'Neo-Con Do You Qualify?'
By JB Williams (09/04/07)
The most popular political slur of our time is the term "neocon." Politically engaged people of several ideologies use the term regularly and although they mean different things when they use it, the term is always intended to be an insult, like the terms "neo-Nazi," and "fascist," also favorite slurs of the same ilk using "neocon."
I was first called a “neocon” by known Democratic Socialists upset by my writings in favor of America’s founding principles, Life, individual Liberty and the right to pursue Happiness in a free market society where all things are possible through individual achievement and reward.
Since Democratic Socialists believe in and support Death not Life (abortion), a Greater Communal Good - not Individual Rights and the right to take from achievers via progressive taxation - not the right to live free, earn and retain wealth by the sweat of one’s own brow, I took the term “neocon” as a compliment.
The term “neocon” was fashioned after the term “neo-Nazi,” both intended to insult those of differing political belief systems.
Dictionary.com defines the term “neo-Nazi” as ..."a person who belongs to a political organization whose beliefs are inspired by or reminiscent of Nazism." On this basis, the term “neocon” would simply translate as "a person who belongs to a political organization whose beliefs are inspired by or reminiscent of Conservatism." It’s hardly much of an insult to any self-proclaimed “conservative,” now is it?
Neocon is short for “neo-conservative,” which Dictionary.com actually shows two opposing definitions for; a) "moderate political conservatism espoused or advocated by former liberals
or socialists"; b) "An intellectual and political movement in favor of political, economic, and social conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s."
In the minds of modern Democratic Socialists, definition (b) is what they mean by the term “neocon.” It’s also what they mean when they use the terms “Nazi” – “Neo-Nazi” or “Fascist” against their political enemy, “conservatives.”
The next time I was referred to as a “neocon” by a reader, it was a 70+ year old self-proclaimed Nazi named Fritz, who had immigrated to the states from Germany years ago and who openly respects, loves and preaches the ideals of Adolph Hitler, denying that the Holocaust ever happened. Fritz hates me (the neocon) who supports our like-minded international allies, in this case, Israel and its right to exist.
As Fritz believes that all Jews are evil socialist dogs, he believes that anyone who supports Israel’s right to exist is a “neocon,” using definition (a) above.
Today, I am being called “neocon” once again, among other not so nice things which can’t be repeated in print. This time it’s by supporters of Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
Since there is more than one definition of the word and more than one ideological group now using the slur against more than one political ideology, I was curious which definition they meant. Since my columns on Ron Paul were not very flattering towards Ron Paul or his supporters, and since nearly every letter from Paul supporters was full of other not so nice expletives, I was sure it was an insult, but which insult?
If you have been following the presidential campaigns, you know that Ron Paul (aka Dr. No – Mr. Constitution, as his friends lovingly refer to him) and his loyal followers consider themselves to be the current standard bearers of true conservative (constitutional) values in America. Under definition (b), this would make them “neocons.” But not so fast…
Look at definition (b) again, "An intellectual and political movement in favor of political, economic, and social conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s." The word “social” is what separates Ron Paul “conservatives” (libertarians) from “neocons.” Based on the statements of Ron Paul and his followers, they indeed consider themselves to be "An intellectual and political movement in favor of political and economic conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s," but not “social conservatives.”
Ah ha! – I said to myself… Now I’m a “neocon” because like our founders, I am conservative on politics, economics and social issues. According to those who are conservative only with their money and their political agenda which can only be defined as “isolationism,” this makes me a “neocon.”
The term “isolationist” seems to offend Ron Paul supporters more than the term “neocon.” This is hard to comprehend since their candidate is indeed a libertarian isolationist, according to his political statements concerning the international war on terror, past foreign diplomatic entanglements and foreign trade policies. Dictionary.com defines “isolationist” as “A national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries.” Paul and his supporters, along with international socialists, refer to these foreign entanglements as “Imperialism.”
Isolationism is exactly what Ron Paul and most libertarians are promoting. Yet the proper label for those ideals seems to offend them. And once offended, anyone not of the same “socially liberal” and “international isolationist” views is a “neocon.”
Being the self-styled constitutional scholars and historians that they fashion themselves to be, they tend to lean on the Irving Kristol definition of the term “neocon” which is,
“Neoconservatism is the first variant of American conservatism in the past century that is in the 'American grain.' It is hopeful, not lugubrious; forward-looking, not nostalgic; and its general tone is cheerful, not grim or dyspeptic. Its 20th-century heroes tend to be TR, FDR, and Ronald Reagan.” [Irving Kristol, "The Neoconservative Persuasion," in "The Weekly Standard," Aug. 25, 2003]
Of course, Kristol was a self-proclaimed reformed liberal. So, why Paul supporters want to connect with Kristol is beyond me. This definition would indicate that all “Reaganites” are “neocons” as well. Good luck figuring out whether or not you qualify as a “neocon” on this basis.
According to Democratic Socialists, anti-war and anti-American Code Pinko types and MoveOn.org pro-secular socialism types, anyone who disagrees with them is a “neocon.” Ron Paul supporters agree.
But according to Fritz-like former members of Hitler’s Nazi regime, anyone who believes the Holocaust actually happened and that Israel has a right to exist is a “neocon.” Ron Paul supporters agree with this one too.
Now, if you include social issues in your brand of conservatism, you too are a “neocon” according to libertarian isolationists like Ron Paul and the folks who follow his “blame America first and often” view of international discourse.
In the end, since I disagree with national isolationism almost as much as communism or socialism, since I am fully conservative in all areas of my life, not just with my money, and since old Nazis, new socialists and short-sighted isolationists alike, see me as a “neocon”, there is no doubt in my mind that I should wear the label with great pride!
The 2008 Ron Paul campaign is in fact uniting these small factions of extremism. Both Democratic Socialists and Isolationist Libertarians support Ron Paul. Anti-war activists from the Democrat Party, the Socialist Party USA, the Communist Party USA and the Libertarian wing of the Republican Party are supporting Ron Paul. He is uniting the “no moral social restraint” anti-war factions from all political ideologies into one group and anyone not in that group is a “neocon” a “Nazi” or a “fascist.” Just ask them…
The hate mail I have received from Ron Paul supporters reads just like the hate mail I have always received from Marxists around the globe and across the aisle. It’s hate-filled overtly angry foul mouthed and threatening rhetoric that reads like it was written by anti-Semitic skin-heads on crack. I doubt that even Ron Paul would be proud of how his supporters behave…
I first thought that Ron Paul supporters were just misguided conservatives seeking a real constitutional candidate who would return America to its morally conscious pro-individual system of self-governance. Having the benefit of direct experience with many active Ron Paul supporters now, I was wrong.
These people are not just well-intentioned conservatives misguided by political propaganda. They are the same type of people we have faced on the far left for decades and they use all the same hate-filled buzz-words and tactics in a similar effort to divide conservatives.
It’s the ideologies I oppose, whether espoused by Cindy Sheehan, Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, John Murtha, Hugo Chavez and modern Democratic Socialists, or libertarian Ron Paul.
A brief study of my body of work will eliminate any possibility that this definition of neocon is in any way suited to me, "moderate political conservatism espoused or advocated by former liberals or socialists."
But after careful study and consideration, I have come to the conclusion that with the exception of this definition, I am proud to wear the name “neocon.” My enemies’ friend is also my enemy.
Do you qualify too?
(Printer friendly version) Email: JB Williams
