is Neo Conservatism treated unfairly?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I suppose that I definitely disagree with neo-conservatism,but like any ideology it cant always be wrong. After all even a broken clock is right twice a day. Unfortunately I often find that individuals are more likely to be outright critical of this ideology without even learning to understand, or carefully consider their position.

I remember in high school how some people would compare George Bush to Hitler, or Neo-conservatism to people who eat poop. As I have gotten older I have become less harsh and have learned that being overly critical of ideology is unfair,polarizing, and uncivil. At the age of 22 i am starting to learn how to "critique" something instead of being "critical". Having an open mind is very liberating,but it can be frustrating when i live in world that is not so open.

[Mechaman]

I remember in high school how some people would compare George Bush to Hitler, or Neo-conservatism to people who eat poop.

Well you are right, it is unfair to compare Bush to Hitler or people who eat poop. Bush is nowhere as competent as Hitler was and he was full of more sh*t than people who ate sh*t.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Couldn't agree more. There are far more scary ideologies that are currently threatening the USA. Obviously I find neocons' vision extremely naive and simplistic, but I think the same about radical anti-neocons like BRTD.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Half of those who keep complaining about "neoconservatism" don't even have an idea what it means.

[k-onmmunist]

No. It deserves far more criticism than it gets.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Couldn't agree more. There are far more scary ideologies that are currently threatening the USA. Obviously I find neocons' vision extremely naive and simplistic, but I think the same about radical anti-neocons like BRTD.

I think it is rather anti-intellectual to be scared of an idea.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Half of those who keep complaining about "neoconservatism" don't even have an idea what it means.

what do you think it means?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

No. It deserves far more criticism than it gets.

perhaps but being mean spirited and hostile towards ideas is rather uncivil in my opinion.

When I open a book or consider an idea i try to be as open as possible, and I think being emotionally invested in a world view is just silly. Yes, we all have our own world view, but some people need to mellow out.

[Scam of God]

Neoconservatism is not treated harshly enough. It combines the worst aspects of both major political philosophies.

[Free Palestine]

Neoconservatism is just a step away from fascism.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

mccarthyism is the only thing I will ever worry about because i think it infringes upon society's intellectual curiosity. Right now I have been reading up on economics, and even though I am a Liberal I have no problem with reading "mises" or "greenspan".

Neo Conservatism is protected because the intellectual backing is well funded, but if it was less well funded than it could potentially suffer a horrible fate. Socialists in the late 19th century had some good ideas, but because of their opposition to world war one their movement was destroyed and eugene debs was thrown in jail. Neo Conservatism on the other hand is well protected and has been cultivated in society that is more lenient relative to the early 20th century.

I am sure that neo conservatives has had some good ideas, because they cant always be wrong.

[Lief 🗽]

No, because it has been applied in the real world twice and failed spectacularly both times.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

No, because it has been applied in the real world twice and failed spectacularly both times.

no ideology has ever been fully implemented but no ideology is completely wrong. For example I disagree with Austrian Business cycle, but most economists do agree that the labour market does lag.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Half of those who keep complaining about "neoconservatism" don't even have an idea what it means.

quite true. for example people blame "neocons" for starting a "war for oil". but of course neoconservatism is very much about foreign policy based on struggles in worldview and deemphasizes material resources when compared to realism. 
 I appreciate neoconservatism's insight that what happens *inside* a country matters to international security, and so emphasizes human rights and freedom in other nations - but not applying these ideals enough to our own actions. They are unfortunately often right about the uselessness of the UN, but  go for solutions that are much more hawkish or militaristic than is wise. 
There are also neoconservative domestic policies, such as those developed by Irving Kristol and carried out by Guilliani as mayor, and here again its a mixed bag but definitely some good ideas.

[Godspeed]

Half of those who keep complaining about "neoconservatism" don't even have an idea what it means.

True.

With the way the word is used around here, neoconservatism is confused with every other idealogy.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Couldn't agree more. There are far more scary ideologies that are currently threatening the USA. Obviously I find neocons' vision extremely naive and simplistic, but I think the same about radical anti-neocons like BRTD.

Ah, getting back to your shared roots.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No. It's been tried and was a miserable failure. It's a discredited joke like Maoism.

[SPC]

To paraphrase Trotsky and Reagan, it belongs in the dustbin of history. Unfortunately we haven't reached that point yet.

[Magic 8-Ball]

A thread like this merits a poll so I can vote no.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It is treated unfairly to the extent that it is greatly misunderstood and abused.

[k-onmmunist]

No. It's been tried and was a miserable failure. It's a discredited joke like Maoism communism.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Half of those who keep complaining about "neoconservatism" don't even have an idea what it means.

quite true. for example people blame "neocons" for starting a "war for oil". but of course neoconservatism is very much about foreign policy based on struggles in worldview and deemphasizes material resources when compared to realism. 
 I appreciate neoconservatism's insight that what happens *inside* a country matters to international security, and so emphasizes human rights and freedom in other nations - but not applying these ideals enough to our own actions. They are unfortunately often right about the uselessness of the UN, but  go for solutions that are much more hawkish or militaristic than is wise. 
There are also neoconservative domestic policies, such as those developed by Irving Kristol and carried out by Guilliani as mayor, and here again its a mixed bag but definitely some good ideas.

you appear to have a balance mind and i respect that! an Ideology cant always be wrong, and sometimes its policy options will be more correct in particular situations than what other ideologies have to offer. Where do you think Neo-conservatives have been correct/wrong?

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

They have several very excellent ideas that should never be lost in the body politic.  One is that there will always be an element of evil in humanity, regardless of socioeconomic conditions.  Albeit, they are a bit too cynical in this regard (such as using it to justify rejection of social welfare spending) but it is a legitimate point.

Another is the inextricable link between America's long term national security and prosperity and promoting democracy abroad.  The Chinese, the Soviets, etc.. all would absolutely destroy us in pure competency.  The Chinese machine in its early foreign forays has proven ruthlessly efficient.  But our great nullifier is the power gained through democracy, liberalism, and nationalism.  Our empire is altogether new; all roads led to Rome; all markets and ideas lead to Washington.

is there an official index of evil? if not than it is a rather stupid assumption but so would the direct opposite be as well. I disagree with their rejection of poverty reduction programs because of my extensive research on this issue, but all conservatives want to do away with this. what is their economic policy?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

They have several very excellent ideas that should never be lost in the body politic.  One is that there will always be an element of evil in humanity, regardless of socioeconomic conditions.  Albeit, they are a bit too cynical in this regard (such as using it to justify rejection of social welfare spending) but it is a legitimate point.

Another is the inextricable link between America's long term national security and prosperity and promoting democracy abroad.  The Chinese, the Soviets, etc.. all would absolutely destroy us in pure competency.  The Chinese machine in its early foreign forays has proven ruthlessly efficient.  But our great nullifier is the power gained through democracy, liberalism, and nationalism.  Our empire is altogether new; all roads led to Rome; all markets and ideas lead to Washington.

is there an official index of evil? if not than it is a rather stupid assumption but so would the direct opposite be as well. I disagree with their rejection of poverty reduction programs because of my extensive research on this issue, but all conservatives want to do away with this. what is their economic policy?

Neoconservatives are not against all social welfare spending, but are very skeptical of it. One type of approach endorsed by neoconservatives is to spend for people in private programs rather than government programs that are usually considered less effective ( for example, vouchers for inner city children to attend private schools).  Also active law enforcement to achieve a sense of order is emphasized as foundational to help impoverished communities advance. Neoconservatives support Social Security and in the past have been more open to deficit spending than traditional conservatives, though this seems to be changing as the debt grows.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

They have several very excellent ideas that should never be lost in the body politic.  One is that there will always be an element of evil in humanity, regardless of socioeconomic conditions.  Albeit, they are a bit too cynical in this regard (such as using it to justify rejection of social welfare spending) but it is a legitimate point.

Another is the inextricable link between America's long term national security and prosperity and promoting democracy abroad.  The Chinese, the Soviets, etc.. all would absolutely destroy us in pure competency.  The Chinese machine in its early foreign forays has proven ruthlessly efficient.  But our great nullifier is the power gained through democracy, liberalism, and nationalism.  Our empire is altogether new; all roads led to Rome; all markets and ideas lead to Washington.

is there an official index of evil? if not than it is a rather stupid assumption but so would the direct opposite be as well. I disagree with their rejection of poverty reduction programs because of my extensive research on this issue, but all conservatives want to do away with this. what is their economic policy?

Neoconservatives are not against all social welfare spending, but are very skeptical of it. One type of approach endorsed by neoconservatives is to spend for people in private programs rather than government programs that are usually considered less effective ( for example, vouchers for inner city children to attend private schools).  Also active law enforcement to achieve a sense of order is emphasized as foundational to help impoverished communities advance. Neoconservatives support Social Security and in the past have been more open to deficit spending than traditional conservatives, though this seems to be changing as the debt grows.

Social programs shouldn't be totally privatized, and my father who has worked in the "social program" sector is pretty skeptical privatization. For example a poor individual couldn't possible afford his service if his social working profession was completely privatized. Normally he will at a company that is private/public. In any event he did lose his job when Ronald Reagan abolished a particular mental health service,but that was in the 80's.