September 2022

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
181920 21222324
2526 27282930 

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Tuesday, July 18th, 2006 05:53 pm
I think that the left should consciously adopt paleoconservative as the standard description of pre neoconservative thinking. Neoconservatism is obviously critically wounded. There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity here to get paleoconservative, with all the baggage that it implies, into standard usage. Once it is in, it could be an albatross around the right's neck long after neocons are just a scary bedtime story.
Wednesday, July 19th, 2006 12:00 pm (UTC)
Hey! I'm a Paleoconservative and proud of it. The way I see it the Neocons are Hamiltonian while the Paleocons are more Jeffersonian.

Acceptable answers also include Paleocons=Friedmanites / Neocons=Keynesians.

I am a 10th amendment absolutist, which means that I’m against almost all federal legislation and exercise of power on principle. To my way of thinking the Republican Party is no more conservative than the Democratic Party. They're just liberal with different stated goals (anti-gay, anti-brown, pro-business, pro-central authority, etc.).

The Republican Party advocates an elastic interpretation of the constitution, the use of big government to drive social policy, a liberal view of separation of powers, and an ends justifies means approach to government. The list goes on and on. Almost every single bit of power exercised or advocated by the Republicans in the Legislative and Executive branches seems to have a very strong liberal principle behind it. Sure the stated goals are the exact opposite of what the Democratic members of the federal legislature say they want, but that doesn't mean that the same principles aren't being applied.

Of course I'm crazy, but that's hardly the point is it?