1 post tagged “jonah goldberg”

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the neoconservative movement?  It often feels like folks who support the Iraq War in particular and the War on Terror in general are unreservedly labeled neoconservative, neocon, neopig, baby-killer, etc.  In truth, support for the war has never been the exclusive domain of neoconservatism, which philosophy is a convenient political ally for conservatives like myself. 
There are some differences between neoconservatism and what I would consider an archetypal American Conservative.  Neocons are not, in my experience, all that committed to social conservatism.  This isn't bad, per se, at best it means they are simply focused on other issues.  Their actual beginnings are quite interesting for someone who has only learned of the neocons through the media.  Burned by liberalism many ages ago, these intellectuals brought their considerable smarts to bear in the fight to spread American notions of liberty and representative government while preserving American interests.  At least I thought so.  The real truth is slightly different.
I read a piece by Jonah Goldberg on the topic.  Here's a snippet:

Obviously, supporting the spread of democracy hardly requires you to support the Iraq war. But it works the other way around as well. Support for the Iraq war doesn’t automatically make you a neoconservative. Douglas J. Feith, a former undersecretary of defense after 9/11, argues in his new memoir, War and Decision, that democratization didn’t rank very high among the Bush administration’s early priorities. Moreover, the administration’s mistakes in Iraq — perhaps including the war itself — have less relationship to ideology than many think. “It is possible,” as Kagan notes, “to be prudent or imprudent, capable or clumsy, wise or foolish, hurried or cautious in pursuit of any doctrine.” (Just ask newly hired Hamas spokesman Jimmy Carter.)

Oooh, burn.  But the point he makes later is that what many people call neoconservatism, that is the "doctrine of democracy promotion abroad, moralism in foreign policy and unilateralism toward these ends when necessary..." is not the original meaning of the idea.  It was a domestic philosophy. 
In the original sense, neoconservatism was the rejection of the idea that we can create a utopia on this earth through government.  It was the realization by former liberals that the progressive ideals that were championed throughout the 20th century lead to fascism and oppression.  At the very least they lead to stagnation and dependence, as evidenced by Europe.
I see a lot of people who want to reject the idea that individuals should be the captains of their destiny.  I see a lot of people whose rejection of neconservatism has less to do with any war and much more to do with the role of government in our lives.  Many people have a vested interest in growing government.

The question I ask myself is whether the current political climate allows the liberals to step back and really examine their views.  For the liberal leaders, this is obviously not in their interest.  But for the people who mindlessly condemn neoconservatism without being able to explain its basic origins and principles...there's hope they will see sense before they are duped into electing a person who will put us on the path taken by Europe.