire to go along?

While it is plausible in the near term to accept the notion which the author sets forth: "In short, the Bush admin--if you like, neoconservatism in power--has been far more inclined to pursue democratic realism and to consign democratic globalism to the realm of aspiration. This kind of prudent circumspection is, in fact, a practical necessity for governing in the real world.... the distinction between democratic realism and democratic globalism may collapse, because globalism is simply not sustainable,"

The real cause of this prudence is economic development and expansion both domestically and internationally, in the near term and hopefully for the long term.

The author does get this right on point....globalism is not sustainable - at least not militaristically - but that is not the game...it is about commercialism. Remember the old adage, follow the money? We would not be pursuing our policy if it was not about the money. Our leaders are elected by powerful rich folks- if it was not about the money , they would not be in power.