The "New World Order"
George Bush and the Guardianship Presidency - by David Mervin.
David Mervin's assessment of the Bush presidency is
important for an understanding of the complexities of American politics in the late
twentieth century. It is well structured and offers a wealth of information which students
of the subject will find invaluable. It is always harder to offer a coherent analysis of a
patently non-ideological administration, particularly one that is sandwiched between the
activist, media conscious, two term presidencies of Reagan and Clinton.
Mervin is effective in explaining the inner drives and conflicts of the Bush
period through an examination not only of the President's complex personality but also of
the way in which those complexities imprinted themselves on the policy agenda of his
administration. The concept on which the book is based - that Bush was a 'guardian'
president in the mould of Eisenhower - is somewhat problematic. Mervin describes such
presidents as "reactive leaders" dealing with issues on a "case by case
basis". They have no grand designs in the LBJ mould but see governing as a
"limited activity", performing as a referee rather than a striker. The
difficulty here is that there has been no self-declared 'guardian' in the executive since
the days of Silent Cal Coolidge. Eisenhower's qualification for this label is debatable,
according to some historians. The modern political system, with its centrifugal power
dynamics, weak parties and hyperactive news media, makes it impossible for presidents to
shout from the touchlines.
The harsh environment of the post- FDR presidency dictates that presidents must
be high profile, decisive, focused or at least re-elected, else they be judged failures.
This is less a prejudice of academics, as Mervin suggests, than simple acceptance of
current realities. This leads us to question Bush's qualification for the title
'guardian'. Mervin's analysis indicates that the president blew hot and cold on this.
Would a true 'guardian' make so blunt a statement as "Read my lips, No New
Taxes"? Would he promise to be "The Education President",
talk of a "New World Order" or
declare war on drugs? It seems that Bush only saw himself as reactive and custodial when
it suited him politically. In 1988 he was "Ready from day one to be great
president." This is not a claim normally ascribed to 'guardians' in the White House.
Perhaps he changed his mind. Mervin rightly points out that Bush's concept of
behind-the-scenes leadership and bargaining skills were simply not enough for a modern
president, though it could be argued that in this area the President and his senior
advisors, notably Darman and Sununu, were also inadequate.
Ultimately, the book's conclusion seems to be that Bush attempted to be a
'guardian' president and failed because his concepts of and performance in that role were
deficient. It should be noted that this might well be because the role of a 'guardian'
president is incompatible with the chaotic, decentralized, personality-driven atmosphere
of late twentieth century American politics.
