- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Your lean says "Very Conservative", so you should be able to answer this yourself.Trump- doesn't support iraq and called neoconservative hero Bush a liar, failure and blamed him for 9-11(a pivotal event in neocon history). He does seem more hawkish then clinton though.
Clinton. Voted for iraq. I think she also supported libya and syria.
Who you got neocons?
A neconservative is one of a group of former Marxists who switched to the conservative side in the 1970s. They were mostly Jewish, and Norman Podhoretz wrote the definitive book (literally) on the movement.
They are called "neoconservative" because they became "newly" conservative.
Generally, they favor big central government and muscular foreign policy.
The term "neocon" has come to mean, among those who don't know what it actually means, "really conservative," or, more accurately, "whatever I don't like about conservatives." It's also used as a dog whistle for "Jews." And some people use it interchangeably with "neo-Nazi."
Your lean says "Very Conservative", so you should be able to answer this yourself.
Uh huh.I am not a neocon though. I am more of a traditional conservative.
Many were not Jewish. Ben Wattenberg brought on James Q Wilson to his show Think Tank a couple of times and they laughed about that association. James Q Wilson, Michael Novak, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and countless others were not Jewish. Given the contributions of Protestants and Catholics, Irishmen, and all flavors of Europeans alike, They settled on their colleagues being "disproportionately" Jewish. Furthermore, though there were a sizable number of socialists in the bunch, that was largely (though not completely) isolated to the later generations of the much-venerated New York Intellectuals of the pre-WWII era.
Norman Podhoretz, while being the author of many books, was not the one who "literally" wrote the book on it. You may be thinking of Irving Kristol who published an anthology of his essays in 1995 with such a title. In the 1990s Podhoretz also published more conclusive memoirs than he had in the past, however. But Kristol himself, though having his own opinions and origins, nevertheless relied heavily on the contributions of those with more formal backgrounds on the social sciences: Moynihan, Glazer, Wilson, and so on.
Much of neoconservatism didn't wait to be published in book form (though, there are many, thanks to the largely academic background of its membership), but rather it was to be found in quarterly policy journals and weekly magazines.
I am not a neocon though. I am more of a traditional conservative.
and what is your definition of a trotskyist?
LOL okay. You are about as conservative as imyoda.
And why is that?
You are correct; it was Irving Kristol. That was my mental short-circuit.
I still contend that they were mostly Jewish, but it's not really a point worth worrying about EXCEPT that "neocon" is indeed used as a dog whistle for "Jews." It's simply WHY it is.
It took on a disproportionate Jewish influence, but in that end what made that stand out was that a lot of conservatives distrusted the grouping on the basis that a number of them were Jewish or came from Ireland, and Eastern Europe (many of them were not religious, but religious utilitarians anyway). Nevertheless, neoconservatism had within it a great many religious and ethnic backgrounds, much to the irritation of many conservatives who, may be Catholic, but were largely in the old WASP grouping, ancestors of earlier American generations or, if not, from more "respectable" countries of origin.
But yes, neocon has also been a dog whistle to inculcate anti-Semitic sentiment. However, at the same time, a number of neoconservatives (Podhoretz and some members of the Podhoretz-Kagan clan) have dramatized such issues to such an extent that they couldn't separate criticisms of, for instance, the Scoop Jackson style of foreign policy, from true anti-Semitic attitudes.
Ignore him, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
that's more clear....There were Neocons in the Bush Administration.
The Neocons were an informal group of professionals and academics that participated in the discourse after the Soviet fell of what the consequences were and how the US response to these results should be. The members of the group were generally very well educated and had had a lot of experience. Many published quite a bit and took differentiating but not always the same views as others in the group.
The general public did not follow the discussions at all closely and had very simplistic ideas at best of the debate and differing opinions and groups held.
Could you explain to me what a neocon is?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?