Necroconservatives

[H2O Man]

DUers who are interested in the origins of the neoconservative movement should enjoy reading Chapter 35 of Taylo Branch's "At Canaan's Edge: America in the King Years 1965-68." In Chapter 34 (Riverside), he describes how Martin Luther King, Jr., fused his nonviolent civil rights movement with the anti-Vietnam War movement. The progressive leaders of the day recognized the connection between the violence within American cities, and the violence in Vietnam.

In the next chapter, "Splinters," Branch describes how the Six Day War divided the "liberals" of the day. It was actually democratic-socialist activist Michael Harrington who coined the word "neoconservatives" to describe the group that developed into the modern group.

Branch writes, "The powerful neoconservative school in American politics would grow from a merger of labor-wing Shactmanites into the larger movement associated with Irving Kristol." (page 620)

An interesting history that provides insight into how the small group of neoconservatives would rise to power is found in James Mann's "Rise of the Vulcans." DUer Emit recommended this book to me a year ago. It is not about neocons per say, and the majority of the Bush2 administration were not neoconservatives in the early phases.

Few books detail the danger the cells of neoconservatives in the executive branch were capable of better than Ambassador Joseph Wilson in "The Politics of Truth." It is fair to say that I. Liar "Scooter" Libby is the poster child of neocon abuses of power. But he is far from unique.

James Bamford's book "A Pretext for War" is an important source of information. Buy the second edition, with the new afterword. It details the amount of espionage associated with the neoconservatives who seek positions giving them access to intelligence. We do not always hear about this type of thing in the corporate media; the neocon-AIPAC espionage scandal should be front page news, for example.

Finally, re-read John Dean's classic "Worse Than Watergate" for some valuable information. See pages 103-104 in particular. Dean uses some information he attributes to libertarian Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex), who notes, "Modern neoconservatives are not necessarily monolithic in their views, but they can generally be described as....

- They agree with Trotsky's idea of a permanent revolution.

- They identify strongly with the writings of Leo Strauss.

- They express no opposition to the welfare state and will expand it to win votes and power.

- They believe in a powerful federal government.

- They believe the ends justify the mean in politics - that hardball (in) politics is a moral necessity.

- They believe certain facts should be known only by the political elite, and withheld from the general public.

- They believe in preemptive war and the use of military force to achieve any desired ends.

- They openly endorse the idea of an American empire, and hence unapologetically call for imperialism.

- They are very willing to use force to impose American ideals.

- They scoff at the Foundinf Father's belief in neutrality in foreign affairs.

- They believe 9/11 resulted from a lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

- They are willing to redraw the Middle East by force, while unconditionally supporting Israel and the Likud Party.

- They view civil liberties with suspicion, as unnecessary restrictions on the federal government.

- They despise libertarians, and dismiss any arguments based on constitutional grounds."

It is important to recognize that the neoconservatives today are a consequence of their origins, but that the movement has not remained exactly what it was 40 years ago. As people like Wolfowitz and Libby were able to convert two people in particular -- Rumsfeld and Cheney -- to true believers in some of the more important issues they advocated, the movement was transformed into what can most accurately be called the necroconservative movement.

[Karenina]

1. K&R!!!

:loveya:

[WilliamPitt]

2. Excellent, and I'd add another basic element to this.

Power.

Ideals, ideology and White-Paper policy theory are but one phenomenon involved. The other half once made for excellently gruesome Greek theater, way back when.

That half? Personal and political power (financed by, subservient to, and thus corrupted by, the "interested parties" who write the campaign checks), the promise of personal riches, plus a pinch of Cheneyian vengeance-motive carried in from Watergate, do scramble the eggs here.

Whatever the neoconservative ideal might have been, it has been devoured by age-old forces that have been crumbling the empires of mice and men since time out of mind: pride, greed, spite and, of course, hubris.

The roots and aspirations of the "neocon" concept are almost irrelevant at this point. Ask Jerry Falwell, whose personal Christianity suffered a similarly caustic and debilitating onslaught. He believed his own press, and went on to massacre his own creed.

Sic semper neocons.

Nice work, H.

[H2O Man]

13. Right.

I think that people who are stuck on what "neoconservatism" was in 1968 or 1972 are a bit like people who think that rock music must be exclusively defined by what albums a few groups they liked put out in '68 or '72. Those forces that you list -- pride, greed, spite, and hubris -- almost always come into play when groups and individuals begin to get a taste of "power."

The neoconservative movements genesis was actually the fusion of a few forces at a particular time in our nation's history. It cannot correctly be identified as a single entity. And just as times change, and people change, the neoconservative movement has changed, as well. It has also changed our country, and not in a good way.

[WilliamPitt]

14. An ideology forged by the Cold War deployed in a post-Cold War world

Our world today was made by that struggle, but the aftermath has so wildly complicated everything that a Cold War-like mindset can only fail. Black and white paradigms went out with Daddy Bush, a lot of combat-trained chickens we once called allies are coming home to roost, d their flawed-from-the-jump game plan has made matters immesurably worse.

Tactically, politically, economically, and diplomatically speaking, these fools brought a knife to a gunfight.

[Me.]

17. What Blows My Mind Is How Many Of Them Began As Dems

and had close associations with Scoop Jackson

"Influence on neoconservatism

Jackson believed that evil should be confronted with power. <30> His support for civil rights and equality at home, <31> married to his opposition to detente, <32> his support for human rights <33> and democratic allies <34>, and his firm belief that the United States could be a force for good in the world <35> inspired a legion of loyal aides who went on to propound Jackson's philosophy as part of neoconservatism. In addition to Richard Perle, neoconservatives Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Charles Horner, and Douglas Feith were former Democratic aides to Jackson who, disillusioned with the Carter administration, supported Ronald Reagan and joined his administration in 1981, later becoming prominent foreign policy makers in the 21st-century Bush administration. Neoconservative Ben Wattenberg was a prominent political aide to Jackson's 1972 and 1976 presidential campaigns. Wolfowitz has called himself a "Scoop Jackson Republican" on multiple occasions. <36><37> Many journalists and scholars across the political spectrum have noted links between Senator Jackson and modern neoconservatism.
Jackson biographer Robert Kaufman says "There is no question in my mind that the people who supported Iraq are supporting Henry Jackson's instincts."

Peter Beinart, author of The Good Fight: Why Liberals---and Only Liberals---Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again, argues that the Democratic Party should return to Jackson's values in its foreign policy, criticizing current-day neoconservatives for failing to adopt Jackson's domestic policy views along with his foreign policy views.<49> <50>

In 2005, the Henry Jackson Society was formed at the University of Cambridge, England. The non-partisan British group is dedicated to "pursuit of a robust foreign policy ... based on clear universal principles such as the global promotion of the rule of law, liberal democracy, civil rights, environmental responsibility and the market economy" as part of "Henry Jackson's legacy." The Society, however, disclaims any neoconservative affiliation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Jackson

[H2O Man]

18. Interesting point.

We can look back to LBJ, signing the Civil Rights Act, and recognizing that his doing so would damage the democratic party for a generation; we see Nixon exploiting the divide that the civil rights movement created, and gaining power from the dixiecrat discontent; and we can look at people like Jeane Kirkpatrick, who became a republican neoconservative activist early in the Reagan era.

Times change. People change. The history of politics is often best understood in terms of temporary alliances of convenience.

[Cults4Bush]

23. Is that your own quote at the end there??

"Times change. People change. The history of politics is often best understood in terms of temporary alliances of convenience"

This is one of the most simple yet profoundly and basically universally true statements Ive seen in a long time.

[H2O Man]

24. Yes. n/t

[Cults4Bush]

29. Thank you.. its my sig now:) nt

[H2O Man]

30. Well, that's nice.

I like that!

[Cults4Bush]

32. It really was a wise thing put simply,

Ive already seen several posts where Id like to point it out :), especially the long neocon thread.

Thanks again and Ill try and be a not overly inflammatory poster while I wear your awesome quote.

Keep on keeping on ;)

[Me.]

26. Pay The Price For Being Right

There is no question that the dem party has paid for its support of civil rights along with other social problems. We also took a hit with Vietnam because that was where, I believe, the notion of dems being weak had its inception. Spite from those like the dixiecrats and the publicans ability to reframe an issue (thanks Huston) went a long way to putting us in a position where the neos could send us to a fake war and steal an election.

[omega minimo]

21. Can they be separated?

"Those forces that you list -- pride, greed, spite, and hubris -- almost always come into play when groups and individuals begin to get a taste of "power." "


Those forces shout out from between each of the lines of your OP list. Anyone who considers themself in a position to perpetrate those ideas must be in the grip of "pride, greed, spite, and hubris" --- or their twisted take would not be possible.

[EFerrari]

25. It could be said that they replaced the basic goals of government

(protecting the citizenry and the common good) with the goal of protecting and promulgating their ideology. If that's true, they aren't actually governors at all but something else. I can't come up with a term (besides criminal syndicate, lol).

[H2O Man]

27. I think that they

are "enemies of our Constitutional democracy."

[qdemn7]

44. The term you are looking for is

"oligarchs" as in oligarchy. Good point at Wikpedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchies

The Iron law of oligarchy

Some authors such as Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, Thomas R. Dye, and Robert Michels, believe that any political system eventually evolves into an oligarchy. This theory is called the "Iron law of oligarchy". According to this school of thought, modern democracies should be considered as elected oligarchies. In these systems, actual differences between viable political rivals are small, the oligarchic elite impose strict limits on what constitutes an 'acceptable' and 'respectable' political position, and politicians' careers depend heavily on unelected economic and media elites.

[EFerrari]

45. Thank you -- I think you're right. n/t

[baldguy]

3. "The Power Of Nightmares"

"This film explores the origins in the 1940s and 50s of Islamic Fundamentalism in the Middle East, and Neoconservatism in America, parallels between these movements, and their effect on the world today."

http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmaresDVD

[Roland99]

5. That is such a wondrous introduction into the insane mindset of the neocons.

It's a good thing our liberal media has shown that on a regular basis!!






Oh wait....

[Az]

7. Here is a link to a downloadable version of this documentary

http://www.jonhs.net/freemovies/power_of_nightmares.htm

[Cults4Bush]

4. Loved it! Thank you H2O!...has anyone heard this meme btw.....

that neocon is just code for Jewish?? I checked out a site of uber militant Jewish "liberals" and a few there were passing that around. trying to frame it so that if you used the word neocon your argument is tainted by default because it is just code for Jewish and therefore youre basically anti semite. Just wondering if anyone else has come across this tactic?

Its one of those ones where I just out and out reject the premise but Im also wondering if anyones debated against this frameing and how they went about it.

[mmonk]

8. Yes. That is probably why America won't have an honest discussion

on these imperialists. They are afraid the neocons will try to label them something they aren't.

[Cults4Bush]

22. As I said below

Id just reject the premise as its obvious BS considering who has been involved in promoting their agenda, spiritual paths obviously have almost nothing to do with it when stood up against their actual policies (clearly mega corp/ Pax Americana driven).

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. Yes, that's an argument that was quite often put forward

See, for instance:

According to Brooks, "To hear these people (the alleged conspiracy theorists) describe it, PNAC is sort of a Yiddish Trilateral Commission, the nexus of the sprawling neocon tentacles." He writes that "con is short for 'conservative' and neo is short for 'Jewish.'" With this vicious slur, Brooks has now joined Jonah Goldberg, Joshua Muravchik, Joel Mowbray, Robert J. Lieber and other neoconservative writers in accusing all critics of Israel's Likud government and its neoconservative supporters of treating "neoconservative" as a synonym for "Jew." Among those smeared by neocons in this way in the past year are Chris Matthews, William Pfaff, Eric Alterman, Joshua Micah Marshall, Gen. Anthony Zinni and yours truly. When I, the descendant, in part, of Jewish immigrants, exposed Pat Robertson's anti-Semitic conspiracy theories in 1995, Norman Podhoretz denounced me, not Robertson, reasoning that while Robertson was objectively anti-Semitic he could be forgiven because of his Christian Zionist support for Israel, on the analogy of the rabbinical rule of batel beshishim, which governs impurities in kosher bread. The most loathsome libel in this loathsome campaign was written by Mowbray: "Discussing the Iraq war with the Washington Post last week, former General Anthony Zinni took the path chosen by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on the Jews.... Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East didn't say 'Jews.' He instead used a term that has become a new favorite for anti-Semites: 'neoconservatives.'" In An End to Evil, Perle and Frum--spontaneously, one can only suppose, as neocons "don't actually have much contact with one another"--repeat the new party line: "Most important, the neoconservative myth offers Europeans and liberals a useful euphemism for expressing their hostility to Israel."

It is true, and unfortunate, that some journalists tend to use "neoconservative" to refer only to Jewish neoconservatives, a practice that forces them to invent categories like "nationalist conservative" or "Western conservative" for Rumsfeld and Cheney. But neoconservatism is an ideology, like paleoconservatism and libertarianism, and Rumsfeld and Dick and Lynne Cheney are full-fledged neocons, as distinct from paleocons or libertarians, even though they are not Jewish and were never liberals or leftists. What is more, Jewish neocons do not speak for the majority of American Jews. According to the 2003 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion by the American Jewish Committee, 54 percent of American Jews surveyed disapproved of the war on Iraq, compared with only 43 percent who approved, and American Jews disapproved of the way Bush is handling the campaign against terrorism by a margin of 54-41.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040223/lind/2

That's actually a good article (a review of the awful Perle/Frum book) for this discussion (across several threads) of neoconservatism. The start:

About a decade ago, I invented a game with a colleague of mine who, like me, had once worked for Irving Kristol. We called it neoconservative bingo. The idea was that the clichés of neoconservative discourse would be arranged in various combinations on bingo cards: "The World's Only Superpower"; "The New Class"; "The China Threat"; "Decadent Europe"; "Against the UN"; "The Adversary Culture"; "The Global Democratic Revolution"; "Down With the Appeasers!"; "Be Firm Like Churchill." The free space in the center of the bingo card would be "The Palestinian People Do Not Exist" (nowadays it would be "No Palestinian State" or "All Palestinians Are Terrorists"). As you read an essay or a book by a neoconservative, you would check off each slogan on the card in the order in which it appeared.

We never printed our neocon bingo cards. But the neoconservative manifesto by David Frum and Richard Perle, An End to Evil, which is more a collection of talking points than a coherent argument, can serve just as well. The United Nations "has traduced and betrayed" the dream of world peace. The China Threat: "Eventual Korean unification will reinforce the power of the world's democracies against an aggressive and undemocratic China, should China so evolve." There are the Neville Chamberlain appeasers and the Decadent Europe theme: "To Americans, (Europe's doubts about the invasion of Iraq) looked like appeasement. But it would be a great mistake to attribute European appeasement to cowardice--or to cowardice alone." There are the obligatory Churchill references--a chapter is titled "End of the Beginning"--and there is this: "We will never cease to hope for the civilized world's support. But if it is lacking, as it may be, then we have to say, like the gallant lonely British soldier in David Low's famous cartoon of 1940: 'Very well, alone.'"

Bingo.

Paradoxically, Perle and Frum happened to publish their manifesto of neoconservative grand strategy at the very moment many of their colleagues were insisting in print that neoconservatism does not exist, and that the neocons have no influence on US foreign policy. Up until the summer of 2003, neo-conservatives proudly championed their movement against adversaries on the left and against factions on the right (realist, paleoconservative and libertarian) that questioned the wisdom of invading Iraq. That summer, however, the invasion of Iraq--planned for a decade and carried out chiefly by leading neoconservative foreign policy experts like the Bush Pentagon's Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith--went terribly wrong. As of this writing, more US soldiers have died in the unnecessary second war in Iraq than have been killed in any other US military venture since Vietnam, and several thousand Iraqis have died, with many more maimed (the Bush Pentagon does not bother to count Iraqi casualties). As the enormity of the debacle became apparent, neoconservatives abruptly began avowing their own nonexistence. Not since Stalin ordered the US Communist Party to go underground has an American political faction pretended to dissolve itself in public like this.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040223/lind/2

[Cults4Bush]

20. Wonderful post!

Very informative, thank you very very much. Im wondering if the article deserves its own thread? Hrrrrmmmm probably but may not be many takers on reading it.

I missed this article back in the day and somehow had never heard this frame before a few days ago. Im still puzzled how it actually gets used in a debate. Id just assume rejecting the premise by illustration of recent neocon movers and shakers would nip that quickly in the bud.

Thanks again for going through the trouble of finding that for me.

[vickitulsa]

6. What an excellent summary! As usual, H2Oman, you make me

wish I had the money and time to buy and read these books you cite.

Well, actually I have the time (and the will), just not the money!

While I'm wishing, I also wish DU had some sort of "members lending library" so those of us who can't buy books could have access to them to borrow and read. I will check my city's public library system to see if they have any of these, though I suspect there's a waiting list to get them if they do.

Unfortunately, my extremely limited income from SSDI -- my sole source -- makes it impossible for me to acquire the books I'd love to read. Ironic that this happens at a time in my life when I do have the time to read. :(

The "welfare state" in the U.S. obviously thinks I have plenty of money to live on, though, especially since it keeps giving me these amazing "cost of living increases" periodically. The last one brought my total monthly income to a whopping $740/month, so gee, my government clearly figures it is keeping up with all my needs very well indeed.

I might get at least one of these books this month if I could find a used copy somewhere. But I plan to donate the piddling tiny amount I can spare this time to help the Greensburg, KS, tornado victims.

(See this thread for a way to do this if you're also interested; it sank into oblivion astonishingly fast with almost no public DU response, though I understand some PMs were sent to the OP.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=889212


Because I can't buy these books, I am ever so grateful for your overviews and quotes from them in your oh-so-helpful posts! Thank you for doing what you do.

I am especially interested in this history of the necroconservative movement. Love your re-titling of it, too! :evilgrin:

Seems perfectly appropriate to me. "They" like to label liberals as a "cult of death," but to any objective observer, it is they who fit this description best. One more time doing their projection thing.

The other descriptive words that should adorn their cult, such as you (and Will Pitt) name here (including that "pinch of Cheneyian vengeance-motive"), make me wonder if this lot will eventually go down in history along with their key proponents who have done so much damage to our nation and its people as well as peoples abroad, as "the worst ever."

If history tells the truth, then future citizens of the U.S. and the world will look back on these times and shake their heads, wondering how the "great American experiment" ever could have gone so wrong....


K&R! :applause:

[H2O Man]

33. Thank you.

Books can be expensive -- no doubt about it. Even the paperback editions of good books often are costly. And it can be a long wait for some new releases if one is on a library waiting list. A lot of the books I get from the local libraries are a couple of years old; it's not the same as reading a new release, but there are a lot of good ones available. For a long time, I've read the rather large amount of books that deal with the 1960s and the Nixon/watergate era that followed .... and it seems that there are getting to be almost as many interesting books documenting the Bush-Cheney administration.

[Me.]

9. Good To See This As There Is A Lot Of Confusion About The Neos

In talking about them, we should also consider those who aren't in power but influence the power elite: William Kristol, Ledeen, Rhoades, Meryvav Wurmser, Bolton and the recently convicted spy, FRanklin. I also think it appropriate to mention that their close ties to the Likudists have had an immense influence on our foreign policy. It is often suggested that the posh for bombing Iran has more to do with benefiting the state of Israel, that us. I found it very interesting that when Olmert made his mistake on Syria, two of his biggest opponents were his wife and daughter. That's important to realize because the point is that the citizens of 2 countries have been held hostage to the wrongheaded thinking of a small group of mainly men.

Here's an interesting article with the hypothesis that we should let the neos play themselves out so we never have to endure them again.

This perfect storm will finally destroy the neocon project


<<<>>>>
“All of which has vital implications for British politics. Nicolas Sarkozy has been called "an American neoconservative with a French passport", which he is not. But Blair really is an American neoconservative with a British passport. He revealingly and accurately said that "there isn't a world of difference" between himself and the neocons politically, and his party must now, as it shakes off the burden of these past years, ask itself what, in that case, he was doing as Labour leader.

The Tories have questions of their own. Even the stupidest have grasped that the war and the American alliance are unpopular with the electorate, but they should now ask if sceptical, pragmatic Conservatism ever had anything in common with neoconservatism and its vast revolutionary scheme. One who did understand is Matthew Parris, the former Tory MP. Before the 2004 presidential election he said he wanted Bush re-elected: his presidency was halfway through an "experiment whose importance is almost literally earth-shattering" and should be played out to its inevitable failure.

But that failure must be demonstrated beyond contradiction. "The theory that liberal values and a capitalist system can be spread across the world by force of arms... should be tested to destruction ... The president and his neoconservative court should be offered all the rope they need to hang themselves."

His wish has come true; neocons are dangling all around us. In a flicker of self-knowledge, Wolfowitz told a recent World Bank meeting: "I understand that I've lost a lot of trust, and I want to build that trust back up." But it's too late, for him and all the other courtiers. They never really enjoyed the trust of most Europeans, let alone Africans and Asians, and they have now lost the trust of the American people.

All the readings on the barometer and the wind gauge say the same thing. The perfect storm is gathering. Unfortunately the collapse of the neocon project comes at a very heavy cost, not only to the people of Iraq but to all of us.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2077320,00.html

[H2O Man]

19. Part of that confusion

is a result of the neoconservatives belief that lying is a good thing when it helps them to achieve theirs goals. Because the core group of neoconservatives have been largely exposed and discredited for their role in planning and executing the US invasion of Iraq, they are engaged in a campaign of lies to attempt to blame others for their crimes.

[fooj]

34. Lying is a means to an end.

Ethically and Morally Bankrupt!!!

[loudsue]

48. So true, fooj. But one thing ALWAYS holds true: Lying NEVER works in the long run.

The old nazi saying that 'if you tell a big enough lie, long enough, boldly enough, everyone will believe it' (or something like that) , is only true for a short while. There always comes too much cognitive dissonance among those being lied to, that, unless they go completely insane, they will eventually see the truth. And they'll be pissed!

[malaise]

10. Thanks

I'll order two of them today. The Politics of Truth is already a classic.

I also love Michael Parenti's Democracy for the Few for youngsters who want to understand the system.

http://www.michaelparenti.org/DemocracyForFew.html

[Birthmark]

11. Most neocons are also petrosexuals

They loves 'em some oil. Hence their pathologic obsession with the ME.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. It has much much more to do with Israel than with oil.

The marriage between the neoconservatives and the petroleum industry guys (Cheney, etc.) is one of convenience.

[opihimoimoi]

16. Awesome...you Da Man...Come, we go drink....on me....

[PRETZEL]

28. great post,

There was a couple of books I read a few years back that dealt with both the historical roots of the neocon movement and the direction it has taken recently.

The first book was "The Neoconservative Revolution" by Murray Friedman. From what I remember he traced the roots (albeit from a Jewish perspective) through 3 main sources. There seemed to be a convergence of thought from students at the University of Chicago (Perle & Wolfowitz among others), New York University (Bill Kristol and the Kagens) and the Ivy League elites (William Buckley Jr.) that seemed more or less to just blend together.

The other book is Francis Fukuyama's "America at the Crossroads". In this book, he basically takes to task where the neoconservative movement has abandoned ideology in favor of preserving power. He makes a very strong case.

[dogday]

31. Yes they are "bomb em all" crazy.

Their answer to the problems in Iraq---Bomb them all.....

[philly_bob]

35. Here's some background on Schactmanites.

from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Shactman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shachtmanism

In the Vietnam era, we know them as "Trots." They took over the Socialist Party.
Also known as Social Democrats. They were always the best organized faction on the left. When you went to their meetings, they were always super-heated over subjects of only minor interest to anyone else; one hot-button was "self-determination."

Other key references are Scoop Jackson, the Six-Day War in the Middle East, and Young People's Socialist League.

[Marie26]

36. What is the Scoop Jackson connection?

It's weird, they almost all seem to have worked in his office at some point.

[H2O Man]

37. A good source of

information on that is James Bamford's book (A Pretext for War). Here is some information that you might find interesting:

"Among Jackson's greatest supporters were members of the neoconservative movement. Predominantly Jewish, they were turned off by the counterculture movements of the 1960s, disillusioned with the Great Society, offended by the 'anti-American' sentiments of the left, and fearful of the expansionist aims of the United Nations. At the core of the movement was a small but prolific band of sedentary intellectuals and think tank warriors, including Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol. In limited-circulation journals, they wrote longingly of a muscular expansion of American power and influence around the world, a rollback of communism and an end to detente with the Soviets, and the creation of a seamless bond between Israel's interests and America's military and foreign policy. ...

"Aided by Perle, Jackson quickly became Israel's number-one man in Congress, constantly pushing for more and more money with fewer and fewer restrictions. In fiscal year 1970, Israel received military credits from the United States worth $30 million. But thanks to a Jackson amendment, the next year the amount skyrocketed to $545 million. By 1974, it had reached an extraordinary $2.2 billion, more than seventy times what it had been just four years earlier. ..." (pages 272-273)

[Lochloosa]

38. Kick

[bobbolink]

39. Found it! Have it in my hand. ^_^ Now I have something to read

for the last 1/2 of my life. ~~gigglesnort~~

Dang, it's heavy.... :hi:

LOVE the "necroconservatives"! Is that your term? clever...

Right now, just seeing the pictures gives me some solace.

Thanks! :applause:

[Spazito]

40. Well done! Thank you for this

It is very important to emphasize , as you have, the movement has not remained static. Your descriptor "necroconservative movement" accurately describes the modern evolution of the original neocons.

[H2O Man]

41. Right.

People who think that there are strict rules on defining "neoconservatives" -- and that we must go by the measure of who some of them were 40 years ago -- are simply wrong.

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

42. K & R for the Waterman! H20, I have an OT request...

Thanks for your insights - it's always an education to read your posts.

I hope you post at some later date the current dustup between the Seneca Nation and Elliot Spitzer regarding the taxation of casino revenue. It looks from here (California) that this is a power play by the State of New York, and it is not a pretty picture. I guess the Senecas have not been ponying up enough "tribute", eh?

[H2O Man]

43. Okay.

I'll do that. The issues of taxation seem to be an on-going issue, and I will post something about it soon.

[Canuckistanian]

46. Excellent analysis

I had ignored this thread, thinking it to be about something completely different.

Glad I looked into it.

I really need to catch up on my reading.

[H2O Man]

47. I'm glad

that you read it. I'm thinking of doing another about the attempts by some of the neoconservatives to adjust to the republican rejection of the policies they advocate. We will see increased efforts on their part as the '08 election cycle comes closer.

[loudsue]

49. I can't wait to see that thread, too! This has been a VERY educational

thread, and I love it. Big thanks!

:kick::kick::kick: & R

[Raksha]

50. K & R, bookmarked. Great thread as usual, H2O Man. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

51. Way'at H2O Man!

:hi: Great thread! :thumbsup:

Ron Paul has been a thorn in the side of Bushler's Texas Republican Party for decades. If they don't shut him out of the rest of the debates, he might wake up enough moderate republican voters to split the GOP in two. Unfortunately, the neocon propaganda networks are already trying to destroy Ron Paul:

FOX NEWS:

JOHN GIBSON, HOST: The "Big Outrage": Presidential heavyweight Rudy Giuliani vs. Congressman Ron Paul. The duo's 9/11 contest got a little spicy at last night's GOP debate in South Carolina after Paul suggested that the U.S. actually had a hand in the terrorist attacks.

(snip)

MICHELLE MALKIN, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: "It is and it doesn't belong here. And I'm glad that this moment provided great TV for FOX News — it was a very instructive exchange — but Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a legitimate representative of Republicans,"

(snip)

MALKIN: "You know, I try not to spend too much time in these cesspools, but it is worth taking a visit to places like, you know, these WTC7 sites and Students and Scholars for Truth, and I note that Ron Paul has basically allied himself with these people. He appears with Students for Truth on campus and he's appeared on radio shows like 9/11 conspiracy nut Alex Jones. And I would hope that that would disqualify him the next time around for appearing on stage with other Republicans."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273343,00.html

______________

National Review:

Giuliani Up, McCain Up, Romney Down, and Ron Paul Out — Way Out
A strange turn at the South Carolina GOP debate.

By Byron York

Columbia, South Carolina — For a man who had just grabbed the spotlight in a nationally televised presidential debate, Ron Paul seemed a little, well, defensive. A few minutes after the debate ended here at the University of South Carolina, Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas, ventured into the Spin Room to talk to reporters, only to find that they wanted to know whether he really blamed the United States for the September 11 terrorist attacks.

(snip)

“Who did that?” Paul snapped. “Who blamed America?” “Well, your critics felt that you did.” “No, I blamed bad policy over 50 years that leads to anti-Americanism,” Paul said. “That’s little bit different from saying ‘blame America.’ Don’t put those words in my mouth.” “But the policies were bad American policies?" “We’ve had an interventionist foreign policy for 50 years that has come back to haunt us,” Paul continued. “So that’s not ‘Blame America’ — that’s demagoguing, distorting issues…That’s deceitful to say those kinds of things.” To many people, however, it did appear that Paul blamed the U.S. for the attacks. A few feet away from where Paul was meeting reporters, Washington lawyer Ted Olson, at the debate to support his friend Rudy Giuliani, was taken aback at what he heard from Paul. “I find it personally offensive and very disturbing,” said Olson, whose wife Barbara died on September 11, “that an American, especially an American member of Congress, can say those things about what happened to cause 9/11.”

(snip)

So in the end, the candidate who made a big move, who came out of nowhere to win new name recognition was…Ron Paul. But it’s probably not the sort of name recognition Republican presidential candidates want. “Wow,” said one adviser to a rival campaign after listening to Paul’s blame-America lecture. “I haven’t heard anything like that this side of Rosie O’Donnell.”

(snip)

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDBkMzQ2MTJmOTFmZWM4NjJhYjg3MTY1MzRhMGU0Y2Y=

[Truthy Nessy]

52. Don't forget to read about Leo Strauss

Many of the talking head followers you see on MSM and that are in W's administration are pupils and followers of Leo Strauss - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss

He is said to be a founder of the neoconservatives.

Try to watch a copy of the BBC documentary Power of Nightmares which discusses. It sure is an eye opener.

Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada is also a avid follower of Strauss. This fact is hidden from the Canadian public.

[DemReadingDU]

53. Thank you, H2O man!

I always learn so much from your posts

[H2O Man]

54. Thank you.

I'm glad that some people enjoy my essays on DU.

[DoctorStrangelove]

55. I suspect that neoconservatism will be around for a very long time.