Posted on 04/18/2012 7:22:43 AM PDT by WPaCon
There stands before you, ladies and gentlemen, one of the few survivors of the original intrepid band of Neoconservatives. Very early in the 1950s, some of us who declared our belief in the Pe rmanent Tldngs were so denominated by our adversaries; but we did not clasp the epithet to our bosoms as a badge of honor - unlike the people who, a quarter of a century later, pleaded guilty as charged, and gloried in their shame.
To put the matter anoth er way, the terms "New Conservative" and "Neoconservative" began to appear in certain journals nearly forty years ago. They were applied to such writers as Robert Nisbet, Peter Viereck, Daniel Boorstin, Clinton Rossiter, and your servant. When commentator s and critics of that remote epoch entertained sentiments kindly in some degree toward such literate obscurants, they used the term "New Conservative" - implying that misguided though such relatively youthful reactionaries might be, still they probably mea nt well, and occasionally displayed glimmerings of sense; nay, that now and again such New Conservatives even made suggestions worth discussing, though perhapsper accidens.
Such were the opinions of our friendlier critics. But journalists and professors wh o thought less well of us pinned upon us the dread label "Neoconservatives," knowing us for symptoms of the recrudescence of a loathsome plague called reaction, enemies of all progress, oppressors of the poor, either tools of the bloated capitalist or els e toadies of feudal barons, simpletons enamored of the superstitions of the childhood of the race. The worst fears of these evangels of secular progress came to be realized; they were true prophets. For indeed revived conservative doctrines were disseminat ed throughout the land by our malicious typewriters, and the American people were arrested in their march toward an earthly Zion.
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
Here are links to the threads with his lectures on cultural conservatives, libertarians, and popular conservatives:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2873340/posts
Mitt Romney's 22 foreign policy advisors aka Romney's Shadow National Security Council is riddled with NeoCons, and a NeoCon wrote Romney's foreign policy speech at the Citadel.
Obama rode into Libya on a coalition between the NeoCon Republicans and the Liberal Interventionist Democrats. And when the House Republicans thought about playing some politics over Libya, the NeoCons told them to shut up, which they did.
Hang onto your seats boys and girls, if romney gets elected and puts the NeoCons in charge of foreign policy, there will be boots on the ground in Iran and Syria to do humanitarianism and nation building.
1988 article.
The neo-con label he referred to had a very different meaning from today. For one thing, it had very little to do with foreign policy.
Though I must admit I’m a little unclear what “neo-con” means today. Seems to be used by all sorts of people to slam anybody they disagree with.
Myself, I pay little attention to what one is called and/or calls himself, and look to see what he/she says and not so much what others say about them.
Some may have noticed the name folks hang on themselves just doesn’t fit a good part of the time—especially in the (pseudo) con field!
Semper Watching!
*****
Making the world safe for democracy doesn’t make sense, especially when you are trying to make Muslim countries democratic.
They must forget that America is a republic, not a democracy.
I’m no NEO-Conservative. I’ve been a Conservative since I learned how to spell conservative in the early 50s. Would that make me a Paleo-Conservative?
Oh come on, we know how old you are, so we know you’re a Cambrian conservative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.