Annoy a liberal today.
Next time one of 'em calls ya a neocon - just say "thank you for the compliment"
Notice the term is NeoCON, not NeoRepublican, They ARE republicans. WE ARE CONSERVATIVES, and we had better start understand we are different from Republicans. They are Big government supporters and have been from their beginning. They are not for the people, they are for the government. They do not even talk about shrinking the size of government, they talk about slowing down the growth of government, but that is still growth. They believe in a strong central government, and do not like the states having power enough to tell the federal government NO to mandates they do not want. They have said they would get rid of agencies to get us to vote for them but that never comes to fruition, because they lie to us and do not intend to do what they say in order to get our votes.
Conservatives had a chance 30 years ago with Reagan, but since then true Republicans took back control, to a point they redistrict true conservatives so they cant win. AKA Allen West.
neocons have outed themselves as having an "alternate agenda". http://www.vdare.com/articles/kristol-confesses-neoconservatism-is-not-conservative
be careful defending what you don't know.
Try reading the article before commenting. The person who wrote it was the wife of the one who invented the term. I'll take her and his definition of the term over anyone else's any day.
You're trying to use logic while arguing with brooksbayne. He has about as much comprehension of history and political philosophy as he does of proper grammar.
This article isn't about the human heart. It is a discussion by one of the founders of a movement. The definition is the definition that they invented and embraced. Whether people wish to "do the opposite" is a non-point and is not germaine to this symposium. Oh and just for your information, I lived through that era when neoconservatism was coined. I've heard it discussed ad nauseum by the very same people that coined the phrase. Thanks for the link. I hope you don't mind if I stay on point and take a pass on it.
saying they support smith and our founders while doing exactly the opposite is lip service. you've got a lot to learn in this area of neoconservatism. re-read the article i linked you earlier for an accurate assessment.
take foreign entanglements, for example. our founders were dead set against them. yet, neocons want us fully involved entangled with which country? not a founding principle. who pushed for globalist banking and bailouts? neocons. not a view from smith either.
So embracing the Founders, Adam Smith and American exceptionalism is fake conservatism? No you didn't read it.
One of my grad school courses was one titled, simply, "Conservatism." It was taught by Claes Ryn, a professor perhaps familiar to a few. He tied neoconservatives to Leo Strauss, although many would dispute a linkage between Strauss and neoconservatives.
It was a great class, but I still am not quite sure what neoconservatism really represents. It seems Ryn thought that neocons, who consisted of a lot of former Trotskyites, had not really left the leftist mindset behind. In other words, neocons were basically liberals who now sought conservative solutions to modern problems. I think the only consistent application of the term is to denote neocons as conservatives who are at least more comfortable with the modern welfare state. Ramesh Ponnuru once wrote that President Bush (the more recent one) was more of a neocon when it came to domestic spending policy than on foreign affairs.
Whatever the case may be, the term lost all meaning over the past decade. As another commenter mentioned, it just sounded more sinister to call people neoconservative - even though neocons were the very types of conservatives liberals claimed to like during the 90s. Once Bill Buckley was called a neocon, you knew the term had lost all descriptive value.
I think the same thing is at play with "tea party" right now. It just gets thrown around because it has less appeal than the simple word "conservative."
You need to read the article. The only valid descriptor of the word neocon was written by the man who invented it and the woman that he married should know the precise meaning. Oh and she's the one who wrote the article.
I think libs like to throw out the word "neocon" because they think it sounds like "neo-Nazi" their favorite claim on against the right even though the Nazi were a socialist party. My definition of neocon or "new conservative" has been former conservative democrats who became republicans. Unfortunately, a lot of them don't really embrace true conservative principles or call themselves fiscally conservative, but socially moderate. Which is an oxymoron: If you are moderate or liberal socially, then you believe in government spending money on social concerns--which means you can't be a true fiscal conservative. These are the ones who become RINOs.
Moral perspective; something which the GOP seems to have lost along the way. Wonder what Reagan the Great Communicator would say to his party today? Methinks he would say what he did about the Democrats I didn't leave them, they left me. Actually, they have left all of us.
Kudos, 911 Infidel.
Factions in the Republican Party:
- Fiscal conservatives
- Social conservatives
President Ronald Reagan was able to win in 1980 and 1984 because he was able to build a coalition between the factions of the party. The coalition originally consisted of five factions: the libertarians, the traditionalists, the anti-communists, the neoconservatives, and the second religious right.
We need to stop this traditionalists vs. conservatives vs. moderates vs. neoconservatives vs. libertarians WAR. We have to stop calling people RINOs because they are moderate instead of conservative. We have to stop this idea that someone cannot be successful in the Republican Party if they happen to be pro-choice or pro-gay marriage.
The Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud support the Republican party on basically every fiscal issue, foreign policy issue and many are pro-life. Should they be left out of the party because they are gay and support gay marriage or at least civil unions? We often oppose the leftist Democrats because they think themselves as the Elites. People who say that if you don't think and act as they do well then you are an evil person who is full of hate or a racist,etc. Are we not doing the same thing when we say that if someone isn't on board with every single issue of the conservative faction than they are RINOs?
One of the main reasons that drew me to conservatism in college? Irving Kristol. He was required reading in one of my classes. One of his main critiques of capitalism was that business leaders never explained nor defended it to the Leftists. How timeless.
Thanks for this post. Despite William's various machinations over the years, his father was a brilliant political philosopher. He was the one who coined the term, "a liberal that was mugged reality."
Yeah, I really "lucked out" with this class and especially, the prof. We were made to read Buckley, Plato, Russell Kirk and Leo Strauss.
Granted, she made us read libs too.
I am convinced that the omission of conservative viewpoints and/or authors is deliberate. B/c conservative thought is so much more rich and the depth of their writings just blows the libs out of the water, IMO.
Another great post 911Infidel Thank you! I remember some time ago I was on another forum mostly filled with lefties and Socialists arguing with them and trying to talk some sense to their nonsense. One of them called me a "Neo-Con" expecting me to be insulted. I wrote back "Oh, thank you! That's the nicest thing anyone has called me in ages" and floored him. I always find that the best way to defeat the personal attacks of trolls is to make a joke of their attack and mock them. They have no idea how to come back being humorless warts that they mostly are.
Yes very well done Infidel911, hope you don't mind me copying & pasting to a few NEO-CONSERVATIVE friends on my list....