To: Sun Tzu who wrote (149076 ) 10/26/2004 10:36:45 AM From: Neocon Respond to of 281500 No, I haven't. Of course, although I respect CATO, it is a libertarian think tank, and therefore part of a faction opposing the neoconservatives within the conservative movement. Podhoretz does pop off sometimes, and did so about Reagan's actions, but remained basically loyal. It is much more true to say that the neoconservatives in general were strongly supportive of Reagan, but that there were debates on the periphery. For example, it is not the case that unilateralism is a neoconservative doctrine, it is an idea that was widely debated among neoconservatives, some of whom supported it, some of whom did not. What tended to unite neoconservatives was a desire to counter the Soviet Union more vigorously, to check the "Finlandization" of Europe, to support dissidents in the Soviet bloc, and to promote democracy to whatever extent was possible. The "great nation" conservatism promoted by people like Bill Krisol is an outgrowth of this, although not fully embraced by all neocons. Its premise is that nations are great not only because of material success, but because they are able to promote their values and affect the course of history. What does "benevolent global hegemony" mean to Kristol and Kagan? It means that the United States embrace its current unique status to accelerate progress toward democracy and capitalism throughout the world, thus helping people escape oppression and poverty. This is, indeed, directly related to Reagan's idea of America's role in the world. Apparently, I have a backlog of American Spectators, and have the piece on hand to read if I can dig it out. I will try to get back to you once I have read the piece........