What is a neo-liberal, neo-communist, neo-facist?

06.18.05 | Vanity Question

[USAfearsnobody]

Well by now I know what a neo-conservative is, but people still mention neo-liberals, neo-communists, neo-facists. What does each term mean--especially the "neo-liberal" term?

[Ken522]

... short answer; a Democrat.

[USAfearsnobody]

I figured I'd get a response exactly like that!

[softwarecreator]

Well, "neo" means new and "liberal" means idiot, do the math.  =)

[SittinYonder]

neo liberals/communists/fascists are fools. The only thing that separates them from traditional liberals, communists and fascists - who are also fools - is that they thought a catchy prefix might get them some attention.

[softwarecreator]

I figured I'd get a response exactly like that!

What kind of answer are you looking for that you can't Google and find out for yourself in seconds?

[softwarecreator]

So, you make a post asking a very easily researched question that you KNOW is gonna get smart a$$ed answers, act indignant when you get one and then disappear after the first response, not waiting to see if someone will reply with an answer that suits you.

Why'd you bother to post it if you didn't want an answer?

[Toidylop]

I'd like your definition :)

[USAfearsnobody]

I figure there is bound to be someone that's going to answer this seriosly. I wasn't complaining about getting smart-ass answers, just the predictibility. And besides, these answers aren't boring, and it's fun just to here everyone's remarks as they are already. Maybe you got the wrong idea with that response. And I wasn't satisfied with the definitions I got on the web.

Act indignant? Disappear after the first response? My friend I don't know what you are talking about--let it go and have some fun. That response about "doing the math" is perfectly fine for me, really. I'm not a historian in desperate need of a real answer.

Besides, I'm about to get some shut-eye, so of course I'm not gonna sit here all night and look at all the responses. Obviously, I'd check out the "new posts to you" sign later.

Chill.

[softwarecreator]

Thanks ... too bad he didn't!  He probably was long gone before I posted it anyway.

[softwarecreator]

Okay, but why post a thread if you only intend to stay a few minutes?

Oh well, no harm ... sorry if I prematurely jumped at ya ... anyway, have a good night's sleep. =)

[USAfearsnobody]

Let me clarify about the complaining because I didn't. I was not complaining AT ALL. I had the prediction that someone would respond by saying 'its a Democrat' and I wanted to share what I predicted.

[USAfearsnobody]

Well this is most likely a low-traffic thread so I figure I'll just see everything tomorrow when I get up. I've had the question on my mind and just felt like bringing it out now. Gnight.

[softwarecreator]

I had the prediction that someone would respond by saying 'its a Democrat' and I wanted to share what I predicted.

Ah, a prediction thread!

Glad you got the results you were looking for, so few of us do.

Just out of curiosity: what does neo-liberal mean to you?

[bad company]

It is a good question as there is deinitly a "new left" out there that is very very socialist and very anti-Israel (Jewish).

I'm on a few boards that are "open" and they tap dance around the hating Jews thing and openly acknowledge the socialism they embrace, even openly attacking capitalism. If you want to see their head spin, point out that Hitler was a socialist.

There is a new monster out there.

[USAfearsnobody]

I just thought of this and I'm surprised it came to me now: its just the opposite of a neo-con. Neo-cons were libs who stopped short, and neo-libs are cons that stop short.

For instance if a full-fledged conservative decides to become a lib, he's going to retain his pro-life, pro-gun, pro-marraige stance and but become an otherwise full-fledged kook. This fits Harry Ried's characteristic (not that he was necessarily a conservative at one point--who knows, but either way that doesnt matter).

Shutting down computer... goodnight!

[USAfearsnobody]

So you'd say it's the Vietnam pack that's neo-libbing from the FDR pack?

Talk to you tomorrow.

[softwarecreator]

Interesting.  I don't go to any other boards except "little green footballs" (non-registered, just lurking), and then only ocassionally, so I don't have any insight into what others are saying.

I know about sites like DU, which is mostly a bunch of know-nothing kids who spout hatred and anti-government crap while calling for a revolution?  I don't take them too seriously because most are harmless kiddies who will be onto a new fad next week and it's currently fashionable amongst their peers to hate Bush.

I can understand that there are a lot of Israel bashing sites (obvious target) because, again, it's fashionable to hate Israel among that crowd.

Are these boards you are talking about like them or something to be taken seriously?

[Stonedog]

I know about sites like DU, which is mostly a bunch of know-nothing kids who spout hatred and anti-government crap while calling for a revolution?

Sadly, the "know-nothing kids" are in the minority at DUh. It is a gathering place for dispossessed hippies and peaceniks. Standard hate America first crowd, just like you see at "peace" rallies.

[TrailofTears]

This is a great post in that we hear these terms over and over spouted by the media in an attempt to garner support for the same old same old idiot liberal candidates.
Basically i would define a neo-liberal as a liberal that the media has fallen in love with.

They get this definition because the media wants to promote them, and they know the majority of America is sick to it's stomach with liberals. So, they promote their favorite sons as neo-liberals as opposed to the "old kind of liberals." They paint these folks as liberals who somehow married pragmatism and reality as far as policy is concerned.

The only governing thing we need to remember on anything passed off as neo-liberal is that they are probably more radical than even the old McGovern liberals or FDR liberals. They are more inclined to use the government to go after their enemies, to use the government to shut up speech that they dislike, and to use the government to stop activities that they dislike (smoking, and other nanny state pet peeves).

Thus inclined i would classify them as much more dangerous than the old liberal crowd, who at least paid lip service to the constitution and the bill of rights. These neo-liberals are ravaging dogs hungry to control each and every thing in the lives of the population around them. They are power hungry fanatics bent on creating their concept of a socialist utopia. (Most normal people would see their concept of a utopia as an Anti-utopia in the nature of such things as ANIMAL FARM, or 1984.)

They still promote the idea of the "socialist concept of the new man" except that they are jaded on the ability to get the average joe to be of interest, so they gravitate toward doing all of it through government force. They are liberals who no longer believe that they can sell these concepts to the rest of us, and no longer believe that they can come at us straight forward with them. Because they have come to the realization that they will fail at their ability to "convince" the rest of us of the rightness of their beliefs, they use government agencies and programs to accomplish what they want.

If you believe that the main aim of all these groups is not to get certain things that they want out of the rest of us, (e.g. homosexual lobby wanting the rest of us to give them acceptance, woman's movement wanting equal place in society, environmental lobby wanting cleaner environment); But that they really want a dissolution of our society and governance and an institution of socialism as the alternative with them in an oligarchy over the rest of us, then you will understand just what they are up to.

These neo-liberals are faddish in attempting to use various different causes and movements to gain more and more position in our society in order to bring down that society. They are not merely looking for their "share" of governance, they are looking to create a new type government here. Not new in the sense that it hasn't been tried before, but new in the sense that we as a society haven't had it here before ruling us.

That is why i have drawn the line in my experience against all their direction, whether it be women in combat or abortion on demand. They are all the same emphasis with the same desired end.

Here is where it gets complicated. When i was growing up you could count on the schools to give you an honest definition of communism/socialism and the principles they are based on. Now we see none of this taught in a way that would instill in the normal joe/jane the ability to both recognize the effort and resist the effect of these things encroaching on the rest of us.

They no longer teach about the dialectic and about the meaning of materialism as it applies to these folks. They dare not. We as western thinkers and as linear thinkers are constantly out of touch with how this all works. We have very little ability to figure out how to think through the attack that is coming against our society. Thus we fail to see that all of the attack is nothing but the dialectic operating to gain foothold in our midst.

We fail to see the effect of the whole picture, and often fall into agreement with some of these groups (and thus quit fighting them) and some of their pet issues. This is dangerous because it takes away from us the ability to make a solid stand against all of it. We compromise on issue after issue, not realizing that they are all coming from one source, and those that are promoting the issues probably don't give a "tinkers damn" about what they are promoting, only about it's effect on destroying a free society and creating a socialist one in it's place.

They understand that on an international level only the United States and it's efforts was able to stop the "international" (world communism) form happening. It was because of our military, and our commitment to freedom that we stopped them dead in their tracks and made them turn back areas that they had gained control over.

This was observed by those promoting such evil on the rest of the world and they determined that if they are to win in the future they then had to go out and take apart our society piece by piece. They had to attack on every level and with every issue they could use to attack. That is why health care, concern for the environment, and other seemingly harmless issues are wielded by them to bring the rest of us under government control and mandate. They use each and every one of the major issues in society, not to resolve the problems they claim interest in; but to bring about control over other areas of society. They use these issues to gain control of people's lives. This is where the danger lies.

We, as constitutionalists, have always got to be concerned and aware of how these socialists are attempting to gain control of us, and what issues are presently being used. They only have to score on one of their attacks to gain victory, we have to score on all points to keep them out of control. The reason that there is such a fight on all fronts is because we no longer teach our children what to watch out for in government classes, nor do we teach them the love of freedom. So this makes the struggle a constant fight.

Remember, the two major changing agents of any society are the public education system and the military. That is why liberals are constantly attempting to destroy the ability of either of these two from doing their job and effectively promoting freedom. Take the issue of "women in combat" and realize that this is an issue that divides many conservatives and constitutionalists. They forget the real purpose of the military and see it as just something to gain opportunity in society. Then they fall prey to the silly argument that women make the same level soldiers as men. They promote the idea that men and women are not any different. Thus the socialists, whose only real aim is to destroy the American military, have made great inroads to weakening the military.

The same thing is true with the homosexual lobby, the woman's movement, the environmental lobby, etc, etc. They are not interested in gaining effect on society, only in using their specific issue to bring the society down from freedom to mandatory government control. They never are satisfied with acceptance of their issues, only with total overthrow of the prevailing balance of a free society.

A free society is a balanced society. Each and every one and each and every issue is placed in it's proper place, with none gaining more important than can be found in the constitution. Whenever these liberals come in they want to use one point over the rest of the others to gain control of the others. They don't have to win on all, only one to begin the process of victory on the rest, and on eroding the whole.

Am i saying that there are not honest adherents to each of these issues? No. There are always people that fall for the ideas promoted and have nothing to do with the reasoning behind it all. They are needed to give a "nice" face to the proponents of these tools of socialists endeavor. I teach my children to look behind the mask on each and every movement and effort to change society they see around them.

Even more, i teach them the definition of how these groups represent the dialectic and how they are promoting materialism in the classic Marxist way. Once you gain the ability to see that it is easy to pick out how your enemy is disguising itself. Secondly, and most importantly, i teach my children faith in God, His Word, and what it has to say about the governance of a society, the importance of freedom, and the importance of ownership (true ownership only exists with being able to use your property without government control) of property.

We have got to go back to the basics to win this battle. That is what made the Great One great. He was great because he walked the path of simple explanations. He both was constantly teaching the rest of the society the importance of freedom, and was teaching us how the enemies of freedom were operating to take it away. It only took that in order to bring down whole efforts at government run slavery. It is a simple order, but a necessary one. If we fail to continue to teach, and that at every opportunity, we will have a great vacuum in which the enemies of freedom can operate. The Great One was so good at this ability to teach that he took Bush senior who was for abortion on demand, and convinced him to come over to the pro-life side.

We need to be constantly teaching the rest of society around us how this all works. Instead of merely saying that we are against the homosexual lobby, and allowing them to define us however they want to define us, we need to define why we are against them, and what they are really up to. This needs to be done on each and every one of the neo-liberal's issues. It is then that we will see them pushed back and freedom guarded in a way that will assure that our children's children will have a free society.

"A righteous man leaves an inheritance to his children's children."