Definition of a NeoCon?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Okay, I have been referred to several times (indirectly) as a "NeoCon" -- I'd like to know the difference between a republican, a conservative, and a neocon. I'm sure there will be differing opinions, but at least I'll be able to get a sense of exactly what kind of "name" I'm being called.

[ldb83]

Originally, it had mostly to do with foreign policy... the support of the use of the military to conquer autocratic governments and replace them with democracies. It's been extended to describe those who believe that the U.S. should have the responsibility of converting other countries to Christianity, but the real definition has less to do with religion and more to do with the government. Obviously though, those two spheres have been blending together a lot, so it makes sense to me.

[Charity]

The different "kinds" of Conservatives has always sort of bewildered me too.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Originally, it had mostly to do with foreign policy... the support of the use of the military to conquer autocratic governments and replace them with democracies.

Thanks, but I didn't ask for the term's origin. It rather confuses the issue, imho. I want to know NOW how the term "neocon" is defined and applied. (No offense intended.)

It's been extended to describe those who believe that the U.S. should have the responsibility of converting other countries to Christianity, ...

I thought that extension of definition was for "Fundies." I wasn't aware anyone associated the term "neocon" with religion directly at all.

but the real definition has less to do with religion and more to do with the government.

Meaning?

Obviously though, those two spheres have been blending together a lot, so it makes sense to me.

Which two spheres, religion and government? And their blending makes sense to you as the "new" definition of "neocon"? Just wanting to clarify your position.

[DoctorDoom]

NeoCon = NeoConservative.

Main Entry: ne-
Variant(s): or neo-
Function: combining form
Etymology: Greek, from neos new -- more at NEW
1 a : new : recent < Neogene > b : new and different period or form of < Neoplatonism > : in a new and different form or manner < Neoplatonic > c : New World < Neotropical > d : new and abnormal < neoplasm >

It's intended as an insult. The premise is that it's a new, perverted and evil version of conservatism that has no relation to classical conservatism. The term is typically used by people who call themselves liberals, but who are blissfully unaware of the nature of classical liberalism.

[Rink]

Here's what I picked up from Dictionary.com's site:

ne·o·con:
n. Informal
A neoconservative: “The neocons and hard-liners have long felt that no Soviet leader could be trusted” (New York Times).
---
NeoCon
n : a conservative who subscribes to neoconservativism
---
2 entries found for neoconservative.

ne·o·con·ser·va·tism also ne·o-con·ser·va·tism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-kn-sûrv-tzm)
n.
An intellectual and political movement in favor of political, economic, and social conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s: “The neo-conservatism of the 1980s is a replay of the New Conservatism of the 1950s, which was itself a replay of the New Era philosophy of the 1920s” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).

[ldb83]

Don't shoot! I'm just the messenger.

It's not my position, it's just what I've found and heard. I don't call people neoconservatives because it's kind of a buzzword and I really don't understand entirely what I'd be saying if I used it. All I've heard or learned about it is that it has mostly to do with supporting OUR government taking over OTHER governments to spread democracy. Some people have told me that you can interchange "democracy" there with "Christianity", because most neocons don't just want to spread democracy, but Christianity as well. That part makes sense to me, so for that I understand why that definition has been extended to Christianity.

That's all I got.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

It's intended as an insult.

THAT I picked up on immediately, LOL :smirky:

The premise is that it's a new, perverted and evil version of conservatism that has no relation to classical conservatism.

But how is neo-conservatism supposed to differ from classical conservatism? Isn't conservatism just conservatism, and the opposite of liberalism?

Inquiring minds are just trying to know, :smirky:

[Rink]

Might be Neoconservatives are more apt to be pro-active in world affairs in difference to that of what Pat Buchanan is, which is a conservative that espouses isolationism and protectionism?

I may be wrong but this is just what I'm getting from the useage of the term.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Some people have told me that you can interchange "democracy" there with "Christianity", because most neocons don't just want to spread democracy, but Christianity as well. That part makes sense to me, so for that I understand why that definition has been extended to Christianity.

This I don't agree with. As a conservatism, I DO think we have a responsibility to try to spread freedom whenever we are able and can, NOT force it, mind you. As a Christian it is my DUTY and responsibility to spread the Gospel, but I'm quite positive that is NOT the goal of conservatism in general, or conservatives at-large.

[Republican_Legion]

Might be Neoconservatives are more apt to be pro-active in world affairs in difference to that of what Pat Buchanan is, which is a conservative that espouses isolationism and protectionism?

I may be wrong but this is just what I'm getting from the useage of the term.

I agree with that. Pat Buchanan is a social and fiscal conservative but he is no neocon. I think a person can be a neocon but also be a liberal on economics and social issues like Jospeh Lieberman for example who is in my opinion a neocon.

[Rink]

Personally from what I'm getting the term 'neocon' boils down to who is an 'interventionalist to that of an isolationist' who is a globalist, to that of a protectionist.

Again I may be wrong but thats what again I'm getting from the useage of this name.

[Rink]

I agree with that. Pat Buchanan is a social and fiscal conservative but he is no neocon. I think a person can be a neocon but also be a liberal on economics and social issues like Jospeh Lieberman for example who is in my opinion a neocon.

Pat of late has been calling those associated with the Bush administrations 'neocons' and has steadfastly renounced globalism and interventiaonalism that he feels is wrong.

Its one part Globalism and one part global econonomism, in difference to that of isolationism and fiscal protectionism.

[Naturalized-Texan]

THAT I picked up on immediately, LOL :smirky:
Liberals and paleo-conservatives use the term "neo-conservative" as a pejorative. Pat Buchanan is an example of a paleo-conservative - someone who used to be a conservative but no longer is. Most paleo-conservatives have opposed the War on Terror from the very beginning and some of them have even blamed the Jews for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

But how is neo-conservatism supposed to differ from classical conservatism? Isn't conservatism just conservatism, and the opposite of liberalism?

Inquiring minds are just trying to know, :smirky:
Since the Reagan years neo-conservatism has been equivalent to conservatism. Prior to and during the Reagan years, neo-conservatives were former liberals who saw the light and converted to conservatism, among them one would find the Reagan Democrats.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Since the Reagan years neo-conservatism has been equivalent to conservatism. Prior to and during the Reagan years, neo-conservatives were former liberals who saw the light and converted to conservatism, among them one would find the Reagan Democrats.

Thanks Tex

But I'm still confused. What is a NeoCon NOW? I'm trying to figure out why someone would call me, or insinuate, that I am a neocon. What are the defining characteristics of a neocon in 2006?

[UnkHiram]

You can call me a Neo Con, you can call me a regular Conservative, You can call me a Conservative Christian or a Christian Conservative. Just dont call me a Liberal.

Actually I think I am more of a Conservative Christian than a Christian Conservative but that is neither here nor there.

[Melz]

I think it is just a name, meant to sound bad. Of course liberals use far worse language, but seriously I do not believe any of the people using this word differentiate it. They believe that all conservatives are "neocons." Because they are insulted when called liberals, they had to come up with some insulting version of conservative.

No one has been able to tell me how exactly I am a neocon and who is a conservative and how it differs.

[nene]

Pat of late has been calling those associated with the Bush administrations 'neocons' and has steadfastly renounced globalism and interventiaonalism that he feels is wrong.

Its one part Globalism and one part global econonomism, in difference to that of isolationism and fiscal protectionism.I think that Pat is not opposed to globalism as long as the playing field is level. What he opposes is the concept that we should play according to set of rules that others need not comply and then have the gall of calling it "free market".

[Naturalized-Texan]

Thanks Tex

But I'm still confused. What is a NeoCon NOW? I'm trying to figure out why someone would call me, or insinuate, that I am a neocon. What are the defining characteristics of a neocon in 2006?
Since the Reagan years neo-conservatism has been equivalent to conservatism
In other words, today there is no difference between conservatism and neo-conservatism. Now they are one and the same. Using a math symbol:

neo-conservatism ≡ conservatism

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

In other words, today there is no difference between conservatism and neo-conservatism. Now they are one and the same. Using a math symbol:

neo-conservatism ≡ conservatism

So, both "Conservative" and "NeoCon" are interchangeable as derogatory terms for anything OTHER THAN liberalism?

How 'conservative' must one be, I wonder. If there is a strident liberal in all areas of social conscience BUT he supports the war in Iraq, is HE a NeoCon simply because he's pro-war?

See I just don't understand why that word has been allowed to float in the ethosphere when it's clearly undefined. I KNOW what a liberal is, I KNOW what characteristics define one -- seems to me, nobody really knows what a neocon is or what the defining characteristics are, it's just a "dirty word" to call a conservative to spark an emotional gut reaction from the bleeding-hearts.

[omegatrump]

Thanks Tex

But I'm still confused. What is a NeoCon NOW? I'm trying to figure out why someone would call me, or insinuate, that I am a neocon. What are the defining characteristics of a neocon in 2006?

As I see it Doctor Dooms first explanation is the closest NeoCon, perverted or new version, I simplify it by saying artificial Conservative.

[aaron11]

Don't shoot! I'm just the messenger.

It's not my position, it's just what I've found and heard. I don't call people neoconservatives because it's kind of a buzzword and I really don't understand entirely what I'd be saying if I used it. All I've heard or learned about it is that it has mostly to do with supporting OUR government taking over OTHER governments to spread democracy. Some people have told me that you can interchange "democracy" there with "Christianity", because most neocons don't just want to spread democracy, but Christianity as well. That part makes sense to me, so for that I understand why that definition has been extended to Christianity.

That's all I got.

A mis-informed liberal? Go figure...:thud:

"Neo-conservative" is most often used when referring to the growing Jewish constituency of the Conservative movement. Hence, it has very little "if anything" to do with Christianity. "Neo-Conservatives" by in large are fiscal liberals while being Conservative socially and in matters of foreign policy and militarily. IE, Conservatives strong support of Israel has brought a large portion of Jewish (Neo-cons) voters into the Republican fold.

Lieberman is a prime example of a (Neo-Conservative), keeping in mind that Conservatism is not exclusively Republican.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

As I see it Doctor Dooms first explanation is the closest NeoCon, perverted or new version, I simplify it by saying artificial Conservative.

His definition was by far closer to the one I was imagining, but I still there are no defining characteristics mentioned.

aaron, I must admit I have NEVER heard your definition of a neocon, ever.

[aaron11]

That's a good thing, Homes. Most often the standard answers are wrong, IMO. However, for sake of further explanation, I will say that my opinion was inherited from Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer. Also, I would add that definitions, even of the most basic words and terms change with the times. (especially in politics, IE, Conservatives = Classical liberals, While Liberals = Marxist Socialists/Communists Totalitarians!)

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I don't think it's a matter of change, the term is complete amorphous. It is without shape or form, except that which lies within the mind of the name-caller and name-bearer. So if one cannot tell me WHY I am considered a neocon, only that I AM one, then how am I supposed to defend myself against such an affront? One cannot do hand-to-hand combat with a vapor, :smirky: .

[matt]

Labels are so useless nowadays. For instance, I consider myself an Eisenhower Republican and conservative, but compare the policies practiced by this administration to Eisenhower's. I suppose this divide is what created the term 'neoconservative'. Based on how the word 'conservative' is used in today's world and especially on this site, an Eisenhower Republican is anything but. Closer to libertarian, but more centrist. Likewise, I don't consider many of the planks held by today's GOP to be conservative at all. From my vantage point, there is very little difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, today.

[Republican_Legion]

Lieberman is a prime example of a (Neo-Conservative), keeping in mind that Conservatism is not exclusively Republican.

He's a Neocon but he isnt conservative on social issues or economic issues.

[aaron11]

I don't think it's a matter of change, the term is complete amorphous. It is without shape or form, except that which lies within the mind of the name-caller and name-bearer. So if one cannot tell me WHY I am considered a neocon, only that I AM one, then how am I supposed to defend myself against such an affront? One cannot do hand-to-hand combat with a vapor, :smirky: .

Why be defensive? If your opponents argument has denigrated into name calling, you have already won the battle!

Besides Homes, You're an Excellent-Conservative, period!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Why be defensive? If your opponents argument has denigrated into name calling, you have already won the battle!

Besides Homes, You're an Excellent-Conservative, period!

:icon126: Thanks, aaron.

I think it's because I would like to know my enemy better. This fight isn't going away, and if we learned to use the tools of their trade (words) as effectively as they do, we deny them the ability to use them against us.

[omegatrump]

Why be defensive? If your opponents argument has denigrated into name calling, you have already won the battle!

Besides Homes, You're an Excellent-Conservative, period!

aarons right Homes, your a good conservative. Knowing your enemy is not about flesh and blood, we battle against principalities, powers and spiritual wickedness in High places.

One of Dwight Eisenhower's most serious warnings was to "beware of the military industrial complex". He must have known something about that, being a General and all.

[star2589]

neo conservative refers to people who call themselves conservatives, but have forgotten many classical conservative values. president bush is usually considered a neo-con by those that use the term.

they typically support big government, and have a very aggressive foreign policy.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-conservative

Neoconservatism refers to the political movement, ideology, and public policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_policy) goals of "new conservatives" in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), who are mainly characterized by their relatively interventionist and hawkish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkish) views on foreign policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy), and their lack of support for the "small government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_government)" principles and restrictions on social (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issues_in_the_United_States) spending, when compared with other American conservatives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_conservatism) such as traditional or paleoconservatives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism).
In the context of U.S. foreign policy, neoconservative has another, narrower definition: one who advocates the use of military force, unilaterally if necessary, to replace autocratic regimes with democratic ones. This view competes with liberal internationalism, realism, and non-interventionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism)...

[omegatrump]

I think that Pat is not opposed to globalism as long as the playing field is level. What he opposes is the concept that we should play according to set of rules that others need not comply and then have the gall of calling it "free market".

I think you are exactly right. The idea that the profiteers can take advantage of a totally uneven playing field and still call it free market.

I think it was aaron that said 'todays conservative = Clasical liberals, I would say that helps define what a neocon is. New Conservative. Based on Doctor Dooms research. I agree with that very much.

Star2589 has some good stuff there too.

[Naturalized-Texan]

So, both "Conservative" and "NeoCon" are interchangeable as derogatory terms for anything OTHER THAN liberalism?

How 'conservative' must one be, I wonder. If there is a strident liberal in all areas of social conscience BUT he supports the war in Iraq, is HE a NeoCon simply because he's pro-war?

See I just don't understand why that word has been allowed to float in the ethosphere when it's clearly undefined. I KNOW what a liberal is, I KNOW what characteristics define one -- seems to me, nobody really knows what a neocon is or what the defining characteristics are, it's just a "dirty word" to call a conservative to spark an emotional gut reaction from the bleeding-hearts.
Liberalism is monolithic. Conservatism is not.

Since we conservatives believe in freedom, there are several variations of conservatism - traditional, social, fiscal, and probably a few others - and sometimes we are at variance with each other and occasionally all of us are in agreement. Most of us here are a combination of all those variations with the emphasis varying depending on the issue. That's what makes FC so interesting and is the main reason that liberals will never figure us out.

[Taylor]

A neo-conservative is a person who used to be a liberal but later converted to conservatism. Ronald Reagan was a neo-conservative.

[Rhino]

HRS, you are using a false paradigm. You are assuming that the people trying to insult you with this term actually know what it means. They don't know anymore than you do, because as you can see from this thread, the definition varies widely depending on who you ask. I think star2589 has the most technically correct definition, but when it comes down to it, that doesn't really matter. The people using this term aren't intending to label you, because they have no idea what the label means. They are intending to insult you, so the definition of "neocon" in that context is no more applicable than the definition of "stupid". Ask them to define it and then laugh when they get it wrong (no matter what they say). That should really piss them off!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

HRS, you are using a false paradigm. You are assuming that the people trying to insult you with this term actually know what it means. They don't know anymore than you do, because as you can see from this thread, the definition varies widely depending on who you ask. I think star2589 has the most technically correct definition, but when it comes down to it, that doesn't really matter. The people using this term aren't intending to label you, because they have no idea what the label means. They are intending to insult you, so the definition of "neocon" in that context is no more applicable than the definition of "stupid". Ask them to define it and then laugh when they get it wrong (no matter what they say). That should really piss them off!

Rhino, you've said my friend, what was already in my heart, :smirky: . I was hoping for a few more of those who would actually USE the term against me to show their hand and define it here for me. :grin:

There really is no such entity as a NeoCon, because there is no substance to the slur. If anyone can be a neocon at any given time, under any given circumstance, and according to any different person's definition, then there really ISN'T such a character, an s/he/they are merely of mythic proportion.

I like your suggestion, BTW, think I'll take it next time I find myself hung with the moniker. :thumb:

[Unity]

According to my father and brother, who are the only people I've ever known (personally) to use the term, aaron is pretty much correct. A neocon is someone who is socially conservative but fiscally liberal. Bush has maintained an anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage social position but has increased government spending while decreasing government income... or so his critics frequently say. If I hear conservatives criticizing Bush at all it's usually for waging a war while decreasing taxes at the same time, thus broadening the federal deficit by leaps and bounds.

Neoconservative is a term repeatedly flung about by the media, but that's the only real defintion I've ever heard. And like I said I don't know many people in person to use it because few have any concept of what it really means.

[Rhino]

......A neocon is someone who is socially conservative but fiscally liberal.....Then I aren't one. Good. :grin:

[star2589]

HRS, you are using a false paradigm. You are assuming that the people trying to insult you with this term actually know what it means. They don't know anymore than you do, because as you can see from this thread, the definition varies widely depending on who you ask. I think star2589 has the most technically correct definition, but when it comes down to it, that doesn't really matter. The people using this term aren't intending to label you, because they have no idea what the label means. They are intending to insult you, so the definition of "neocon" in that context is no more applicable than the definition of "stupid". Ask them to define it and then laugh when they get it wrong (no matter what they say). That should really piss them off!


whenever I've heard the term used, it always fell under the definition I gave. it is definatly a term used by those that look down upon those policies, but i've never heard it used to directly insult someone.

[Tumblehome]

I'd like to know the difference between a republican, a conservative, and a neocon.

A republican is somebody who belongs to the republican party.
A conservative is somebody who has a conservative ideology.
A neocon is what you are before you become an excon.

[Unity]

A republican is somebody who belongs to the republican party.
A conservative is somebody who has a conservative ideology.
A neocon is what you are before you become an excon.

Erm, so Bush is an ex-conservative?

I think not. :)

[Rhino]

Or, after an oldcon?

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

If you plead "No Contest" are you an excon?

[Rhino]

Wouldn't that be a noncon?

[Lazarus]

Its real simple... Doc put his finger on it early on...

Neocon is just the latest Liberal term meant to show their bitterness for anyone who isnt a liberal... Its not meant to be different from Conservative... Its meant to be a term of derision, because the term Conservative isnt ugly-sounding enough... So they want it to sound like we have shifted into a deeper level of evil - Its meant to sound like we are the new Nazis... Mainly because we have been winning all the elections and they have become impotent on the US political stage...

Next time someone calls you a Neocon, just tell them, "Why dont you have the guts to call me what you want to call me - A Nazi"...

As for us wanting to spread Christianity around the world, since when have we been doing this - I wish to God we were doing it... There was a time in the nation's history when spreading the gospel of Christ by means of Missionaries was a significant side effect of our foreign policy - The government was not involved in evangelism but it had a friendly stance toward it because Missionaries brought medicine and education with their message of Christ...

Now, foreign evangelism has become treated by even our own citizens as some form of evil - Spreading Democracy is the new religion, but dont dare clear the way for Christ... Its another sign of the decay of our culture... The further we try to distance ourselves from God, the more he will remove his blessings from this nation...

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Wouldn't that be a noncon?

http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biglaugh.gif

Then would that make me a NeoNonCon or a NonNeoCon or a NeonCon?

[Rhino]

You'd need a fancier font color for NeonCon, I think.

I'll be an EnigmaCon. That way nobody can tell what I am!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

You'd need a fancier font color for NeonCon, I think.

I'll have to put a "glow" on, LOL. I like the term "NeonCon," that settles it, I l ike it!

I'll be an EnigmaCon. That way nobody can tell what I am!

I like that, Rhino! Suits you to a T, :grin: . What would Doc be? Warlady?

[Rhino]

Hmmmm. Doc could be the CritiCon maybe. WL would be the PrimaCon!

[Lazarus]

I'll have to put a "glow" on, LOL. I like the term "NeonCon," that settles it, I l ike it!Yeah I like that too... I second the motion... From now on we're NeonCons... Which implies we're on the cutting edge of Societal Evolution - As Mr Limbaugh puts it... ;)

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Yeah I like that too... I second the motion... From now on we're NeonCons... Which implies we're on the cutting edge of Societal Evolution - As Mr Limbaugh puts it... ;)

That's purty, Brudder Laz, I like that color better 'n mine! I hafta see how you did that and fits mine (like my fancy lingo-there?)

Hms
The NeonCon Admin

[Rink]

Whut would I be?

A 'Spasti-Con'? LOL :D

[Lazarus]

That's purty, Brudder Laz, I like that color better 'n mine! I hafta see how you did that and fits mine (like my fancy lingo-there?)

Hms
The NeonCon AdminOh I like that last onethe best... Looks like a real Neon light... We'll have to experiment some...;)

[Rhino]

Whut would I be? DieselCon!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

DieselCon! Hmmm, wouldn't that apply to dPrasse too? (Doesn't dP drive a truck?)

Oooh I like these nicks, they're cute! Rink we'll think of a good one for ya!

Laz, that new one is purty too! I love being colorful ... just not rainbow-colored, k, :smirky:

[Tumblehome]

lol! I appear to have started a complete derail of this thread (see above).

If Neocons are socially conservative and fiscally liberal then I am the exact opposite of a neocon. So does make me an oldpro?

[Maggie_T]

NeoCon = NeoConservative.


It's intended as an insult. The premise is that it's a new, perverted and evil version of conservatism that has no relation to classical conservatism. The term is typically used by people who call themselves liberals, but who are blissfully unaware of the nature of classical liberalism.

As usual, the Doc nailed it.

Yes, this is what liberals throw at conservatives and expect them to quiver in their shoes from shame.

Pay no attention to it, Li'l Sis. You're a Christian conservative. Period.

And for liberals, that's bad enough.

[Rink]

DieselCon!

Kewl :thumb:

:D

[Peachdiane]

Hmmm, wouldn't that apply to dPrasse too? (Doesn't dP drive a truck?)

Yup! He's been DieselCon for many years. :grin: Even LOVES the smell of diesel.

As for neocon being thrown out as an insult I would just ask, "Is that the best you can do?" :rolleyes:

[Rink]

I too love the smell of diesel (chalk THAT one up to having an old man who was a Union oil 76 distributor all my life) :thumb:

ya get used to it

[Peachdiane]

Pretty close here... my grandpa was a Standard Oil distributor. ;)

[The Hard Truth]

NeoCon = NeoConservative.

Main Entry: ne-
Variant(s): or neo-
Function: combining form
Etymology: Greek, from neos new -- more at NEW
1 a : new : recent < Neogene > b : new and different period or form of < Neoplatonism > : in a new and different form or manner < Neoplatonic > c : New World < Neotropical > d : new and abnormal < neoplasm >

It's intended as an insult. The premise is that it's a new, perverted and evil version of conservatism that has no relation to classical conservatism. The term is typically used by people who call themselves liberals, but who are blissfully unaware of the nature of classical liberalism.

The modern "father" of the neoconservative movement is Irving Kristol, who has proudly applied the label to himself and like-minded individuals for years.

"[We] are conservative, but different in certain respects from the conservatism of the [traditional] Republican Party. We accepted the New Deal in principle, and had little affection for the kind of isolationism that then permeated American conservatism."

Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, 1995

Neoconservatives are a far cry from classical conservatives. Neocons are social liberals and economic socialists on a number of issues, while masquerading as "conservatives".

George W. Bush is a prime example of a neocon.

[ThomasMore]

The modern "father" of the neoconservative movement is Irving Kristol, who has proudly applied the label to himself and like-minded individuals for years.

"[We] are conservative, but different in certain respects from the conservatism of the [traditional] Republican Party. We accepted the New Deal in principle, and had little affection for the kind of isolationism that then permeated American conservatism."

Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, 1995

Neoconservatives are a far cry from classical conservatives. Neocons are social liberals and economic socialists on a number of issues, while masquerading as "conservatives".

George W. Bush is a prime example of a neocon.


Hard Truth, your quotation of Kristol as one of the original Neoconservatives is correct, and Norman Podhoretz and Midge Decter were some of the original Neoconservatives.

The reason they applied the term "Neoconservative" to themselves is that, as New York literati, they were like their peers mostly socialists, but who grew to see the bankruptcy of socialism. Thus, they were new to conservatism and redefined themselves as neoconservative.

That said, I disagree with your conclusion of what neoconservatives believe. Neoconservatism IS Reagan Conservatism. Some "paleoconservatives" believe that conservatism means hiding in a corner and not being active in the world. But that is the abdication of power, not its use.

The US has been blessed with both economic and military power. It can use that to expand freedom, to oppress freedoms, or it can hide in the corner. Conservative ideals include spreading freedom.

[The Hard Truth]

Hard Truth, your quotation of Kristol as one of the original Neoconservatives is correct, and Norman Podhoretz and Midge Decter were some of the original Neoconservatives.

The reason they applied the term "Neoconservative" to themselves is that, as New York literati, they were like their peers mostly socialists, but who grew to see the bankruptcy of socialism. Thus, they were new to conservatism and redefined themselves as neoconservative.

That said, I disagree with your conclusion of what neoconservatives believe. Neoconservatism IS Reagan Conservatism. Some "paleoconservatives" believe that conservatism means hiding in a corner and not being active in the world. But that is the abdication of power, not its use.

The US has been blessed with both economic and military power. It can use that to expand freedom, to oppress freedoms, or it can hide in the corner. Conservative ideals include spreading freedom.
Neoconservatives have NEVER rejected New Deal-style socialism. They rejected the communism of Lenin and Stalin.

Neocons like Bush fervently support wasteful multi-billion dollar socialist boondoggle programs like the "No Child Left Behind" Act and the prescription drug plan.

Classical conservatives believe that the federal government has no business funding education and prescription drug programs.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Well I know 100% without a shadow of a doubt that I am NO social liberal, neither am I a fiscal liberal. I want a strict Constitutional government, NO special interests, NO social programs provided by the government -- I believe, as others have shared elsewhere, that government's role is and should be restricted by the Consitution and the provisions it allows. Nothing more, nothing less. I do not believe in the social reconstruction of the Constitution, nor do I believe it is a "living" document.


But I still like the idea of being a NeonCon
http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/biggrin.gif

[ldb83]

Then why do we have amendments? You're entitled to your beliefs, but this guy seems to disagree with you. I think I'm gonna side with him.

"Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years."

"No society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The Earth belongs always to the living generation..."

Thomas Jefferson
Letter to James Madison
September 6, 1789

[The Hard Truth]

Well I know 100% without a shadow of a doubt that I am NO social liberal, neither am I a fiscal liberal. I want a strict Constitutional government, NO special interests, NO social programs provided by the government -- I believe, as others have shared elsewhere, that government's role is and should be restricted by the Consitution and the provisions it allows. Nothing more, nothing less. I do not believe in the social reconstruction of the Constitution, nor do I believe it is a "living" document.

Judging by your above statements, you're definitely not a neocon.

[UnkHiram]

Then why do we have amendments? You're entitled to your beliefs, but this guy seems to disagree with you. I think I'm gonna side with him.

"Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years."

"No society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The Earth belongs always to the living generation..."

Thomas Jefferson
Letter to James Madison
September 6, 1789








It may have escaped your notice but the Amendments are PART of the Constitution. Occasionally the Constitution needs fine tuning and their is a manner laid out within the Constitution to do that. And guess what it is not the Judiciary.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

It may have escaped your notice but the Amendments are PART of the Constitution. Occasionally the Constitution needs fine tuning and their is a manner laid out within the Constitution to do that. And guess what it is not the Judiciary.

Thanks for the assist there, brudder, :smirky: .

[Wyatt_Junker]

I never converted from anything to anything. I have always been conservative for as long as I can remember. There very simply is no 'neo' in me and never has been. My conservatism is of old. I am an organic conservative, a biological conservative, an original conservative.

I remember my reaction in first grade when my teacher told me to 'share' my crayons. I was shocked. They were my crayons. Why did I have to give them to someone else? It made little sense. Little did I know that this was a foreshadowing of the world in which I lived; the tax state.

In show-n-tell, I brought in my plastic AK-47. This was kindergarten. It was way before the Columbine morons. I wanted to pretend shoot up my class. The teacher was somewhat apprehensive, but she finally caved. I got to go around the room and ratatatat the entire class. By the time I was done, the class was lying motionless on the ground.

I still have the videotape of it. My mom was there and took it on Super 8. Later they copied it to tape with AC/DC's Back In Black playing. I almost sent it to John Stossel on Dateline to ask him to do a special on how far we've come as a society.

I never understood liberalism, sharing, FDR's bullshit New Deal or even the bad stink of taxes. Politicians have always repelled me, instintcually. Same with lawyers.

I have never had to convert from anything to anything else. That, too, makes no sense to me. I am who I am, what I've always been, straight from the womb to now. I am no different now at 36 than when I was at 5. C-O-N-S-E-R-V-A-T-I-V-E.

[Lazarus]

...In show-n-tell, I brought in my plastic AK-47. This was kindergarten. It was way before the Columbine morons. I wanted to pretend shoot up my class. The teacher was somewhat apprehensive, but she finally caved. I got to go around the room and ratatatat the entire class. By the time I was done, the class was lying motionless on the ground.

I still have the videotape of it. My mom was there and took it on Super 8. Later they copied it to tape with AC/DC's Back In Black playing...Bwahahahaha... Now that's a video I would dearly love to see...:thumb:

[Naturalized-Texan]

Neoconservatives have NEVER rejected New Deal-style socialism.
That is flat-out false! Today's neo-conservativism is the exact equivalent to conservatism. That is an irrefutable fact!

Neocons like Bush fervently support wasteful multi-billion dollar socialist boondoggle programs like the "No Child Left Behind" Act and the prescription drug plan.
President Bush is only a neo-conservative according to my definition above.

Classical conservatives believe that the federal government has no business funding education and prescription drug programs.
There are no such things as "classical conservatives." Conservatives are conservatives are conservatives. However, today's conservatives are equivalent to classical liberals - i.e., the Founding Fathers.

[dPrasse]

Wyatt , too funny !

Myself and a friend were banned from our 5th grade talent show in '73 for having a "Pro-troops" skit ... we looked "funny" ,I'm sure , singing "Candyman" and "I'd like to Teach the World to Sing" wearing cammo ... Got into fights on the school bus backing Nixon over McGovern ... wrote a book repoet in 3rd grade on Gen Patton ... guess I've been a Con for a long time ....

[Lazarus]

Wyatt , too funny !

Myself and a friend were banned from our 5th grade talent show in '73 for having a "Pro-troops" skit ... we looked "funny" ,I'm sure , singing "Candyman" and "I'd like to Teach the World to Sing" wearing cammo ... Got into fights on the school bus backing Nixon over McGovern ... wrote a book repoet in 3rd grade on Gen Patton ... guess I've been a Con for a long time ....I know what ya mean, Bro... I was in high school during the Vietnam/Nixon backlash, and those of us who were true Conservatives were few and far between... But we never backed down from an arguement with a liberal...

Of course it wasnt hard to really win such arguments - most high school kids dont have enough sense to get in out of the rain and they were only parroting the propoganda that they heard on the evening news... Many were actually glad to see us stand up for Conservative values because it made it socially acceptable for them to express their closet conservatism...

[The Hard Truth]

That is flat-out false! Today's neo-conservativism is the exact equivalent to conservatism. That is an irrefutable fact!
"Flat-out false" best describes your own post.

Since you obviously missed it, here is a direct quote from the father of modern neoconservatism, who has written entire books on the subject. Please note that he states there are clear differences between neoconservatism and the conservatism of traditional American conservatives:

"[We] are conservative, but different in certain respects from the conservatism of the [traditional] Republican Party. We accepted the New Deal in principle, and had little affection for the kind of isolationism that then permeated American conservatism."

Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, 1995

President Bush is only a neo-conservative according to my definition above.
Bush is a neoconservative (i.e. pseudoconservative) because of his support for multi-billion dollar socialist boondoggle programs, his sucking up to the terrorists who run the UN etc.

There are no such things as "classical conservatives." Conservatives are conservatives are conservatives. However, today's conservatives are equivalent to classical liberals - i.e., the Founding Fathers.
Hogwash.

A pseudoconservative like Bush doesn't hold a candle in a hurricane compared to the true conservatism of the Founding Fathers.

The Founding Fathers would clearly reject Bush's federal funding of education, prescription drugs, the UN etc. etc.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

As I said, neoconservatism doesn't exist, it is a whisp of a thing, floating here as an aparition of one definition and elsewhere as another. When a term can come to mean so many different things, to so many different people, and never nailed down to specifics, then it isn't relevant.

[Rhino]

You guys know you're just arguing semantics, right?

[UnkHiram]

You guys know you're just arguing semantics, right?

I think that are just arguing to argue. Not that I have not indulged in that a few times myself.

[Rhino]

As have I, but it gets frustrating going round and round and really getting nowhere. I was just curious if they were aware that was what was happening.

[The Hard Truth]

As I said, neoconservatism doesn't exist, it is a whisp of a thing, floating here as an aparition of one definition and elsewhere as another. When a term can come to mean so many different things, to so many different people, and never nailed down to specifics, then it isn't relevant.

You guys know you're just arguing semantics, right?

You are both incorrect.

Neoconservatism has been clearly defined by many of its adherents. Especially by the modern "founding father" of the movement, Irving Kristol, in his many books and articles on the subject over the years.

Neoconservatives oppose the communism of Lenin and Stalin, but have no problem with socialist New Deal-style programs and big government in general. They believe in considerably more government involvement in both domestic and foreign affairs than traditional conservatives.

For the most part, they are bitterly opposed to the so-called "isolationism" (i.e. non-interventionism) of classical conservatives in foreign affairs. They are also frequently strong supporters of the U.N., who if willing to criticize it at all, will usually just say that it needs to be "reformed". Whereas most traditional conservatives don't believe the U.N. should have any authority over the U.S. whatsoever, and that we should get out of the organization all together.

Many neoconservatives have no problem with legal abortion and gay rights, which classical conservatives almost universally oppose.

So to say that neoconservatism "doesn't exist", or that it's "identical" to the classical conservatism of the Founding Fathers and today's Conservative Christians---is simply preposterous.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Believe what you want, but the proof is in this thread -- differing explanations, differing opinions, differing definitions, no definitive answer. And so, there IS my answer -- neoconservatism is in the mind of the name-caller and received, and most times, never the twain shall meet. Suffice it to say, I believe I've successfully gotten my answer, :smirky: .

[Rhino]

You are both incorrect.

Neoconservatism has been clearly defined by many of its adherents.Actually, we are both correct, and in a way, so are you. Neoconservatism has been differently defined by many of its adherents, as evidenced by the varying definitions posted here. Your definition is merely one of them. Semantics.

[ponch21]

When I teach liberalism and conservatism to my American Government students I use this web site as a source to define neo-cons.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

It does use the Kristol definition of this type of conservatism. Active foreign policy to ensure U.S. goals. "Pre-emptive" war. Using the might of U.S. military and economy to accomplish foreign policy objectives.

I have never heard it used in a negative sense.

There are many types of conservatives as there are many types of liberals.

[Melz]

When I teach liberalism and conservatism to my American Government students I use this web site as a source to define neo-cons.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

It does use the Kristol definition of this type of conservatism. Active foreign policy to ensure U.S. goals. "Pre-emptive" war. Using the might of U.S. military and economy to accomplish foreign policy objectives.

I have never heard it used in a negative sense.

There are many types of conservatives as there are many types of liberals.

You use the word "neocons" when you TEACH?? What the hell do you teach, and please tell me it is not a high school or younger. How crazy, but it certainly proves a point about liberals in the education system I guess.

[Charity]

You use the word "neocons" when you TEACH?? What the hell do you teach, and please tell me it is not a high school or younger. How crazy, but it certainly proves a point about liberals in the education system I guess.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________


I'll second that!!!

[ponch21]

Yes I try to teach kids what is happening in their world. There are christian conservatives, neo-conservatives (neo-cons), individualist conservatives (Ayn Rand conservatives), Constitutional Conservatives, etc. They should know what each stands for in order to make good decisions. However, I suppose I should only teach them some surface level definition of conservative and liberal. Too bad the world is more complex than that.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

ponch,
May I ask, what curriculum do you use? Or have you designed it yourself using different reference sources?

[ponch21]

Homes,
I have developed my own. In fact this development is what first brought me here to Free Conservatives many years ago. I grew up conservative (a child of the Reagan years), but the more I learned about society, government, and corporate America the more liberal I became. It had been a while since I had been on the "right" so I came here to make sure that I wasn't biased in my discussion of Conservative and Liberal. It is my modus operandi to try to keep my views to myself and present both sides of the issue. I realize I am far from perfect in this regard, but I do try hard.

I used an old text book from a political theory class - it was something like American Political Thought - I don't really remember. I actually gave it to a parent of one of my students as she was curious as to where I got my definitions of liberal and conservative from. She traded me some wild rice for it.

Of course conservative and liberal are flexible in their definition - 2000's liberals are different from 1960's liberals. This is why I visit here now and again. Almost like research for my teaching. What issues fire up conservatives, what their responses are, etc.

Again I am confused by the concern with Neo-con. The Kristols and the Weekly Standard wear the label with pride. Is it because it sounds like neo-nazi?

[Rhino]

No, it's because many liberals hurl it at us as an insult, so we've begun to view the term negatively, even though the term itself isn't supposed to be.

[Wyatt_Junker]

I actually gave it to a parent of one of my students as she was curious as to where I got my definitions of liberal and conservative from. She traded me some wild rice for it.



It better've been Uncle Ben's or you GOT TAKEN!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Homes,
I have developed my own.

I would be very interested in any source material you use. If you wouldn't mind sharing these sources (where to find them), please PM me.

In fact this development is what first brought me here to Free Conservatives many years ago. I grew up conservative (a child of the Reagan years), but the more I learned about society, government, and corporate America the more liberal I became.

I'm very surprised growing up conservative you went "the other way." I know very few, actually that's not true, I know of none that have done that (personally don't know anyone who shared my conservative stance then went liberal).

I realize I am far from perfect in this regard, but I do try hard.

Yes, complete unbias is impossible.

Again I am confused by the concern with Neo-con. The Kristols and the Weekly Standard wear the label with pride. Is it because it sounds like neo-nazi?

It seems it's being used as a slur or derogatory term whenever it is "hurled" at me, therefore I want to know WHY it is a "dirty word."

[The Hard Truth]

Believe what you want, but the proof is in this thread -- differing explanations, differing opinions, differing definitions, no definitive answer. And so, there IS my answer -- neoconservatism is in the mind of the name-caller and received, and most times, never the twain shall meet. Suffice it to say, I believe I've successfully gotten my answer, :smirky: .
Your logic and arguments are badly flawed.

Just because people have differing opinions of what something is, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. People have differing opinions of what Naziism and Communism are, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

The founding father of modern neoconservatism, Irving Kristol, has admitted that it is frequently at variance with the ideals of classical conservatism. Which clearly means that neoconservatism is NOT classical conservatism.

So his expert testimony easily trumps the opinions of the non-experts on this thread who loudly proclaim that neoconservatism doesn't exist.

[The Hard Truth]

"Viewed in this way, one can say that the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy."

--Irving Kristol, founding father of modern neoconservatism

[2nd_Amendment]

And, of course, what is "classical conservatism"? A conservative today is a Classical Liberal. A "liberal" today is really nothing more than a leftist, ie, socialist. A "neocon" is really nothing more than a fiscal conservative-social leftist/moderate. He's a halfbreed, hence Kristol's definition/ambition of being capable of governing a modern democracy(Socialist Democracy) as opposed to a Constitutional Republic.

Now THAT is a real world functional definition of the whole lot of 'em.

[The Hard Truth]

And, of course, what is "classical conservatism"? A conservative today is a Classical Liberal. A "liberal" today is really nothing more than a leftist, ie, socialist. A "neocon" is really nothing more than a fiscal conservative-social leftist/moderate. He's a halfbreed, hence Kristol's definition/ambition of being capable of governing a modern democracy(Socialist Democracy) as opposed to a Constitutional Republic.

Now THAT is a real world functional definition of the whole lot of 'em.

Actually, your definition is flawed.

Fiscal conservatism is NOT a core value that most neoconservatives adhere to.

According to the statements of Kristol and other prominent neocons, many of them have NO problem with FDR-style social programs and big government in general.

Many top neocons warmly supported their fellow neocon Bush's prescription drug act, which at about seven hundred BILLION dollars over the first ten years alone--can in NO way be described as fiscally conservative.

[Rhino]

The founding father of modern neoconservatism, Irving Kristol, has admitted that it is frequently at variance with the ideals of classical conservatism. Which clearly means that neoconservatism is NOT classical conservatism.

So his expert testimony easily trumps the opinions of the non-experts on this thread who loudly proclaim that neoconservatism doesn't exist.And if we don't accept Irving Kristol as the founding father of neoconservatism, then his testimony trumps nothing. Again, you are assuming an axiom that others may not share, hence the variance in definitions.

[The Hard Truth]

And if we don't accept Irving Kristol as the founding father of neoconservatism, then his testimony trumps nothing. Again, you are assuming an axiom that others may not share, hence the variance in definitions.

There is variation in the definitions of communism, naziism, liberalism, socialism and conservatism--just to name a few. That doesn't mean none of them exist.

I called him the founding father of MODERN neoconservatism. Anybody familiar with America's political landscape KNOWS that he is the most important figure in modern neoconservatism--having authored several books, innumerable articles in major journals and magazines, given countless speeches at major institutions etc.

He is recognized as such by friend and foe alike, at the highest levels of politics and academia. You can cover your ears and repeatedly scream "no" loudly, but that doesn't change the hard facts and truth.

A quick search of Yahoo and Google, using the keywords Kristol and neoconservatism, will easily prove my statements.

[The Hard Truth]

From Wikipedia:

Irving Kristol (born 1920 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920)) is considered the founder of American neoconservatism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_%28United_States%29). He is married to conservative author and emeritus professor Gertrude Himmelfarb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gertrude_Himmelfarb), and is the father of William Kristol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Kristol). He describes himself as a "liberal mugged by reality."

Irving Kristol was born into a Jewish family in New York City (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City), earned his B.A. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.A.) in History from the City College of New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_College_of_New_York) in 1940 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1940), where he was an active Trotskyist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyist). He wrote in 1983 that he was “proud” to have been a member of the Fourth International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International) in 1940. [1] (http://www.amconmag.com/06_30_03/feature.html) From 1941 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1941)-1944 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1944), he served as staff sergeant in the armored infantry in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe) in World War II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II).

He was the managing editor of Commentary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentary_Magazine) magazine from 1947 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947) to 1952 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952), cofounder of the British magazine Encounter (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Encounter_%28magazine%29&action=edit) and its editor from 1953 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953) to 1958 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958), editor of the Reporter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter) from 1959 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959) to 1960 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960), executive vice-president of Basic Books (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Books) from 1961 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961) to 1969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969), and professor of social thought at the New York University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_University) Graduate School of Business from 1969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969) to 1988 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988). Since 1988 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988), he has been John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute).

Kristol is the founder of the politics and culture journal The Public Interest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Public_Interest) and the foreign affairs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_affairs) journal The National Interest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Interest). He was co-editor of The Public Interest (first with Daniel Bell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Bell), then with Nathan Glazer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Glazer)) from its founding in 1965 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965) until 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002) and publisher of The National Interest from its founding in 1985 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985) to 2001 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001).

He is a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute) since 1988 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988), a lifetime member of the Council on Foreign Relations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations) since 1972 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972), a member of the Wall Street Journal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Journal) Board of Contributors since 1972 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972), and president of National Affairs, Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Affairs)

In July (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July) 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002), President George W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) awarded Kristol the Presidential Medal of Freedom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Medal_of_Freedom).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Kristol

[Rhino]

He is recognized as such by friend and foe alike, at the highest levels of politics and academia.He is not recognized as such by everyone, hence my point. You can cover your ears and repeatedly scream "no" loudly, but that doesn't change the fact that not everyone shares the same definition. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[Naturalized-Texan]

The vast majority of the people who use "neo-conservative" as a pejorative are referring to the Jews who saw the light and converted to conservatism 20 or 30 years ago or so. Of course, that definition is now invalid since neo-conservatism and conservatism have become one and the same.

[DesertFox]

Tex has it right.

FWIW, I have a high regard for ponch21 as a teacher. I disagree with his politics, but I am persuaded that he works hard at presenting the conservative argument in a way conservatives would essentially agree with. We can't ask more than that. Similarly, when I teach my cadets about liberals, I work hard at presenting the liberal argument in a way liberals would essentially agree with. This is the only fair way to teach such subjects.

[ponch21]

Thanks DF.

[The Hard Truth]

He is not recognized as such by everyone, hence my point. You can cover your ears and repeatedly scream "no" loudly, but that doesn't change the fact that not everyone shares the same definition. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Your logic is flawed.

Hitler is not recognized as an "evil man" by everyone. By your logic, since some people don't recognize him as evil, he must not be.

You've presented absolutely no hard evidence to support your case, and you resort to mockery by sarcastically repeating one of my lines verbatim. Whereas I argue to educate others as to what a neocon is, you argue merely because you don't like to be proven wrong.

[The Hard Truth]

The Weekly Standard is one of the most prominent neoconservative journals in the USA and the world, available at most newsstands and bookstores everywhere. Irving Kristol's articles frequently appear in TWS, including this one where Kristol refers to himself as the "godfather" of neocons:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp

[The Hard Truth]

Irving Kristol is a senior fellow at the internationally renown American Enterprise Institute, a neocon think-tank that is prominent and influential in Washington, D.C.

Kristol is obviously recognized as a very important neocon figure by numerous major neocon organizations, journals and neocon politicians like George W. Bush:

http://www.aei.org/scholars/scholarID.34,filter.all/scholar.asp

[The Hard Truth]

The world renown Christian Science Monitor on Irving Kristol:

"Widely referred to as the "godfather" of neoconservatism, Mr. Kristol was part of the "New York Intellectuals," a group of critics mainly of Eastern European Jewish descent. In the late 1930s, he studied at City College of New York where he became a Trotskyist. From 1947 to 1952, he was the managing editor of Commentary magazine, later called the "neocon bible."


By the late 1960s, Kristol had shifted from left to right on the political spectrum, due partly to what he considered excesses and anti-Americanism among liberals. Kristol built the intellectual framework of neoconservatism, founding and editing journals such as tTe Public Interest and The National Interest.


Kristol is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and author of numerous books, including "Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea." He is the father of Weekly Standard editor and oft-quoted neoconservative William Kristol."

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html

[DoctorDoom]

Has any asshat who flings "neocon" about as a pejorative uttered the term, "neolib"? Of course not. The dumb bastards don't want to admit that today's liberalism is nothing more than a candy-coated version of communism. They're so ashamed of what they are that they refuse to admit to being neolibs. They prefer the bullshit euphemism, "progressive"—as though anything that they've done since the New Deal can be called progress.

[SkiGuy]

Interesting thread. I was thinking of posting a similar question. I think when the left uses the term, they do it in a derogatory way. It's all about PNAC with them. I don't think that anyone in the Bush administration is a neoconservative except for maybe Rove, but I don't really know too much of his background. I kind of lean in the direction of neoconservatism, but don't agree with all foreign policy. If I'm not mistaken, a REAL neoconservative is a globalist. I am definitley not that. Isolationist there. However, I strongly believe that military strength should be the top concern. I think Bill Kristol is a genius. I wish some (ahem, Rumsfeld) would have listened to him more.
To add here, I also like the term Theocon. A nativity scene for every Democrat's yard, at their expense would be mandatory. :)

[Native American]

To add here, I also like the term Theocon. A nativity scene for every Democrat's yard, at their expense would be mandatory. :)


LOL!!! Very nicely put, SkiGuy!

[Native American]

Originally, it had mostly to do with foreign policy... the support of the use of the military to conquer autocratic governments and replace them with democracies.

OK, by that measure, JFK (Bay of Pigs) was a Theocon.