Look I'm a political junkie like most of the people who read political blogs.
But can somebody explain to me what the distinction is between a neo conservative and a plain ordinary vanilla conservative.
Or is that a liberal tag that just sounds scary.
Seriously, I'm looking for an education like the one I didn't get in the public skools.
7 comments:
Gordon;
Your question can really get deep and at times hair splitting, but in short and in my humble opinion, neo-cons generally believe that the power of a centralized government can be administrated through virtuous bureaucrats, and they are generally neophytes to the conservative movement; where as a traditional or paleo conservative rejects the use of large government, only for those areas that state and local could not accomplish, such as national defense, and would look for private associations and community involvement to provide assistance before the state; in which case, only the smallest entity needed would be used to provide assistance.
For example a neo-con believes that the Department of Education has a role in standardizing and supporting our public education, where as a traditional conservative would say that there is no Constitutional basis for the ED and that education should be the responsibility of the parents first, and the local community and private schools second; above that there is no need for state support. Now this is quick and dirty, but I hope that it answers a bit of your question.
Gordon -
Great question, and I'm very encouraged to see you asking the question. Most conservatives are so out of tune with their own ideology, they are inclined to think that "neocon" is a smear term.
I was just listening to a podcast the other day on an interview with Jim Lobe, who has been writing about and studying such things for many, many years.
You can listen to the podcast at:
http://dissentradio.com/radio/08_02_01_lobe.mp3
Give it a listen. Its about 55 minutes long.
-LJ
Jason,
I don't agree that most conservatives are out of touch with their own ideololgy. By definition, conservatism has been about strong defense, protected borders, small government, free markets, low taxes, minimal regulation, and originalist interpretation by the courts. Most conservatives I know follow this, even some that are not comfortable with labels.
When one strays away from pure conservatism one, by definition, gets into activism.
Neoconservatism is a label which, since it is not simply conservatism, implies activism to a degree. Generally it refers to a more active foreign policy backed up by military. Pure conservatives don't like the activist part of it. Liberals don't like the military part of it.
So there's something for everyone to hate in the term, which is probably why it is used a lot, albeit by different people with different intent, creating confusion for everyone.
I'd disagree. I fail how to see Conservatism, rightly understood denies "activism". Any set of principles can be agitated for. I don't see how Conservatism is any different.
Neo-Conservatism represents a profound break with traditional conservatism, specifically in the means. With Neo-Cons, gone is the suspicion of power, to replaced with great faith in men with power.
As Lord Acton stated, power corrupts. That is a classical conservative view, that is all but gone with neo-cons.
"With Neo-Cons, gone is the suspicion of power, to replaced with great faith in men with power."
You may have a point. If this quote represents the thought process of what someone has arbitrarily defined as a neo-con then I'd have to say that this is not even close to traditional conservatism. But then I look at this quote and I say it closely resembles the thought process of a proponent of a big, powerful, monopolistic, and intrusive government. Ie. a liberal. So can we call Hillary a neo-con? Why not?
Which get us back to Gordon's original point. What does the term neo-con mean?
"I'd disagree. I fail how to see Conservatism, rightly understood denies "activism". Any set of principles can be agitated for. I don't see how Conservatism is any different."
IMHO, conservatism is adherence to a set of basic principles that are rooted in the philosophy of the founding fathers. Low taxes, small government, sovregnty, free markets were all considered the ideal back in the day. Non-conservatism is the opposite: High taxes, large government, open borders, and regulated markets. The trend to the latter has been a long and persistent one.
So we are now at the point where to reverse these effects and get back to smaller government probably does technically require activism. So I'm agreeing with you in a sense. I have always considered the left to be the new good-old-boys club; the neo-establishment if you will. And conservatives are the neo-rebels of today.
But the original thinking is that any push back to the basic founding principles is conservative and any push away from them is activist, regardless of how *active* a role one takes in making that push.
Break the word down. Neo - new. Con - conjunction meant to refer to Conservative. Neo-Con - New Conservative.
In the classic sense a neocon is someone who is new to conservatism. The biggest influx of neocons came post September 11th when a bunch of people who may have considered themselves blue dog Democrats or Conservative Democrats switched sides due to the attacks. These people are hawkish on defense but advocate larger government, federal funding for social programs etc... etc... etc...
In a sense, a neocon is a lib who sobered up, partially.
Post a Comment