What Is A Neocon?

[BPSCG]

I'm serious. I don't know. Please tell me what a "neocon" is. I've asked this before, never got an answer. From the context in which it is used around here, "neocons" appears to be a way of saying "Hitler and his thugs (wink wink)." But that can't be right, can it?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm serious. I don't know. Please tell me what a "neocon" is. I've asked this before, never got an answer. From the context in which it is used around here, "neocons" appears to be a way of saying "Hitler and his thugs (wink wink)." But that can't be right, can it?

It's a liberal....who's just been mugged.

-z

[TragicMonkey]

I've been confused about that too. Seems that it's mostly a term not used by "neocons" themselves, but by their opposition. This Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_%28United_States%29 essay seems to suggest it all hinges on foreign policy...therefore the neocon label doesn't tell you much about someone's social conservatism, or lack thereof.

[The Don]

Neocon, literally a new conservative. I believe the identifying characteristics include:

- Dislike of socially liberal policies
- A strong belief in the US' destiny to save the world from the forces of evil
- A strong belief in the free market
- A tendancy to see things in black (evil) and white (good) and a desire to portray as much as possible in these terms
- A departure from traditional conservative values (fiscal responsibility)

Edited to add.....

Never mind, I stand corrected

[zakur]

neocon

n : a conservative who subscribes to neoconservativism


neoconservatism also neo-conservatism
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.).

(Source (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=neoconservative))


Neoconservatism (U.S.)

Neoconservatism is a term referring to the political goals and ideology of the "new conservatives" in the United States of America, characterized by hawkish views on foreign policy and a lesser emphasis on social issues and minimal government than other strains of American conservatism. The "newness" refers either to being new to American conservatism or to being part of a "new wave" of conservative thought and political organization.

In both meanings the term is sometimes used pejoratively. This criticism has grown due to the increased controversy over an alleged major neoconservative initiative, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

More specifically, the term refers to journalists, pundits, policy analysts, and institutions affiliated with policy think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Heritage Foundation and the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and periodicals such as Commentary, Policy Review and The Weekly Standard. The neoconservatives, often dubbed the neocons by supporters and critics alike, are credited with (or blamed for) influencing U.S. foreign policy, especially under the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

The term neoconservative is somewhat controversial, with many to whom the label is applied rejecting it. It has become increasingly popular in recent years, to the point where many say it is becoming overused and lacking any coherent definition, especially since many so-called neoconservatives vehemently disagree with one another on major issues.

(Much more at Source (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Neoconservatism+(U.S.)))

[Patrick]

Neocons popularly are the boogeymen of the appeasers fevered imaginations. In reality, they are former liberal intellectuals, many jewish, who were forced by their honesty and intellectual integrity to admit, most importantly to themselves, the failings of the liberal/left philosophies. With the advent of Ronald Reagan, the politician who capitalized on the political movement started 20 years earlier by Barry Goldwater and the growing disgust with liberalism by the white middle class, the neocons saw the opportunity to influence the american polity with their ideas, and have done so.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by zakur
The term neoconservative is somewhat controversial, with many to whom the label is applied rejecting it. It has become increasingly popular in recent years, to the point where many say it is becoming overused and lacking any coherent definition, especially since many so-called neoconservatives vehemently disagree with one another on major issues.
Okay, so (for the group):

Are/Were the Following Con, Neocon, Neither, or Both?

George Will
Charles Krauthammer
George Bush
Ronald Reagan
Barry Goldwater
John McCain
Donald Rumsfeld
Condoleeza Rice
Karl Rove
Zell Miller
BPSCG

Explain your answers. Serious replies only, please.

[The Don]

George Will No
Charles Krauthammer Yes
George Bush 1 no 2 yes
Ronald Reagan no, but some of his close friends were
Barry Goldwater Probably not
John McCain No
Donald Rumsfeld Yes
Condoleeza Rice Yes
Karl Rove Yes
Zell Miller No
BPSCG No

[aerocontrols]

Are/Were the Following Con, Neocon, Neither, or Both?

George Will No
Charles Krauthammer Yes
George Bush No
Ronald Reagan We wish
Barry Goldwater No
John McCain Yes
Donald Rumsfeld No
Condoleeza Rice Tough call. I say 'no'.
Karl Rove No
Zell Miller No
BPSCG Probably yes
aerocontrols yes
Wolfowitz yes
Bill Kristol yes

Explain your answers. Serious replies only, please.


I would explain my answers, but it would take too long. With respect to Reagan, I would merely say that every flavor of conservative wants to claim Reagan, but I tend to think he followed the realist school of thought on foreign policy. He kicked Wolfowitz out of the Middle East because Wolfy was too critical of our tyrannical buddies there.

Here are previous discussions

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870470795&highlight=neocon%2A#post1870470795

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870502598&highlight=neocon%2A#post1870502598

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=377385&highlight=neocon%2A#post377385

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870311018&highlight=neocon%2A#post1870311018

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm serious. I don't know. Please tell me what a "neocon" is. I've asked this before, never got an answer. From the context in which it is used around here, "neocons" appears to be a way of saying "Hitler and his thugs (wink wink)." But that can't be right, can it?

Why does it puzzle you that the political opponents of neoconservatives would use the name as a slur.

There are people who equate Democrat with Socialist or Liberal with Communist. Don't be puzzled by it, just accept it as the overblown rhetoric that it is.

[jj]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Okay, so (for the group):

Are/Were the Following Con, Neocon, Neither, or Both?

George Will
Charles Krauthammer
George Bush
Ronald Reagan
Barry Goldwater
John McCain
Donald Rumsfeld
Condoleeza Rice
Karl Rove
Zell Miller
BPSCG

Explain your answers. Serious replies only, please.

Will - no
Krauthammer - not sure
Bush - very much so
Reagan - on the edge
Goldwater - not at all
McCain - flirts with it, but seems repelled
Rumsfeld - defines the genre
Rice - Not clear, actually, but acts as though she is
Rove - also defines the genre
Miller - Schizophrenic
BPSCG - You don't explain your "why" well enough, but you act like one.

[crimresearch]

After the election, it looks like the slur of 'neocon' is going to have to be expanded to include black voters who are turned off by Democrat's positions on religion, gay marriages, and other issues that many of the members of the large African American religious denominations are having a problem reconciling...

[The Don]

Originally posted by crimresearch
After the election, it looks like the slur of 'neocon' is going to have to be expanded to include black voters who are turned off by Democrat's positions on religion, gay marriages, and other issues that many of the members of the large African American religious denominations are having a problem reconciling...
Only if they also characterise the politics of the world as good (the U.S. and possibly its closest allies) and evil (everyone else). Social conservatism is not sufficient to be a neocon, a paleocon perhaps but not a neocon

[BPSCG]

So a neocon is simply a fan of recycled conservatism (“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�)? Is there such a thing as a neolib? Does that mean that FDR was a lib and Ted Kennedy is a lib, but Howard Dean and John Kerry are and John Edwards are neolibs?

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by BPSCG
So a neocon is simply a fan of recycled conservatism (“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�)? Is there such a thing as a neolib? Does that mean that FDR was a lib and Ted Kennedy is a lib, but Howard Dean and John Kerry are and John Edwards are neolibs?

I would say you've gotten entirely the wrong idea from this thread. I don't know that the bit quoted above is all that helpful in understanding what neoconservatism is, but it's certainly not a group of young people who are conservative in the same way that some group of older people was. Che was not a 'neocommunist' following after Lenin's communism.

Reagan, Thatcher, and Clinton are largely considered to be neoliberals. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism) So are Dick Cheney, George Bush, and Donald Rumsfeld.

Neoliberal and neoconservative are not even necessarily contradictory terms as far as I can tell. I seem to be both. My neoconservatism may conflict with my neoliberalism with respect to the EU in that I prefer the EU to remain focused on monetary policy and trade rather than become a sovereign state, as a more 'pure' neoliberal might. (might not?)

MattJ

[Furious]

I've always understood neocon to be thus:

Back in the day, your conservative was an avowed state's rights kind of conservative. Government programs, civil rights, and any sort of federal governmental intervention was a bad thing. We'll take care of ourselves at the state level or lower, thank you very much.

IMO, what happened is that they stuck too long with their guns on the race issue. I think minorities and mainstream America never forgave them for it through the 60s (and Nixon REALLY pissed them off in the 70s), but the other issues of fiscal conservatism and semi-isolationism kept them alive (Many were annoyed at wars of containment started by Democratic Presidents.)

That's what I'd call the "base" conservative. Government is hands off everything except defense.

There was a transformation leading up to and during Reagan, but I wouldn't call it neoconservatism. Certainly no longer isolationist and definitely more willing to legislate and enforce morality. Inflamed by Roe v. Wade, the meteoric rise of publicly acceptable pornography and increased drug use, there was certainly a desire for government to get involved in your personal life on a national level.

What I consider neoconservative is the sort of younger generation of Republicans. Inclusive of minorities (but no special priviledges!), ambivalent towards drug use, very hawkish on foreign affairs (liberate countries from tyrants, the UN is irrelavent or nearly so, and definitely want open trade with other nations, especially China), but still willing to put up with the moral crusader wing of the party for votes. And they want their taxes cut. They want their taxes cut very much.

Rummy, Rice, Rove and even W I would put in this category.

Mcain goes beyond it by adding in a strong dislike for special interest groups and doesn't seem to be all that tolerant of the moral side of the Republican party. Young (18-30) neocons practically worship him because he's all the good of Republicans without all that legislated morality BS, and a lot of left leaning centrists do too.

Reagan and Bush Sr. are sorta there, but they are too much on the moral side to be true neocons IMO. I hate to make too much of a "True Scotsman" argument though, and as stated earlier, all conservatives like to claim Reagan.

Ashcroft is a died in the wool traditional conservative, but wants the legilated morality of the 1980s too, which is why liberals consider him pure evil.

EDIT: I'd place BPSCG in the neocon category as well. You seem more on the hawkish side of foreign policy and want your fiscal conservatism, but as far as I know, you don't give a rat's ass if gays get married and are somewhere in between a clump of cells and partial birth abortion on Roe v. Wade (or at least you aren't as rabid as 1inC about railing against them, which I know you'd do more thoughtfully if you did believe strongly about them.)

[billydkid]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm serious. I don't know. Please tell me what a "neocon" is. I've asked this before, never got an answer. From the context in which it is used around here, "neocons" appears to be a way of saying "Hitler and his thugs (wink wink)." But that can't be right, can it?

This was probably answered better somewhere below, but, simply put, it is a new version of conservative who is an an advocate of expanded federal government authority (as opposed to a "small government" conservative) and who also believes in extended American influence, ideology and authority throughout the world. They have always been around in one form or another. There is a significant rift within the conservative movement between those who believe being conservative means being less authoritarian and advocating personal as well as economic liberty/responsibility and those who think being conservative means attempting to universalize and enforce their own personal notions of morality using the force of the federal government to further their social agenda both home and abroad. In fact, yes, they bear a striking resemblance to facists and National Socialists in their mentality. Carl Rove, for example, is a neo-con.

[BPSCG]

Okay, so far I have:
Tragic Monkey: it all hinges on foreign policy
Zakur: hawkish views on foreign policy and a lesser emphasis on social issues and minimal government than other strains of American conservatism.The Don:they also characterise the politics of the world as good (the U.S. and possibly its closest allies) and evil (everyone else). Social conservatism is not sufficient to be a neocon, a paleocon perhaps but not a neoconaerocontrols:it's certainly not a group of young people who are conservative in the same way that some group of older people was. Furious:younger generation of Republicans. Inclusive of minorities (but no special priviledges!), ambivalent towards drug use, very hawkish on foreign affairs (liberate countries from tyrants, the UN is irrelavent or nearly so, and definitely want open trade with other nations, especially China), but still willing to put up with the moral crusader wing of the party for votes. And they want their taxes cut. They want their taxes cut very much.billydkid:advocate of expanded federal government authority (as opposed to a "small government" conservative) and who also believes in extended American influence, ideology and authority throughout the world.As for who's in/out (Yes/No/Maybe)
George Will 0-3-0
Charles Krauthammer 2-0-1
George Bush 2-1-0
Ronald Reagan 0-3-1
Barry Goldwater 0-3
John McCain 2-2-0
Donald Rumsfeld 3-1-0
Condoleeza Rice 3-1-0
Karl Rove 3-1-0
Zell Miller 0-3-0
BPSCG 3-1-0

The only unanimity is on Will and Goldwater, and where there are matches in the final score (Rice, Rove, Runsfeld), it was by different combinations of voters.

I'm starting to think "neoconservative" means whatever you damn want it to mean, and the Left is (has?) turning it into a slur by sloppily applying it to anyone to the right of Joe Lieberman that they disapprove of. I don't see any consensus on what it means beyond "hawkish" foreign policy. For example, I see little difference in the views of George Will and Charles Krauthammer (Will uses bigger words and more Shakespeare) but the consensus here seems to be that Will is and Krauthammer isn't. Why?

Similarly, there seems to be zero agreement on McCain. Okay, he's sui generis, but why the disagreement?

And I'm surprised Reagan got zero votes (so far). Supposedly, he's the neocons' idol. Why, if he wasn't one himself? Do you "age out" at some point?

I find this fascinating. Maybe from now on whenever I see the term "neocon" in a post, I'm going to ask the author to define the term. Keep a file of definitions for later publication. Should be fun...

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Reagan, Thatcher, and Clinton are largely considered to be neoliberals. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism) So are Dick Cheney, George Bush, and Donald Rumsfeld.Do I assume correctly you'd include the likes of Jean Kirkpatrick and anyone else who likes to say, "I didn't leave the Democratic party; the Democratic party left me"?
Neoliberal and neoconservative are not even necessarily contradictory terms as far as I can tell. I seem to be both. My neoconservatism may conflict with my neoliberalism with respect to the EU in that I prefer the EU to remain focused on monetary policy and trade rather than become a sovereign state, as a more 'pure' neoliberal might. (might not?)Oof... still trying to wrap my brain around that one... :)

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Furious
I'd place BPSCG in the neocon category as well. You seem more on the hawkish side of foreign policy Oh, it shows?
and want your fiscal conservatism, but as far as I know, you don't give a rat's ass if gays get married I have a small libertarian streak in that I mostly don't care what people do as long as it doesn't panic the horses in the streets. Unfortunately, same-sex marriage still does panic the horses; I wish there was a way of calming them all down rather than prohibiting same-sex marriage, because I can't think of a good reason to oppose it except that it panics the horses in the streets. Maybe shoot the horses...
and are somewhere in between a clump of cells and partial birth abortion on Roe v. Wade Closer to the clump of cells end, but not a whole lot closer.
(or at least you aren't as rabid as 1inC about railing against them, which I know you'd do more thoughtfully if you did believe strongly about them.) The last time I was less thoughtful than 1inC, I was terrifyingly drunk.

And how does all this make me a neocon? Is a neocon a foreign policy hawk combined with a libertarian on social issues? So far, the only constant I've found in all the replies is the hawkish foreign policy.

[epepke]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Okay, so (for the group):

Are/Were the Following Con, Neocon, Neither, or Both?

George Will: Conservative, not Neocon
Charles Krauthammer: Dunno
George Bush: If Sr., conservative, not Neocon. If Jr., Neocon
Ronald Reagan: Conservative with a liberal twist
Barry Goldwater: Conservative, but with some Neocon elements
John McCain: Conservative, not Neocon
Donald Rumsfeld: Neocon
Condoleeza Rice: Hard to tell
Karl Rove: Dunno
Zell Miller: Definitely Neocon. Up the butt. With bells on.
BPSCG: Somewhere between conservative and neocon

Explain your answers. Serious replies only, please.

That would take too much time, on a point-by-point basis. Generally, though, a conservative conserves. A conservative might have invaded Iraq but only with a clear idea of how to see it through to the end. This idea might be wrong, mind you, but there would be some idea that is reasonably well thought-out and would have figured out how to pay for it. A neocon might have invaded Iraq but with some fantasy image that things would take care of themselves. Which is about what George W. Bush did.

Superficially, the desires of a neocon and a conservative seem similar.

Take some other examples. Johnson seems to me to map well onto a modern neocon. Send more troops to Vietnam but have no well established goal in mind or how to achieve it. Ford was a conservative. Even George Bush Sr. was a conservative: have action with broad support and specific goals and get out once they were achieved.

Note that being conservative rather than neocon doesn't necessarily mean right; perhaps it would have been better in the long run to advance into Baghdad in the early 1990s.

[corplinx]

A neocon remembers the tragedy the PLO brought on Lebanon.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm starting to think "neoconservative" means whatever you damn want it to mean, and the Left is (has?) turning it into a slur by sloppily applying it to anyone to the right of Joe Lieberman that they disapprove of.

Yes, that's it. If you want to know what a neoconservative is, you can either trust a neoconservative to tell you, or read up on the issue from sources that predate 9/11.

Originally posted by BPSCG
Similarly, there seems to be zero agreement on McCain. Okay, he's sui generis, but why the disagreement?

Because a lot of people who like McCain don't understand what a neoconservative is, but think that it's a negative label and thus don't want to apply it to him.

Originally posted by BPSCG
And I'm surprised Reagan got zero votes (so far). Supposedly, he's the neocons' idol. Why, if he wasn't one himself? Do you "age out" at some point?

He doesn't qualify as a neocon because his foreign policy was realism. Neoconservatism is a set of policy positions, not a result of when one was born.

Originally posted by BPSCG
I find this fascinating. Maybe from now on whenever I see the term "neocon" in a post, I'm going to ask the author to define the term. Keep a file of definitions for later publication. Should be fun...

That sounds like a good rule of thumb.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Do I assume correctly you'd include the likes of Jean Kirkpatrick and anyone else who likes to say, "I didn't leave the Democratic party; the Democratic party left me"?

Not necessarily. I didn't include Zell Miller, for instance. I doubt I would include Krikpatrick, but I really don't know enough about her to say.


Originally posted by BPSCG
Oof... still trying to wrap my brain around that one... :)

Neoconservatism means you tend more than others to support military and economic intervention to encourage the establishment of democracy.

Neoliberalism means that you tend to support using multilateral institutions to try to get states to enact market reforms towards free market economics.

Both groups believe that doing A to achieve B will result in more freedom and justice. I agree with both groups, therefore I belong to both categories.

[Ladewig]

Is a neocon a foreign policy hawk combined with a libertarian on social issues? So far, the only constant I've found in all the replies is the hawkish foreign policy.

The replies are not as far apart as you might think. The word has been changing over the past few decades, but not to the point of its being meaningless. The briefest definition would be "intervention rather than containment."

(God, I hate to say this but) Patrick was right when he referred to former liberal intellectuals, many jewish, who admitted .... the failings of the liberal/left philosophies. However their conversion was based on their disatisfaction with US/USSR relations. They were against détente. † They viewed the communists as enemies that should be fought, not negotiated with. The philosophy was then picked up by some conservatives who always had been conservative and that's why it is no longer a matter of converting to conservatism. One no longer has to be new to conservatism to be a neocon.

When Reagan said, "tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev," he didn't mean tear it down or we will send in troops to tear it down for you. That's why R. Reagan was not a neocon. Bush 41 was not a neocon because he was prepared to increase trade with communist China, while a pure neocon would have called for an embargo at the very least. Also, Bush 41 went to war with Iraq, but did not overthrow the government with the intent of forming a US style democracy. Bush 43 is most certainly a neocon because he sent troops to Iraq even though they never attacked the homeland.

Many of the previous posters descibed neocons as having domestic agendas regarding morality while others said their views of social programs were not as important. The difference comes about because the latest batch of neocons (led by Bush 43) do have strong feelings about about morality and the usefulness of outlawing immoral behavior (e.g. homosexuality). Therefore, because these neocons have added values to their agenda, it is now common to refer to neocons as both hawkish on foreign policy and strong on making God's law the law of the land.

People who prefer a more isolationist foreign policy (e.g. Pat Buchanan) are sometimes refered to as paleoconservatives.


.......................
† A policy toward a rival nation or bloc characterized by increased diplomatic, commercial, and cultural contact and a desire to reduce tensions, as through negotiation or talks.

[Furious]

Originally posted by BPSCG


And how does all this make me a neocon? Is a neocon a foreign policy hawk combined with a libertarian on social issues? So far, the only constant I've found in all the replies is the hawkish foreign policy.

Bingo. :D

IMO of course.

Neoconservatism is the idea of making the world a better place through military/economic might.

I would qualify that I don't think neocons are pure libertarian on social issues (advocating that there be NO governmental intervention), I just think they don't especially care about the issues one way or the other. Gays marrying or being outlawed from getting married doesn't really matter to them.

[jj]

Originally posted by corplinx
A neocon remembers the tragedy the PLO brought on Lebanon.

So do we moderates.

[jj]

Originally posted by Furious
Neoconservatism is the idea of making the world a better place through military/economic might.


Not quite. It's "our might makes right".

It's USA vs. the entire rest of the world.

That's what we have now.

[billydkid]

Originally posted by Furious
Bingo. :D

IMO of course.

Neoconservatism is the idea of making the world a better place through military/economic might.

I would qualify that I don't think neocons are pure libertarian on social issues (advocating that there be NO governmental intervention), I just think they don't especially care about the issues one way or the other. Gays marrying or being outlawed from getting married doesn't really matter to them.

Neocons are not even remotely libertarian. I don't where anyone has gotten that idea. You will find that 99% of libertarian columnists have nothing good to say about libertarians. Neocons are statists - exactly what libertarians are not.