Originally posted by Ecthelion
as I have said, American realists would, due to their tendency to real politics, quite often be considered right wingers in Europe, the land of pacifist daydreaming and lefty-influenced welfare states.
as I have said, American realists would, due to their tendency to real politics, quite often be considered right wingers in Europe, the land of pacifist daydreaming and lefty-influenced welfare states.

Another neo-con whose articles are well worth reading is David Brooks. Find him in the Weekly Standard.
For a discussion of American viewpoint on foreign policy theres an article (book?) somewhere by Walter Russel Meade - who talks about 4 orientations - Hamiltonian (realist/mercantilist) Jeffersonian (isolationist/idealist) Wilsonian (multilateralist) and Jacksonian (nationalist/unilateralist) These labels have begun to make their way into US discourse, especially on the right, in the last couple of years, though i dont think Meade is a rightist.
I would note that there is an element of aggressive/wilsonianianism (again, think Blairism) that is on the center of US for pol opinion, but looks right wing to continental europe (despite fischers flirtation with it) This shades off into a more moderate right wing positions, both realist and neo-con - the more sensible neo-cons are not completley hostile to multilateralism. There is a nationalism/unilateralist element that hates multilateralism on principle, and i dont think your list captures that.
Comment