The Neocon War on Peace and Freedom, Part 1

Future of Freedom Foundation ^ | 18 Feb. 04 | James Bovard

[realpatriot71]

Now, there is potentially a legimate complaint about using Patriot Act provisions for non-terrorism-related investigations.

My point was made then :-)

[u-89]

>Do you know what a neo-conservative really is? A libertarian who took a hard right hand to the jaw from a concept none of us can avoid...reality.

Where did you get that definition from? There is nothing now and never was historically anything libertarian in neoconservative thought. If you care to read any of their biographies or have ever heard them speak on C-Span or watched documentaries on PBS you'll see that they readily admit they were Trotskyites. That means followers of Leon Trotsky, the Trotsky of the communist revolution in Russia fame. They are not ashamed of this past either, they're rather proud of it. In fact they're rather snooty about it. Trotskyites were "high brow" and Stalinists were "low brow" to quote Kristol.

The trouble they had with Stalin was he worked toward consolidating his power in Russia rather than immediately pushing for a global socialist revolution. That made him a traitor to the revolution in thier eyes. The neocons in their youth dreamed of a world wide socialist revolution. Today they want to remake the Muslim culture of a billion people and spread "democracy" to the entire world through force of arms. You see, they never lost their world revolutionary zeal but they do suffer from delusions of grandeur.

Please notice the Kristol quote from post #105. Here it is again:

-" foreign policy... a great power, the "national interest" is not a geographical term..... A smaller nation might appropriately feel that its national interest begins and ends at its borders, so that its foreign policy is almost always in a defensive mode. A larger nation has more extensive interests. And large nations, whose identity is ideological, like the Soviet Union of yesteryear and the United States of today, inevitably have ideological interests "

Please note here he sees the United States in the same light as the Soviet Union i.e. a vehicle, a mighty government vehicle for spreading his ideology of the moment around the globe. Now given the man's background and examining his current writings how can anyone conclude he is a conservative let alone a libertarian?