You force me to post a link to my STEPHEN SCHWARTZ'S STENCH
What is a modern Trotskyist, I mean what do they take away from this 20s origin movement? World wide revolution but no longer for communism but for democratic socialism -- sort of like big govt. that does not act like big govt. -- cyrpto-socialist state (I just coined that copyright pending).
I think the Trotskyist's fear nationalism. They hate ideas of borders-an evolution from the slogan "workers of the world unite" to maybe something like "citizens of the world unite." Citizens that are uni-racial, uni-cultural, uni-you name it. In other words it is the elimination of all things that make humans conflict with each other. To do so you need a strong hand to smash people into place when they don't act homogenized. That is why the laughable pronouncements that Iraq, after the war would somehow transform itself to a selfless democracy.
That is the key I think to understanding neocons--their ideal for selfless actions as a policy guide, which itself is of socialist origin. I know it sounds decent and even Christian, but what motivates people is selfish interests. The same selfish interests that guide Adam Smith's invisible hand of capitalism also guides our democracy.
Being selfish in your own self interest seems not to be a good policy taken individually but applied on a mass scale it is the only system that works. Neocon policy is to IGNORE national self-interest, Sure they may dress up policy in patriotic terms-being that they are also Plato-Straussians (lie to the people for their own good and let the elite govern)- but their actions are geared to one thing--the elimination of nations - of borders-and thus conflict. Yes, some are Jews-because a philosophy geared to the elimination of conflict based on ethnic or religious status would appeal to many Jews. The fear of the return of a nationalist fueled monster like Hitler animates the nightmares of the neocons. You see it in how they call all their enemies "Hitlers". Milosevic is Hitler, Saddam is Hitler, Osama is Hitler. Hell all that that Mad-Cow Albright did was talk about Munich's lessons as her justification for her policies in the Balkans against Serbia. Bill Clinton stated that WW2 began in the Balkans on national television-talk about neocon Freudian slips! (Poland by the way is nowhere near the Balkans).
Neocons, also betray their roots in how they attack those against them-calling them traitors, putting them on the defensive, etc. These denounciation tactics are a legacy of the leftists.
Trotsky sure sets you off. I guarantee he has little influence in America, little influence on the neo-conservatives and junior influence in the growth of world wide communism. You inflate him and give him too much credit. Just like his devotees. Perhaps in Europe Trotsky gets debated and discussed. Not in America.
Seems a lot of people are trying to denigrate neo-conservatism by tying it to Leon Trotsky.
World wide revolution was preached by practically every communist. Lenin, certainly. Does the "ghost of Lenin" haunt "neo-conservatism" too? I guess I just don't understand why Trotsky is singled out
Neocon policy is to IGNORE national self-interest,
Yeah I guess that's why we pre-emptively struck Iraq
Sure they may dress up policy in patriotic terms
Ok I get it, what's going on is that you've got a policy disagreement with the "neocons" (they think attacking Iraq was in our self-interest, you don't) and because you can't argue with them on their terms using rational arguments and objective facts, you've decided to try to claim that "they're not really interested in national interest in the first place". In other words you're begging the question and assuming that the thing you believe (attacking Iraq not in our nat'l interest) has already been proven, which it hasn't.
I understand now.