The author sees the constitutionally aligned "agrarian" republican as most resistant. - 'Puritans' as prone to the prohibitionist fallacies of control.
It is the socialist leaning moderates in the GOP that are the ones most likely to side with authoritarian socialism.
True. Todays 'neo-conservatives' are a prime example.
Yes, there is a smattering of libertarians, Ron Paul comes to mind. But the Reagan Revolution was largely advanced by the Christian Right.
Right thinking Christians realize [or should] that a prohibitive government is their worse enemy:
"-- The puritan, like the primitive shaman, seeks to make everything right in the world by magical words of command. Has it ever worked? Can it ever work? Look at the record -- it has never been successful.
Puritanism is, at bottom, simple tyranny, and tyranny is doomed to failure. --"
Prohibitions against murdering babies and of removing God out of the pledge, perhaps, but not prohibitions of speech, religion, assembly, and pursuit of happiness.
It is the RINOS that like affirmative action, diversity training, socialized medicine, etc etc. They are as "puritan" as my big toe.
Neo con is lousy term and defines very few people. Supposedly Bush is a Neo-con. He comes from a long family history in the GOP, and he is more conservative than his family. People call Rumsfeld a neo-con. The guy is older than anyone who calls him that and has been a GOP fixture since before the term was invented. It's a phony term used by those who think somehow we should mind our own business in the world, as if that is even a remote possibility.