Replies

You wrote, "You contend that what has been come to be called the "Neo-Conservative" movement is not populist?

Yes, that is precisely what I contend. Look up every populist movement in the United States for the last 150 years or so, beginning with the Know Nothings, and then work your way forward. Neoconservativism is not a populist movement--it isn't even a movement, by any understanding of the term. It is a school of thought with a foreign policy emphasis.

You wrote, "As for the origin of the terms I'm unfamiliar with who coined them, but it seems to me that they both probably predate Buchanan."

No. The term 'paleo-conservative' does not predate Buchanan. Buchanan coined the term as an oppositional phrase to neo-conservativism.

You wrote, "I use the terms broadly, in the same sense as they are used by opponents of the two positions, in the interest of objectivity."

Not sure what you mean by 'in the interest of objectivity'. I can call a tulip a rose, but it is still a tulip, and even close friends will look at me sideways and roll their eyes if I insist upon doing so. You simply can't change the meaning of a word at will, particularly when engaged in reasoned debate.

Further, that bit about neoconservatives advocating a 'watered down socialism' was a bit over the top, particularly the part about the Reagan Administration being rife with neocon proponents of a hidden, quasi-socialist agenda. Like something out of a John Birch Society tract.

You wrote, "Similarly I use “paleo-conservative” in the same sense as the neo-cons use it. That is, anyone who basically disagrees with the modern movement and where it is going. This includes backsliders who seem to be supporting a more pragmatic approach to the war on terror."

Paleo-conservative is, after all, a fairly precise word naming a very specific group--a name that (again) they gave themselves. So it would be confusing to someone reasonably well informed on current political trends to throw the term around in a broad, all-encompassing way. Can you name an instance where a recognized, self-identified, neoconservative writer, thinker, columnist or pundit has used 'paleo-conservative' to describe someone other than the Buchanan crowd? No? Okay.

Lastly, what exactly do you mean by 'a more pragmatic approach to the war on terror'? By any chance, does this 'more pragmatic approach' involve selling out Israel?

I thought so.

I like how you ask a question and then answer it. Tell me do you still beat your wife? yeah I thought so.

Any way, I'll avoid using Paleoconservative in the future. It had seemed to me to be a negative style so I assumed, like the term neocon, it was originally used disparagingly to describe the ideology of traditional conservatism negatively as “old-fashion.” That is at least how it is commonly used here at FR, especially by those who identify themselves as neocons.

BTW, any movement that calls itself “grass roots,” or that justifies itself as the legitimate voice of the Greatest Number, especially in opposition to the established system, is a "populist movement." In that sense the so called “Conservative Movement” of the 80s-90s was a populist one. It had to be, the modern political system does not favor anything but populism. Indeed, you must claim to be against the establishment even if you are the establishment. Thats why elections often devolve into a mere exercise in voicing dissatisfaction with the current system, what ever it is. The socialists of the 20th century framed the debate, and established the rubrics.