This has confused me for some time and this article helped a little.Can someone list 5 or 6 well known neocons. Perhaps some examples will help.
Posted on 05/03/2003 8:44:59 AM PDT by quidnunc
To the contrary, paleos are more akin to crypto-fascists than they are to mainstream conservatives or neo-conservatives.
And you're using someone who doesn't even call himself a conservative as "evidence" in support of that ridiculous conclusion?
By the way, it wasn't paleos who teamed up with Democrats to enact the proto-fascistic HMO Act in 1973, as well as various other forms of corporate welfare down through the years.
This has confused me for some time and this article helped a little.Can someone list 5 or 6 well known neocons. Perhaps some examples will help.
I agree, so do they. So why are you calling them paleo-cons? They -- most of them -- call themselves libertarians. That was the point I raised, this "paleo-con" terminology is confusing. We have two distinctly different definitions of paleo-cons, one a member in good standing of the conservative family, the other painted as evil. We'll never get anywhere with this discussion unless everyone agrees to the same system of labels.
Some who are often referred to as neo-conservatives are William Kristol, David Frum, Norman Podhoretz, Bill Bennett, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Jeanne Kirkpatrick.
Personally I think the differences between mainstream conservatives and 'neo-cons' are overr-hyped.
Although the term was originally applied to a group of liberals who began to adopt some conservative notions, it's come to be understood as applying to the school of thought generated by these individuals, and those who continue to follow it (regardless of whether they started out liberal).
The school of thought (warning: about to receive a description by someone critical of their thought) is, by all indications, characterized by the same evangelical zeal that drives liberals to believe that government is the savior - except neocons apply it globally. They believe countries throughout the world must be made to reform their ways, at gunpoint if necessary. Unfortunately, this results (as I see it anyway) in a less-than-complete willingness to reform our own country in its slide towards socialism. That kinda seems to get put on the back burner.
Well, we have to call them something.
Seriously, they started calling themselves paleo-conservatives and that seems as good a title as anything because when one refers to paleo-conservatives or paleo-cons there's not much doubt as to who is being discussed.
Who?? That's my problem. Name some who do. The ones Frum named do not.
Ummmmm, the reason they're despised is not because of their heritage. God bless them if they're Jewish. They're God's Chosen People. The reason many neocons are not conservative is the fact that instead of calling for a smaller government as conservatives used to do, they call for a government to push their agenda, and while some aspects are conservative in nature it is not a true conservative position to want the national government involved in every aspect of a person's daily life
Or did I misread the latest agenda for nationailized healthcare, 15 billion for AIDS in Africa, more Patriot Act nonsense, and 2 billion for hydrogen cars all from a Republican administration. Spending the taxpayers' money on unconstituional actions and boondoggle research doesn't sound very conservative to me
True. Interestingly, as far as I know not all of these people actually ARE "neo-conservatives" (=new conservatives who used to be socialist..)
Unless I'm wrong, which I don't think I am.
How about them? Not a "neo-conservative" among them, unless perhaps Jacoby and/or Krauthammer were socialists in their youth (I'm fairly sure the others weren't)
Although the term was originally applied to a group of liberals who began to adopt some conservative notions, it's come to be understood as applying to the school of thought generated by these individuals, and those who continue to follow it (regardless of whether they started out liberal).
It sure has, it has "come to be understood" as something which it doesn't actually mean, that's for sure.
That's what this article is about.
Seriously, what sense does it make to take the term "neo-conservative" and slap it onto George Will? when wasn't he a conservative?
Words mean things. If you think you have identified a school of thought here, try finding a term which actually describes that school of thought. To take the term "neo-conservative" and paste it over this school of thought is ridiculous,
words mean things! Ann Coulter is not a "neo" conservative!
The school of thought (warning: about to receive a description by someone critical of their thought) is, by all indications, characterized by the same evangelical zeal that drives liberals to believe that government is the savior - except neocons apply it globally. They believe countries throughout the world must be made to reform their ways, at gunpoint if necessary. Unfortunately, this results (as I see it anyway) in a less-than-complete willingness to reform our own country in its slide towards socialism.
This sounds like it might actually be an interesting school of thought to pay attention to and understand, if it actually exists as a coherent political force. However, just what the heck you think it has to do with the term "neo-conservative" a la Irving Kristol is beyond me.
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.