The Slow, Agonizing Death of Neoconservatism – IOTW Report

The Slow, Agonizing Death of Neoconservatism

American Thinker:
By Francis P. Sempa

Matthew Continetti, writing in Commentary, credits leading neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol and his son Bill Kristol, with “modernizing” conservatism so that the Republican Party — which neoconservatives reluctantly joined after they lost influence with the Democrat party — could suitably govern a modern democracy.  And he laments the fact that since the rise of the Tea Party movement, neoconservatives have gradually lost influence with a populist-nationalist Republican Party.  Leading neoconservatives like Bill Kristol and Jonah Goldberg (then at National Review) publicly opposed Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020.  As a result, neoconservatism is now a movement without a political party.

The immediate causes of neoconservatism’s decline in influence within the GOP were the twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, begun during the George W. Bush administration.  Initially, most conservatives supported the war in Afghanistan, even while some questioned the need to invade Iraq.  But Bush transformed those wars into a crusade for democracy, which is when many conservatives — including William F. Buckley, Jr. — got off the bandwagon.  Neoconservatives like Norman Podhoretz called the terrorist attacks of the 1970s, ’80s, and ’90s, culminating in 9/11 and the Iraq and Afghan wars, “World War IV” in articles in Commentary that were later collected into a book with that title.

Podhoretz is a compelling writer, and his comparison of Bush’s Global War on Terror to America’s hot war against Nazi Germany and Japan and its Cold War against the Soviet Union convinced many that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were part of a larger existential conflict with radical Islam.  And that is how Bush portrayed them in speech after speech and in formal national security documents.  The result was twenty years of “endless wars,” in which American blood was shed and American treasure was expended in a futile effort to democratize those two nations.  Bush’s greatest cheerleaders were David Frum, Max Boot, Bill Kristol, and other neoconservatives.  When the futility of those wars became obvious to anyone not blinded by ideology, these neoconservatives continued to urge greater American military efforts. more

h/t NAAC

13 Comments on The Slow, Agonizing Death of Neoconservatism

  1. The neoconservatives sent the valorous off to fight and die for no better reason than that it served their political power goals. This was/is a fundamentally evil action. May they all burn in Hell, and sooner rather than than later.

    10
  2. Isn’t this just a new name for the Rockefeller wing of the GOP? Either way it’s nothing more than the democratic party of the 1960’s, and it can not go away quick enough!

    9
  3. What the hell happened to Romney? Years ago he was a good egg, then he did a 180. Is he being blackmailed by the CCP, the DNC? Hillary maybe? Whatever the hell, it’s time for him to get out of politics. No one in either party will ever trust him. He’s a disgrace to his country, his state, and his faith.

    13
  4. @judgeroybean
    Romney was never a good egg. His time as governor of MA was a disaster. He left the state in shambles and the Republican partyweakparty weaker than ever in MA

    7
  5. “…Continetti writes, among “non-college-educated blue collar workers disaffected from the electoral process and contemptuous of political, business, social and cultural elites,” including, one may add, neoconservative elites…”

    Neo-cons are nothing more than ruling class establishment elites who don’t give rat’s ripped ass about anything other than their own accumulation of personal wealth and power, at the expense of the best interest of our country and the blue collar middle class.

    That is why they abhor national populism. It depletes their defense contractor and multinational corporate contributions and related perks – ALL of which ultimately come from our tax dollars.

    2
  6. ARTICLE IS GOOD! But many very big distortions/errors.

    Scoop and Ronny were “Randian Democrats 66 years ago! When talking about liberal govt.. His most famous saying – quoted or misquoted millions of times (usually without reference to him) – was”A $million here , a $million there and soon we’re talking about real money!”! When he first said that a gallon of gas could be bought in SoCal for $0.119; a carton of cigs for $0.75! It was real money, not what Lebron gets for a Nike add!

    For those <70 The Bush Clan denigrates ‘Ayn’s view of government’s power as “Voo Doo Economics”!
    A term used to belittle the Cal. Gov in 1979; by the CIA Dir!

    Agains he is wrong. Populists are not all "non-college-educated blue collar workers disaffected from the electoral process and contemptuous of political, business, social and cultural elites,”

    My town is”populist”. Ronny won big with 80% in ’84. Liberal GWB got crushed with only 41& in 2000. Most of us have several degrees and are WHITE COLLAR folk!

    COMPLETELY wrong on Rush! I have listened to Ronny loving Rush for 32 years! Rush was America First then and died America First! Did not change! Was “right” then 1990!

    Near 200 words; probably worn out my welcome!

    But there are more glaring misstatements; if you want them ask.

    3
  7. I remember the first time I ever became aware of Romney. I was watching CSPAN and he was about to debate The Swimmer, Ted Kennedy. I didn’t know anything about Mitt at the time. The live video showed Kennedy bloated and tired, sitting on a bench before the debate. Then the camera went to Romney. He looked great and fit, the opposite of Kennedy. I thought to myself, “This is gonna be a piece of cake. All Romney has to do is show that he’s nothing like Kennedy and the visual has him halfway there without even saying a word!”
    And then, to my utter disbelief, in the debate Romney tried to out-liberal Kennedy! And he’s been following the same moronic playbook ever since.

    1

Comments are closed.