The new neo-cons are much more dangerous than the old neo-cons

[bluestateguy]

The older neo-cons formed in the 1970's and 1980's out of an opposition to the growing dovishness of the Democratic Party. It was ideologically rooted in Trotskyite Leftism, and most of the old neo-cons were liberal Democrats in favor of the New Deal state and civil rights. They tended to be a little put off by the emerging religious right within the Republican Party, as many of them were Jewish. They were Cold Warriors and staunchly pro-Israel. They included such people as Irving Kristol, James Q. Wilson and Sen. Henry Jackson of Washington. Joe Lieberman would be a good example of a classical neo-con.

The post-Cold War, 21st century neo-cons are, however, much more dangerous. What we are seeing today is more and more of a merger of religious right conservatism and neo-conservatism. Granted, there are some paleo-conservatives, firmly in the religious right's camp, like Pat Buchanan, who will have nothing to do with the neo-cons, but they are increasingly the exception. The idea of American exceptionalism--America as a special nation, with a unique destiny to fulfill in the course of humankind--has always been a strain of both neo-con political thought, as well as the political thought of the religious right. The religious right sees Christian civilization as being under attack, while the neo-cons see an opportunity to use the war against Al Qaeda for world conquest and domination. It also provides the religious right with the chance to "Christianize" the world and advocate Middle East policies that will bring about their ultimate wet dream--the Rapture. The religious right very much wants a war on Islam, while the neo-cons want conquest and capitalist domination of the Muslim world.

Thus neo-conservatism has become both a vehicle for fundamentalist Christianity as well as 21st century imperialism.

[opihimoimoi]

1. From Bad to Worse.......................the infection continues.......

Hopefully we see the Kerry Cure.....soon.