why are there something called "neocons"

[Minotaurus]

and why are this Republican government called neocons

the word neocon is something i associate with a some sort of secret underground organization that planes to take over the control of a nations and so

[Revtim]

Accordign to the Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative

Neoconservatism (or neocon) refers to the political movement, ideology, and public policy goals of “new conservatives” in the United States, that are relatively unopposed to “big government” principles and restrictions on social spending, when compared with other American conservatives such as traditional or paleoconservatives. [citation needed]

In the context of United States foreign policy, neoconservative has another, narrower definition. Critics [citation needed] define it as interventionist with hawkish views on foreign policy. Supporters define it as advocating the use of military force, unilaterally if necessary, to replace autocratic regimes with democratic ones. This view competes with liberal internationalism, realism, and non-interventionism.

Of course, being Wikipedia, that should not be taken as gospel.

[BrainGlutton]

Do a keyword search on “neocon” or “neocons” and you’ll find a lot of GD threads discussing who the neocons are, where they come from, and what their goals are.

[Minotaurus]

i’ve read somewhere that the neocons have it’s origins from the far left

It’s a fact that many neocons are jewish or very supportive of zionism and Israel

[Der_Trihs]

@Minotaurus

It’s a fact that many neocons are jewish or very supportive of zionism and Israel

Some are Jewish; I’ve also heard that many are Christian end-of-the-world types who think the Jews need to be in Israel to confirm Biblical prophecy ( and be killed when it happens ).

[BrainGlutton]

@Minotaurus

i’ve read somewhere that the neocons have it’s origins from the far left

Yes – many former neocons were former Trotskyites (i.e., anti-Soviet leftists, dedicated to international socialist revolution) who signed on to support the Cold War. Today, they are still rather similar to Trotskyites in their thinking, but they have substituted capitalism and democracy for socialism as their global end-goal.

One ostensibly left-wing organization generally supports the neocon agenda: The Social Democrats USA. http://www.socialdemocrats.org/

[Minotaurus]

@Der Trihs

Some are Jewish; I’ve also heard that many are Christian end-of-the-world types who think the Jews need to be in Israel to confirm Biblical prophecy ( and be killed when it happens ).

i’ve have the strong impression that all are either jewish or zionists - and as you say very religious - evangelical christians with a stong armageddon perspecive

[Lemur866]

@Der Trihs

Some are Jewish; I’ve also heard that many are Christian end-of-the-world types who think the Jews need to be in Israel to confirm Biblical prophecy ( and be killed when it happens ).

Cite?

Those people wouldn’t be neoconservatives, but paleoconservatives.

Neoconservatism is/was a movement of intellectuals and wonks, not mouth-breathing bible-beaters.

[Larry_Borgia]

Not all zionists–Jewish or otherwise–are neocons.

[Captain_Amazing]

@BrainGlutton

Yes – many former neocons were former Trotskyites (i.e., anti-Soviet leftists, dedicated to international socialist revolution) who signed on to support the Cold War. Today, they are still rather similar to Trotskyites in their thinking, but they have substituted capitalism and democracy for socialism as their global end-goal.

I’d say “many” is an exaggeration. The only former Trotskyite I can think of right now who became a neocon is David Horowitz. Then there were some Schachtmanites who became neocons, like Irving Kristol, Sidney Hook, and Nathan Glazer, but generally, by the time they were Schactmanites, Schachtman had already split from Trotsky.

[Jackmannii]

@Minotaurus

and why are this Republican government called neocons

the word neocon is something i associate with a some sort of secret underground organization that planes to take over the control of a nations and so

Whew! After seeing his first post cut off I was worried that the Neocon Cabal had kidnapped Minotaurus and hauled him off to their secret dungeon (glad to see that’s not the case).

Lots of people love a good conspiracy theory, Minotaurus apparently more than most.

David Brooks had this to say about perceptions of the Evil NeoCons:

*Still, there are apparently millions of people who cling to the notion that the world is controlled by well-organized and malevolent forces. And for a subset of these people, Jews are a handy explanation for everything…You get to choose your own reality. You get to believe what makes you feel good. You can ignore inconvenient facts so rigorously that your picture of the world is one big distortion.

And if you can give your foes a collective name — liberals, fundamentalists or neocons — you can rob them of their individual humanity. All inhibitions are removed. You can say anything about them. You get to feed off their villainy and luxuriate in your own contrasting virtue. You will find books, blowhards and candidates playing to your delusions, and you can emigrate to your own version of Planet Chomsky. You can live there unburdened by ambiguity. *

[BrainGlutton]

@Jackmannii

.Lots of people love a good conspiracy theory, Minotaurus apparently more than most.

David Brooks had this to say about perceptions of the Evil NeoCons:

OTOH, a good case can be made for the neocons-as-a-very-real-evil-or-at-any-rate-stupid-conspiracy-that-really-has-landed-us-all-in-the-shit. See this article by Michael Lind, from the New Statesman, 4/7/03: http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=1189

And a critique by Alan Wald of said article: Are Trotskyites Running the Pentagon? | History News Network

And this rebuttal by Lind and counter-rebuttal by Wald:

I Was Smeared | History News Network

Who Is Smearing Whom? | History News Network

Judge for yourself. Lind, at any rate, is a highly respected intellectual figure and not known for gullibility about anything, least of all conspiracy theories.

[Captain_Amazing]

@Minotaurus

i’ve have the strong impression that all are either jewish or zionists - and as you say very religious - evangelical christians with a stong armageddon perspecive

That’s not true. There are a lot of prominent neocons who aren’t Jewish or evangelical Christian. Jeane Kirkpatrick isn’t Jewish, Pat Moynahan wasn’t Jewish. Condi Rice isn’t, Samuel Huntington isn’t, Francis Fukiyama (who no longer identifies himself as neocon) isn’t, etc. (Then there’s Stephen Schwartz, who had a Jewish father, a Christian mother, and who’s Muslim, so I don’t know where you’d put him)

[Captain_Amazing]

@BrainGlutton

Judge for yourself. Lind, at any rate, is a highly respected intellectual figure and not known for gullibility about anything, least of all conspiracy theories.

Lind also has a lot of axes to grind, and he’s not neccesarily objective about this whole issue.

[BrainGlutton]

@Lemur866

Cite?

Those people wouldn’t be neoconservatives, but paleoconservatives.

Actually, they would be “Christian Zionists.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism With whom the neocons have formed a slightly uneasy (on the neocons’ part) strategic partnership. From The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America, by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge (New York: The Penguin Press, 2004), p. 215:

Indeed, this [the September 11 attacks] reinforced one of the strangest marriages in the conservative movement. The Religious Right has been pro-Israel since at least the 1970s. Evangelicals believe that the Second Coming will take place in Israel – and that it will be preceded by the conversion of the Jews to Christianity; thus, both the Jews and Israel need to be saved in order to fulfill their dual roles in Christian eschatology. The highlight of the Christian Coalition’s 2002 conference was a rally for Israel. Fundamentalist congregations spend millions to subsidize Jewish settlements. Go to fundamentalist churches and you will find prayers to let Israel keep the biblical lands of Judea and Samaria.

You might think that, as secular intellectuals, the neocons would have found this eschatological brew a bit too strong for their tastes, and that, as Jews, they would balk at being assigned to a bit role in the Christian revelation. But the neocons have always been remarkably good at biting their lips on these subjects, treating Christian fundamentalism as something of a Straussian “noble myth” – it might be nonsense, but it advances the conservative cause. Sometimes they break ranks – Bill Kristol supported John McCain’s attempt to end the Religious Right’s stranglehold on the GOP – but his father’s infinite tolerance for the Religious Right’s peccadilloes was a much more typical neoconservative position. In one essay, Irving Kristol praised the Religious Right for its vital role in creating the Reagan majority – and conveniently forgot to mention the fact that Pat Robertson had said some pretty terrible things about the Jews.

The paleocons, OTOH – best represented by Pat Buchanan and his America First Party – http://www.americafirstparty.org/ – are committed to social-religious conservatism, nativism (immigration control), economic populism (Main Street vs. Wall Street), economic nationalism (anti-globalization, NAFTA, etc.), and military isolationism. Buchanan is dead against U.S. support for Israel, as well as the GWAT in general. So there’s a significant schism on the American right, where Israel is concerned.

[BrainGlutton]

@Captain Amazing

Lind also has a lot of axes to grind, and he’s not neccesarily objective about this whole issue.

Could you expand on that?

[Marley23]

@Minotaurus

i’ve have the strong impression that all are either jewish or zionists - and as you say very religious - evangelical christians with a stong armageddon perspecive

I occasionally hear people allege that “neocon” is just a code word for “Jew,” as a number of prominent neocons in the Bush administration are Jewish. But unless Cheney, Rumsfeld and a lot of other people converted at some point, that seems patently false.

[Captain_Amazing]

Michael Lind was a neoconservative writer for the National Interest who, after he got upset that there wasn’t more criticism of Pat Robertson from the right, had this “road to Damascus” moment, and declared in “Dissent” that conservative intellectualism is dead, and that the neoconservatives have sold out and now merely work to legitimize and apologize for the anti-intellectual religious right and the racist, anti-democratic and anti-semitic elements of the right wing.

[Minotaurus]

here is an interesting article from the program 60 Minutes on CBS which was aired in 2003

(CBS) This week, Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told President Bush that he would start to dismantle some illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank as part of an agreement with the new Palestinian Prime Minister.

That news has already alarmed those Jewish settlers – and ultra-Zionist Israelis who believe that the Jewish State should control all of the Biblical Jewish homeland.

But they’re not the only group that feels that way. So do Fundamentalist Christian Evangelicals who make up the largest single religious grouping in the United States. Correspondent Bob Simon first reported this story on October 6, 2002.

**What’s the number one item on the agenda of the Christian Right? Abortion? School Prayer? No and No. Believe it or not, what’s most important to a lot of conservative Christians is the Jewish State. Israel: Its size, its strength, and its survival. Why?

For Christians who interpret the bible in a literal fashion, Israel has a crucial role to play in bringing on the Second Coming of Christ. **

Last fall, supporters of the Christian Coalition gathered on the Mall in Washington to express their faith and to lobby the administration. The rally was organized by the Christian Coalition, which wants to make sure that the Bush Administration sees the struggle in the Middle East between Jews and Muslims their way - the Christian way.

American Christian Zionists say they are now a more important source of support for Israel than American Jews or the traditional Jewish lobby.

“It is my belief that the Bible Belt in America is Israel’s only safety belt right now,” says Rev. Jerry Falwell, one of the leaders of the Christian Right. That’s the bulk of Evangelical Christians; Falwell claims to speak for all of them.

“There are 70 million of us,” he says. “And if there’s one thing that brings us together quickly it’s whenever we begin to detect our government becoming a little anti-Israel.”

However, the plot is ripped from the pages of the Bible, so it all winds up here in Israel where, according to the Book of Revelations, the final battle in the history of the future will be fought on an ancient battlefield in northern Israel called Armageddon. It will follow seven years of tribulation during which the earth will be shaken by such disasters that previous human history will seem like a day in the country. The blood will rise as high as a horse’s bridle at Armageddon, before Christ triumphs to begin his 1,000-year rule.

**And the Jews? Well, two-thirds of them will have been wiped out by now. But the survivors will accept Jesus at last. **

“The Jews die or convert. As a Jew, I can’t feel very comfortable with the affections of somebody who looks forward to that scenario,” says Gershom Gorenberg, who knows that scenario well.

Gorenberg is the author of the “End of Days,” a book about those Christian evangelicals who choose to read the Bible literally. “They don’t love real Jewish people. They love us as characters in their story, in their play, and that’s not who we are, and we never auditioned for that part, and the play is not one that ends up good for us.”

“If you listen to the drama they’re describing, essentially it’s a five-act play in which the Jews disappear in the fourth act.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/03/60minutes/main524268.shtml

[BrainGlutton]

@Marley23

I occasionally hear people allege that “neocon” is just a code word for “Jew,” as a number of prominent neocons in the Bush administration are Jewish.

That canard has its origin in a very, IMO, disengenuous article written for the Wall Street Journal in 2003 by Max Boot, who was trying to make a case that the “neocon” label does not really mean anything and the movement as such does not exist at all: Opinion & Reviews - Wall Street Journal David Brooks took that same ball and ran with it, in the article linked above by Jackmanii.