On the whole disconcerting discourse, let alone demagoguery, over the challenges confronting the rules-based order, international law, diplomatic relations, national sovereignty, and global power politics, the Venezuelan experiment is off the charts.

It’s important to unbundle the threat of US imperialism, the mad race for hegemony, the trade and tariff wars, the supranational role of an industrial military complex, the dominance of the US dollar in the global economy, the bastardization of the UN Charter, the “mutually-hurting diplomatic stalemate.”

However conflicted the worldviews, ideologies, schools of thought are on the subject, everything screams for a common ground to “relax” the continuous stream of historical, disciplinary, policy worldviews, diplomatic “resets” obtaining since that fateful 3rd of January 2026.

The perceived US supremacy on two major fronts buoys up its image as a hegemon, namely: a) the almighty dollar, and b) as the misshapen world’s policeman. Thus, on both the global economy and world peace, it has professed, even proved, and sustained its dominance and reign over both.

In its last attempt to reassert itself as an economic and military superpower in the Western Hemisphere bar none, it has revealed by clear optics and its chronic rhetoric under the guise of expert formularies by global thinkers what the US really means to the global order.

The most commonly shared belief is that it swept into the dustbin any reverence for international law, a rules-based order, a non-hostile sense of global family. Unabashedly, President Donald Trump behaves cavalierly, arrogantly, and spews comments with racist undertones. It’s antithetical to what Farazmand (2002) said when he divined the new world order as a “system of collective world security where states and peoples can live in peace with each other, ideologies aside.”

By my readers’ leave, this author takes occasion to prescribe the choice that does away with hierarchies and pyramids to “nobody-in-charge systems,” or what Charles Lindblom terms a “mutual adjustment in a generally understood environment” (Harlan Cleveland, 2002).

More concretely, Cleveland argued, viz: “The real-life management of peace worldwide seems bound to require a Madisonian world of bargains and accommodations among national and functional ‘factions,’ a world in which people are able to agree on what to do next together without feeling the need (or being dragooned by some global government) to agree on religious creeds, economic canons, or political credos.”

Before the US takes us through storms any further, the rest of humankind must take a stand against a global dragon, as it were. Why should a hungry insatiable giant take the shores of Greenland when its nationals and sovereign do not want strangers to lead the way?

A critical article, “Global Politics: Is It an Un-centralizing New World Order?” (Public Policy, Vol.12 & 13; 2014-2015), lays down the whole intellectual horizon that makes up what global politics is through various disciplinary lenses and leading lights in the fields, “a one-stop shop,” if you will, for anything and everything worthy to be grasped and understood about its close relation to contemporary events, not the least, the Venezuelan experiment.

With it as a backgrounder, it would then be easy to draw disciplinary insights and reflections of various scholars and authors on the questioned global order that places US national security high in the pecking order.

In the globalizing modern world, no country defines what hostility is, more so what’s important to US national security in the Western Hemisphere. Trump’s furtherance of the Monroe doctrine of 1823 purportedly cited in the 2025 National Security Strategy must not warrant the United States to reassert or enforce it after years of purported “neglect.”

Quite questionably, it aims to deny “non-hemispheric competitors,” specifically European powers, from “recolonizing newly independent Latin American nations,” yet it aims for a corporate takeover of “strategically vital assets” of Greenland. The large island doesn’t belong to America but to the Kingdom of Denmark. Neither can it de facto be under US control without validating that Taiwan and the Philippines already are.