Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: u-89
Do you really think of Dwight Eisenhower and Herbert Hoover (??????) as conservatives when in office? Have you studied their policies in office?

You keep on omitting Kristol's reference to Ronald Reagan as a "neo-conservative" 20th Century hero, according to Kristol. Why? And why no ellipsis to tip people off to the omission?

130 posted on 08/22/2003 9:16:24 AM PDT by BlackElk ( We're off to hunt the RINOs, the RINOs who want to rule Oz! Becuz, becuz, becuz.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk
>Do you really think of Dwight Eisenhower and Herbert Hoover (??????) as conservatives when in office?

No I don't and I never claimed them to be.

>You keep on omitting Kristol's reference to Ronald Reagan as a "neo-conservative" 20th Century hero, according to Kristol. Why? And why no ellipsis to tip people off to the omission?

I did that to avoid my critique of neooconservatism from getting side tracked to a discussion of the cold war since most conservatives have a knee jerk admiration for the cold war - any criticism would result in a barrage of posts but damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.

Kritsol made it clear that on domestic issues he is no Reaganite. Reagan was against the welfare state and high taxes. Kristol admits he needs the latter to fuel the former which he sees as a virtue not a vice. What attracts neocons to Reagan then? An aggressive foreign policy i.e. meddling in other countries affairs.

The cold war is an odd and multifaceted event which served many purposes. It was an excuse for the US to keep troops around the world post W.W.II and to expand US influence i.e. build an empire. For New Dealers it was an opportunity for socialist wealth redistribution on a global scale in the guise of foreign aid to keep communism out (funny how we bribed foreign governments to keep the Soviets out while we sent in Marxist US advisors to help their economies but that is another story). See the above W.F.Buckly quote as to how it helped domestic socialism. The arms race, maintaining a large military and supplying guerillas and anti-Communists globally was very profitable for the military-industrial complex.

There are other purposes and reasons but the point is Reagan was an establishment outsider and a true believer in the evils of communism and he wanted to defeat it. The US governing establishment saw the cold war as a perpetually useful tool. That is why Reagan was so opposed. The neocons however were jaded communists and had it in for the Soviet Union which to them betrayed the socialist revolution. Kristol and company may have modified the extreme socialist views of their youth but they still have the passion for world revolution i.e. to remake the world in their image. Kristol admits this. Reagan was a natural vehicle to further their grand designs for mankind. Now they see the war on terrorism as an opportunity. Luckily for them the enemy is nebulous and can be construed to be anywhere they set their sights.

143 posted on 08/22/2003 11:07:50 AM PDT by u-89
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson