Neoconservative

Neoconservatism is the political philosophy that emerged in the United States from the rejection of social liberalism and the New Left counter-culture of the 1960s. It influenced the Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and the George W. Bush presidential administrations, representing a re-alignment in American politics, and the defection of "an important and highly articulate group of liberals to the other side." E.J. Dionne, (1991) Why Americans Hate Politics, New York, New York: Simon & Schuster Inc. p. 56. ISBN 0-671-68255-5 One accomplishment was "to make criticism from the Right acceptable in the intellectual, artistic, and journalistic circles where conservatives had long been regarded with suspicion."

As a term, neoconservative first was used derisively by democratic socialist Michael Harrington to identify a group of people (who described themselves as liberals) as newly stimulated conservative ex-liberals. The idea that liberalism "no longer knew what it was talking about" is neoconservatism's central theme. E.J. Dionne, (1991) Why Americans Hate Politics, New York, New York: Simon & Schuster Inc. p. 61. ISBN 0-671-68255-5

The development of this conservatism is based on the work and thought of Irving Kristol, co-founder of Encounter magazine, and of its editor (1953–58), and others who described themselves as "neoconservatives" during the Cold War.

Prominent neoconservatives are associated with periodicals such as Commentary and The Weekly Standard, and with foreign policy initiatives of think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).

Neoconservatives are often dubbed neocons by critics.

Critics of Lind contend that there is no theoretical connection between Trotsky's "permanent revolution," and that the idea of a "global democratic revolution" instead has Wilsonian roots. While both Wilsonianism and the theory of permanent revolution have been proposed as strategies for underdeveloped parts of the world, Wilson proposed capitalist solutions, while Trotsky advocated socialist solutions.

Great Depression and World War II

"New" conservatives initially approached this view from the political left. The forerunners of neoconservatism were often liberals or socialists who strongly supported the Allied cause in World War II, and who were influenced by the Depression-era ideas of former New Dealers, trade unionists, and Trotskyists, particularly those who followed the political ideas of Max Shachtman. A number of future neoconservatives, such as Jeane Kirkpatrick, were Shachtmanites in their youth; some were later involved with Social Democrats USA.

Some of the mid-20th century New York Intellectuals were forebears of neoconservatism. The most notable was literary critic Lionel Trilling, who wrote, "In the United States at this time liberalism is not only the dominant but even the sole intellectual tradition." It was this liberal "vital center," a term coined by the historian and liberal theorist Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., that the neoconservatives would see as threatened by New Left extremism. But the majority of "vital center" liberals remained affiliated with the Democratic Party, retained left-of-center viewpoints, and opposed Republican politicians such as Richard Nixon who first attracted neoconservative support.

Initially, the neoconservatives were less concerned with foreign policy than with domestic policy. Irving Kristol's journal, The Public Interest, focused on ways that government planning in the liberal state had produced unintended and harmful consequences. Norman Podhoretz's magazine Commentary, formerly a journal of the liberal left, had more of a cultural focus, criticizing excesses of the movements for black equality and women's rights and the academic left. Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s the early neoconservatives had been socialists or liberals strongly supportive of the American Civil Rights Movement, integration, and Martin Luther King.

Opposition to Détente with the Soviet Union and the views of the anti-Soviet and anti-capitalist New Left, which emerged in response to the Soviet Union's break with Stalinism in the 1950s, was one factor that would cause the neoconservatives to split with the "liberal consensus" of the early postwar years.

Drift away from New Left and Great Society

While initially the views of the New Left became very popular among the children of hard-line Communists, often Jewish immigrant families on the edge of poverty and including those of some of today's most famous neoconservative thinkers, some neoconservatives also came to despise the counterculture of the 1960s and what they felt was a growing anti-Americanism among many baby boomers, exemplified in the emerging New Left by the movement against the Vietnam War.

As the radicalization of the New Left pushed these intellectuals farther to the right, they moved toward a more aggressive militarism, while also becoming disillusioned with the Johnson Administration's Great Society.

Academics in these circles, many of whom were still Democrats, rebelled against the Democratic Party's leftward drift on defense issues in the 1970s, especially after the nomination of George McGovern in 1972. Many of their concerns were voiced in the influential 1970 bestseller The Real Majority by future television commentator and neo-conservative Ben Wattenberg. Many clustered around Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a Democrat derisively known as the "Senator from Boeing," during his 1972 and 1976 campaigns for President; but later came to align themselves with Ronald Reagan and the Republicans, who promised to confront charges of Soviet "expansionism." Among those who worked for Jackson are Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, Richard Perle and Felix Rohatyn.

Michael Lind, a self-described former neoconservative, wrote that neoconservatism "originated in the 1970s as a movement of anti-Soviet liberals and social democrats in the tradition of Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Humphrey and Henry ("Scoop") Jackson, many of whom preferred to call themselves 'paleoliberals.' When the Cold War ended, "many 'paleoliberals' drifted back to the Democratic center… Today's neocons are a shrunken remnant of the original broad neocon coalition. Nevertheless, the origins of their ideology on the left are still apparent. The fact that most of the younger neocons were never on the left is irrelevant; they are the intellectual (and, in the case of William Kristol and John Podhoretz, the literal) heirs of older ex-leftists." Lind 2004. The particular quotation can be found on page 2 of the online version.

In his semi-autobiographical book, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, Irving Kristol cites a number of influences on his own thought, including not only Max Shachtman and Leo Strauss but also the skeptical liberal literary critic Lionel Trilling. The influence of Leo Strauss and his disciples on some neoconservatives has generated some controversy.

1980s

During the 1970s political scientist Jeane Kirkpatrick increasingly criticized the Democratic Party, of which she had been a member since the nomination of the antiwar George McGovern. She accused the Jimmy Carter administration of using a double standard by tolerating human rights abuses in Communist states, while withdrawing support of anti-communist autocrats on the basis of human rights. She joined Ronald Reagan's successful 1980 campaign as his foreign policy advisor and later became the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, a position she held for four years.

During this period, the United States increased its support for anti-communist governments engaged in human rights abuses as part of its general hard line against communism. As the 1980s wore on, younger second-generation neoconservatives, such as Elliott Abrams, pushed for a clear policy of supporting democracy against both left and right wing dictators. This debate led to a policy shift in 1986, when the Reagan administration urged Philippines president Ferdinand Marcos to step down amid turmoil over a rigged election. Abrams also supported the 1988 Chilean plebiscite that resulted in the restoration of democratic rule and Augusto Pinochet's eventual removal from office. Through the National Endowment for Democracy, led by another neoconservative, Carl Gershman, funds were directed to the anti-Pinochet opposition in order to ensure a fair election.

1990s

During the 1990s, neoconservatives were once again in the opposition side of the foreign policy establishment, both under the Republican Administration of President George H. W. Bush and that of his Democratic successor, President Bill Clinton. Many critics charged that the neoconservatives lost their raison d'être and influence following the collapse of the Soviet Union.Template:Fact Others argue that they lost their status due to their association with the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan Administration.

Neoconservative writers were critical of the post-Cold War foreign policy of both George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, which they criticized for reducing military expenditures and lacking a sense of idealism in the promotion of American interests. They accused these Administrations of lacking both "moral clarity" and the conviction to pursue unilaterally America's international strategic interests.

Particularly galvanizing to the movement was the decision of George H. W. Bush and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Colin Powell to leave Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War in 1991. Some neoconservatives viewed this policy, and the decision not to support indigenous dissident groups such as the Kurds and Shiites in their 1991-1992 resistance to Hussein, as a betrayal of democratic principles.

Ironically, some of those same targets of criticism would later become fierce advocates of neoconservative policies. In 1992, referring to the first Gulf War, then United States Secretary of Defense and future Vice President Dick Cheney, said:

"I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We'd be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home...."

"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam (Hussein) worth? And the answer is not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

Within a few years of the Gulf War in Iraq, many associated with neoconservatism were pushing for the ousting of Saddam Hussein. On February 19, 1998, an open letter to President Clinton was signed by dozens of pundits, many identified with neoconservatism and, later, related groups such as the PNAC, urging decisive action to remove Saddam from power.

Neoconservatives were also members of the blue team, which argued for a confrontational policy toward the People's Republic of China and strong military and diplomatic support for Taiwan.

Administration of George W. Bush

Vanity Fair editor Craig Unger on the Bush family feud, neoconservatives and the Christian right}} The Bush campaign and the early Bush Administration did not initially appear to exhibit strong support for neoconservative principles. As a candidate Bush argued for a restrained foreign policy, stating his opposition to the idea of "nation-building" [1] Bush Begins Nation Building] WCVB TV, April 16, 2003 and an early foreign policy confrontation with China was handled without the vociferous confrontation suggested by some neoconservative thinkers." Vernon 2001. Also early in the Administration, some neoconservatives criticized Bush's Administration as insufficiently supportive of the State of Israel, and suggested Bush's foreign policies were not substantially different from those of President Clinton.[2]Bush accused of adopting Clinton policy on Israel] The Daily Telegraph, June 26, 2001

But Bush's policies seemed to change dramatically immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks. According to columnist Gerard Baker, "It took, improbably, the arrival of George Bush in the White House and September 11, 2001, to catapult [neoconservatism] into the public consciousness. When Mr Bush cited its most simplified tenet — that the US should seek to promote liberal democracy around the world — as a key case for invading Iraq, neoconservatism was suddenly everywhere. It was, to its many critics, a unified ideology that justified military adventurism, sanctioned torture and promoted aggressive Zionism." [3] The neocons have been routed] The Times, April 13, 2007

Bush laid out his vision of the future in his State of the Union speech on January 2002 following the September 11, 2001 attacks. This speech was written by neoconservative David Frum, and the speech named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as members of an "axis of evil" which, he said, "pose a grave and growing danger."[4] Bush Speechwriter's Revealing Memoir Is Nerd's Revenge] The New York Observer, Jan. 19, 2003 It is also in this speech that Frum and Bush suggest the possibility of preemptive war: "I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons." [5] The President's State of the Union Speech] Whitehouse Press Release, Jan. 29, 2002

"Bush Doctrine"

The Bush Doctrine of preemptive war was explicitely stated in the National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002. "We must deter and defend against the threat before it is unleashed. ... even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack. ... The United States will, if necessary, act preemptively." National Security Strategy of the United StatesNational Security Council, Sept. 20, 2002. Policy analysts noted that the Bush Doctrine as stated in the 2002 NSS document bore a strong resemblance to recommendations originally presented in a controversial Defense Planning Guidance draft written in 1992 by Paul Wolfowitz under the first Bush administration. [6] The evolution of the Bush doctrine] PBS Frontline The war behind closed doors, Feb. 20, 2003

The Bush Doctrine was greeted with accolades by many neoconservatives. When asked whether he agreed with the Bush Doctrine, Max Boot said he did, and that "I think [Bush is] exactly right to say we can’t sit back and wait for the next terrorist strike on Manhattan. We have to go out and stop the terrorists overseas. We have to play the role of the global policeman.... But I also argue that we ought to go further."[7] The Bush Doctrine] PBS Think Tank transcript, July 11, 2002 Discussing the significance of the Bush Doctrine, neoconservative writer William Kristol claimed: "The world is a mess. And, I think, it's very much to Bush's credit that he's gotten serious about dealing with it.... The danger is not that we're going to do too much. The danger is that we're going to do too little." [8] Assessing the Bush Doctrine] PBS Frontline The war behind closed doors, Feb. 20, 2003

Supporters in Britain and Ireland

In Britain, the most notable supporters of the neoconservative viewpoint in relation to foreign affairs are associated with the Henry Jackson Society. They include the academics Dr. Brendan Simms and James M. Rogers and the politicians Michael Gove, Michael Ancram, Edward Vaizey and Lord David Trimble. Richard Perle has acted as a patron of the society. Another member, Oliver Kamm, wrote Anti-Totalitarianism: The Left-wing Case for a Neoconservative Foreign Policy (2005)

In Ireland the most prominent supporter of Neoconservative policies is the scriptwriter and commentator Eoghan Harris. Harris strongly praised the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, and argued that Neoconservative policies would lead to democratisation in Iraq. Harris continues to support U.S. actions in the War on Terror.

Evolution of neoconservative views

Usage and general views

The term has been used before, and its meaning has changed over time. Writing in The Contemporary Review (London) in 1883, Henry Dunckley used the term to describe factions within the Conservative Party; James Bryce again uses it in his Modern Democracies (1921) to describe British political history of the 1880s. The German authoritarians Carl Schmitt, who became professor at the University of Berlin in 1933, the same year that he entered the Nazi party (NSDAP), and Arthur Moeller van den Bruck were called "neo-conservatives". Fritz Stern: Five Germanies I Have Known (2006 hc), p.72 In "The Future of Democratic Values" in Partisan Review, July-August 1943, Dwight MacDonald complained of "the neo-conservatives of our time [who] reject the propositions on materialism, Human Nature, and Progress." He cited as an example Jacques Barzun, who was "attempting to combine progressive values and conservative concepts."

In the early 1970s, socialist Michael Harrington prominently used the term in a manner similar to the modern meaning. He characterized neoconservatives as former leftists -- whom he derided as "socialists for Nixon" -- who had moved significantly to the right. These people tended to remain supporters of social democracy, but distinguished themselves by allying with the Nixon administration over foreign policy, especially by their support for the Vietnam War and opposition to the Soviet Union. They still supported the "welfare state," but not necessarily in its contemporary form.

Irving Kristol remarked that a neoconservative is a "liberal mugged by reality," one who became more conservative after seeing the results of liberal policies. Kristol also claims three distinctive aspects of neoconservatism from previous forms of conservatism: a forward-looking approach drawn from their liberal heritage, rather than the reactionary and dour approach of previous conservatives; a meliorative outlook, proposing alternate reforms rather than simply attacking social liberal reforms; taking philosophical or ideological ideas very seriously. American conservatism 1945-1995 - Thirtieth Anniversary Issue Public Interest, Fall, 1995 by Irving Kristol

Some observers name political philosopher Leo Strauss as a major intellectual antecedent of neoconservativism, mostly because of his influence on Allan Bloom and the influence of Closing of the American Mind.

Neoconservative views on foreign policy

Historically, neoconservatives supported a militant anticommunism (Can the Neocons Get Their Groove Back? [9], tolerated more social welfare spending than was sometimes acceptable to libertarians and mainstream conservatives, and sympathized with a non-traditional foreign policy agenda that was less deferential to traditional conceptions of diplomacy and international law and less inclined to compromise principles, even if that meant unilateral action.

The movement began to focus on such foreign issues in the mid-1970s. However, it first crystallized in the late 1960s as an effort to combat the radical cultural changes taking place within the United States. Irving Kristol wrote: "If there is any one thing that neoconservatives are unanimous about, it is their dislike of the counterculture." (Kristol, “What Is a Neoconservative?” 87) Norman Podhoretz agreed: "Revulsion against the counterculture accounted for more converts to neoconservatism than any other single factor." (Podhoretz, 275.) Ira Chernus, a professor at the University of Colorado, argues that the deepest root of the neoconservative movement is its fear that the counterculture would undermine the authority of traditional values and moral norms. Because neoconservatives believe that human nature is innately selfish, they believe that a society with no commonly accepted values based on religion or ancient tradition will end up in a war of all against all. They also believe that the most important social value is strength, especially the strength to control natural impulses. The only alternative, they assume, is weakness that will let impulses run riot and lead to social chaos. (Chernus, chapter 1)

According to Peter Steinfels, a historian of the movement, the neoconservatives' "emphasis on foreign affairs emerged after the New Left and the counterculture had dissolved as convincing foils for neoconservatism... The essential source of their anxiety is not military or geopolitical or to be found overseas at all; it is domestic and cultural and ideological." (Steinfels, 69.) Neoconservative foreign policy parallels their domestic policy. They insist that the U.S. military must be strong enough to control the world, or else the world will descend into chaos.

Believing that America should "export democracy," that is, spread its ideals of government, economics, and culture abroad, they grew to reject U.S. reliance on international organizations and treaties to accomplish these objectives. Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an idealist stance on foreign policy, a lesser social conservatism, and a much weaker dedication to a policy of minimal government, and, in the past, a greater acceptance of the welfare state, though none of these qualities are necessarily requisite.

Aggressive support for democracies and nation building is additionally justified by a belief that, over the long term, it will reduce the extremism that is a breeding ground for Islamic terrorism. Neoconservatives, along with many other political theorists, have argued that democratic regimes are less likely to instigate a war than a country with an authoritarian form of government. Further, they argue that the lack of freedoms, lack of economic opportunities, and the lack of secular general education in authoritarian regimes promotes radicalism and extremism. Consequently, neoconservatives advocate the spread of democracy to regions of the world where it currently does not prevail, most notably the Arab nations of the Middle East, communist China, North Korea and Iran.

Neoconservatives also have a very strong belief in the ability of the United States to install democracy after a conflict - comparisons with denazification in Germany and installing a democratic government in Japan starting in 1945 are often made - and they have a principled belief in defending democracies against aggression. This belief has guided U.S. policy in Iraq after the removal of the Saddam Hussein regime, where the U.S. insisted on organizing elections as soon as practical Template:Fact.

Distinctions from other conservatives

Most people currently described as "neoconservatives" are members of the Republican Party, but while neoconservatives have generally been in electoral alignment with other conservatives, have served in the same Presidential Administrations, and have often ignored intra-conservative ideological differences in alliance against those to their left, there are notable differences between neoconservative and traditional or "paleoconservative" views. In particular, neoconservatives disagree with the nativist, protectionist, and non-interventionist foreign policy rooted in American history and once exemplified by the ex-Republican "paleoconservative" Pat Buchanan. As compared with traditional conservatism and libertarianism, which also sometimes exhibits a non-interventionist strain, neoconservatism is characterized by an increased emphasis on defense capability, a willingness to challenge regimes deemed hostile to the values and interests of the United States, pressing for free-market policies abroad. Neoconservatives are strong believers in democratic peace theory.

Neoconservatives also differ with the traditional "pragmatic" approach to foreign policy often associated with Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, which emphasized pragmatic accommodation with dictators; peace through negotiations, diplomacy, and arms control; détente and containment—rather than rollback—of the Soviet Union; and the initiation of the process that led to ties between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the United States.

Criticism of the term "neoconservative"

Some of those identified as neoconservatives refuse to embrace the term. Critics argue that it lacks coherent definition, or that it is coherent only in a Cold War context.

Many writers, such as Barry Rubin, director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Institute, argue that the neoconservative label is used as a pejorative by anti-Semites:

"neo-conservative" is a codeword for Jewish. SomeTemplate:Who? claim that just as antisemites did with big business moguls in the nineteenth century and Communist leaders in the twentieth, the term is used to take all those involved in some aspect of public life and single out those who are Jewish, implying that this is a Jewish-led movement conducted not in the interests of all the, in this case, American people, but to the benefit of Jews, and in this case Israel. Barry Rubin, director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Institute, Interdisciplinary Center of Herzliya, in a letter from Washington for Sunday, April 6, 2003]

Critics of Rubin's position might argue that because neoconservatives aren't necessarily Jewish, this criticism is not valid. As with the contested concept of the "New Anti-Semitism", these critics claim that it is anti-Semitic to identify support for Israel with the Jewish people. For example, according to Norman Finkelstein, it would be anti-Semitic "both to identify and not to identify Israel with Jews." Finkelstein, Norman. Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History, University of California Press, 2005, p. 82.

The fact that the use of the term "neoconservative" has rapidly risen since the 2003 Iraq War is cited by some conservatives as proof that the term is largely irrelevant in the long term. David Horowitz, a conservative author, offered this critique in a recent interview with an Italian newspaper:

[Neo-conservatism] is a term almost exclusively used by the enemies of America's liberation of Iraq. There is no "neo-conservative" movement in the United States. When there was one, it was made up of former Democrats who embraced the welfare state but supported Ronald Reagan's Cold War policies against the Soviet bloc. Today "neo-conservatism" identifies those who believe in an aggressive policy against radical Islam and the global terrorists.Template:Fact

Many other supposed neoconservatives, similarly, believe that the term has been adopted by the political left to stereotype supporters of U.S. foreign policy under the George W. Bush administration, or as a conspiracy theory, saying the term is used simply to label Jews in a negative way, or to downcast any support given of Israel or some supposed Jewish tenet often associating Jews with control of the media, the entertainment industry, the government of the United States of America, or the concept of capitalism. Paul Wolfowitz has denounced the term as a meaningless label, saying:

[If] you read the Middle Eastern press, it seems to be a euphemism for some kind of nefarious Zionist conspiracy. But I think that, in my view it's very important to approach [foreign policy] not from a doctrinal point of view. I think almost every case I know is different. Indonesia is different from the Philippines. Iraq is different from Indonesia. I think there are certain principles that I believe are American principles – both realism and idealism. I guess I'd like to call myself a democratic realist. I don't know if that makes me a neo-conservative or not.

Jonah Goldberg and others have rejected the label as trite and over-used, arguing "There's nothing 'neo' about me: I was never anything other than conservative." Other critics have similarly argued the term has been rendered meaningless through excessive and inconsistent use. For example, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are often identified as leading "neoconservatives" despite the fact that both men have ostensibly been life-long conservative Republicans (though Cheney has been vocally supportive of the ideas of Irving Kristol). Such critics thus largely reject the claim that there is a neoconservative movement separate from traditional American conservatism.

Other traditional conservatives are likewise skeptical of the contemporary usage of the term, and may dislike being associated with the stereotypes, or even the supposed agendas of neoconservatism. Conservative columnist David Harsanyi wrote, "These days, it seems that even temperate support for military action against dictators and terrorists qualifies you a neocon." FrontPageMagazine.com August 13, 2002

Criticism

The term is frequently used pejoratively by self-described paleoconservatives, Democrats, and by libertarians of both left and right.

Critics take issue with neoconservatives' support for aggressive foreign policy; critics from the left especially take issue with what they characterize as unilateralism and lack of concern with international consensus through organizations such as the United Nations.[10]| Kinsley quotes Rich Lowry, whom he describes as "a conservative of the non-neo variety", as criticizing the neoconservatives "messianic vision" and "excessive optimism"; Kinsley contrasts the present-day neoconservative foreign policy to earlier neoconservative Jeane Kirkpatrick's "tough-minded pragmatism".</ref>

Conflict with libertarian conservatives

There is also conflict between neoconservatives and libertarian conservatives. Libertarian conservatives are ideologically opposed to the expansiveness of federal government programs and regard neoconservative foreign policy ambitions with outspoken distrust. They view the neoconservative promotion of preemptive war as morally unjust, dangerous to the preservation of a free society, and against the principles of the Constitution.

Friction with paleoconservatism

Disputes over Israel and public policy contributed to a sharp conflict with "paleoconservatives," starting in the 1980s. The movement's name ("old conservative") was taken as a rebuke to the "neo" side. The "paleocons" view the neoconservatives as "militarist social democrats" and interlopers who deviate from traditional conservatism agenda on issues as diverse as federalism, immigration, foreign policy, the welfare state, abortion, feminism and homosexuality. All of this leads to a debate over what counts as conservatism.

The paleoconservatives argue that neoconservatives are an illegitimate addition to the conservative movement. Pat Buchanan calls neoconservatism "a globalist, interventionist, open borders ideology."[11] Tolson 2003]. The open rift is often traced back to a 1981 dispute over Ronald Reagan's nomination of Mel Bradford, a Southerner, to run the National Endowment for the Humanities. Bradford withdrew after neoconservatives complained that he had criticized Abraham Lincoln; the paleoconservatives supported Bradford.

Criticism in popular culture

Music

• The Rolling Stones' song "Sweet Neo Con", from the A Bigger Bang album (2005), is critical of American Neoconservatism, with implied references to the Iraq War, Halliburton, George W. Bush, and Condoleezza Rice.
• The Offspring's 2003 album, Splinter, included the song "Neocon". The song's lyrics, though defiant, are vague. However, it is generally assumed to be referring to George W. Bush, since The Offspring have been critical of him (both vocally and lyrically) in the past.
• Pro-Pain has a song critical of neo-conservatives entitled, "Neo Con".

Related publications and institutions

Institutions

• American Enterprise Institute
• Bradley Foundation
• Foundation for Defense of Democracies
• Henry Jackson Society
• Hudson Institute
• Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
• American Israel Public Affairs Committee
• Project for the New American Century
• Strategic Studies Group GEES

Publications

• Commentary
• Weekly Standard
• Democratiya

Political magazines featuring neoconservative ideas:

• Front Page Magazine
• The National Interest
• National Review
• Policy Review
• The Public Interest

See also

• City College of New York
• Clash of Civilizations
• Euston Manifesto
• Globalization
• Jewish right
• Neoconservatism in Canada
• Neoconservatism in Japan
• Neoconservative - Paleoconservative Conflict
• Neoliberalism
• Paleoconservatism
• Roots of neoconservativism
• Trotskyism

References

• Lawrence Auster, Buchanan's White Whale, FrontPageMag, March 19, 2004. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Joyce Battle, ed., Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein: The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 82 February 25, 2003. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Patrick J. Buchanan, Whose War, The American Conservative, March 24, 2003. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• George W. Bush, Gerhard Schroeder, et al., Transcript: Bush, Schroeder Roundtable With German Professionals, The Washington Post, February 23, 2005. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Ira Chernus, Monsters To Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2006. ISBN 1-59451-276-0
• John Dean, Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush (Little. Brown, 2004) ISBN 0-316-00023-X (hardback) -- Deeply critical account of neo-conservatism in the administration of George W. Bush.
• David Frum, Unpatriotic Conservatives, March 19, 2003, National Review online. The piece appears in the April 7, 2003, issue of National Review. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Mark Gerson, ed., The Essential Neo-Conservative Reader (Perseus Publishing, 1997) ISBN 0-201-15488-9 (paperback) or ISBN 0-201-47968-0 (hardback)
• Mark Gerson, Norman's Conquest: A Commentary on the Podhoretz Legacy, Policy Review, Fall 1995, Number 74. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• John Gray, Black Mass, (Allen Lane 2007) ISBN 978-0-713-99915-0
• Jim Hanson, The Decline of the American Empire, (Praeger Publishers, 1993) ISBN 0-275-94480-8
• Halper, Stefan & Clarke, Jonathan, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge University Press, 2004) ISBN 0-521-83834-7
• Robert Kagan et al., Present Dangers: Crisis and Opportunity in American Foreign and Defense Policy (Encounter Books, 2000) ISBN 1-893554-16-3.
• Kristol, Irving. Neo-Conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea: Selected Essays 1949-1995. New York: The Free Press, 1995. ISBN 0028740211 (10). ISBN 978-0028740218 (13). (Hardcover ed.) Rpt. as Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea. New York: Ivan R. Dee Publisher, 1999. ISBN 1-56663-228-5 (10). (Paperback ed.)
• –––. "What Is a Neoconservative?" Newsweek, January 19, 1976.
• Kalle Lasn, Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?, Adbusters, March/April 2004. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Michael Lind, "A Tragedy of Errors", The Nation, February 23, 2004, 23-32.
• Tod Lindberg, "Neoconservatism's Liberal Legacy." Policy Review, 127 (2004): 3-22.
• James Mann, Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet. (2004) Viking. ISBN 0-670-03299-9 (cloth)
• Sam Manuel, Jew-hatred, red-baiting: heart of claims of ‘neocon’ conspiracy, The Militant (U.S.), June 28, 2004. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Georg Mascolo, "A Leaderless, Directionless Superpower": interview with Ex-Powell aide Wilkerson, Spiegel Online, December 6, 2005. Accessed 16 September 2006.
• Joshua Muravchik, "Renegades" Commentary, October 1, 2002. Bibliographical information is available online, the article itself is not.
• Joshua Muravchik, "The Neoconservative Cabal", Commentary, September, 2003. Bibliographical information is available online, the article itself is not.
• Joseph Prueher, letter with U.S. apology to China over spy plane incident, April 11, 2001. Reptroduced on sinomania.com. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Norman Podhoretz, The Norman Podhoretz Reader. New York: Free Press, 2004. ISBN 0-7432-3661-0
• Michael C. Ruppert, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, New Society Publishers, 2004. ISBN 0-86571-540-8
• Claes G. Ryn, America the Virtuous: The Crisis of Democracy and the Quest for Empire. Transaction Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-7658-0219-8 (cloth).
• Irwin Stelzer (ed), Neoconservatism, Atlantic Books 2004
• Grant F. Smith, Deadly Dogma: How Neoconservatives Broke the Law to Deceive America, ISBN 0-9764437-4-0
• Stephen Solarz et al., Open Letter to the President, February 19, 1998, online at IraqWatch.org. Accessed 16 September 2006.
• Peter Steinfels. The Neoconservatives: The Men Who Are Changing America's Politics. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979.) ISBN 0-671-22665-7.
• Leo Strauss, Natural Right and History. (University of Chicago Press, 1999) ISBN 0-226-77694-8.
• Leo Strauss, The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism. (University of Chicago Press, 1989) ISBN 0-226-77715-4.
• Jay Tolson, The New American Empire?, U.S. News, January 13, 2003. Accessed online 16 September 2006.
• Joseph Wilson, The Politics of Truth. (2004) Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1378-X.
• Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack. (2004) Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-5547-X.
• Wes Vernon China Plane Incident Sparks Re-election Drives of Security-minded Senators, NewsMax.com, April 7, 2001. Accessed online 16 September 2006.

Further reading

• The NeoCon Reader, edited by Irwin Stelzer, ISBN 0-8021-4193-5
• The Neoconservative Vision, Mark Gerson, ISBN 1-56833-100-2.
• Neocon Middle East Policy: The 'Clean Break' Plan Damage Assessment, edited by Grant F. Smith, ISBN 0-9764437-3-2
• Neoconservatism: Why We Need It, Douglas Murray, ISBN 1-59403-147-9
• The Neoconservative Mind, Gary Dorrien, ISBN 1-56639-019-2
• Monsters To Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin, Ira Chernus, ISBN 1-59451-276-0
• John Ehrman, The Rise of Neoconservatism: Intellectual and Foreign Affairs 1945—1994, Yale University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-3000-6870-0.
• Murray Friedman. The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 0521545013.

History of neoconservatism

• Christian Science Monitor: Neocon 101
• Michael Lind. How Neoconservatives Conquered Washington, Salon.com, April 9, 2003.
• Jack R. Fischel, The Rise of Neoconservatism (book review).
• Benjamin Ross, "Who Named the Neocons?" Dissent Summer 2007

Who is neoconservative?

• List of prominent neoconservatives, Sourcewatch.org.
• Max Boot. What the Heck Is a 'Neocon'? An attempt to deny, in sharp contrast to Kristol, the very existence of neoconservatism.
• Zachary Selden, Director of the Defence and Security Committee of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly: Neoconservatives and the American Mainstream.
• Bill Steigerwald: So, what is a 'neocon'?
• Irwin Stelzer: Nailing the neocon myth.
• The Christian Science Monitor, "Neoconservatism: Key Figures."

Explanations of neoconservative ideas

• Irving Kristol. The Neoconservative Persuasion
• The Christian Science Monitor, "Q&A: Neocon power examined." (Max Boot discusses the extent of neoconservative influence with The Christian Science Monitor.)

Critiques of neoconservative ideas

• Francis Fukuyama, After Neoconservatism - archived copy of original New York Times article. Links to a PDF of the article from the NYT website.
• International Relations Center's RightWeb - critical analysis and biographies of important neoconservatives.
• Alexander S. Peak. Conservative Socialism. A libertarian critique of neoconservatism, likening it to socialism. LewRockwell.com

Conservative criticism of neoconservatism

• Paul Gottfried: What’s In A Name? The Curious Case Of “Neoconservative”
• Conservatives, Neoconservatives, Paleoconservatives: What Next? by Paul Gottfried.
• Claes G. Ryn, "The Ideology of American Empire". Orbis 47 (2003), 383-397. A longer and more scholarly traditional conservative critique.
• Zmirak, J.P., "America the Abstraction," A conservative critique of neoconservatism.
• Why do NeoCons hate France? Why real conservatives should be pro-France.
• Nation or Notion? by Patrick J. Buchanan
• Strauss & the Straussians by Paul Gottfried.
• Strauss & History by Claes G Ryn.
• William Norman Grigg. Neoconservative fascism. A paleolibertarian critique of neoconservatism, likening it to fascism. LewRockwell.com

Neoconservatism, Leo Strauss, and Trotskyism

• Ben Jelloun, Mohammed, Swans.com: Wilsonian Or Straussian Post-Cold War Idealism? - a postcolonial-Nietzschean view)
• Shadia Drury. Leo Strauss and the neoconservatives, Evatt Foundation, September 11, 2004 - claims Strauss inspired the neocon movement
• Benjamin Balint, Review of The Truth About Leo Strauss
• Ami Eden, "Now it's Trotsky's fault?", The Forward - a sceptical look at the existence of a Trotskyist-Neoconservative link.
• Bill King, Neoconservatives and Trotskyism - challenges the view that there is a relation between the neocons and Trotskyism
• Justin Raimondo, Trotsky, Strauss, and the Neocons, Antiwar.com, June 13, 2003 - alleges neoconservatism is a conspiracy inspired by Leo Strauss and Max Shachtman
• Justin Raimondo, The Imperial Delusion, Antiwar.com, 2006
• Ben Ross, George Bush's Philosophers - left-liberal account of neoconservatism's origins
• Alan Wald, Debate with Michael Lind on neoconservatism and Trotskyism History News Network
• Monty Cantsin, The Philosophy of Leo Strauss: Oligarchs with Myths - Left-wing account of the Neocon development and influence
• Logos Spring 2004 Issue: Confronting Neoconservatism - several articles on the different aspects of neoconservatism.

Neoconservatism and Jews

• Kevin B. MacDonald, Neoconservatism and American Jewry in Occidental Quarterly
• Gorin, Julia, "Blame It on Neo," OpinionJournal. September 23, 2004 - "Just because we call ourselves "neocons," it doesn't mean you can."
• Robert J. Lieber, The Left's Neocon Conspiracy Theory, Chronicle of Higher Education
• Jim Lobe. Attacking Neo-Cons From the Right (Review of America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order, a critique by two center-right authors)
• Murray Friedman. The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 0521545013.

Documentaries

• Adam Curtis, The Power of Nightmares (BBC), [12]