Are you a Neo-Con?

I've never seen a term that has been more misused on this board.

Here is a pretty interesting article by Gary North from lewrockwell.com regarding the Neoconservatives and their origins.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north180.html

Quote:

---

The "godfather" of neoconservatism is Irving Kristol, who had been a youthful Trotskyite. He defined a neoconservative as "a liberal who was mugged by reality." This definition is clever, memorable, and accurate. It called forth the definition of a neo-liberal by M.I.T. economics professor Lester Thurow: "A liberal who was mugged by reality, but who has declined to press charges."

---

Quote:

---

It was no secret that many of the founders were Jews. (So, by the way, have been its most articulate opponents: Murray Rothbard and Paul Gottfried.)

---

Quote:

---

What becomes apparent in studying the rise of the neoconservative movement is this: (1) it is not a broadly based grass roots movement; rather, it is a movement of institutionally subsidized professors and essayists; (2) its founding members had spent their formative years as Democrats or (in some cases) as Trotskyites; (3) they had gained tenured positions at America's premier universities before they made to journey into the political swamps; (4) they gained access to influence in the Reagan years as conservatives.

---

So, are you a Neo-Con? Here's a nice quiz to help you find out. I'm a Realist, apparently.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/ne...eoconQuiz.html

Quote:

---

I've never seen a term that has been more misused on this board.

---

Cant argue with that as Ive been called one more times than I can count.

Quote:

---

I'm a Realist, apparently.

---

I got the same answer.

It said i was a liberal, never would have guessed that one... ~;)

I wanted to be a Neo-Con. Maybe they disallowed it since I've actually served on active duty and I'm not Jewish.

:happyg:

Quote:

---

Based on your answers, you are most likely a liberal. Read below to learn more about each foreign policy perspective.

---

Did I win mummy, did I win!!!?!!!!!!!?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAG

Did I win mummy, did I win!!!?!!!!!!!?!

---

yep you won ~D

Did any of you find any of the questions actually thought provoking?

The one that stumped me was the Iran question. I really don't know what to do with those turkeys. All the others it was rather clear cut where I stood.

Liberal

Liberals…

Are wary of American arrogance and hypocrisy
Trace much of today's anti-American hatred to previous US foreign policies.
Believe political solutions are inherently superior to military solutions
Believe the US is morally bound to intervene in humanitarian crises
Oppose American imperialism
Support international law, alliances, and agreements
Encourage US participation in the UN
Believe US economic policies must help lift up the world's poor

Historical liberal: President Woodrow Wilson
Modern liberal: President Jimmy Carter

I never knew I was a liberal. Now I'm ashamed. :embarassed:

~;) ~D

Quote:

---

As I understand it, Neo-Conservatism is largely about taking every opportunity to secure America's place in the world, no? About not wasting an opportunity to increase our international strength?

---

Wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

As I understand it, Neo-Conservatism is largely about taking every opportunity to secure America's place in the world, no?

---

Maybe if you switch America for Democracy.

Did you read the Lew Rockwell article?

Yup its more like they believe its americas destiny and duty to spread democracy around the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Yup its more like they believe its americas destiny and duty to spread democracy around the world.

---

Then im the opposite of that. I believe it is up to a country for what type of government it wants.

That explains why you came up as a liberal. How about countries like Iraq where the people didn t get to pick what type of government they want?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

That explains why you came up as a liberal. How about countries like Iraq where the people didn t get to pick what type of government they want?

---

Look at the french revelution. People were in an oppresive government, but they took it upon themselves to change it.

If Iraq had shown some kind of effort to get freedom, then i would fully support a war to try and help them, but that was simply not the case.

So unless people are willing to fight and die for their freedom they deserve what they get?

Many Innocent people of Iraq have died, for freedom that they didnt ask for. And yes they should fight and die for their freedom if they really want it.

Quote:

---

All it's doing is costing money and lives,

---

Do you really believe this?

Quote:

---

while giving that scumbag in the whitehouse all the opportunities in the world to complete his "Big Government" agenda.

---

I think you have him confused with a democrat though for a republican he certainly hasnt done anything much in decreasing the size of government. But then again who has. Its a monster on the loose as Steppenwolf says.

Quote:

---

God help us if we get another one like Bush in 2008.

---

Yes hopefully we will get someone far more conservative.

Realist, apparently.

I would say that this is based on the fact that I cannot equate American power to world peace. Power creates an uneasy stability, but not much more. Many of those throughout history must have seen world peace in their visions to conquer the world.

China will rise to a position of power that will rival the United States at every level. Should we attack them becasue of this in order to remain the only superpower? Of course not. If they surpass us in power, it will make little difference. The United States has enough military might to destroy the world in under an hour. We should not fret in jealousy at the rise of others. We should stand with them with our eyes open. We have more than enough clout on this planet. It does not mean we must always be the world leader. It is better to assume that we will decline safely and steadily in power and accept it. It's not like we are going to be overrun!

Quote:

---

Based on your answers, you are most likely a neoconservative . Read below to learn more about each foreign policy perspective

---

there you have it - i wasnt all that impressed with the answers
it is never that cut and dry

i always thought i was a mixture of realist and neo-con
i dont support israel all that much
i think iraq as a stable ally will be a great alternative - especially if it is successful

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

there you have it - i wasnt all that impressed with the answers
it is never that cut and dry

---

I agree. I thought the wording on the questions was biased.

Kind of like:

What do you think of the evil imperialist President George W. Bush?

(a) I think the lieing swine-sucking ne'er-do-well is good.

(b) He should be impeached.


I mean, what kind of questions and answers are these anyways? Okay okay. Slightly exaggerated, but you get the point.

Some of you know what I mean, while others are going "what, I thought it was perfectly fair!"

Neocon-never really thought of myself as one-I'm more of a Christian Libertarian.

Crazed Rabbit

Apparently I'm a realist... who knew?

Quote:

---

I've never seen a term that has been more misused on this board.

---

That's because it's used by many as a veiled insult or to attempt to undercut credibility. The term "conservative" just doesnt have enough negative connotations attached to it I guess. ~D

Quote:

---

Do you really believe this?

---

I think the end result will be far from good. Most likely another dictator will come to power sooner or later.

Quote:

---

Yes hopefully we will get someone far more conservative.

---

Hopefully we get someone who is far smarter.

I think McCain would have been the best choice for a president last election, though i dont know if he even wants the job.

Quote:

---

Based on your answers, you are most likely a neoconservative. Read below to learn more about each foreign policy perspective.

---

Hmm, only problem is I never went through the ignorant bliss of youthful liberalism. Ive always been in the cold world of reality.

I got;Realist
Realists…

* Are guided more by practical considerations than ideological vision
* Believe US power is crucial to successful diplomacy - and vice versa
* Don't want US policy options unduly limited by world opinion or ethical considerations
* Believe strong alliances are important to US interests
* Weigh the political costs of foreign action
* Believe foreign intervention must be dictated by compelling national interest

Historical realist: President Dwight D. Eisenhower
Modern realist: Secretary of State Colin Powell

I'm not sure Canadian's are allowed to take the test, but I did anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Did any of you find any of the questions actually thought provoking?

---

Yes. Despite the four answers, I had to fudge on more than half, since my views were represented by none. Iran is certainly a huge question, and none of the answers provided really summed up our options. Or maybe it's that our options are not appetizing. Dunno.

Realist, BTW.

Realist. Which is unsurprising for me. It all comes down to marginal gains and margina costs. I opposed the war in Iraq, becaus it was useless, Iraq eas never a threat, whereas Iran really needed removing. Call me heartless, but the Iraqis could have had twenty more years of Saddam, if N. Korea and Iran could have been dealt with instead. They are the threats, not Iraq. You deal with what threatens you first, not what is an ideological target.

That last question was stupid though, two were essentially all ahead and damn the deficits, and the other two were do nothing abroad, increase domestic spending :dizzy2:.

Sorry about my bad typing in this post, for some reason my backspace and delete keys aren;t working, relegating me to using cut and paste to clean pu errors. Quite frustrating to say hte lkejast :wall:

All these conservatives coming out as 'realist'. Pft, nothing rational or real about being a conservative, merely cold hearted, fantasy worlds. ~;)

I'm a little scared by my answer, because it puts me in the Pat Buchanan/Cal Coolidege camp, and there's plenty they and I will never see eye to eye on. They take their views on a nationalist 'the world is not worthy of our notice ' philosophy, and I'm just afraid there's nothing we can ever do right other than send cash. In any case, I'm embarrassed, but not surprised:

Isolationist

The term isolationist is most often used negatively; few people who share its beliefs use it to describe their own foreign policy perspective. They believe in "America first." For them, national sovereignty trumps international relations. Many unions, libertarians, and anti-globalization protesters share isolationist tenets.

Isolationists…

Are wary of US involvement in the United Nations
Oppose international law, alliances, and agreements
Believe the US should not act as a global cop
Support trade practices that protect American workers
Oppose liberal immigration
Oppose American imperialism
Desire to preserve what they see as America's national identity and character
Historical isolationist: President Calvin Coolidge

Modern isolationist: Author/Commentator Pat Buchanan

This test is horrible. I disagree with half the things on the liberal description, and yet I'm a liberal? Yeah right!

Don, maybe you forgot to read the first paragraph. I thought I was isolationist too at first, because I missed the first paragraph. :embarassed: