Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (6888)	12/15/2005 9:34:25 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 542155

I was noting how Kristol states neoconservatism began in the 1970s, but Ron Paul (Republican congressman who has interacted with them frequently) gives 1960s date. I think the neocons would like to hide their genesis and so provide a distracting history. I would think that Neoconservatism like any other philosophical, political, and economic construct has founding members giving life to the idea and then it grows and has a thrust of its own. People join at various times and add new meaning to the concept. At various times you could get a snapshot of its definition. For most of these advocates, right and wrong, good or bad is only of marginal interest. For the most part, it is all about ego. The advocates care more about being perceived right and being perceived intelligent matter more than anything else. It doesn't matter that they are trying to sell an idea that hurt a lot of people.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (6888)	12/15/2005 10:15:44 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 542155

One of the difficulties in nailing down the neocons/Strausians is that they create false persona on a continual basis just in case they ever need them. Of course, this premise of your argument is one I can't accept without more evidence. Without it, I simply go with what I read. I'm struck with just how loose the term is rather than how strict. It's an analytical term with a bit of rigor, it's a term for a network with less rigor, and it's a "beat up your political opponents" term with almost no rigor at all.