What is a Neoconservative?

An excerpt of a piece by Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

1. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.[/FONT]​
2. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.[/FONT]​
3. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.[/FONT]​
4. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.[/FONT]​
5. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They express no opposition to the welfare state.[/FONT]​
6. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.[/FONT]​
7. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.[/FONT]​
8. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.[/FONT]​
9. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.[/FONT]​
10. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.[/FONT]​
11. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.[/FONT]​
12. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.[/FONT]​
13. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.[/FONT]​
14. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.[/FONT]​
15. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists).[/FONT]​
16. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.[/FONT]​
17. [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party. [/FONT]​

Arlen f'n Specter is a neocon.

Neocon, or new conservative, means about as much as the label, "new left" when it was popular in the late 60s.

neocon

made up word by the left to try and discredit any conservative agenda they disagree with

the right has words for the left to so its whatever

A neoconservative is someone who is primarily concerned with national security. The term is also frequently used in the pejorative to mean a Jewish Conservative who supports Israel.

The claims in your post however are nothing but weak insults that aren't even rational thoughts.

Statements such as these are downright silly:

"They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised."


What does that even mean? Surely there are times when neutrality is wise and others when it is not. The statement like most are idiotic on their face.

That is why Ron Paul couldn't get elected if he was the only candidate running. I'd love to see him try to convince terrorist captors that he is on their side and wants all Americans out of the middle East. Let me know how that works out for you Ron.

RickWhite said:

The claims in your post however are nothing but weak insults that aren't even rational thoughts.

Statements such as these are downright silly:

"They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised."


What does that even mean? Surely there are times when neutrality is wise and others when it is not. The statement like most are idiotic on their face.

That is why Ron Paul couldn't get elected if he was the only candidate running. I'd love to see him try to convince terrorist captors that he is on their side and wants all Americans out of the middle East. Let me know how that works out for you Ron.

Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. Who wants to dis a kook who loves the constitution as Paul does, though?

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_196286.html

Q: What is a neoconservative and who are they?



Rich Lowry: Historically, 30 years ago it meant a former liberal who became a conservative. The cliche was because "they were mugged by reality," but it was because they saw the empirical failures of liberal welfare, state and foreign policies, and they were therefore less ideological than other conservatives and brought much more of a social science background to their argumentation.

They were associated with Irving Kristol's journal, the Public Interest, that had a lot of social-science pieces poking empirical holes in liberal theory. These people were former liberals, former Democrats, and in some cases former communists, but gradually over 30 years they really merged into the conservative mainstream, and the difference was very difficult to tell.

In fact, one of the foremost neoconservatives, Norman Podhoretz, wrote an obituary for this distinction several years ago because it just seemed to no longer matter. We've seen the rise of it again, first of all, with John McCain's candidacy in 2000, where the segment of conservatives that supported Sen. McCain tended to have more neo-kind of tendencies and tended to sort of self-consciously describe themselves as "neoconservatives," foremost among them Bill Kristol and David Brooks.

Neoconservatives are less skeptical of government than other conservatives. They are less worried about reducing the size of government, less enthusiastic about tax cuts, more concerned about forging national crusades that can tap either the American public's patriotism or its desire for reform. You saw this in McCain with his campaign finance proposal and a little bit in his foreign policy.

And with the war on terror, you saw neoconservatives emerging as a distinct tendency within conservatism, mostly on foreign policy; its hallmarks being extreme interventionism, extremely idealistic foreign policy, and emphasis on democracy building and spreading human rights and freedom and an overestimation, in my view, of how easy it is to spread democracy and liberty to spots in the world where it doesn't exist currently.

"Neo-conservatism entails support for the following: consensus politics, organic society, religion, duty, authority, state interventionism, paternalism, natural hierarchy, defending tradition, cautious pragmatism, a strong state, and nationalism.

Neo-liberalism entails support for the following: ideological conviction, individualism, reason, self-interest, freedom, free market, populism, equality of opportunity, challenge vested interests, radical reform, minimum state internationalism, and global commenrce."

source: Leach, Coxall & Robins 2002 pp199.

The context of this book is British politics; i dunno how much the definitions might change across the pond.

ruderalis88 said:

source: Leach, Coxall & Robins 2002 pp199.

The context of this book is British politics; i dunno how much the definitions might change across the pond.

Click to expand...

British school book?

Table of contents-

PART 5: ISSUES AND POLICIES
* The Policy Process
* Managing the Economy
* Delivering public services
* Tackling Poverty and Exclusion
* Racism, Ethnicity, Religion and Culture
* Gender and Feminism
* The Politics of the Environment
* Britain and the World: Foreign and Defence Policies
* Who Governs? Power and the New British Politics

ChChoda said:

British school book?

Table of contents-

PART 5: ISSUES AND POLICIES
* The Policy Process
* Managing the Economy
* Delivering public services
* Tackling Poverty and Exclusion
* Racism, Ethnicity, Religion and Culture
* Gender and Feminism
* The Politics of the Environment
* Britain and the World: Foreign and Defence Policies
* Who Governs? Power and the New British Politics

Click to expand...

suggested reading for year 1 for BA in politics (university)

whatever copy you googled is a different edition from mine but you get the idea!

thought it would be nice to do a post that wasn't just my opinion and could be backed up by more than wikipedia haha

It was Bill Kristol's dad, who founded the Weekly Standard, who coined the term. he meant it as those without so much of the social conservative agenda, but with the small government and national security agenda. I am proudly a neoconservative in that sense.

Economic conservatives who put a lot of trust in the free market, even though it doesn't work for about 99% of the populace...

Neoconservatism that purports to back "small government" while also pushing an outrageously costly and imperialist military is a contradiction. However that should not be surprising, many of the recent Neocon leaders, Cheney, Bush (the idiot, not the wimp) and yes Bill and Hillary Clinton advocate war but they themselves are Chickenhawks.

Neoconservatism = Rationalizing imperialism and rationalizing stealing your liberty to "protect you" . Even the way they name their secret police functions is Orwellian....Homeland Security ? The "Patriot Act"

It's no surprise that Chertoff the former head of Homeland Stupidity is now working in the private sector pushing the sale of invasive body scan technology for airports. And don't forget the Cheney / Haliburton blatant feeding at the pig trough.

buttery420 said:

Economic conservatives who put a lot of trust in the free market, even though it doesn't work for about 99% of the populace...

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree with you. Neoconservatives do not believe in the free market. They are not economic conservatives either. They SAY they are, but they aren't.

The free market, if we were allowed to have one, DOES work.

Sigh. Free market. I don't care what anyone says, I AM an economic conservative. And I can tell you that a totally free market works in the same way that smoking cures cancer. In the first place, there has never been a totally free market because there has never been an absence of those with power seeking to control it. it's a concept like absolute zero.

Would it work in theory? Depends on how you define work. The lag times for the correction made by the market are in many cases so long that they are not tolerable from a human perspective. Can market forces do a better job than the government in almost all cases? yes they can! But those who talk about totally free markets and no government at all are just mirror images of the wack job socialists who think we need no private sector.

According to Mark Levin (Liberty & Tyranny, pg1) the following, among other, exist:

Neoconservative = Concerned with National security.

Paleo-Conservatism = Concerned with preserving the culture.

Social-Conservatism = Concerned with faith and values.

Libertarianism = Concerned with personal liberty.

I am all of these. I think National security is more important now than ever before because we are facing a new enemy that is greater than any we have faced before. I think that culture and values are the cornerstone of a healthy, happy and productive society. Although I am not a religious person I think religion is one of the most expedient ways of ensuring morality and values even if not perfect. And I am concerned with individual liberties although I find hard core Libertarians to be over the edge at times.

In my estimation we are facing two of the biggest threats we have ever faced - radical Islam and radical left thinking. There is no greater antithesis to social health than moral relativism IMO.

Illegal Smile said:

Sigh. Free market. I don't care what anyone says, I AM an economic conservative. And I can tell you that a totally free market works in the same way that smoking cures cancer. In the first place, there has never been a totally free market because there has never been an absence of those with power seeking to control it. it's a concept like absolute zero.

Would it work in theory? Depends on how you define work. The lag times for the correction made by the market are in many cases so long that they are not tolerable from a human perspective. Can market forces do a better job than the government in almost all cases? yes they can! But those who talk about totally free markets and no government at all are just mirror images of the wack job socialists who think we need no private sector.

Click to expand...

If you are an economic conservative you must be alarmed by this right?

http://www.borgenproject.org/Defense_Spending.htmlvative,

-Sigh- There goes my theory that pot smokers are more enlightened. I'm guessing most of you who identify with the neo-conservative label come from the US?

buttery420 said:

-Sigh- There goes my theory that pot smokers are more enlightened. I'm guessing most of you who identify with the neo-conservative label come from the US?

Click to expand...

Pot smokers enlightened? Some are, some aren't. If you don't believe in freedom, what do you suggest is better?