What is neo-conservatism?

[Kidlicious]

Conservative: Believes that conservative ideas are good enough that they don't need to be forced on people. They believe that principles will always prevail.

NeoCon: Believes that people are too stupid to know that conservative ideas are good. So they believe in forcing them on people, and they believe that eventually everyone will accept them. NeoCons also don't generally believe in principles as much as Conservatives.

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Ah, a Machiavellian foreign policy.

That would make neo-conservatives, neither conservative nor particularly neo.

Indeed, foreign policy determined by Realpolitik isn't neo-conservative, it is of a realist nature.

Realism (and neo-realism in particular) and neo-conservatism oppose each other in some cases. Neorealist thinkers, such as John Mearsheimer, have made realist approaches to neo-conservative dominated US foreign policy and found it wrong. Mearsheimer opposed the Iraq war for realist reasons.

Macchiavelli was not particularly conservative, he was a realist. If you follow (neo-)conservative lines of thinking, your actions are dominated by an ideological influence. Realism is the exact opposite of ideological meddling with reason.

Hence, neo-conservatism =!= (neo-)realism.

[Ecthy]

The funny thing about US foreign policy as I preceive it is, that now that the Secretary of State is more "hawkish" than the former one, US foreign policy gets ever softer. With all her hawkishness, Rice is much closer to the president than Powell was, so she has more influence. More neorealist than neocon, she can thus more effectively oppose neocons like Rumsfeld.

[MrFun]

Agathon and Kid -- I have suspicions about neo-conservatives, too.

[Drake Tungsten]

she can thus more effectively oppose neocons like Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld doesn't seem like much of a neocon. Most of the neocons actually seem to have been purged from the administration; Cheney is the only high-profile neocon I can think of off the top of my head and one wonders how complete his transformation from realist to neocon has been.

[Ted Striker]

It's funny to see the Reactionaries try and distance themselves from their own supported policies by trying to label who and who isn't a neocon ("oh it's those neocons doing all the bad thing)

Rumsfeld is a neocon, guilty as charged

Conservative website definitions don't count

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm with Drake. Rummy doesn't seem like much of a neo-con. Cheney probably is. Rice definetly isn't.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Indeed, foreign policy determined by Realpolitik isn't neo-conservative, it is of a realist nature.

Not quite. Realists seek to balance power and maintain peace, while neocons seek to impose their view on others through any means necessary.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Not quite. Realists seek to balance power and maintain peace, while neocons seek to impose their view on others through any means necessary.

Realists look at foriegn policy programs in term of the country's interests and not on ideological bases. Basically, it's realpolitik. Realpolitik rejects ideology in foriegn relations. Ecthy is 100% correct.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Btw, in the wiki article (which is MUCH better than it was a year ago), I found something interesting to those saying neoconservatism is Straussianism:

During the 1970s, for example in a book on the movement by Peter Steinfels, the use of the term neoconservative was never identified with the writings of Leo Strauss. The near synonymity, in some quarters, of neoconservatism and Straussianism is a much more recent phenomenon, which suggests that perhaps two quite distinct movements have become merged into one, either in fact or in the eyes of certain beholders.

I definetly believe that neoconservatism and Straussianism has become merged to critics, but is not true in fact.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'm with Drake. Rummy doesn't seem like much of a neo-con. Cheney probably is. Rice definetly isn't.

Look at the Project for a New American Century and then look who signed the document.


This is the Neocon golden standard document for their vision for the next century

If you signed this article it's pretty much like filling out a application for membership in the Circle of Neocon Bastards

Rumsfeld's name is on it

Besides that his actions speak louder than his words

Don't fall for his nice old grandpa routine he's a bastard that just sounds like a soft spoken nice guy

[Ted Striker]

Cheney was always a bastard, it's just that his role before was more of an administrator

He's now a decision maker, visionary, and the most powerful driving force in the White House, even more than the President himself

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Look at the Project for a New American Century and then look who signed the document.

Yes, and if I considered PNAC to be a neoconservative be all and end all, then I'd consider this to have some merit.

I'll quote wiki:

[q=wikipedia]The meaning of the term has changed over time. It was possibly first used circa 1970 by socialist author and activist Michael Harrington to characterize former leftists who had moved significantly to the right – people he derided as "socialists for Nixon." The "neoconservatives" thus described in this original sense tended to remain supporters of the welfare state, but had distinguished themselves from others on the left by allying with the Nixon administration over foreign policy, especially in their anti-communism, their support for the Vietnam War, and strident opposition to the Soviet Union.

This support for the welfare state is not implied by the contemporary use of the term, which critics suggest implies support for an aggressive worldwide foreign policy, especially one supportive of unilateralism and less concerned with international consensus through organizations such as the United Nations. However, neoconservatives describe their shared view as a belief that national security is best attained by promoting freedom and democracy abroad through the support of pro-democracy movements, foreign aid and in certain cases military intervention. This is a departure from the classic conservative tendency to support friendly regimes in matters of trade and anti-communism even at the expense of undermining existing democratic systems. Author Paul Berman in his book Terror and Liberalism describes it as, "Freedom for others means safety for ourselves. Let us be for freedom for others."

In academia, the term "neoconservative" refers more to journalists, pundits, policy analysts, and institutions affiliated with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and with Commentary and The Weekly Standard than to more traditional conservative policy think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation or periodicals such as Policy Review or National Review.[/q]

I don't look at neoconservative in the academic sense, for one. The Statement of Principles of PNAC makes a lot of references to a Reaganite policy, which could be seen as both neoconservative and paleoconservative (ideology is clear, but it was also in our interest to support anti-communist regimes, even if not democratic).

For example, I don't particularly consider Dan Quayle or Steve Forbes to be neoconservatives, but they've signed the PNAC Statement of Principles.

Further from wiki:

Other critics have similarly argued the term has been rendered meaningless through excessive and inconsistent use. For example, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are often identified as leading "neocons" despite the fact that both men have ostensibly been life-long conservative Republicans (though Cheney has been vocally supportive of the ideas of Irving Kristol). Such critics thus largely reject the claim that there is a neoconservative movement separate from traditional American conservatism.

Rumsfeld was a big time realpolitik guy while in Ford's White House, for instance.

[Odin]

The bunch in the White House are using the neo-conservative ideology as a cover of war profiteering, IMHO.

[Drake Tungsten]

Other critics have similarly argued the term has been rendered meaningless through excessive and inconsistent use.

True dat.