Replies

The analogical dimensions of the metaphorical use of "Jacobin" seem to have thrown some off from the wider argument. The issue really should not be whether the excesses of neocons are comparable to those of the French Revolution, as some seem to have wandered off. It's not a question of "higher" or "lower" orders of society or whether some are more or less worthy of rights of liberty or access to the benefits of a free society based on constitutional republic models of liberty. And it's certainly not a question of returning to a pre-18th-century "divine right of kings" form of statism.

The main issue should be focused on the historical dimensions of developments in British and Anglo-American culture which rendered the kind of society in the 13 British colonies possible. Now, that doesn't exist in Iraq. If nominal "conservatives" are confused by the arguments between theoretical neocons and scholarly paleocons, between the Jaffaites and Kirkians, concerning the cultural and historical dimensions of political orders, they should contemplate more ponderously what is actually happening in Iraq. A good example of the differences in culture recently was exhibited in these photos of the abuse of prisoners. It may have seemed "funny" and just "fine" for the U.S. soldiers to apply some Porky's-style locker-room hazing of the Iraqis, with masturbatory and homoerotic taunting as one might find in a U.S. public school or surely in the adolescent experience of, say, Bill Clinton. Iraqis, as historic Muslims have a DIFFERENT cultural understanding of nudity and the sadomasochistic nature of Iraqi culture is DIFFERENT from the sadomasochistic nature of American neo-Puritan culture. Cultures are DIFFERENT and have different HISTORIES. The question is whether a society with a VERY DIFFERENT "culture" and "history" might also have a DIFFERENT kind of political and social order. The historical experience is that they do.

Whether a group of intellectuals from Columbia University or Harvard could sit around in a thinktank with a bunch of social studies textbooks and maps and redesign the entire world to fit the lifestyle expectations of surbanites from Westchester, Montgomery, and Fairfax County is a legitimate issue for conservative theorists to debate. Granted, Ryn may not be the most articulate or diplomatic proponent of the debate. He's certainly not one of the kinder and gentler "puppies" of the race to take Chicago esoteric neo-Platonism lying down.

The issue of how to handle Islamo-fascist terrorism really ought to be removed from the Bell Curve mafia. And just for diplomatic purposes, it would be better for European Christians to take an interest in the subject.

Unfortunately, the European Christians are too busy trying to prop up their duct tape and chickenwire version of state socialism to worry much about the Middle East, unless it's a matter of a lucrative contract for an aeronautical or petrochemical firm.
The 'excesses' of the neoconservatives jolted us out of 1970s post-Vietnam posture of detente and accomodation. There's something to be said for that.
That Porky's-style photo-op has nothing to do with neoconservatives or American culture. It has everything to do with the propensity for bored rear-echelon troops, especially security-types, to behave badly. That this is the worst act documented, given two years of constant conflict, says more about the basic decency of the US soldier then it does about homoeroticism in Western civilization. Or how it applies to Islam.
All those (I mean the Lew Rockwell types) who argue against neoconservatism have failed to propose their own policy for defeating Islamic fundamentalism. They know what they are against, but don't seem to know what their for, except perhaps a return to Jefferson's mythical republic of the yeoman farmer.
Neoconservatism as it exists today means the will to employ US power to defeat those who wish to destroy us, and to dissuade those who wish to rival us from attempting to do so. That's not imperialism, and it's not jacobinism either.
It is in our national interest to defeat evil where we can. To paraphrase an old saw, American hegenomy is the worst kind, except for all the others.