Posted on 12/28/2013 4:51:25 AM PST by Olog-hai
… There are a number of differences between conservatives operating in the William F. Buckley Jr./Ronald Reagan tradition and neoconservatives operating in the Irving Kristol/George W. Bush tradition. Here are three, and I’ll use Kristol’s own words to explain it.*
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Neoconservatives are more interested in being popular than doing the right thing.
srbfl
Neoconservatives are opportunists who want to control the levers of powers so they can hold on to the money left to them by their fathers and grandfathers.
Democratizing the Palestinians worked pretty well. Their people proved they support radicals at the ballot box, making it easier for Israel not to have to negotiate with them. And they started infighting between themselves for internal power more than fighting Israel.
While destroying the value of said money. Funny how mammon-worship works, isn’t it?
“Socialist Conservatives:
This is a major element of neoconservatism. What then is a neoconservative?
Briefly, he is an opponent of Communism but a supporter of socialism and internationalism. Lenin’s once revered partner in crime, Leon Trotsky, was perhaps the first neoconservative, although a case can be made that Karl Marx himself was a neocon. The acknowledged “godfather” of this movement in our nation in recent years is Irving Kristol. In his 1995 book, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, Kristol announced what it means to him:
We are conservative, but different in certain respects from the conservatism of the Republican Party. We accepted the New Deal in principle, and had little affection for the kind of isolationism that then permeated American conservatism.
So, neocons are for the New Deal — which is socialism. And they despise “isolationism,” which means Kristol and his neocon friends are internationalists. In a 1993 article appearing in the Wall Street Journal, Kristol expressed his enthusiasm for Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, Medicaid, even cash allowances for unwed mothers. You won’t find a neocon opposing the UN, although he might issue a recommendation merely to reform the world organization. And you certainly won’t find any neocon challenging the growth of big government because they love big government.
A major problem in America is that these neocons have taken over the conservative wing of the Republican party. And they have succeeded in doing so to the degree that the word “conservative” is now being applied to individuals and ideas that are, in fact, liberal (in the leftist sense), socialist, and totally undeserving of the conservative label. It pains me when someone describes himself to me as a conservative. It pains me even more when that label is applied to me. I’ve actually adopted a policy of asking that I at least be called a “constitutional conservative.” That separates me from the so-called conservatism of most leading Republicans — which has really become neoconservatism.”
much more at link:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/15568-the-pied-pipers-of-neoconservatism
Neoconservatives (AKA Moderates) are lying manipulative bottom feeding scum who will happily hand a race to their democrat masters as a means of holding a few crumbs of power.
They’re like concentration camp kapos who sell the rest of us out for a few extra rations for themselves.
Neoconservatives are former Democrats who got kicked out of the Democratic party by the extreme left, IMHO.
While it is good to describe neocons and their faults, it is far more important to describe real conservatives, and yes, their agenda.
Importantly, the agenda of conservatives is not uniform, and has many sharp disagreements over both ends and means. However, the Tea Party has coalesced around two clear concepts that really define modern conservatism.
1) The federal government is vastly too large, with most of it based on unconstitutional grounds. It is also severely out of balance with the states and the people, as well as internally, with the three branches needing extensive reforms.
2) The way to correct this disaster is to, first, get rid of Republicans in power who support and uphold this terrible status quo, or arrogantly assume they can manage the disaster while still retaining its worst features. Each one of them doing worse damage than a dozen radical Democrats, by betraying and undermining conservatism from within. Their removal from office and the seats of power is a gradual, but determined process, that will not end.
“Neoconservative” is code for formerly leftist Jew. The original neocons came to the conclusion one day that the heart of anti-Semitism in the world was the European Left and that the only defenders of Israel were the American Christian conservatives. But they still retain much of their leftist beliefs.
That whole movement should have been sent out to sea on a burning trash barge. Only a flaming @sshole would consider it a worthwhile venture to p!ss away thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars on a military campaign to establish and prop up a foreign government in which --- get this -- Islam is enshrined in its constitution as its official state religion.
Modern technology would allow us to decentralize the legislative branch back into their own constituencies. Then they can legislate via teleconference with their constituents right there to hold their feet to the fire. No popularity contests except with their bosses, THE PEOPLE.
I would go so far as to sequester senators and representatives in their respective states and districts while in session. I would also require them to hire from within.
You nailed it. Neocon = kapo!
Excellent. This would require an amendment. But it might be the best amendment since the Bill of Rights.
It would make things a lot tougher for the lobbyists too.
A perverse flavor of neo-con is an essential component of the ILL-ANNOY Combine. When neo-cons partner with progressives they protect the ruling class at the expense of the taxpayer. This result gives us so-called Conservatives who are pro gay marriage, pro abortion, pro higher taxes especially after the evil “rich”. The two party system collapses into a class system.
I know about Iraq’s constitution. Not only is it a Sharia constitution, but the government’s foreign policy recognizes Israel as their number-one regional enemy.
As conservatives, we conserve, and, by definition, that’s conserve some tradition or long-standing practice or way of life. The question is: which one?
The answer is the Constitution grounded in Judeo-Christian values (though not mandating them, other than what’s in the Constitution). One of those values is humility, which means non-interventionism. See http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/2013/04/conservative-credo.html
Neocons want to conserve something, but it’s “new”, a modified progressivism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.