Where Did the Neo-Con’s Philosophy Come From, & Why did it Work?
Mark this down on the calendar. “On December 06, 2006 ABA agreed in part, but not completely with Rush Limbaugh. For over six years now Rush has been saying that what we, (He means his ilk, the Nutty Right.) have to deal with in Washington is the left over products of the Sixty’s. Rush didn’t mean it in the way I am going to go with this. Read on.>>>
According to an op-ed piece I finally got around to reading by, Harold Myerson of, The Washington Post, May 24, 2006. (It was in my favorites.) In the column, he points out that most of your hard Right-Wingers, were Radical Lefties in the 60’s. You know the type, took over college campuses and destroyed towns. Much of what they support today.
With the release of the Baker Hamilton report and the Senate‘s confirmation of Robert Gates, I started asking where did these Neo-Cons in the White House today come from? We know that the original thirteen were handpicked from PNAC, and the ones that are going to replace those that are falling on the sword for the administration, will be friends of daddy Bush. But I want to go deeper than that, where were they before they decided their calling was to take absolute power over the Middle East and possibly the world?
The past actions of today’s Neo-Cons, follow a pretty logical pattern,
They never stay long with one idea; what they wanted was action.
Some reversed position only once and then stayed with their new world view for the rest of their lives. This happened if their previous commitment was brought more by the influence of others rather than their own beliefs. This kind of transition was always the most credible.
Their knowledge of the new movement was shallow but the immersion was very rapid.
There was not a long period of time and reflection as they made the jump.
Their need to join was more out of filling a void in their personal life more than a need to bring justice and fairness or freedom to society.
If they brought a deep intellectual commitment to the endeavor, they were more interested in ordering the world in their image rather than learning about the world.
Most of today’s Neo-Cons believe that we should be involved in all aspects of the words doings. From foreign affairs, to removing dictators and trying to replacing our from of Democracy. (Something that our present little dictator found is not working.) The Neo-Con believes that the force of the U.S. military should be used to achieve this. The main belief amongst all True Neo-Cons is, Israel must be protected at all cost.
It is hard to find anything that goes deeper than their college days. With Bill Kristol we can look at his father who is call the Godfather of Neo-Cons. Irving Kristol authored the Neo-Con Bible, “Neo-conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea”. Also writing, “On the Democratic Idea in America”, “Two Cheers for Capitalism”, and, “Neo-conservatism”. With this in mind we can guess where young William gets his Neo-Con roots.
Neo-Cons and Crowd Control.
For over 40 years the Neo-cons have seen something that most have missed, the opportunity to control the masses. Time has shown that we have become more open to all that surrounds us. It was a short time ago that we would have never even thought of anyone of the same sex even asking for the right to marry his or her partner. Then during the late 70s early 80s it became an, “as long as they don’t bother me” attitude. Then came a point when the Right decided, it was the right issue to split the country. This started after the 80s AIDs outbreak. The fear tactic on gay relationships was pushed to the forefront. This was done at breakneck speed with the Right-Wing Christian Waco’s calling the gay disease.
The other day I was listening to the Rush Limbaugh show, when a listener called in and said that Rush was a Neo-Con, and Rush ask him why he thought Rush was an anti-Semitic. This puzzled the caller, as it did me. As I listened on I started to see what was going on. The Right has taken the word used to describe the new kind of conservative, and are trying to make it into a word that shows hatred against the Jew. This has become something they do well. They managed to take the word liberal, and change it into a word that brings the worst out in some want-be Neo-Cons. They have taken the word that means to be open to change, and progressive, and made it mean enemy of the country.
Abortion has been around since the beginning of time. It was something that was never talked about, but it was known to happen. After Roe -v- Wade, the Right-Wing Christian fanatics decided that it was better for young women to die in the back ally, than to allow the procedure to be done right. So they pushed this issue by placing their people in the right places. And as they always do in these times of uncertainty they invoke the fear of God or death to push their agenda.
A study conducted by the PEW Forum found that 70% of Americans don’t think that Religious leaders should endorse any one candidate. However we all now they do. In fact I became shunned by the Catholic Church that I attended since I was a child, because of my view on John Kerry in “04”, and his stance on Same Sex Marriage and Abortion. Needless to say I have never gone back and lost what I thought was a good friend.
The Democrats were labeled as anti-gun in the 60’s after the assassination of JFK, and his brother Bobby, by the questioning of the gun laws. The label has stuck and was really pushed in the 2000, and 2004 campaigns as a wage issue. In fact I found it to be the reason in the small, poor, rural town I live in the people vote republican most of the time. (Even when it is against their best interest. When I get into a political discussion about who someone will vote for in an upcoming race, I always hear, “Democrats want to take your guns.” As if that is a major concern at this time. Then when I say that I am Liberal you would have thought I did take a shot at them.
Neo-Conservitism has found the key issues that will drive a wedge into and divide this country faster than anything the Democrats have ever come up with to hold it together, and for their tactics of trying to use the Orwellian tactic of “Black is White and White is Black they need to read Irving Kristol’s, “Neo-conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea”, and “Neo-conservatism” a little closer.