Have absolutely no idea if true of Pelham, but at least for many, nutters on both left and right, neocon=Jew.
repeatedly criticizing neo-conservatives (in his current book he calls them neo-Statists)
Probably about the last FReeper, but still looking forward to reading your book. If critiquing individual neocons on this basis, fine and fair. But I'm not aware that the "neocon" label denotes a specific ideology wrt to domestic policy.
As I understand... Generically it refers to national security hawks. Historically it refers to liberals who moved to the right mainly over foreign policy / national security issues, most in response to the weakness of the Carter administration, or in response to Reagan's strength.
So, yeah. Many probably remained more left on domestic issues. But I don't see that follows of necessity. Many solid conservatives are "neocon" in the generic sense without being statists, e.g. a Mark Steyn. (Although probably every conservative faction would gladly claim Steyn.)
“Have absolutely no idea if true of Pelham, but at least for many, nutters on both left and right, neocon=Jew”
Which makes Irving Kristol what, exactly? He must have been a true nutter considering the way he tossed around the term “neoconservative”. Imagine titling your book “Neo-conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea”. Or
“Reflections of a Neoconservative: Looking Back, Looking Ahead”. And God knows know what to make of his Weekly Standard essay “The Neoconservative Persuasion”. Imagine acknowledging your reputation as the Godfather of Neoconservatism, instead of lashing out at the nutters who apply that label to you.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp