What neo-conservative is - and what it isn't

Doesn't fit anywhere? Put it here! Just something you think we might be interested in, humour, a new moon, who knows what...

Postby JBG » 11/ 18/ 05 9:13 pm

bulldog905 wrote:
Remember that saying: "I was country, before country was cool"?


It was: "I was country, when country wasn't cool", by, I believe, Barbara Mandrell and George Jones.
bulldog905 wrote:
We REAL conservatives feel the same way. And we don't believe the NEOS are conservatives.


True enough. I am by some definitions a neo-con. I voted for Reagan and Bush (Bush Sr. the first time, Bush Jr. the second time). My politics, as those who know me from this Board can attest, are far left of Dithers, Layton and McDonough.
If it's us or them, I choose us.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
<b><a href="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu100130.html"target="_blank">Winston Churchill</a></b>

"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours."—<b><a href="http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Golda_Meir"target="_blank">Golda Meir </a></b>
User avatar
JBG
 
Posts: 8256
Joined: 03/ 10/ 04 7:11 pm
Location: New York City area

Postby Crash » 12/ 03/ 05 7:30 pm

bulldog905 wrote:Neo conservatives, or at least the originators of, are the linear descendants of the Trotskyist wing of the Communist movement.


Nonsense
Crash
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: 07/ 18/ 03 6:56 pm
Location: Nova Scotia

Postby JBG » 12/ 04/ 05 2:58 am

bulldog905 wrote:Neo conservatives, or at least the originators of, are the linear descendants of the Trotskyist wing of the Communist movement.


Yes, Ronald Reagan, Norman Podhoretz, Charles krauthammer, Mark Steyn. Real Trotskyites.
If it's us or them, I choose us.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
<b><a href="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu100130.html"target="_blank">Winston Churchill</a></b>

"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours."—<b><a href="http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Golda_Meir"target="_blank">Golda Meir </a></b>
User avatar
JBG
 
Posts: 8256
Joined: 03/ 10/ 04 7:11 pm
Location: New York City area

Postby Little Big Man » 12/ 04/ 05 10:34 am

brianwalsh wrote:Those that say the US should not exercise its military might outside the US are not conservatives but they would more typically be called libertarian or even anarchists.


I think it's fair to say that MANY libertarians and anarchists are pacifists and/or isolationists. An excellent example is the Murray Rothbard school of libertarianism.

See any of the numerous related sites, including www.lewrockwell.com and www.antiwar.com. Both of these sites were sponsored by the Center for Libertarian Studies ( www.libertarianstudies.org, which, for some reason is under re-construction). The Center for Libertarian Studies was founded by Murray Rothbard (an "anarcho-capitalist") and later headed-up by Lew Rockwell. Lew Rockwell founded the Ludwig von Mises Institute, www.mises.org , which features free online versions of many of Rothbard's works, as well as Mises.

Word of caution for the newbie: unlike Rothbard, Mises was not an anarchist, not a libertarian, not a pacifist etc.. He was a capitalist economist and, in my view, provides us with the most clear conception of capitalist economics. He was and is referred to with approval by the Objectivists, who want nothing to do with libertarianism, anarchism, or pacifism. That von Mises' legacy is being protected by libertarian pacifist anarchists amounts, almost, to a smear. Kind of like putting a child pornographer in charge of the International Child Actors Museum.

All that said: not all folks against using force outside the US' borders are libertarians or anarchists.
<center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2371/2185492972_5a1cb2ef14.jpg?v=0"></center>
User avatar
Little Big Man
 
Posts: 4395
Joined: 12/ 16/ 03 9:55 pm

Alice in Wonderland

Postby BlawBlaw » 07/ 11/ 06 12:09 am

This all seems rather Humpty-Dumpty-ish.

Neo-conservative seems to have been coopted by the left as a derogatory term for those that oppose them. The consistent meaning is that neo-cons will not tax their citizens and spend it on leftist social programs. They may spend hordes of money on military programs, and perhaps other forms of corporate welfare. They can be confused with so-cons.

Are we trying to reclaim the title of "Neo-conservative" and redefine it in a positive light?
User avatar
BlawBlaw
 
Posts: 9907
Joined: 01/ 30/ 06 3:15 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Alice in Wonderland

Postby Red Green » 07/ 11/ 06 12:43 am

BlawBlaw wrote:This all seems rather Humpty-Dumpty-ish.

Neo-conservative seems to have been coopted by the left as a derogatory term for those that oppose them. The consistent meaning is that neo-cons will not tax their citizens and spend it on leftist social programs. They may spend hordes of money on military programs, and perhaps other forms of corporate welfare. They can be confused with so-cons.

Are we trying to reclaim the title of "Neo-conservative" and redefine it in a positive light?


Neo-cons are generally thought of as be internationalist or one-world govt types. If the desire to arrange the affairs of the entire world to one's liking is not a social program, I don't know what is.
"The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." ~ John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Red Green
 
Posts: 13459
Joined: 02/ 03/ 04 12:59 am
Location: AZ

Postby reformthesystem » 07/ 11/ 06 12:52 am

I find the term neo-con is used derrogatorally by the left. The term just refers to new or modernized conservative political ideals but the left have somehow made it into an insult.

Of couse liberalism by Chretien and Martin was Neo-liberalism but I have yet to see anybody use that term at all.
"All which a man without authority can give, -- his unbiased opinion, his honest advice, and his best reasons." Edmund Burke

I support multiculturalism and massive third world immigration to Israel.

Did you know that anybody or everybody in the world is a potential Canadian within 3 months time?
User avatar
reformthesystem
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: 02/ 26/ 06 8:21 am
Location: Tory's Red Ontario

Postby Red Green » 07/ 11/ 06 12:59 am

reformthesystem wrote:I find the term neo-con is used derrogatorally by the left. The term just refers to new or modernized conservative political ideals but the left have somehow made it into an insult.

Of couse liberalism by Chretien and Martin was Neo-liberalism but I have yet to see anybody use that term at all.


I'm just trying to figure out what is "conservative" about a neo-con... but to me "conservative" is a meaningless term anyway since it seems to be embraced from everyone from the facist left to the moderate right.
"The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." ~ John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Red Green
 
Posts: 13459
Joined: 02/ 03/ 04 12:59 am
Location: AZ

Postby Ipberg2 » 07/ 11/ 06 12:02 pm

Crash wrote:
bulldog905 wrote:Neo conservatives, or at least the originators of, are the linear descendants of the Trotskyist wing of the Communist movement.


Nonsense



Not really.

Just consider the evolution of Christopher Hitchens from an anti-Thatcher trade unionist to darling of the Blairist neoconservatives.
Ipberg2
 
Posts: 10550
Joined: 11/ 17/ 05 9:22 pm

Postby DrWright » 07/ 11/ 06 3:46 pm

JBG wrote:
bulldog905 wrote:Neo conservatives, or at least the originators of, are the linear descendants of the Trotskyist wing of the Communist movement.


Yes, Ronald Reagan, Norman Podhoretz, Charles krauthammer, Mark Steyn. Real Trotskyites.


:lol:

marks my hero!!!!

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/i ... le_id=1821



Mr Blair, said on the day of the bombing that terrorists would not be allowed to “change our country or our way of life”. Of course not. That’s his job - from hunting to Europeanisation. Could you reliably say what aspects of “our way of life” Britain’s ruling class, whether pseudo-Labour like Mr Blair or pseudo-Conservative like Sir Ted, wish to preserve? The Notting Hill Carnival? Not enough, alas.
http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=36

http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=27
Two years ago, you may recall, Sudan was elected to the UN Human Rights Commission at a time when the government’s proxies were busy slaughtering and gang-raping their way round Darfur. The last thing one needs when one’s got a hectic schedule of mass murder on one’s plate is a lot of tedious paper-shuffling committee meetings in New York, but Sudan’s ambassador, Elfatih Mohammed Ahmed Erwa, gamely rose to the occasion by announcing, upon joining the Commission, that he was very concerned about human rights abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.


http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cs ... eyn09.html
As the great Shakespearean actor Edmund Kean said on his deathbed: ''Dying is easy. Comedy is hard.'' Not for Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon.



very commie like.
:lol:
http://marginalizedactiondinosaur.net/



2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion; b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and d) freedom of association.
http://marginalizedactiondinosaur.net/?p=855
User avatar
DrWright
 
Posts: 2570
Joined: 11/ 18/ 04 2:28 pm

Postby Neocon Recovery » 07/ 11/ 06 6:48 pm

As someone who considers himself a neoconservative, here is a perspective on the matter.

First, neo-conservatives are in fact conservative. However, their path to conservatism often involved an intellectual conversion from another system of belief, most often American liberalism or socialism. In brief, neo-conservatism is that acknowledgment that the Right was in fact right, that 'there is no alternative' but the conservative position for those who want to avoid hypocrisy and realize the greatest ambitions of the Western World. As well, neo-conservatism is primarily a social policy framework- note its origins in the critique of social science arguments for greater liberalism in public policy.

Secondly, neo-conservatism takes a very amitious foreign policy agenda simply from the realization that the preservation of our liberty in the West requires its extension well beyond the frontiers of the West. This, ultimately, is the reason for the staunch support of neocons for Israel and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Third, and for the record, any attempt to attack neo-conservatism as a form of Jewish self-aggrandizement is frankly anti-Semitic and stupid beyond compare. Apart from the simple fact that many of the most prominent enemies of neoconservatism also happen to be Jewish, that many if not most neoconservatives are not Jewish and, ultimately, neoconservatism is an interconnected response to the failure of liberalism to realize its own ambitions prompting a reconsideration of conservatism.
And, as for Pat Buchanan, there is a simple word to describe his basic political position: fascist. If any conservative has a flirtation with fascism, they are practically lost to the collectivist beast.

"I hath spoken and thus saved my soul." (Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy)
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
“The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you've simply abdicated the responsibility to think.”
- William F. Buckley, Jr.
Neocon Recovery
 
Posts: 123
Joined: 02/ 08/ 06 3:07 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba

Postby bulldog905 » 07/ 11/ 06 7:15 pm

Neo Con Recover Says
And, as for Pat Buchanan, there is a simple word to describe his basic political position: fascist. If any conservative has a flirtation with fascism, they are practically lost to the collectivist beast.


I couldn't disagree more strongly.

Pat and the trads and pals were here long before the neos who only become conservative when the left went anti-Israel.

Secondly, neo-conservatism takes a very amitious foreign policy agenda simply from the realization that the preservation of our liberty in the West requires its extension well beyond the frontiers of the West. This, ultimately, is the reason for the staunch support of neocons for Israel and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


It would be nice if these people who want to go abroad to preserve liberty, would fight for it at home, by opposing immigration policies and multiculturalism, that are destroying it right here, right now. I don't get it: I agree Israel has a right to preserve it's heritage, values, culture, religion and identity: Why are the neo-cons battling paleos and traditionalist conservatives who wish to do in our own country what Israel is doing in theirs?

And, as for Pat Buchanan, there is a simple word to describe his basic political position: fascist


No, it's called traditional conservativism . Pat's against abortion, feminism, the homosexual agenda, and all those other things the neo-cons are telling us the war is already lost against.

The interlopers that call themselves neo-conservatives are only temporary allies. I have no doubt if the left ever becomes pro-Israel again, they will return to their natural home.
User avatar
bulldog905
Member
 
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01/ 07/ 01 2:01 am

What's being said

Postby BlawBlaw » 07/ 11/ 06 9:02 pm

Google neocon+Harper and you find hits where various lefties accuse Harper of being neoconservative for his support of Afghanistan and Iraq.

But foreign policy can't be all there is to being labelled as a neocon. Look at Mike Harris. Google "Mike Harris"+neoconservative and the hits refer to his cuts to both social programs and taxes. As a provincial leader, he didn't have a foreign policy.
User avatar
BlawBlaw
 
Posts: 9907
Joined: 01/ 30/ 06 3:15 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Postby styky » 07/ 12/ 06 11:50 am

GLOBAL NEOCON
GLOBALISTS AND FOREIGN LOBBYISTS


By: Novakeo



When you read or listen to a neocon, you must come to the conclusion that they are utterly hopeless, and infantile. Like a good liberal, emotional hyperbole is mainly what they use for intellectual debate, and they tend to back up their delusional arguments with historical revisionism. I have always said that neoconservatives are nothing more than self-hating liberals with a belligerent complex in megalomania.

That is why they left the Democratic Party in the sixties, the pot-smoking hippies in the Democratic Party were much too much wimpy and docile for the neocons. Neoconservatives like Anne Coulter unremittingly write about the "godless liberals," only to reveal to the rest of us how godless the neocons really are. Coulter talks and acts like the typical liberal, playing the big political game in sensationalism all the way to the bank. Hypocrisy is her true asset.

On a national level, neoconservatives, as a matter of ideology and strategy look for enemies to kill in the field of foreign policy, especially when there is no legitimate strategic interest for the United States to protect. The neocons are neoliberal-globalists that want to strategically and economically dominate the globe; they create confrontations, create an atmosphere of fear at home by manipulating the media, and insist that violence is the only viable course of action for national safety and survival. The most recent case in point is North Korea and its daring unsuccessful firing of a number of ballistic firecrackers.

The Pyongyang regime of Kim Jong-II has managed to get the neocons all flustered, and panicky. How dare the North Koreans fire off their Taepodong-2 missiles in an obvious act of a nation performing a sovereign act? Leave it to the modern day Romans to find danger in the actions of a sovereign nation exercising their sovereignty by firing off a number of worthless missiles. According to the neocons this blatant act of semi-aggression must not be tolerated, they currently are screaming for economic sanctions, which theoretically is an act of war.




Never mind that after the cease-fire that ended the bloodletting in the Korean War, some 37,000 soldiers continue to be stationed there with no strategic vital interest. Why should American lives continue needlessly to be at risk in Korea? Let the Japanese, Chinese, and South Koreans deal with the crazies in the Hermit Kingdom, after all, it is in their backyard. The Korean War was a stupid war directed by a stupid President in America's first official police action without legitimate congressional approval. Foolishly called the Truman Doctrine, the Korean War was fought without actually trying to win the war, setting the stage for the Viet Nam. Neocons are good at fighting unwinnable wars because they enjoy turning chaos into gold; they prosper greatly in their unending conflicts, Iraq being the latest glaring example.

What the North Korean show of impertinence has demonstrated is how much a failure the Bush administration is in international diplomacy. Saber rattling, and illegal invasions by the United States has had a counterproductive result in geo-strategic diplomacy. Nations have become weary at the constant bullying by the United States and are refusing to play the American game called the "war on terror." Any resolution that the Bush administration is able to formulate in the UN Security Council, will most likely be void of any punitive substance against North Korea because the United States has lost all moral credibility.

That is why the "war on terror" and the Iraq War is a colossal bust; it is another failure in liberalism and not much more.

Conservatives need to take a good look at themselves and decide if they want to continue to support the Republican Party which has been hijacked by a select few. The neocons do not believe in the Constitution, they believe in wide-ranging power and not much more, and their agenda is global. The Republican Party has become a criminal enterprise that needs to be cleansed of all neo-conservatism and replaced by genuine conservatives that believe in legitimate conservative principles.

The conservative movement has always been an America First political movement that opposed foreign entanglements until the 1960s. Limited government, and minding one's own business in foreign affairs is the true virtue for conservatives. The neocons have always believed in senseless foreign adventures and social engineering on a global scale.

The neoconservatives are fundamentally on the political left, presently working to establish a high surveillance police state with illegal wiretaps, and terrorist fear mongering while at the same time allowing an invasion by millions of illegal aliens from Mexico for cheap labor. This is unrestrained globalism, a criminal enterprise that is eliminating the middle class and diminishing the sovereignty of the United States which the global elites want.

Americans need to stop listening to the delusional culprits who engage in establishing chaos throughout the world so that the select few can make fortunes out of the death and destruction that they create. When the neocons from both tightly controlled political parties warn America about the national vital interest in confronting North Korea, Iran, or whoever may be the next evil entity, Americans need to understand that the only vital interest to protect for the power elite is corporate globalism pushed by the globalists in Washington DC.

The problem in Washington DC is not all the corruption, and criminality, the fundamental problem in the district of perversion and mendacity is that it is in the hands of globalists and foreign lobbyists. Americans protecting real American interests in Washington DC is a rare commodity these days.


<a href=http://www.etherzone.com/2006/nova071106.shtml>source</a>
Click here for FREEDOMINION FORUM RULES
All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom; justice; honor; duty; mercy; hope ~ Sir Winston Churchill
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money." Margaret Thatcher They say it takes a minute to find a special person, an hour to appreciate them, a day to love them, but then an entire life to forget them.
User avatar
styky
Member
 
Posts: 120244
Joined: 03/ 10/ 03 9:21 pm

Postby Brock » 07/ 12/ 06 12:52 pm

The above article reminds me of the isolationist position and smacks of leftism IMO.


Conservatives contain diversity of opinion in there ranks as any ideology would, this should be no surprise to us, and the neo-con label is just an example of that. For the left to be begging for the "real conservatives" to come back is laughable. There pissed off we won the cold war, and their pissed of were taking their "social program" money away and killing off Crown Corporations the left (unions) have abused. Too bad tough titty kitty; It’s our turn.


I'm a neo-con but I don't share every last point with them, as I think abortion is wrong, too much immigration from certain places is detrimental to Canada, but I believe in low taxes and the War on Terror and all it brings.

I love Ann Coulter too, and I'm sure she is considered a neo-con by the left....
User avatar
Brock
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 06/ 22/ 06 12:54 pm
Location: London, Ontario

PreviousNext

Return to Miscellaneous Articles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests