Neoconservativism and Paleoconservatism: Defininition and Origins Thereof

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ^ | Unattributed

[rmlew]

Some honesty is needed. Neos are more willing to support an activist government. However, they opposed Clinton, and were key in killing Hillary Care.
As for Marxist structures, why is it that they all oppose the war on terror.

[JohnGalt]

Lets be clear Kraut objected to it because of Bill Clinton, he was rather vague as I recall, on the reasoning in general. National Review was much of the same but they had yet to purge the rest of the Mainstream Conservatives.

PCR and PJB are Beltway paleocons, true which I distinguish from the real thing. I did not intend to call them fusionists; I reserved that designation to WF 'Big Government for the Duration" Buckley.

[JohnGalt]

Like I said, neo's have been prone to accept the Marxist construct (didn't we have a conversation about this the other day?) and I appreciate your efforts to prove my point.


Neo's have no objection to Big Government run by "conservatives." As I have noted in many posts, Bill Kristol did as much as anyone to defeat Hillary-care, for which he should be applauded, however, he was pretty quiet over the more recent boondoggle. I think he was tactically against Hillary-care rather than philosophically against.

[Bonaparte]

"Buckley is a 'fusionist' from the Cold War..."

What do you have against Edmund Burke and John Locke? I always thought these two were given places of honor in the conservative pantheon.

Or is it just that Buckley always rejected Rand and her objectivism?

[meema]

Oh Quid! Are we doing this again?

Well let's have at it!

[rmlew]

Lets be clear Kraut objected to it because of Bill Clinton, he was rather vague as I recall, on the reasoning in general. National Review was much of the same but they had yet to purge the rest of the Mainstream Conservatives.
1. Krauthammer seemed opposed to the misuse of the term "genocide" for mutual ethnic cleansing, and with the idea of the UN using NATO to punisha country for something less than actual genocide. On top of those concerns, Kraut had reasonable ones about the Clinton administration.
2.I wasn't aware of any purge of Buckleyite conservatives in Buckley's magazine.

PCR and PJB are Beltway paleocons, true which I distinguish from the real thing. I did not intend to call them fusionists; I reserved that designation to WF 'Big Government for the Duration" Buckley.
I don't think that this is a fair assesment of fusionist conservatism. Fusionists oppose domestic growth of government. However, they support the activist foreign policy and military-industrial complex inherent in Cold War confrontationalism.

[rmlew]

1. Bill Buckley was one of the founders of the Fusion Conservative movement. (Look it up on the web or read The Conservative Intellectual Tradition since 1945)
Fusionists are/were Cold War hawks who sought to roll back communism. However, they never had the dogma of universal democracy that catagorizes Neo-Conservatism.
Fusionists were cultural conservatives who supported smaller government at home.

2. Buckley (rightly) fired Joseph Sobran for his open anti-Semitism. Sam Francis never worked for National Review. Buckley has called Buchanan indifferent to his apparent anti-Semitism.
There is nothing inherently anti-Semitic about Paleo-Conservatives. Paul Gottfried and Don Feder are prominent paleoconservative Jews. However, the anti-Capitalist, conspiratorialist, anti-PC/anti-anti-rascist, Neo-Confederate, and isolationist subgrioups do lend themselves to anti-Semitism.

[Valin]

Oh boy! Everyone be nice.


Beeeeauuuutiful Dreamer! :-)

[Valin]

One reason to vote GOP?

If I may, another reason.
President Howard Dean.
Now if that doesn't send a shiver down your spine I don't know what will.

[Tailgunner Joe]

You said it!

Proud CONSERVATIVE here!

[Burkeman1]

Dean doesn't scare me as much as a "President Clark" or a "President Hillary Clinton" would scare me- but it would be pretty bad. The number one reason for voting GOP is the Supreme Court. Number two is that Republicans are adults and have a sense of right or wrong. Democrats are children and don't believe in right or wrong. They only believe in power. So even if you disagree with a Republican on a particular issue (war in Iraq for example)- alwyas know that it will only get worse if a Democrat gets into office.

[Burkeman1]

Well- that is a concern. I have to admit that I am less than impressed with how even Appellate court nominations have been handled by this administration to date.

But part of being a conservative is recognizing reality. Think like Edmund Burke. You don't just throw away what is in place because it is imperfect (that is juevenile and anti conservative) but work within it! It is not glamorous. It isn't heroic. No one will lionize you and propagate your speeches and writings for decades. Conservatism- true conservatism- is silent work done by men who will rarely if ever be recognized for their deeds or actions by the very nature of what they believe in. They don't start wars, they don't initiate "Great" public work progarms, and they don't create entire new agencies and beuracracies to solve "problems". That is the greatest weakness of conservatism in the age of mass communication. Of course there comes a time when even the most conservative patrician must recognize that his efforsts to save or preserve the existing order are futile as their is nothing left in that order that resembles anything of the tradition of past he believed in. It is at such a juncture that Reactionary politics should be embraced *and "reactionary" is not a bad word in my book. We are almost at that point but not quite. Give the GOP one more chance.

[billbears]

And I can recognize that and appreciate that point. However I still have concern because we well know that judges appointed by Republicans over the long term are not always conservative

[Burkeman1]

Thomas? Scalia? Pretty good records I would say. Souter? Very bad. O'Conner? Bad. Kennedy? Bad as well. I won't deny that it is possible that SC nominees named by a Republican President will turn out to be raving Liberals or half arsed "moderates" that side with the Left when it comes down it. But I will Gurantee that any nominee from a Democrat will be a near communist who sees no limit on Federal authority over the states.

[Valin]

No disagreement here. I used Howard the duck Dean's name as he's the front runner now.

"Democrats are children"
I long for the days when the democrats had some adults in leadership. They can't be trusted with power until they get some adults in charge. If they had the brains god gave an animal cracker they'd really start listening to Zell Miller.

[Burkeman1]

Don Feder actually surprises me. He changed to more "paleo" thought in his Boston Herald Column and then went on "sabatical" to write a book. I haven't heard much from him lately.

And I diagree with the anti semitism charge on most "paleos". A card thrown more often than American blacks throw the race card IMHO.

[rmlew]

Don Feder has a radio show and a website.

Regarind the charge fo anti-Semitism and paleos, I was pointing out that paleos are not anti-Semitic as a whole.

[Burkeman1]

Radio show? Available in Boston?

[Pyro7480]

. Paleoconservatism has recently become the principal operating philosophy of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI). In its publications and conferences it often champions pre-WWII ideas, such as isolationism, cultural homogeneity, and a deep suspicion of the market economy.

Wikipedia got this part wrong. ISI is, for the most part, traditionalist. They have strong connections to Russell Kirk's surviving family. Jeffrey O. Nelson, their publisher, is married to the daughter of Kirk, and the Kirk Center in Michigan and ISI hold yearly summer conferences at the Kirk residence in Mecosta. I should know, because I was a student member of ISI until 2002, and they're based in my home stae of Delaware, not even 5 miles from the house I grew up in. They are one of my favorite conservative organizations.

[rmlew]

FEDER LAUNCHS TALK SHOW ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003 . ON WTTT RADIO
November 4, 2003
For immediate release
For more information: (508) 405-1337
Don Feder, a former Boston Herald writer and syndicated columnist, began a daily talk show on WROL radio (950AM) in Boston, on Tuesday, March 18, 2003. Now he is moving to a brand new sister station in Boston, WTTT. The show ? airing from 6 to 9am, Monday through Friday ? covers local and national issues. WTTT is a brand new Salem Communications station, with affiliates across the country.

http://www.donfeder.com/