{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022803114571746386, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00389321468298109, 'mean_word_length': 5.425, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Rituals of Power: Theory, Languages, and Vernaculars of International Relations

There have been many signs of exasperation at the seeming inability of US foreign-policy makers, following the end of the Cold War, to properly envision a "New World Order." This dissatisfaction was expressed in the 1995 summer issue of Dcedalus entitled "The Quest for World Order" (hereafter, "The Quest").1 Underscoring its significance, this issue followed two others dedicated equally to the post-Cold War conditions of the world order.2 It also commemorated the thirty-year anniversary of an antecedent volume on the same subject.3 I, too, appreciate the importance of these issues and I will take the thrust of their combined views as context for the present article. In the first instance, the Daedalus issue demonstrates that the quest for world order has exerted considerable influence on the collective consciousness of scholars and politicians throughout the world during this century. Indeed, the degree to which the tumultuous events of the two world wars and the collapse of the Soviet Union undermined existing political and ideological conventions compelled humanity to confront modern pathologies, including wars on global scale. The historical denouements of these events also highlighted the enduring condition of global interdependence and, as such, provided unparalleled opportunities for opinionmakers and policymakers to envisage new forms of politics, with particular attention to the mechanisms of global governance, or world order. In the second instance, the recurrence of the subject of world order in the pages of Daedalus and elsewhere, taken together with the structure of the related debate, demonstrates a conscious determination by "networks of knowledge-based experts" to frame the