Replies

u-89 wrote: To sum it up these people are not conservatives at all, they have manufactured a NEW conservatism which is the antithesis of the traditional American variety.

Actually, paleoconservatism is more recent than neoconservatism.

And I don't believe may people would agree that paleocons, given their small numbers, are entitled to appoint themselves as arbiters of what is, and what is not, conservatism.

As a matter of fact, this business of the paleocons making common cause with hard-left liberals on so many issues leads me to think that paleocons should be drummed out of the conservative movement.

I didn't mention paleocons specifically nor hold them up as ideal model. I use the generic term of conservative and qualify it with traditional to separate those beliefs that were guiding the movement from those currently in vogue.

As far as drumming anyone out of the movement - you injected that. I believe that if the two camps of thought were honestly represented and inspected "conservatives" could then decide for themselves under which banner they will march. However judging by posts I regularly read here on FR many "conservatives" do not know or understand what neoconservatism is or unbelievably what conservatism is or historically was. That is why I believe threads like this are important. Personally I believe the neocon remake of the right is a fate accompli as far as the leadership goes, it is now a battle for the hearts and minds of the grassroots. If it weren't for the ongoing war on terror I do not think the grassroots would be as supportive of the neocon view of the world - foreign or domestic as they are now.

Regarding your assertion that paleos make common cause with leftist is not as damning as would seem to think. If I oppose punching you in the nose because I see it as morally wrong and a leftist does not want to punch you in the nose because he would rather punch you in the gut does not mean we are in solidarity because we both oppose punching you in the nose.

...paleocons should be drummed out of the conservative movement.

We want no part of your "conservative movement." "Paleo" merely refers to the "Old Right" principles conservatives used to espouse: very limitied government, low taxes, states' rights over federal control, etc. You will not find those principles among the likes of Kristol, Bush, Powell, Rice, et al. Sure, they may say they want smaller government, but their actions betray their true nature.

this business of the paleocons making common cause with hard-left liberals on so many issues leads me to think that paleocons should be drummed out of the conservative movement.

So the hard left is for doing away with most of FDR's policies, Social Security, Medicare, federally funded education, returning to a Constitutional government, morally and financially, etc.? Didn't think so. Seems the neocons in their 'more government is good for us' mantra fall in quite well with the liberal left. I suggest you get a compromise nailed down on foreign policy with the Democrats, then the vocal minority of the Republican party that believes the neocon line can just go join the Democrats

I'm sure the neos can get a good deal. Just look what they've 'compromised' this nation into within the past 30 years.

IF anything- the term "paleo conservative" is a made up term and it was made up by Neos to disparage and label all conservatives who don't sign onto to their worldly plans. I have yet to see someone label themselves a "Paleo conservartive" but plenty used to call themselves "neocons" back in the day when it was "cool"!

As a matter of fact, this business of the paleocons making common cause with hard-left liberals on so many issues leads me to think that paleocons should be drummed out of the conservative movement.

The real "paleo" conservatives left a long time ago.