Krauthammer: ‘Neoconservative’ is epithet used to disparage Jewish conservatives [VIDEO]

[Agorism]

Krauthammer: ‘Neoconservative’ is epithet used to disparage Jewish conservatives [VIDEO]


At the National Review Institute Summit in Washington, D.C. on Friday night, Washington Post columnist and Fox News Channel regular Charles Krauthammer disowned the term “neoconservative,” saying it has become little more than an epithet used to disparage Jewish conservatives.

Krauthammer, who has long been considered hawkish on foreign policy matters, made the remarks in an interview with National Review magazine editor Rich Lowry.

“No,” Krauthammer said, when asked whether he identifies as a neoconservative. “It is an epithet. It is nothing more. It once had a meaning, when Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz sort of changed their political ideology and made a great case for it in the ‘70s. Today it’s usually meant as a silent synonym for ‘Jewish conservative.’”

“And when it is meant otherwise, I would ask you whenever you hear the word [to] challenge the person to describe and explain to you what a neocon is. And I guarantee you they will have no answer. So it used to mean someone who was once a liberal, as in the ‘70s, and became more conservative and made the case for the change. Thirty years later, I don’t think it has [any] meaning at all, except for a pejorative one.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/26/krauthammer-the-term-neoconservative-is-an-epithet-video/#ixzz2J7fcbRpH

[belian78]

LOL.. Don't like Obama? Obviously a racist. Don't like neocons? Obviously a jew hater. Yup, the GOP slowly becoming liberals 2.0 for sure.

[kathy88]

LOL.. Don't like Obama? Obviously a racist. Don't like neocons? Obviously a jew hater. Yup, the GOP slowly becoming liberals 2.0 for sure.
Exactly what I was thinking.

[Agorism]

LOL.. Don't like Obama? Obviously a racist. Don't like neocons? Obviously a jew hater. Yup, the GOP slowly becoming liberals 2.0 for sure.


Well an attack on Israel is the exact same thing as an attack on the USA so this must be true.


http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2011/03/10/rand-paul-6d18b399bbc8921a29c08061953dd49e275c517f-s6-c10.jpg

[belian78]

Come on Ag, no need to bring that argument into other threads.

[erowe1]

Thirty years later, I don’t think it has [any] meaning at all, except for a pejorative one.

I think he's pretty much right about that.

[Agorism]

Come on Ag, no need to bring that argument into other threads.

It's directly related.

[belian78]

I think he's pretty much right about that.

The term sure does have meaning, and a negative one at that, and it fits like a glove IMO.

[Pisces]

I can't stand Krauthammer, but he has a point here. The word neoconservative today has become so overused that its pretty much meaningless anymore. For many on RPF's neoconservative just means anyone who disagrees with Ron Paul on anything.

[libertygrl]

Geesh... this is nothing new to me. A Zionist on a local tea party forum kept accusing me of being anti-semetic because I was using the term neo-con in a couple of my posts. He said it was code word for Jew. I told him I never heard of such a thing before. Weren't Cheney, Bush, etc., all neo-cons???

It's nothing but a page out of Rules for Radicals. Attack the character of a person into submission so that you silence him from speaking the truth. But I think more people are waking up and speaking out despite the slander. They're getting fed up with the BS.

[erowe1]

A Zionist on a local tea party forum kept accusing me of being anti-semetic because I was using the term neo-con in a couple of my posts. He said it was code word for Jew.

Limbaugh's been saying exactly that for a long time. Definitely since before RP's 2007 campaign.

[Pisces]

I think in general it is better to describe why people like Krauthammer or Cheney are not truly conservative than to just call them neo-cons. Krauthammer, for example, supports gun control. Cheney famously said that "deficits don't matter". People will pay attention to statements like this whereas they may just tune you out if all they hear is "neo-con this and neo-con that".

[Occam's Banana]

A Zionist on a local tea party forum kept accusing me of being anti-semetic because I was using the term neo-con in a couple of my posts. He said it was code word for Jew.

We already have code words for "racist", "sexist", etc. Now we've got (a new) one for "anti-semite".

What we really need is a code word for "Shut the hell up - you're full of shit!"

[Brian4Liberty]

The term is over-used, and often is not properly used.


I would ask you whenever you hear the word [to] challenge the person to describe and explain to you what a neocon is.

A Trotskyite who shifted over to the GOP to better continue their fight against Stalin (USSR). With the demise of the Soviet Union, they became Israel-centric. They generally have few true disagreements with US (and international) socialists, apart from their openly aggressive foreign policy. As a generalization, they only pay lip service to fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, constitutionalism, and small government in order to gain allies for their foreign policy agenda.

Does that cover it sufficiently?

[erowe1]

A Trotskyite who shifted over to the GOP to better continue their fight against Stalin (USSR).

So basically, it only applies to people no longer living.

[Agorism]

We're all Neocons now in the GOP. One big party.

Don't question it.

[Brian4Liberty]

So basically, it only applies to people no longer living.

You ignore the rest of the post, which is more relevant to today.

That's the history. Stalin was dead when they were battling the Soviet Union. The focus has shifted over the decades, and the first generations are pretty much gone, but Kristol and Krauthammer are still pushing the (modified) agenda.

[libertygrl]

I think in general it is better to describe why people like Krauthammer or Cheney are not truly conservative than to just call them neo-cons. Krauthammer, for example, supports gun control. Cheney famously said that "deficits don't matter". People will pay attention to statements like this whereas they may just tune you out if all they hear is "neo-con this and neo-con that".

Why? Why should I have to alter my words just because they fear being exposed for who they are - far right foreign interventionists? It just means new conservative. With all due respect, isn't this just a form of censorship or political correctness? I haven't had a problem with people tuning out by the use of this word unless they were a neo-con. Besides, it's an easier description to use and I get lazy sometimes. LOL.

Neo-con is a term that they themselves have used. It's a political philosophy and now it's being used to describe an ethnicity? That's ridiculous. They're trying to hi-jack the word so that people will be afraid to use it. They did the same thing with the word Zionism and equated it with Judaism.

The "neoconservative" label was used by Irving Kristol in his 1979 article "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'"[8] His ideas have been influential since the 1950s, when he co-founded and edited the magazine Encounter.[9] Another source was Norman Podhoretz, editor of the magazine Commentary from 1960 to 1995. By 1982 Podhoretz was terming himself a neoconservative, in a New York Times Magazine article titled "The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan's Foreign Policy".[10][11] During the late 1970s and early 1980s, the neoconservatives considered that liberalism had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about, " according to E. J. Dionne

The term "neoconservative" (sometimes shortened to "neocon") was used initially during the 1930s to describe American communist intellectuals who criticized Soviet ideology.Yet from the 1930s to the early 1950s, conservatives were strong non-interventionists and the Old Right committed to the concept of anti-imperialism until the late 1960s when neoconservatives began to endorse nationalism and interventionism in opposition to the USSR.

h ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

[erowe1]

Why? Why should I have to alter my words just because they fear being exposed for who they are - far right foreign interventionists?

For one thing, they're not far right.

For another thing, nothing in what you copied from wikipedia says anything about why anyone today can properly be called a neoconservative.

[Brian4Liberty]

It's not like there hasn't been a hundred threads here already about the definition of neo-conservatism.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/01/GR2008020102389.html

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/01/GR2008020102389.gif

[erowe1]

If anyone wants to see how Krauthammer is basically right on this, just look at how the word "neoconservative" has been thrown around in response to what Rand said about defending Israel. "Neoconservative" was never defined as being pro-Israel until it became a pejorative. Now, at least for the people who use it pejoratively, that's pretty much the main thing it means.

[Pisces]

Why? Why should I have to alter my words just because they fear being exposed for who they are - far right foreign interventionists? It just means new conservative. With all due respect, isn't this just a form of censorship or political correctness? I haven't had a problem with people tuning out by the use of this word unless they were a neo-con. Besides, it's an easier description to use and I get lazy sometimes. LOL.

Neo-con is a term that they themselves have used. It's a political philosophy and now it's being used to describe an ethnicity? That's ridiculous. They're trying to hi-jack the word so that people will be afraid to use it. They did the same thing with the word Zionism and equated it with Judaism.

The "neoconservative" label was used by Irving Kristol in his 1979 article "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'"[8] His ideas have been influential since the 1950s, when he co-founded and edited the magazine Encounter.[9] Another source was Norman Podhoretz, editor of the magazine Commentary from 1960 to 1995. By 1982 Podhoretz was terming himself a neoconservative, in a New York Times Magazine article titled "The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan's Foreign Policy".[10][11] During the late 1970s and early 1980s, the neoconservatives considered that liberalism had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about, " according to E. J. Dionne

The term "neoconservative" (sometimes shortened to "neocon") was used initially during the 1930s to describe American communist intellectuals who criticized Soviet ideology.Yet from the 1930s to the early 1950s, conservatives were strong non-interventionists and the Old Right committed to the concept of anti-imperialism until the late 1960s when neoconservatives began to endorse nationalism and interventionism in opposition to the USSR.

h ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

You can use whatever words you like. I only meant to say that you'll have more success in convincing people if you avoid cliched words like neo-con. Why not just call them "far-right foreign interventionists" if that is what you think they are? That is a much better description than neo-con. I don't agree that they are "far-right" but that phrase does a better job at illustrating what you think about them than just saying "neo-con".

[Brian4Liberty]

For one thing, they're not far right.


Got that right, errr, correct.

Which is why you only get tepid protests from Krauthammer when it comes to things like gun control, Obamacare, welfare/warfare state, etc.

[erowe1]

It's not like there hasn't been a hundred threads here already about the definition of neo-conservatism.

That graphic doesn't really give any way to say when the label applies to anyone today. It's just a network of influence without a common uniting philosophy.

It is a good graphic though, and I think I'll want to refer back to it in the future.

[Brian4Liberty]

If anyone wants to see how Krauthammer is basically right on this, just look at how the word "neoconservative" has been thrown around in response to what Rand said about defending Israel. "Neoconservative" was never defined as being pro-Israel until it became a pejorative. Now, at least for the people who use it pejoratively, that's pretty much the main thing it means.

That's because the true neo-conservatives like Krauthammer and Kristol have distilled their ideology down to the single issue of Israel. Therefore anyone who makes Israel their number one issue gets put into their camp. But it also makes Krauthammer wrong when he says that it is equal to being a Jewish conservative. Gentiles may very well outnumber Jews in the modern neo-conservative movement.

[Agorism]

btw- that picture I posted looks like Rand is wearing a Zegna tie possibly.

[erowe1]

That's because the true neo-conservatives like Krauthammer and Kristol have distilled their ideology down to the single issue of Israel.

Where did they do this? I think it was their opponents who distilled it down to that, not them.

[James Madison]

If anyone wants to see how Krauthammer is basically right on this, just look at how the word "neoconservative" has been thrown around in response to what Rand said about defending Israel. "Neoconservative" was never defined as being pro-Israel until it became a pejorative. Now, at least for the people who use it pejoratively, that's pretty much the main thing it means.

The old, "If you critisize Israel, you hate Jews" argument.:rolleyes:

Oh, that's right! Israel is our friend! Except when they attempt to sink our ships, murder our Sailors, steal our technology, and hold our politicians for ransom. How anyone could support that (literally) God-Forsaken country is beyond me. But they're our best buds, right? Just like when they helped us in Vietnam...oh wait, they didn't. Just like they helped us in Iraq and Afghanistan...oh wait, they didn't do that either. Please, tell me how this relationship isn't completely one-sided. When has Israel done anything to warrant our status as 'friends'. Face it, we're Israel's bitch. I know it; you know it. Hell, even Israelites know it. That's why our politicians have to go on a pilgrimage to kiss some 3,000 year-old wall as if it's Holy. This doesn't even begin to explore the theological issues of this debate.

[AGRP]

What do you prefer Charles? How about Zionists?

[Brian4Liberty]

Where did they do this? I think it was their opponents who distilled it down to that, not them.

Kristol and Krauthammer are generally only involved in foreign policy discussions. If Fox calls them in for anything other than their regular shows, it's almost always a foreign policy issue, related to Israel. Of course they kill a little time on other subjects, but how much time do they really want to spend talking about how they think gun control and Obamacare aren't really that bad? Their historical interest in Russia is not gone either. Putin is their new Stalin, so they will throw barbs his way on occasion.

[Lucille]

I agree. #banit We should NEVER call them "conservatives."


In the Orwellian world of the neocons, where a new form of political correctness frames their every utterance, the language is contracting (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j061303.html). Because the goal of totalitarian thought control is to make the expression of political incorrectness impossible, the goal of this Neocon Newspeak is the abolition of many now-common words. In this context, words are used, not to make debating points, but to end all discussion. There are no Straussians, we are told, and even the word neoconservative is to be flushed down the Memory Hole, along with shelves full of books, articles, and even one incredibly boring film detailing their intellectual and political evolution in minute detail.
[...]
The esoteric elitist Strauss, the Leninist elitist Trotsky, Schwartz and his mock-operatic "Third and a Half International" re-fighting the inter-Commie faction wars of the 1930s with a gaggle of ex-Stalinists – this is the official "conservative" movement of today! No wonder Commissar Frum and his fellow neocons felt compelled to attack us antiwar, limited government types as "unpatriotic conservatives," going so far as to declare that they "turn their backs" on us. They turned their backs on authentic conservatism some time ago.

[erowe1]

The old, "If you critisize Israel, you hate Jews" argument.:rolleyes:

Oh, that's right! Israel is our friend! Except when they attempt to sink our ships, murder our Sailors, steal our technology, and hold our politicians for ransom. How anyone could support that (literally) God-Forsaken country is beyond me. But they're our best buds, right? Just like when they helped us in Vietnam...oh wait, they didn't. Just like they helped us in Iraq and Afghanistan...oh wait, they didn't do that either. Please, tell me how this relationship isn't completely one-sided. When has Israel done anything to warrant our status as 'friends'. Face it, we're Israel's bitch. I know it; you know it. Hell, even Israelites know it. That's why our politicians have to go on a pilgrimage to kiss some 3,000 year-old wall as if it's Holy. This doesn't even begin to explore the theological issues of this debate.

See what I mean?

I point out the misuse of the label "neoconservative" for Rand. And instead of addressing that point, someone interprets that as me arguing that "If you critisize Israel, you hate Jews." That's how entrenched and precious the label "neoconservative" is to those who want to be able to use it against anything and everything pro-Israel.

[AGRP]

What does Charles want to use? Zionists? Trotskyites? Pirates?

[erowe1]

Kristol and Krauthammer are generally only involved in foreign policy discussions. If Fox calls them in for anything other than their regular shows, it's almost always a foreign policy issue, related to Israel. Of course they kill a little time on other subjects, but how much time do they really want to spend talking about how they think gun control and Obamacare aren't really that bad? Their historical interest in Russia is not gone either. Putin is their new Stalin, so they will throw barbs his way on occasion.

When they talk about Israel, do they call the view they're espousing "neoconservative"? Based on the quote in the OP, I'd guess that Krauthammer at least does not.

[James Madison]

See what I mean?

I point out the misuse of the label "neoconservative" for Rand. And instead of addressing that point, someone interprets that as me arguing that "If you critisize Israel, you hate Jews." That's how entrenched and precious the label "neoconservative" is to those who want to be able to use it against anything and everything pro-Israel.

That's bullshit and a total copout. Answer my question: What has Israel done for us? Anything?! Why should we defend them? They're grown-ups, and they can take care of themselves. What makes them so special? Why don't we see politicians smoozing up to any other nation like they do for Israel. Here's a hint: it has nothing to do with Jews...it's all about money and power. To say it's about Jews is laughable considering these so-called 'Jews' are Eastern European Atheists.

[erowe1]

What does Charles want to use? Zionists? Trotskyites? Pirates?

If the thing about them you intend to criticize is zionism, then yes, that's the word you should use.

It's just that using "zionist" as a pejorative sounds anti-semitic, so people who would like to use it use "neoconservative" instead. I think that's pretty much Krauthammer's point.

[erowe1]

That's bullshit and a total copout. Answer my question: What has Israel done for us? Anything?! Why should we defend them? They're grown-ups, and they can take care of themselves. What makes them so special? Why don't we see politicians smoozing up to any other nation like they do for Israel. Here's a hint: it has nothing to do with Jews...it's all about money and power. To say it's about Jews is laughable considering these so-called 'Jews' are Eastern European Atheists.

What does any of this have to do with the use of the word "neoconservative"?

The very fact that you're going there proves Krauthammer is right.

[Lucille]

What does Charles want to use? Zionists? Trotskyites? Pirates?

I hear Max Boot (http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1025471851512120640,00.html?mod=opinion#artic leTabs%3Darticle) likes "neo-Wilsonian (http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster91.html)."


The Wilsonian alternative is clear: We will settle for nothing less than the establishment of liberal democracy in Iraq within a federalist framework that allows a great deal of autonomy to the Kurds and Shiites. And if this requires American and allied troops to undertake occupation duty, so be it.

Well, he got his occupation anyway.

[James Madison]

What does any of this have to do with the use of the word "neoconservative"?

The very fact that you're going there proves Krauthammer is right.

You wrote...


just look at how the word "neoconservative" has been thrown around in response to what Rand said about defending Israel.

One of the key components of neo-conservativism is Zionism, which means supporting Israel, right or wrong. Rand is saying he would consider an attack on Israel as an attack on the US...that is a text-book neo-conservative talking point. Would he say the same thing about the UK? Russia? Germany? Canada? Doubt it.

[erowe1]

One of the key components of neo-conservativism is Zionism

What do you base that on?

Let me guess, you got it from someone else who was using the word "neocon" as a pejorative.

[erowe1]

I hear Max Boot (http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1025471851512120640,00.html?mod=opinion#artic leTabs%3Darticle) likes "neo-Wilsonian (http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster91.html)."



Well, he got his occupation anyway.

I hate to agree with Boot. But "Neo-Wilsonian" seems like a great label to use, and one that could be more effective in winning over other conservatives to be against it.

[James Madison]

What do you base that on?

Let me guess, you got it from someone else who was using the word "neocon" as a pejorative.

I base this on observation and history, going back to Rothschild.

[sailingaway]

Nonsense, to K. How does he explain McCain, in that case?

[AGRP]

It sounds like the term has really gotten a foothold and they dont like it. The neocons are attempting to do the exact same thing the "liberals" did when they had to change to "progressive." The term "liberal" and the people who ascribed to it got trashed so they had to change terms.

[erowe1]

I base this on observation and history, going back to Rothschild.

The problem is, we're talking about the meaning of a word. Neoconservatism was never about zionism until it was used a pejorative by people who didn't want to say "zionism." When neoconservatives were pushing democracy in the Philippines, that had nothing to do with zionism. And nothing Rand said about defending Israel has anything to do with anything "neoconservative" ever meant when it actually meant something.

[erowe1]

Nonsense, to K. How does he explain McCain, in that case?

Did anyone other than Ron Paul supporters ever call McCain a neoconservative?

[sailingaway]

Did anyone other than Ron Paul supporters ever call McCain a neoconservative?

sure. What else would he be? The man is a progressive who just likes war and international domination above other funding projects.

[erowe1]

sure. What else would he be? The man is a progressive who just likes war and international domination above other funding projects.

Got an example of someone calling him "neoconservative" and not using the word pejoratively?

"A progressive who just likes war and international domination above other funding projects" describes 90% of all politicians from my perspective, and could be applied to them long before there was such a thing as neoconservatism.

[sailingaway]

Got an example of someone calling him "neoconservative" and not using the word pejoratively?

"A progressive who just likes war and international domination above other funding projects" describes 90% of all politicians from my perspective.

I'd have to look for one, but I thought he was commonly called that.

[Brian4Liberty]

If the thing about them you intend to criticize is zionism, then yes, that's the word you should use.

It's just that using "zionist" as a pejorative sounds anti-semitic, so people who would like to use it use "neoconservative" instead. I think that's pretty much Krauthammer's point.

Krauthammer said "Jewish conservative" is being equated to neo-conservative. No mention of Israel. A subtle shifting of the debate there. Krauthammer is playing games, trying to discredit and demonize people. He is not a conservative, and not all pro-Israel people are Jewish.

Yes, people who are misusing the term, or over-simplifying it, are equating it with Israel centric foreign policy. This is the case when people misuse it for Rand. I would dare say that because the major neo-conservative pundits have made Israel centric foreign policy their number one priority by far, they have created this simplified definition. And no doubt they would like to keep their socialism on the down-low anyway. It's part of the deception.

[jkr]

how bout we just call em ASSHOLES
nothing "jewish" about that is there?

fucking crybabies

[James Madison]

The problem is, we're talking about the meaning of a word. Neoconservatism was never about zionism until it was used a pejorative by people who didn't want to say "zionism." When neoconservatives were pushing democracy in the Philippines, that had nothing to do with zionism. And nothing Rand said about defending Israel has anything to do with anything "neoconservative" ever meant when it actually meant something.

Communism has had more than a few forayes into the realm of militarism, but it doesn't take away from its core thesis of wealth distribution and the overthrowing of the bourgeoisie.

[erowe1]

Krauthammer said "Jewish conservative" is being equated to neo-conservative. No mention of Israel.

Yeah, I get that. Krauthammer was propagandizing too. IMHO, he was implicitly equating Jewishness with zionism so that he could paint people who use the word as antisemites. When you read between the lines, I think that the way "neocon" has come to be used pejoratively, and the way that pejorative use tends to get attached to policies related to Israel, is what he's talking about.

[RickyJ]

When all else fails just cry anti-Semitism! It usually shuts up all who fear the cult.

[erowe1]

Communism has had more than a few forayes into the realm of militarism, but it doesn't take away from its core thesis of wealth distribution and the overthrowing of the bourgeoisie.

Again, what does any of this have to do with the word "neoconservative"?

[James Madison]

Again, what does any of this have to do with the word "neoconservative"?

I already told you. Neo-conservativism is characterized by hawkish foreign policy that includes, thanks to many of its founding members being Jewish, unwavering, unilateral support of Israel. Since the 40s and 50s, neo-conservatism has infected the majority of Christians, fooled into thinking the nation of Israel will play a role in Armaggedon.

[erowe1]

I already told you. Neo-conservativism is characterized by hawkish foreign policy that includes, thanks to many of its founding members being Jewish, unwavering, unilateral support of Israel. Since the 40s and 50s, neo-conservatism has infected the majority of Christians, fooled into thinking the nation of Israel will play a role in Armaggedon.

Let's pretend for the sake of argument that that was a good definition of neoconservative.

I still don't get your point. The statement you made that my question was about was this:

Communism has had more than a few forayes into the realm of militarism, but it doesn't take away from its core thesis of wealth distribution and the overthrowing of the bourgeoisie.

Plus, everything you say here just illustrates Krauthammer's point. So now "neoconservative" includes Christians who think Israel will play a role in Armageddon? Do any Christians who think that ever call that view "neoconservative"?

The last time I recall ever hearing someone use "neoconservative" as a self-description, and not a pejorative, it was Giuliani in the 2008 primaries, and IIRC he wasn't saying anything related to Israel.

[Occam's Banana]

What does Charles want to use? Zionists? Trotskyites? Pirates?

Speaking for myself, I think "slavery-and-death-worshipping thugs" pretty much accounts for the most salient points.


I hear Max Boot (http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1025471851512120640,00.html?mod=opinion#artic leTabs%3Darticle) likes "neo-Wilsonian (http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster91.html)."


The Wilsonian alternative is clear: We will settle for nothing less than the establishment of liberal democracy in Iraq within a federalist framework that allows a great deal of autonomy to the Kurds and Shiites. And if this requires American and allied troops to undertake occupation duty, so be it.

Well, he got his occupation anyway.

Ah, good ol' Max "somtimes ya just gotta pick up a little country and smear it against the wall - just 'coz ya can" Boot. He never fails to disgust ...

[AGRP]

Let's pretend for the sake of argument that that was a good definition of neoconservative.

I still don't get your point. The statement you made that my question was about was this:


Plus, everything you say here just illustrates Krauthammer's point. So now "neoconservative" includes Christians who think Israel will play a role in Armageddon? Do any Christians who think that ever call that view "neoconservative"?

The last time I recall ever hearing someone use "neoconservative" as a self-description, and not a pejorative, it was Giuliani in the 2008 primaries, and IIRC he wasn't saying anything related to Israel.

Why pretend? He flat out answered your question and concerns.

[James Madison]

Plus, everything you say here just illustrates Krauthammer's point. So now "neoconservative" includes Christians who think Israel will play a role in Armageddon? Do any Christians who think that ever call that view "neoconservative"?

The last time I recall ever hearing someone use "neoconservative" as a self-description, and not a pejorative, it was Giuliani in the 2008 primaries, and IIRC he wasn't saying anything related to Israel.

No, those would be called Dispensationalists, of which you are one. The fact most people are too lazy to perform even basic research doesn't excuse their ignorance of Neo-Conservatism's sordid history.

Krauthammer wasn't trying to have a serious discussion about political and philosophical idealogoy. He was attempting to label those critical of 'neocons' as anti-semetic. Just like dipshit moron whats-his-face on MSNBC saying nullification is code for rascist. Oh, and if you oppose government healthcare you hate black people. THAT was Krauthammer's point. Just more guilt-by-association politics designed to pry on peoples emotions.

[amy31416]

Fuck political correctness.

Some neocon "Jews" make fun of Christians, use them, demonize Muslims and do push our country into financial and moral destruction. Some "Christians" are neocon scumbags too--the ones that aren't stark, raving mad are psychopaths who should be disparaged at least, dropped onto a sinking ship in shark-infested water at best. That goes for that repulsive ferret known at Krauthammer and those nut jobs known as McCain/Cheney, etc. These people steal and kill innocent people--they won't push me into treating them like delicate flowers whose nonexistent feelings get hurt because they're called an accurate name.

If it's anti-semitism to call out murderers and thieves, then perhaps assholes like Krauthammer should stop rallying for it so other Jews don't have to be burdened with his repulsive association.

[amy31416]

............

[erowe1]

No, those would be called Dispensationalists, of which you are one.

So you're pretty much admitting that your use of "neoconservative" is your own, and only means what you mean by it when it's used a pejorative. And when you give your own definition of it, you make it about Israel.

I agree that none of that means you hate Jews, if you thought I was implying it did. But doesn't that all just support Krauthammer's basic point about how the word has lost all connection to any historical meaning it had and it now only gets used pejoratively?

[erowe1]

Why pretend?

Because it wasn't a good definition of the word, but we could pretend it was for the sake of argument so I could ask how what he said about communism had anything to do with it.

And did you honestly see something in his post 56 that answered my question in post 55 about what he said in post 52? If you thought he did answer it, then you misread him.

[James Madison]

So you're pretty much admitting that your use of "neoconservative" is your own, and only means what you mean by it when it's used a pejorative. And when you give your own definition of it, you make it about Israel.


No, I'm pretty much saying I answered your question several posts ago. You didn't seem to like my answer so you continue appealing to ignorance.

[erowe1]

No, I'm pretty much saying I answered your question several posts ago. You didn't seem to like my answer so you continue appealing to ignorance.

But your answer only proved my point.

You have ripped the word "neoconservative" from any positive meaning it ever had so that you can use it as a pejorative in place of the word "zionist," which it never meant until people like you started using it that way.

That usage of the word has become so common around here that you were just taking it for granted when we began this exchange. "Of course what Rand said was neoconservative, because zionism is the main part of neoconservatism!" It hadn't even crossed your mind that that wasn't true.

[AGRP]

Because it wasn't a good definition of the word, but we could pretend it was for the sake of argument so I could ask how what he said about communism had anything to do with it.

Sounds more like you personally dont like the answers. Are you going to write neocon extraordinaire himself Bill Kristol to complain about calling Barack Obama a born again neocon?

[erowe1]

Sounds more like you personally dont like the answers. Are you going to write neocon extraordinaire himself Bill Kristol to complain about calling Barack Obama a neocon?

No. But that's interesting. Did Krauthammer say that? And was he talking about zionism?

[AGRP]

No. But that's interesting. Did Krauthammer say that? And was he talking about zionism?

So was Bill Kristol, neocon extraordinaire, son of the man who coined the term, wrong when he identified Obama as a born again neocon? How so?

[DFF]

Neoconservatism was invented by a Jew, professor Leo Strauss....

Communism was invented by a Jew, Karl Marx....

Perhaps instead of whining, Jews should stop inventing evil ideologies that cause death and suffering for millions?

[erowe1]

So was Bill Kristol, neocon extraordinaire, son of the man who coined the term, wrong when he identified Obama as a born again neocon was right? How so?

I don't know. Did he say that? And when he said it, was he talking about zionism?

I know nothing about it, but it seems like you do.

It wouldn't surprise me if Kristol said that. It would surprise me if he intended it in a way that had anything to do with zionism. And if I'm right about that, then it would only further support my point about how people misuse the word when they use it that way.

ETA: From googling, it looks like Kristol did say that, and he was specifically talking about Libya. Question: Is Rand's position on Libya the same as Obama's? Or are you folks using the word "neoconservative" in a way totally different than Kristol?

[erowe1]

Neoconservatism was invented by a Jew, professor Leo Strauss....

Communism was invented by a Jew, Karl Marx....

Perhaps instead of whining, Jews should stop inventing evil ideologies that cause death and suffering for millions?

OK, everyone. See?

[AGRP]

I don't know. Did he say that? And when he said it, was he talking about zionism?

I know nothing about it, but it seems like you do.

It wouldn't surprise me if Kristol said that. It would surprise me if he intended it in a way that had anything to do with zionism. And if I'm right about that, then it would only further support my point about how people misuse the word when they use it that way.

Its not challenging to search for the video. Why do you throw topics when you get cornered or receive sufficient answers? Do you purposely use troll tactics?

[erowe1]

Its not challenging to search for the video. Why do you throw topics when you get cornered or receive sufficient answers? Do you purposely use troll tactics?

I already edited my post. As I suspected, I was proven right. Why did you bring it up, since you presumably knew that would happen?

[anaconda]

I can't stand Krauthammer, but he has a point here. The word neoconservative today has become so overused that its pretty much meaningless anymore. For many on RPF's neoconservative just means anyone who disagrees with Ron Paul on anything.

I think the term has a pretty consistent meaning, around here at least. It seems to define any politician that advocates military intervention based upon directly non threatening scenarios, yet usually claimed to be threatening with false propaganda, for the purposes of preemptively securing natural resources, corporate market share and revenue, and/or strategic military hegemony, all with an appeal to nationalistic patriotism.

[erowe1]

I think the term has a pretty consistent meaning, around here at least. It seems to define any politician that advocates military intervention based upon directly non threatening scenarios, yet usually claimed to be threatening with false propaganda, for the purposes of preemptively securing natural resources, corporate market share and revenue, and/or strategic military hegemony, all with an appeal to nationalistic patriotism.

As you can probably see from this thread, that meaning is not a very consistent one here. There's another common meaning. And Krauthammer's words apparently came a little too close to home for some.

[dillo]

If anyone wants to see how Krauthammer is basically right on this, just look at how the word "neoconservative" has been thrown around in response to what Rand said about defending Israel. "Neoconservative" was never defined as being pro-Israel until it became a pejorative. Now, at least for the people who use it pejoratively, that's pretty much the main thing it means.

Maybe that's because its not a conservative idea to have entangling alliances, yet this current wave off people claiming to be conservatives believe in just that. They are therefore neo (new) conservative

[erowe1]

Maybe that's because its not a conservative idea to have entangling alliances

Having entangling alliances is neither conservative nor liberal. Entangling alliances have historically been advocated by most politicians who could be called by either of those labels. There have been minorities of conservatives and liberals who have been against entangling alliances, but that has been in spite of their conservatism and liberalism.

[James Madison]

But your answer only proved my point.

You have ripped the word "neoconservative" from any positive meaning it ever had so that you can use it as a pejorative in place of the word "zionist," which it never meant until people like you started using it that way.

That usage of the word has become so common around here that you were just taking it for granted when we began this exchange. "Of course what Rand said was neoconservative, because zionism is the main part of neoconservatism!" It hadn't even crossed your mind that that wasn't true.

Woah, woah, woah...are you saying there are positive aspects of neo-conservatism?? Think of it this way: all Zionists are neo-conservatives, but not all neo-conservatives are Zionists.

[CaptainAmerica]

there are plenty of neocons of every race so Krauthammer is just making himself seem like a doofus

[Ender]

Neo-conservatism is basically the political beliefs that encompassed the far left several decades ago. It was co-opted and given the name "neoconservative" to capture the right, who fell for it and are now pro big government and big military.

When I say that a politician is a neocon, this is what I mean. They are basically following the progressive agenda of FDR et al - this has NOTHING to do with antisemitism.

[erowe1]

Woah, woah, woah...are you saying there are positive aspects of neo-conservatism?

No. I mean the way you use it is purely pejorative, and obviously bears no resemblance to what it has historically meant. I didn't mean positive in the sense of good by my own judgment, I meant positive in the sense of a definition that says what neoconservatism is, by people who intended the word actually to mean something.

What you're doing would be like if somebody didn't like Christians, so they use the word "Christian" in place of "ugly."

[Pisces]

Having entangling alliances is neither conservative nor liberal. Entangling alliances have historically been advocated by most politicians who could be called by either of those labels. There have been minorities of conservatives and liberals who have been against entangling alliances, but that has been in spite of their conservatism and liberalism.

If I remember correctly, the phrase "entangling alliances" is taken from George Washington's farewell address, which was actually written by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton is probably second only to Abraham Lincoln on the list of early American political leaders most hated by libertarians. The part of the speech that contains this phrase was directed at the Jeffersonians, who he felt were too pro-French and anti-British.

It's still very good advice, though, whatever the current geopolitical situation is. Sorry if this is too off-topic but I think it is interesting.

[erowe1]

If I remember correctly, the phrase "entangling alliances" is taken from George Washington's farewell address, which was actually written by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton is probably second only to Abraham Lincoln on the list of American political leaders most hated by libertarians. The part of the speech that contains this phrase was directed at the Jeffersonians, who he felt were too pro-French and anti-British.

It's still very good advice, though, whatever the current geopolitical situation is. Sorry if this is too off-topic but I think it is interesting.

I don't think it's off topic. I think it's illustrative of how hard it is to take something like "entangling alliances" and make it a defining feature of "neoconservatism."

[Brian Coulter]

What does Charles want to use? Zionists? Trotskyites? Pirates?

Reds..

[purplechoe]

Neoconservative means that the person has given up on the idea that one must fight for a smaller government (meaning basically that you except socialism) but are willing to use the might of the US military to spread democracy (socialism) across the globe. That's how I would define a neocon, be it Jewish, Christian, Atheist, etc... It just so happens that the guy who came up with the term was Jewish. So I guess when one disagrees with something that a Jewish person says that automatically makes one anti-semetic? Lets forget the fact the the Jewish population living in Palestine (today called Israel), is actually anti-semetic. Because the people who lived in that land originally, be it Jewish, Muslim, or Christian, were the actual Semites. That term does not mean exclusively Jewish. In fact those Jews who came from Germany, Poland, Russia, etc. living in Palestine today are the actual anti-semites...

I was born in Poland (now a US citizen), whose grandparents were in the concentration camps, and whose family used to hide the Jews in the attic of the house I grew up in when the Nazi came to town, so don't give me this crap that I'm some kind of Nazi sympathizer. I see disgusting human behavior, I'm gonna point it out, be it Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or an Atheist...

[anaconda]

Does that cover it sufficiently?

Nicely summarized. I would like to add that neoconservatism openly advocated misleading the citizens with false propaganda to rally a nationalistic empathy for creating enemies based upon lies. Which also calls into question Krauthammer's claim that various individuals "made a good case for it."

For those that haven't seen this documentary on neoconservatism yet, it's a must see (parts 2 and 3 are also on youtube):


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGo1DqmfHjY

[purplechoe]

Krauthammer is a slime. Just like Hillary Clinton who stopped calling herself a liberal because that word got a bad rap and started calling herself a progressive. Liberal, progressive, neocon, etc., all traiters to human dignity and liberty as far as I'm concerned...

[LibertyEagle]

Neo-conservatism is basically the political beliefs that encompassed the far left several decades ago. It was co-opted and given the name "neoconservative" to capture the right, who fell for it and are now pro big government and big military.

When I say that a politician is a neocon, this is what I mean. They are basically following the progressive agenda of FDR et al - this has NOTHING to do with antisemitism.

But, that is not accurate, Ender. You are grouping all interventionists and one-worlders together into one big lump.

[heavenlyboy34]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuefjIYKkjE
/thread

[AGRP]

But, that is not accurate, Ender. You are grouping all interventionists and one-worlders together into one big lump.

Semantics. Is a democrat really a democrat and a republican really a republican? Is a liberal really a liberal? Is a conservative really a conservative? No. Most identifying terms no longer match the beliefs behind them when they were first created. It is what it is. Enjoy your definition crusade. Youve got a lot of work ahead.

[heavenlyboy34]

Semantics. Is a democrat really a democrat and a republican really a republican? Is a liberal really a liberal? Is a conservative really a conservative? No. Most identifying terms no longer match the beliefs behind them when they were first created. It is what it is. Enjoy your definition crusade. Youve got a lot of work ahead.
Yep. Semantic drift makes communication complicated and difficult, but it's an unavoidable fact of life, for better or worse.

[COpatriot]

Krauthammer is the lowest form of lizard known to man. This is a cheap attempt to discredit people like us who very well know what a neocon is and label us as anti-Semites, just like everyone who disagrees with Obama is a "racist". These people deserve nothing but contempt after what they did. All the propaganda, the lies, the fear-mongering that got our soldiers killed in Iraq. Fuck all of them.

And if they don't like being called neocons, that's fine. Maybe we can call them what they truly are: liars, propagandists, and sociopaths.

But if the word "neocon" is too toxic anymore, I would be all for labeling them as neo-Wilsonians.

[Indy Vidual]

Fuck political correctness....

When can we all just be individuals?

[amy31416]

When can we all just be individuals?

Whenever we choose to be.

[paulbot24]

Neo-Zionists?

[LibertyEagle]

Semantics. Is a democrat really a democrat and a republican really a republican? Is a liberal really a liberal? Is a conservative really a conservative? No. Most identifying terms no longer match the beliefs behind them when they were first created. It is what it is. Enjoy your definition crusade. Youve got a lot of work ahead.

It is far more than semantics. If of all people, we do not understand that the internationalists are not just neocons, we will be missing the target.

Calling anyone and everyone a neocon who doesn't agree with us on foreign policy is not only inaccurate, it makes us fall right into the trap that people like Krauthammer are setting.

[purplechoe]

Neo-Zionists?

+rep...

[heavenlyboy34]

Krauthammer is the lowest form of lizard known to man. This is a cheap attempt to discredit people like us who very well know what a neocon is and label us as anti-Semites, just like everyone who disagrees with Obama is a "racist". These people deserve nothing but contempt after what they did. All the propaganda, the lies, the fear-mongering that got our soldiers killed in Iraq. Fuck all of them.

And if they don't like being called neocons, that's fine. Maybe we can call them what they truly are: liars, propagandists, and sociopaths.

But if the word "neocon" is too toxic anymore, I would be all for labeling them as neo-Wilsonians.
Even that label isn't strong or nuanced enough to describe neoconservatives. My second choice is "Trotskyites".

[AGRP]

Calling anyone and everyone a neocon who doesn't agree with us on foreign policy is not only inaccurate, it makes us fall right into the trap that people like Krauthammer are setting.

Is that strawman older than dirt?

[paulbot24]

At least Krauthammer let us know how offensive and hateful our disparaging comments have been so we can all apologize and promise to always remember this sin.:D

[Agorism]

So is Rand Paul an internationalist for every country, or is he a person who is kind of like an internationalist but only for country (Israel) kind of like a Zionist?

[TER]

What makes Mr. Krauthammer uneasy is not that Zionism is a doctrine of being a neocon or follower of those individuals who started this movement and actually coined the name, but rather, what makes him uneasy is that many people now are beginning to more clearly see that the neoconservative movement has been a Zionist movement from its inception, through careful and well funded deliberation.

[purplechoe]

So is Rand Paul an internationalist for every country, or is he a person who is kind of like an internationalist but only for country (Israel) kind of like a Zionist?

I had a hunch for a while now that Rands Christianity is a little different then his fathers. I'm not gonna go on the offensive against Rand, but on certain issues, like Israel, I'm gonna hold his feet to the fire...

[purplechoe]

What makes Mr. Krauthammer uneasy is not that Zionism is a doctrine of being a neocon or follower of those individuals who started this movement and actually coined the name, but rather, what makes him uneasy is that many people now are beginning to more clearly see that the neoconservative movement has been a Zionist movement from its inception, through careful and well funded deliberation.

You're my type of Christian, bless you...

[Feeding the Abscess]

Ron Paul calling average GOP people neocons:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6krFKAsD_1U

Neoconservatism today is not exactly the same as it was in its inception; however, some things remain constant. As Max Boot explains:


It is not really domestic policy that defines neo-conservatism. This was a movement founded on foreign policy, and it is still here that neo-conservatism carries the greatest meaning, even if its original raison d'être — opposition to communism — has disappeared.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/neo-con-explained.html

And Lew Rockwell expands:


Now, it would be wrong to say that the neoconservatives had not undergone any kind of intellectual change. They became less enamored of formal socialism and more at home with mixed-economy capitalism. They grew to hate much of the egalitarian-left cultural agenda of Democratic Party special-interest groups. Many of them wrote treatises decrying the excesses of their ex-brethren.

Ironically, some of the people here who cling to the original definition of neocon and reject any stretching of the word, are those who call themselves conservatives; which for centuries was an ideology that defended the state and big business, and only recently has (kind of) come to represent something resembling limited government. You'd think they'd be calling themselves liberals, as, after all, classically speaking, that is much closer to their beliefs than conservatism.

[dbill27]

Someone should ask Herman Cain what a neoconservative is

[Anti-Neocon]

Of course Krauthammer knows there's a difference between Jewish conservatives and Israel-firsters. He is both, and also a neocon. He needs to get used to that fact.

No more wars for Israel!

[otherone]

Stop using the term "neocon" and just go with "fascist" (/thread)

[acptulsa]

Republican politicians wanted to take lobbyist money and grow government. But they also wanted to grow the military industrial complex, and wanted to win reelection by getting bloodthirsty girly-men voters all worked up about whose ass needed kicking next. The new 'neoconservative movement' was either coopted or created to give them 'intellectual cover', so voters who couldn't be bothered to read up on the subject would think there was a school of deep thought behind this simple desire to be big government and an ass-kicker all at once. They took over the Republican Party, primarily because certain corporations (read that 'the military industrial complex') would slather neocons with contributions at primary time.

So what's zionist about it? Simple. Nothing gets televangelical channel viewers behind your next splendid little war like telling them Israel will benefit.

Since that time, Dubya and Cheney weren't content to merely give neoconservatism a bad name. They gave it a terrible name, trying to get us into Iran even though the intelligence clearly showed there was no pressing need, raiding the Social Security Trust Fund for their wars and thus ensuring the SSI crisis comes decades earlier than it would have, and God knows what the real story behind 9/11 was. And the nation of Israel was getting tarnished by association. So, does this mean Krauthammer is going to disavow neoconservatism, and embrace real conservatism? Don't be silly.

If you use the term, you hate Jews. Well, that ought to kill it.


I was born in Poland (now a US citizen), whose grandparents were in the concentration camps, and whose family used to hide the Jews in the attic of the house I grew up in when the Nazi came to town, so don't give me this crap that I'm some kind of Nazi sympathizer. I see disgusting human behavior, I'm gonna point it out, be it Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or an Atheist...

Would that we all had such an impeccable base of ground on which to stand for our anti-neocon principles. Then we would be immune from the Krauthammeresque attempts to remove enough words from the language to make the world safe for neoconservatism.

[Inkblots]

LOL.. Don't like Obama? Obviously a racist. Don't like neocons? Obviously a jew hater. Yup, the GOP slowly becoming liberals 2.0 for sure.

Slowly? The whole point of neoconservatives is that they ARE liberals 2.0.

[GunnyFreedom]

We already have code words for "racist", "sexist", etc. Now we've got (a new) one for "anti-semite".

What we really need is a code word for "Shut the hell up - you're full of shit!"

I love how the racialists make everything into code-words for racism. they are after an actual ploy to take the very language away and use it as a weapon against us.

libertarian: "Hmm, I'm a little hungry, want to stop by Arby's for..."

Neoconservative: "Ha! I KNEW you were a closet racist!!"

libertarian: "Huh?"

Neoconservative: "That word, Arby's I was told when one of you paulite libertarians used it you really meant racism!"

libertarian: LOL, "and where did you het that, William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer?"

Neoconservative: "uh, yeah..."

libertarian: LOL "they call EVERYTHING 'key words for racism' just like the obamatons do. Are you really getting your information from someone who doesn't even have the integrity of a Democrat?"

Neoconservative: "You dirty liar!"

libertarian: "You keep using this word, racist, I do not think it means what you think it means..."

Neoconservative: "AAAaaaaauuuuuuggghhhhhHHHH!

[Origanalist]

Slowly? The whole point of neoconservatives is that they ARE liberals 2.0.

I was thinking the same.....

[AGRP]

Slowly? The whole point of neoconservatives is that they ARE liberals 2.0.

Dream on. Liberals aren't even liberals. A liberal or socialist country is better than a tyrannical oligarchy. There would have be half of the problems under the current system.

[KingNothing]

I can't stand Krauthammer, but he has a point here. The word neoconservative today has become so overused that its pretty much meaningless anymore. For many on RPF's neoconservative just means anyone who disagrees with Ron Paul on anything.

Well, I think our foreign policy has been dominated by neo-conservative thinking, spearheaded by guys like Cheney and Rumsfeld. They're the ones I most associate with enacting the philosophy.... and they ain't even joos.

Krauthammer, from my perspective does NOT have a point.

[Lucille]

If Chuck and his progs in red jerseys don't mind, I'll just keep using neo-Trot, because calling them "conservative" is a misnomer.

[libertygrl]

I think the term has a pretty consistent meaning, around here at least. It seems to define any politician that advocates military intervention based upon directly non threatening scenarios, yet usually claimed to be threatening with false propaganda, for the purposes of preemptively securing natural resources, corporate market share and revenue, and/or strategic military hegemony, all with an appeal to nationalistic patriotism.

That's exactly how I view it. And when I first heard the term "neo-conservative" it was during the Bush administration. Anytime the word was used, I immediately thought of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld.

I recall a General (can't remember the name) who wrote a book that was critical of the neo-cons in the Bush administration that led us into invading Iraq. He named Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, as the chief architects. He was roundly criticized for being anti-semetic. He was surprised by the reaction and said that he was just naming those who were responsible. He didn't know who was/wasn't Jewish. He was just presenting the facts. It's ridiculous.

[libertygrl]

For one thing, they're not far right.

For another thing, nothing in what you copied from wikipedia says anything about why anyone today can properly be called a neoconservative.


From what I've always read, they were originally leftists who moved to the far right:


NeoCons: Radical Foreign Policy for U.S. Global Empire | PeaceAware.com feature article by David M. Boje, Ph.D. April 10, 2003

What is a NeoCon? Neocon is a neo-conservative who began as anti-Stalinist Trotskist before moving to the far right in U.S. politics. NeoCons have roots in the Leon Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s. In the 1950s and 1970s that movement morphed into anti-communist liberalism. Today the NeoCons are embedded in the imperial right and militarism of the U.S. defense and foreign affairs departments. If this sounds like muddled thinking, then you are not alone in such an assessment.

What is Evangelical Capitalism? Abbass Ali of Indiana University of Pennsylvania coined the term "Evangelical Capitalism" in a presentation to the 2003 International Academy of Business Discipline meetings in Orlando Florida (April). NeoCons tutored President George Bush Jr. in foreign affairs, since Bush had no prior experience. Bush was an empty vessel. Prior to becoming president, Bush had never left the United States (except for 2 trips to Mexico). Bush's evangelical protestant value set was a perfect fit with the NeoCon strike first value of 'strike first" preemption. You will recall Bush's comment before the war that this was a "Crusade" and that he intended to destroy the "Axis-of-Evil." Since WWII the foreign policy of the U.S. has been 'containment' and is now a radical Neocon policy of 'preemption.' Preemption, plus Evangelical Protestantism, combines in U.S. policy of Evangelical Capitalism. This is the spreading of corporate hegemony of American corporations that make weapons of mass destruction (Rayethon, Lockheed Martin, TWR, Northrop Grumman) and the grab for oil (Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco) and purveyors of global sweatshops (Wal-Mart, Nike, Reebok).

What are the implications of NeoCon's Evangelical Capitalism? The application of Trotsky's concept of Permanent Revolution (explained below) means that the U.S. is engaging in an "endless war." Since in the U.S. corporate lobbies elect presidents, it is a new kind of class war. The corporate class (and banking elites) versus the working class citizens of the U.S. and the people of any nation who has resources that can be colonized by Evangelical Capitalism. Any Third World nation that asserts independent control of natural resources such as oil or natural gas are either overthrown by CIA covert ops or by overt military preemptive invasion. The current policy in the U.S. is strike first, without U.N. approval, which means a continuing set of violations of Geneva Convention and Nuremberg Treat.

Who are the main NeoCons:

Paul Wolfowitz,deputy secretary of defense is the NeoCon defense mastermind of the Bush administration
Donald Rumsfeld is defense secretary (since Wolfowitz is too controversial)
Douglas Feith, No. 3 at the Pentagon
Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a Wolfowitz protégé who is Cheney's chief of staff
John R. Bolton, a right-winger assigned to the State Department to keep Colin Powell in check
Elliott Abrams, recently appointed to head Middle East policy at the National Security Council.
James Woolsey,former CIA director, who tried repeatedly to link both 9/11 and the anthrax letters in the U.S. to Saddam Hussein
Richard Perle, who recently resigned as chair of a defense department advisory body after a lobbying scandal. His comment that day was "It is not about the oil."

Robert Kagan is a NeoCon propagandist who argues that Americans are 'martial' and Europeans 'pacifist.'

Irving Kristol(b. 1920), City College '40; co-editor of The Public Interest magazine; John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Kristol said," Ever since I can remember, I’ve been a neo-something: a neo-Marxist, a neo-Trotskyist, a neo-liberal, a neo-conservative; in religion a neo-orthodox even while I was a neo-Trotskyist and a neo-Marxist. I’m going to end up a neo- that’s all, neo dash nothing."

Who are the apprentice-NeoCons?

President George W. Bush Jr. Bush has surrounded himself with NeoCon radicals, in a modern example of Irving Janis' "Group Think' (where all advisors say the same things and there is no critical reflection or counter-thinking allowed). Bush said, "you are either with us or with them," this is a "crusade," and he is taking out the "axis-of-evil" nations in preemptive strikes, with or without the UN.

Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney, speaking on behalf of the Bush NeoCon administration, promised after September 11 that there would be "endless war" and a war lasting a lifetime.

Retired General Jay Garney -to be proconsul of occupied Iraq

(Un) Think Tanks

Jinsa - Washington-based and Likud-supporting 'Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs' (Jinsa)

Jinsa sends wannabe defense/foreign affairs experts on trips to Israel. For example, Jinsa flew Jay Garner (October 2000) to Israel for programming; Garner cosigned a Jinsa letter that began: "We ... believe that during the current upheavals in Israel, the Israel Defense Forces have exercised remarkable restraint in the face of lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of [the] Palestinian Authority."

What is Preemption? Preemption is a foreign policy of strike first. It is expressly forbidden and outlawed in the Geneva Convention and Nuremberg Treaty. American foreign policy now follows the Israeli Likud party's tactics, including preventive warfare such as Israel's 1981 raid on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor.

What was Trotsky's Theory? Trotsky's theory is called "Permanent Revolution" (first published in Russian in Berlin in 1930). Permanent Revolution is a contribution to Karl Marx and Frederick Engel's thought. They wrote that "an independently organized party of the proletariat. Their battle-cry must be: The Permanent Revolution" (Address of the Central Committee of the Communist League, March 1850). Trotsky wrote: "The permanent revolution, in the sense which Marx attached to this concept, means a revolution which makes no compromise with any single form of class rule, which does not stop at the democratic stage, which goes over to socialist measures and to war against reaction from without; that is, a revolution whose every successive stage is rooted in the preceding one and which can end only in complete liquidation" (Ryan, 1996).

Trotsky also wrote: "The Perspective of permanent revolution may be summarized in the following way: the complete victory of the democratic revolution in Russia is conceivable only in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat, leaning on the peasantry. The dictatorship of the proletariat, which would inevitably place on the order of the day not only democratic but socialistic tasks as well, would at the same time give a powerful impetus to the international socialist revolution. Only the victory of the proletariat in the West could protect Russia from bourgeois restoration and assure it the possibility of rounding out the establishment of socialism" (Ryan, 1996).

In sum, the Permanent Revolution that the NeoCons pick up from Trotsky is that a country like Iraq need not pass through the stages of economic development achieved bu countries such as the U.S. Rather, the post-war Iraq government can combine backward and advanced economic aspects, in the form of a Permanent Revolution.

What are the implications of NeoCon ideology and hegemony for Iraq?

Bush's NeoCon administration is rushing to impose a colonial-style occupation government on Iraq. NeoCon apprentice, retired General Jay Garney is to be the U.S. proconsul of occupied Iraq. The NeoCon Bush administration began its conquest of Empire by declaring war on Afghanistan (which it continues to bomb), and then invaded Iraq (after the UN Security Council refused to go along). The buzz in Washington D.C. is the next conquest will be Syria. "Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, and their main ideological ally at the State Department, undersecretary John Bolton, have all made menacing public remarks about Syria in recent days" (RoundUp, Apr 10). Other sites of Empire-conquest include Iran, southern Lebanon, North Korea,Philippines, and Palestine.

h ttp://www.peaceaware.com/NeoCon.shtml

[erowe1]

From what I've always read, they were originally leftists who moved to the far right:


NeoCons: Radical Foreign Policy for U.S. Global Empire | PeaceAware.com feature article by David M. Boje, Ph.D. April 10, 2003

What is a NeoCon? Neocon is a neo-conservative who began as anti-Stalinist Trotskist before moving to the far right in U.S. politics. NeoCons have roots in the Leon Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s. In the 1950s and 1970s that movement morphed into anti-communist liberalism. Today the NeoCons are embedded in the imperial right and militarism of the U.S. defense and foreign affairs departments. If this sounds like muddled thinking, then you are not alone in such an assessment.

What is Evangelical Capitalism? Abbass Ali of Indiana University of Pennsylvania coined the term "Evangelical Capitalism" in a presentation to the 2003 International Academy of Business Discipline meetings in Orlando Florida (April). NeoCons tutored President George Bush Jr. in foreign affairs, since Bush had no prior experience. Bush was an empty vessel. Prior to becoming president, Bush had never left the United States (except for 2 trips to Mexico). Bush's evangelical protestant value set was a perfect fit with the NeoCon strike first value of 'strike first" preemption. You will recall Bush's comment before the war that this was a "Crusade" and that he intended to destroy the "Axis-of-Evil." Since WWII the foreign policy of the U.S. has been 'containment' and is now a radical Neocon policy of 'preemption.' Preemption, plus Evangelical Protestantism, combines in U.S. policy of Evangelical Capitalism. This is the spreading of corporate hegemony of American corporations that make weapons of mass destruction (Rayethon, Lockheed Martin, TWR, Northrop Grumman) and the grab for oil (Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco) and purveyors of global sweatshops (Wal-Mart, Nike, Reebok).

What are the implications of NeoCon's Evangelical Capitalism? The application of Trotsky's concept of Permanent Revolution (explained below) means that the U.S. is engaging in an "endless war." Since in the U.S. corporate lobbies elect presidents, it is a new kind of class war. The corporate class (and banking elites) versus the working class citizens of the U.S. and the people of any nation who has resources that can be colonized by Evangelical Capitalism. Any Third World nation that asserts independent control of natural resources such as oil or natural gas are either overthrown by CIA covert ops or by overt military preemptive invasion. The current policy in the U.S. is strike first, without U.N. approval, which means a continuing set of violations of Geneva Convention and Nuremberg Treat.

Who are the main NeoCons:

Paul Wolfowitz,deputy secretary of defense is the NeoCon defense mastermind of the Bush administration
Donald Rumsfeld is defense secretary (since Wolfowitz is too controversial)
Douglas Feith, No. 3 at the Pentagon
Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a Wolfowitz protégé who is Cheney's chief of staff
John R. Bolton, a right-winger assigned to the State Department to keep Colin Powell in check
Elliott Abrams, recently appointed to head Middle East policy at the National Security Council.
James Woolsey,former CIA director, who tried repeatedly to link both 9/11 and the anthrax letters in the U.S. to Saddam Hussein
Richard Perle, who recently resigned as chair of a defense department advisory body after a lobbying scandal. His comment that day was "It is not about the oil."

Robert Kagan is a NeoCon propagandist who argues that Americans are 'martial' and Europeans 'pacifist.'

Irving Kristol(b. 1920), City College '40; co-editor of The Public Interest magazine; John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Kristol said," Ever since I can remember, I’ve been a neo-something: a neo-Marxist, a neo-Trotskyist, a neo-liberal, a neo-conservative; in religion a neo-orthodox even while I was a neo-Trotskyist and a neo-Marxist. I’m going to end up a neo- that’s all, neo dash nothing."

Who are the apprentice-NeoCons?

President George W. Bush Jr. Bush has surrounded himself with NeoCon radicals, in a modern example of Irving Janis' "Group Think' (where all advisors say the same things and there is no critical reflection or counter-thinking allowed). Bush said, "you are either with us or with them," this is a "crusade," and he is taking out the "axis-of-evil" nations in preemptive strikes, with or without the UN.

Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney, speaking on behalf of the Bush NeoCon administration, promised after September 11 that there would be "endless war" and a war lasting a lifetime.

Retired General Jay Garney -to be proconsul of occupied Iraq

(Un) Think Tanks

Jinsa - Washington-based and Likud-supporting 'Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs' (Jinsa)

Jinsa sends wannabe defense/foreign affairs experts on trips to Israel. For example, Jinsa flew Jay Garner (October 2000) to Israel for programming; Garner cosigned a Jinsa letter that began: "We ... believe that during the current upheavals in Israel, the Israel Defense Forces have exercised remarkable restraint in the face of lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of [the] Palestinian Authority."

What is Preemption? Preemption is a foreign policy of strike first. It is expressly forbidden and outlawed in the Geneva Convention and Nuremberg Treaty. American foreign policy now follows the Israeli Likud party's tactics, including preventive warfare such as Israel's 1981 raid on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor.

What was Trotsky's Theory? Trotsky's theory is called "Permanent Revolution" (first published in Russian in Berlin in 1930). Permanent Revolution is a contribution to Karl Marx and Frederick Engel's thought. They wrote that "an independently organized party of the proletariat. Their battle-cry must be: The Permanent Revolution" (Address of the Central Committee of the Communist League, March 1850). Trotsky wrote: "The permanent revolution, in the sense which Marx attached to this concept, means a revolution which makes no compromise with any single form of class rule, which does not stop at the democratic stage, which goes over to socialist measures and to war against reaction from without; that is, a revolution whose every successive stage is rooted in the preceding one and which can end only in complete liquidation" (Ryan, 1996).

Trotsky also wrote: "The Perspective of permanent revolution may be summarized in the following way: the complete victory of the democratic revolution in Russia is conceivable only in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat, leaning on the peasantry. The dictatorship of the proletariat, which would inevitably place on the order of the day not only democratic but socialistic tasks as well, would at the same time give a powerful impetus to the international socialist revolution. Only the victory of the proletariat in the West could protect Russia from bourgeois restoration and assure it the possibility of rounding out the establishment of socialism" (Ryan, 1996).

In sum, the Permanent Revolution that the NeoCons pick up from Trotsky is that a country like Iraq need not pass through the stages of economic development achieved bu countries such as the U.S. Rather, the post-war Iraq government can combine backward and advanced economic aspects, in the form of a Permanent Revolution.

What are the implications of NeoCon ideology and hegemony for Iraq?

Bush's NeoCon administration is rushing to impose a colonial-style occupation government on Iraq. NeoCon apprentice, retired General Jay Garney is to be the U.S. proconsul of occupied Iraq. The NeoCon Bush administration began its conquest of Empire by declaring war on Afghanistan (which it continues to bomb), and then invaded Iraq (after the UN Security Council refused to go along). The buzz in Washington D.C. is the next conquest will be Syria. "Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, and their main ideological ally at the State Department, undersecretary John Bolton, have all made menacing public remarks about Syria in recent days" (RoundUp, Apr 10). Other sites of Empire-conquest include Iran, southern Lebanon, North Korea,Philippines, and Palestine.

h ttp://www.peaceaware.com/NeoCon.shtml

I'm not familiar with peaceaware.com. But people who think neoconservatives are far right must see Dennis Kucinich as a centrist.

They probably don't want to call neocons progressive because they're embarrassed to admit how close they are to each other.

[bolil]

If he doesn't like that label we could call them fascoconservatives. Or the bunch for death

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/neo-con-explained.html

And Lew Rockwell expands:


More from that article by Lew:


...
It is often forgotten that it was not only American conservatives who backed anti-communism. Another group of anti-communists of the period was variously called Scoop Jackson Democrats, Cold War Liberals, Democratic Socialists or Social Democrats, or simply the anti-Stalinist Left. They favored big government at home and abroad, and had a particular distaste for the Reds in Russia because they saw them as having discredited the great dream of socialist planning (and killed Trotsky). They were passionately for the Cold War but saw it as less an ideological struggle than a political one. They favored New Deal-style planning but rejected the excesses of Soviet-style totalism.

Of them, Mises wrote:

What these people who call themselves 'anticommunist liberals'…are aiming at is communism without those inherent and necessary features of communism which are still unpalatable to Americans. They make an illusory distinction between communism and socialism…. They think that they have proved their case by employing such aliases for socialism as planning or the welfare state…. What these self-styled 'anticommunist liberals' are fighting against is not communism as such, but a communist system in which they themselves are not at the helm. What they are aiming at is a socialist…system in which they themselves or their most intimate friends hold the reins of government. It would perhaps be too much to say that they are burning with a desire to liquidate other people. They simply do not wish to be liquidated. In a socialist commonwealth, only the supreme autocrat and his abettors have this assurance.
...
After Vietnam, the Democratic Party became home to an ever-more influential group of Cold War skeptics, so many leftist Cold Warriors gravitated to the Republican Party, where they sought to cement the GOP's attachment to welfare and especially warfare. As Max Boot admits: "It is not really domestic policy that defines neo-conservatism. This was a movement founded on foreign policy, and it is still here that neo-conservatism carries the greatest meaning, even if its original raison d'être — opposition to communism — has disappeared."

Now, it would be wrong to say that the neoconservatives had not undergone any kind of intellectual change. They became less enamored of formal socialism and more at home with mixed-economy capitalism. They grew to hate much of the egalitarian-left cultural agenda of Democratic Party special-interest groups. Many of them wrote treatises decrying the excesses of their ex-brethren.

But the transformation was never complete, and the core of their ideology never changed: these people had then and have now a remarkable faith in the uses of state power, at home and abroad. Their intellectual formation in Straussianism convinced them of the centrality of the elite management of society by philosophers, and their background in Trotskyite organizing kept a ruthless political strategy as the operating mode.

As David Gordon sums up Rothbard's early analysis: "As Strauss sees matters, classical and Christian natural law did not impose strict and absolute limits on state power; instead, all is left to the prudential judgment of the wise statesman." The younger generation absorbed this tendency as much as the old.

Thus with neoconservatism, we have the statist aspects of the old conservatism minus the libertarian aspects that led the old conservatives to favor decentralist political institutions and free enterprise. Add to that the natural tendency of anyone in power to use the tools they have at their disposal. What we end up with is a danger to liberty as fierce as any ever posed by the left.

But by the standard of loving Leviathan, today's neo-conservatism is worse than every brand of conservatism that preceded it. It is worse than Reaganism, which included some libertarian impulses, and worse than National-Review-style conservatism from the 1960s and 1950s. One expects pro-state affections from socialists, but the puzzle of neo-conservatism is how it could exist within a group of self-professed non-socialists who even claim to despise what the collectivist left has done to the world.

Thus the great fallacy of neo-conservatism is the one that afflicts all non-libertarian ideologies: they believe that society can be managed by the state in both its political and economic life. They believe this to a lesser extent than some left socialists, but to a far greater extent than most thinkers on the right.
...

I would dare say that pretty much all of the intellectual descendants of Marx/Lenin/Trotsky (including Obama) now at least pay lip service to "mixed-economy capitalism". They want a big welfare/warfare socialist state, paid for by a carefully controlled private sector, dominated by the largest crony corporatists.

[Feeding the Abscess]

More from that article by Lew:



I would dare say that pretty much all of the intellectual descendants of Marx/Lenin/Trotsky (including Obama) now at least pay lip service to "mixed-economy capitalism". They want a big welfare/warfare socialist state, paid for by a carefully controlled private sector, dominated by the largest crony corporatists.

Indeed. Paul Ryan also exemplifies the modern GOP iteration of neoconservatism well, as his appearance on Meet the Press this morning showed. He was crowing that his food stamp proposals would have led to a 260% increase in the amount of food stamp recipients over the last decade, as opposed to the 270% increase that actually occurred. And he said this is a good thing.

All wrapped in the banner of free markets, a rejection of Keynesianism (LOL!) and fidelity to the constitution, of course.

[libertygrl]

All excellent articles. Thanks.

[purplechoe]

Would that we all had such an impeccable base of ground on which to stand for our anti-neocon principles. Then we would be immune from the Krauthammeresque attempts to remove enough words from the language to make the world safe for neoconservatism.

Imagine the heartbreak of someone like me and many others who have escaped those socialist hell holes like Poland and came to the USA which is supposed to be a beacon of hope for human liberty only to find that the same thing is happening here like those countries they have escaped from. I'm not a big fan of Ronald Reagan's but he was right when he said this is the last stand for human liberty. Once the US of A goes, that experiment of individual freedom will most likely die with it... :(

[Origanalist]

Imagine the heartbreak of someone like me and many others who have escaped those socialist hell holes like Poland and came to the USA which is supposed to be a beacon of hope for human liberty only to find that the same thing is happening here like those countries they have escaped from. I'm not a big fan of Ronald Reagan's but he was right when he said this is the last stand for human liberty. Once the US of A goes, that experiment of individual freedom will most likely die with it... :(

Never.

[heavenlyboy34]

Never.
That's what they all say. :(

[acptulsa]

That's what they all say. :(

Not me.

I can promise no more than, 'Over my dead body.'

[erowe1]

Once the US of A goes, that experiment of individual freedom will most likely die with it...

Maybe. On the other hand, that might be when the experiment finally begins.

[heavenlyboy34]

Not me.

I can promise no more than, 'Over my dead body.'
bless you, sir! :) ~hugs~

[purplechoe]

Never.

From your mouth to God's ears.

"Let it not be said that we did nothing."

[libertygrl]

Imagine the heartbreak of someone like me and many others who have escaped those socialist hell holes like Poland and came to the USA which is supposed to be a beacon of hope for human liberty only to find that the same thing is happening here like those countries they have escaped from. I'm not a big fan of Ronald Reagan's but he was right when he said this is the last stand for human liberty. Once the US of A goes, that experiment of individual freedom will most likely die with it... :(

Only people like yourself purplechoe, can truly know and understand what it's like to live under socialist tyranny. You can speak from direct experience whereas, those born here cannot. We take for granted many of our liberties and are ignorant of our history as well as the history of others - such as yourself. Americans can help educate those who remain in the dark, but only someone like yourself can truly speak from experience.

I also remember that quote from Reagan and never forgot it. He WAS right. We are that shining light on the hill for the rest of the world to look toward. Once that light is extinguished.... I shudder to think! This is why, we may one day be looked upon as either the generation of Americans who fought back and defeated tyranny, or as the generation who allowed the Republic to slip from our hands.

Can you share some of your experiences with us purplechoe? Were you or your family a part of the Solidarity movement? What were some of the things the govt. did? How did you get by during difficult times? This is so important. I've been looking up books on Amazon of resistance movements throughout history, and am very interested in hearing other peoples accounts of what they went through in the hopes it may help Americans be better prepared. Thanks.

[purplechoe]

Maybe. On the other hand, that might be when the experiment finally begins.

Yeah, but if you go out and interact with people, that hope somewhat disappears.

You would think that people that went through those socialist experiments in Europe would have learned their lessons. But if you look closer a lot of those socialist tendencies are very much alive and kicking. You still have central banking, government run media, public schooling, nationalized health care, etc...

[purplechoe]

Can you share some of your experiences with us purplechoe? Were you or your family a part of the Solidarity movement? What were some of the things the govt. did? How did you get by during difficult times? This is so important. I've been looking up books on Amazon of resistance movements throughout history, and am very interested in hearing other peoples accounts of what they went through in the hopes it may help Americans be better prepared. Thanks.

Yes, my father and other family members were part of the Solidarity movement. But don't think for a second that it was any type of repudiation of the socialist system as far as I can tell. It probably wasn't true for everyone who took part in the Solidarity movement, but a great deal of them including my father just wanted to be rid of the Russian control. They still believed in socialism, they only though that once they put their own guy who wasn't a puppet of the Soviet regime, everything would be fine again. I'm sad to say that even my own father is a socialist and when I heard him speak about politics he blames the capitalists. :(

I remember watching American movies in the underground market on vhs and a lot of us were jealous of all the freedoms people enjoyed here. For example, you could go check out the movie "First Blood - Rambo" in the theater because Stallone in that movie was going against a corrupt American sheriff. Rambo II on the other hand was banned because he was fighting and the Russians as he tried to liberate the American POW's. We on the other hand were cheering him on! :)

A lot of Polish people looked up to the USA as an example of liberty, little did they know was that it was already co-opted by those with the socialist mindset. There wasn't someone like Ron Paul to show us the way. So even though the Soviet regime fell in the 90's a lot of those socialist tendencies survived (central banking, public schooling, national healthcare, etc.). Most of the people living there have lived their whole lives under communist control and they thought that the USA was the blueprint. The only mistake they made was that they didn't take the blueprint from 1776, but the one that was already in place in the 70's and 80's which already was a semi-socialist state.

[purplechoe]

Life under communism was like a prison without the bars. Every aspect of your life was regulated. Everybody was on food stamps, meaning that you could only buy a certain amount of meat per month, if there was any on the shelf in the first place. Long lines were part of everyday life. People would wait in lines to the store because there was a rumor that their would be some kind of delivery, even though they didn't know what. They would buy products even if they didn't need them to use as barter because money was pretty much useless. I remember carrying bags and bags of sugar or toilet paper as a kid because there was a delivery at the store and if you didn't stuck up, you never know when the next one would show up. A lot of things were in short supply. Everybody had a job under the communist system, but what good is the job if you can't purchase the things you need for everyday life. As far as food, those of us who did not live in the big cities grew our own food or raised chickens and pigs just to feed ourselves. As you can imagine, the underground market was huge. Another thing you needed stamps from the government for was gasoline. We had the crappy Fiat (pretty much the only company allowed to make cars in the country back then), but if you wanted to do some traveling across the country you were probably s**t out of luck if you didn't have enough stamps to get to where you wanted to go. Health care was a nightmare. There was no accountability. A drunk doctor would amputate the wrong hand because he was drunk and there was little you could do to get any kind of restitution.

Check out this video which was posted here on the site earlier today with a Polish guy who tells about his experience about living under communism in Poland in the 70's and 80's...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3guk8eFmsBo

[heavenlyboy34]

Only people like yourself purplechoe, can truly know and understand what it's like to live under socialist tyranny. You can speak from direct experience whereas, those born here cannot. We take for granted many of our liberties and are ignorant of our history as well as the history of others - such as yourself. Americans can help educate those who remain in the dark, but only someone like yourself can truly speak from experience.

I also remember that quote from Reagan and never forgot it. He WAS right. We are that shining light on the hill for the rest of the world to look toward. Once that light is extinguished.... I shudder to think! This is why, we may one day be looked upon as either the generation of Americans who fought back and defeated tyranny, or as the generation who allowed the Republic to slip from our hands.

Can you share some of your experiences with us purplechoe? Were you or your family a part of the Solidarity movement? What were some of the things the govt. did? How did you get by during difficult times? This is so important. I've been looking up books on Amazon of resistance movements throughout history, and am very interested in hearing other peoples accounts of what they went through in the hopes it may help Americans be better prepared. Thanks.
The last vestiges of classical republicanism (small r) were swept away in the early 20th century.

[libertygrl]

Yes, my father and other family members were part of the Solidarity movement. But don't think for a second that it was any type of repudiation of the socialist system as far as I can tell. It probably wasn't true for everyone who took part in the Solidarity movement, but a great deal of them including my father just wanted to be rid of the Russian control. They still believed in socialism, they only though that once they put their own guy who wasn't a puppet of the Soviet regime, everything would be fine again. I'm sad to say that even my own father is a socialist and when I heard him speak about politics he blames the capitalists. :(

I remember watching American movies in the underground market on vhs and a lot of us were jealous of all the freedoms people enjoyed here. For example, you could go check out the movie "First Blood - Rambo" in the theater because Stallone in that movie was going against a corrupt American sheriff. Rambo II on the other hand was banned because he was fighting and the Russians as he tried to liberate the American POW's. We on the other hand were cheering him on! :)

A lot of Polish people looked up to the USA as an example of liberty, little did they know was that it was already co-opted by those with the socialist mindset. There wasn't someone like Ron Paul to show us the way. So even though the Soviet regime fell in the 90's a lot of those socialist tendencies survived (central banking, public schooling, national healthcare, etc.). Most of the people living there have lived their whole lives under communist control and they thought that the USA was the blueprint. The only mistake they made was that they didn't take the blueprint from 1776, but the one that was already in place in the 70's and 80's which already was a semi-socialist state.


Thank you for sharing your experiences with us purplechoe. I will certainly watch the video when I get a spare moment.

Seeing that it appears we (USA) are heading in the same direction, do you have any suggestions as far as what some people are doing to prepare for this? You hear of long term food storage but is there anything in particular you wish your family would have stocked up on if you knew back then what you know now? What advice would you give Americans who were born here and basically clueless to what people like yourself had to endure? Thanks!

[dinosaur]

Would that we all had such an impeccable base of ground on which to stand for our anti-neocon principles. Then we would be immune from the Krauthammeresque attempts to remove enough words from the language to make the world safe for neoconservatism.

I was actually thinking that we should just find a new word. The strategy that Krauthammer is using tends to work, the racist smear works time and time again. We will never win the battle of restoring the word to its original meaning.

How about Lib-con? Or maybe an acronym would be better, GEPAC (global elitist posing as conservative). Can anyone come up with a better acronym?

[dinosaur]

Imagine the heartbreak of someone like me and many others who have escaped those socialist hell holes like Poland and came to the USA which is supposed to be a beacon of hope for human liberty only to find that the same thing is happening here like those countries they have escaped from. I'm not a big fan of Ronald Reagan's but he was right when he said this is the last stand for human liberty. Once the US of A goes, that experiment of individual freedom will most likely die with it... :(

We are still in the stage that the american people could gain back freedom peacefully and quickly. The hard part is getting the american people to decide that they want freedom.

[GunnyFreedom]

I was actually thinking that we should just find a new word. The strategy that Krauthammer is using tends to work, the racist smear works time and time again. We will never win the battle of restoring the word to its original meaning.

How about Lib-con? Or maybe an acronym would be better, GEPAC (global elitist posing as conservative). Can anyone come up with a better acronym?

I rather like "Trotskyite Communist Republican."

[Todd]

Ask Krauthammer why one of the leading intellectuals in Neoconservatism is a Japanese American then? He kinda wrote the modern NeoCon philosphical Bible.

http://dalfar.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/fukuyama.jpg


http://ecimages.kobobooks.com/Image.ashx?imageID=nlultJfOMEiXK_n9STjoEg&Type=Full

[AGRP]

My vote is for Trotskyites.

[dinosaur]

I rather like "Trotskyite Communist Republican."

Too descriptive! Maybe something more subtle, like neocomm?

How about throwing the words "unpatriotic" in there, then everytime someone asks about it, we can explain that it is unpatiotic to turn our republic into an empire and spend our inheritance on wars that weaken our nation and compromise our ability to defend ourselves. unpcon? hmm, still not catchy.

Your's is still best. I will use TCR on this forum instead of neocon until further notice.

[acptulsa]

We used to just call 'em 'warmongers'. Of course, they were easier to find in both parties back then.

Still ain't too hard. Look up Biden's senate record some time.

[itshappening]

Indeed. Paul Ryan also exemplifies the modern GOP iteration of neoconservatism well, as his appearance on Meet the Press this morning showed. He was crowing that his food stamp proposals would have led to a 260% increase in the amount of food stamp recipients over the last decade, as opposed to the 270% increase that actually occurred. And he said this is a good thing.

All wrapped in the banner of free markets, a rejection of Keynesianism (LOL!) and fidelity to the constitution, of course.

Paul Ryan is the worst of the worst.

His voting record is atrocious and shameful.

He has been forced to write a budget that balances in 10 years by House Republicans, it will be interesting to see what he comes up with.