Posted on 11/19/2006 6:51:55 AM PST by shrinkermd
"...So, is neoconservatism dead?
Far from it. Neoconservative ideas have been vindicated again and again on a string of major issues, including the Cold War, Bosnia and NATO expansion.
It is the war in Iraq that has made "neocon" a dirty word, either because Bush's team woefully mismanaged the war or because the war (which neocons supported) was misconceived. But even if the invasion of Iraq proves to have been a mistake, that would not mean that the neoconservative belief in democracy as an antidote to troubles in the Middle East is wrong, nor would it confirm that neoconservatism's combination of strength with idealism is misguided.
Neoconservatism isn't dead; it can be renovated and returned to prominence, because, even today, it remains unrivaled as a guiding principle for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That should be a big warning sign. McCain is a useful idiot for the left. That is all he is.
One of the few positive things to have happened is that "Neocons" have been thoroughly discredited. Earth to Bill Kristol, don't promote a war, unless you have the balls to fight it.
Operation Comeback. How to Save the Neocons
American Enterprise Institute ^ | 11/1/06 | Joshua Muravchik
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1736193/posts
Posted on 11/10/2006 7:23:07 AM CST by Valin
TO: My Fellow Neoconservatives FROM: Joshua Muravchik RE: How to Save the Neocons
We neoconservatives have been through a startling few years. Who could have imagined six years ago that wild stories about our influence over U.S. foreign policy would reach the far corners of the globe? The loose group of us who felt impelled by the antics of the 1960s to migrate from the political left to right must have numbered fewer than 100. And we were proven losers at Washington’s power game: The left had driven us from the Democratic Party, stolen the “liberal” label, and successfully affixed to us the name “neoconservative.” In reality, of course, we don’t wield any of the power that contemporary legend attributes to us. Most of us don’t rise at the crack of dawn to report to powerful jobs in government. But it is true that our ideas have influenced the policies of President George W. Bush, as they did those of President Ronald Reagan. That does feel good. Our intellectual contributions helped to defeat communism in the last century and, God willing, they will help to defeat jihadism in this one. It also feels good to see that a number of young people and older converts are swelling our ranks.
The price of this success is that we are subjected to relentless obloquy. “Neocon” is now widely synonymous with “ultraconservative” or, for some, “dirty Jew.” A young Egyptian once said to me, “‘Neoconservative’ sounds to our ears like ‘terrorist’ sounds to yours.” I am shocked to hear that some among us, wearying of these attacks, are sidling away from the neocon label. Where is the joie de combat? The essential tenets of neoconservatism--belief that world peace is indivisible, that ideas are powerful, that freedom and democracy are universally valid, and that evil exists and must be confronted--are as valid today as when we first began. That is why we must continue to fight. But we need to sharpen our game. Here are some thoughts on how to do it:
(snip)
One of the few positive things to have happened is that "Neocons" have been thoroughly discredited
Really? How so?
Why are neo-cons considered a Republican phenomenon?
Disillusioned liberal intellectuals in the 1970s fled the New Left-dominated Democrat Party under a shower of insulting taunts from the extremists, "Neo-Cons!"
The liberals were too traditional, too patriotic, too pro-America for what is the Democrat Party.
The liberals did not want to "Bring it all down, man." They had to be purged and destroyed along with conservatives.
Pat Buchanan has referred to them as "McGovern boat people."
The Iraq war is seen as a Neocon concept. Therefor they lose all those who are against the war. Second, Neocons like Kristol and Aldlemaon, were quick to abandon the administration as soon as we had a few causualties in Iraq, thereby losing the support of those of us who believe that you don't start a war unless you have the stamina to win it. Therefore, I'd say they are thoroughly discredited. If you don't agree, please tell me who is taking those people seriously.
The terms "neocon" and "paleocon" are terms used by the left in an attempt to divide and conquer conservatives. The terms are used to appeal to any conservative who sees some other conservative as being not-conservative on an issue. It implies a present day erosion of conservatism when in reality there has always been differences amongst conservatives on issues.
In reality there is only conservatism and non-conservatism.
This is my understanding of it...
Pope Condemns Neoliberalism
"More and more, in many countries of America, a system known as "neoliberalism" prevails; based on a purely economic conception of the human person, this sytem considers profit and the law of the market as its only parameters, to the detriment of the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and peoples. At times this system has become the ideological justification for certain attitudes and behavior in the social and political spheres leading to the neglect of the weaker members of society. Indeed, the poor are becoming ever more numerous, victims of specific policies and structures which are often unjust."
from Ecclesia in America (No. 56), Report of the Synod of America
WHAT IS NEOLIBERALISM?
Neoliberalism is known in the United States as neoconservatism. Its Catholic proponents are Fr. John Neuhaus, George Weigel, Michael Novak and Fr. Robert Sirico. Their publications are available through the American Enterprise Institue, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the Acton Institute and First Things magazine.
1. The ideology of the Invisible Hand of the Market. The authority of the market is unchallenged. For many it is higher than God--an 'idolatry of the market' (Centesimus Annus, n.40).
2. Slave wages and unsafe working conditions in poor countries in maquiladoras (factories which belong to companies in the U.S. or other highly developed countries) and in some parts of the United States.
3. It is amazing that "free market" proponents are opposed to big government, but depend on the governments of wealthy nations for their protection in reaping enormous profits at the expense of the poor. Rather than laissez-faire, it is government- supported capitalism for the few.
4. Privatization of all public and state-owned enterprises.
5. Control of women's reproduction by companies, especially maquiladoras. Proof of no pregnancy frequently required.
6. Tax free zones (no help for the local community) and blackballing of union organizers wherever there are maquiladoras-arranged by the U. S. government.
7. Harsh austerity programs (Structural Adjustment) imposed on poor countries related to repayment of irresponsible loans from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
8. A World Trade Organization controlled by rich nations to the detriment of poorer ones. A "Group of Eight" well-to-do countries whose representatives meet regularly to plan the world economy.
9. Enormous transnational companies and trade agreements which destroy small businesses.
10. Agribusinesses, operating on a huge scale, which make it im-possible for small farmers to succeed in any country. Large companies patent seeds and plants, which have been developed for centuries by indigenous peoples, stealing them from the poor of the earth.
11. Huge discrepancies between CEO's making millions of dollars and the salaries of their workers in the United States, as well as in maquiladoras. (A Wal-Mart clerk would have to work 312 years to match the 1997 pay of the Wal-Mart CEO).
12. Government economic policies separated from the common good, making the defeat of inflation the goal above all other economic goals (e.g., Alan Greenspan at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department). A Catholic neoconservative has stated publicly that slave wages must be paid in poor countries in order to keep down inflation.
13. In neoliberalism the realization of social and ethical ideals is only in the response of the individual. It frees the state from any social and ethical responsibility. Thus, social policy is not necessary.
14. Neoliberalism is a cousin, maybe a first cousin of social Darwinism, where the fittest dictate all and take all.
15. Solidarity is out. Those who make money easily in this system with government support disavow the needy, deny funds for social needs, and blame the poor or their character or culture for their lack of material goods. Those who receive large stock bonuses often forget the worker who produced them.
16. Pernicious consumerist materialism promoted by advertising, even in poor, developing countries.
17. Neoliberalists/neoconservatives declare that the only alternatives are their policies are socialism or Communism. Not true! There are other ways! (e.g., Jeff Gates, The Ownership Solution, Addison Wesley, 1998.
Houston Catholic Worker, Vol. XIX, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1999.
To me neocons lives in the present and sees the future.. Paleocons live in the past and would like to turn back the clock....
Steve Sailor summed up the Neocon philosophy quite nicely: "Invite the world, invade the world." "Paleocons" are America first, traditional conservatives that agree with Washington's farewell address: "Avoid foreign entanglements." There is simply nothing conservative about exporting democracy and open borders. It's a fools game promoted by elites to further the aims of "The new world order". There is simply nothing conservative about exporting democracy and open borders. It's a fools game promoted by elites to further the aims of "The new world order". There is simply nothing conservative about exporting democracy and open borders. It's a fools game promoted by elites to further the aims of "The new world order".
Protecting the sovereignty of one's borders is conservative.
Removing dangerous dictators in this day and age of WMD is conservative.
The terms "Paeleocon" and "Neocon" are WP-type BS.
BTW, without the help of the "entangled" French army, George Washington and this conservative country may never have won the Revolution.
Congress declared war.This has been covered here on FR many times. Don't post such stale propaganda.
You have a strange definition of conservative. To me, conservative is having respect for law.
I've done nothing to disrespect the law. What a dopey comment.
Ping me only when you have something constructive to say. okay? Thanks.
BTW, only a global socialist such as yourself would think Saddam's Iraq was remarkably "sovereign".
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.