Really, What Are Neo-cons?

The political leanings of some Republicans known as Neo-conservatives , or neo-cons in popular parlance, is terribly misunderstood by the mainstream. The mis-characterization, in my opinion, is perpetuated by the popular press and is not discussed in an intellectual but emotional manner as barbs are thrown out in political discourse. Many people that I know that speak of neo-cons in a negative light, particularly those that are socially liberal, have absolutely no clue what they really stand for and advocate.

Historically, the neo-cons of old were anti-communist [more accurately, anti-Soviet Union] Democrats that were rallying against the pacifist McGovernites and hard-left socialists of the 1960's.

This political group supported a militant anticommunism; more social welfare spending than was sometimes acceptable to libertarians and mainstream conservatives; civil equality for blacks and other minorities; and sympathy with a non-traditionalist agenda, being more inclined than other conservatives toward an interventionist foreign policy and a unilateralism that is sometimes at odds with traditional conceptions of diplomacy and international law. They feuded with traditional right-wing Republicans, and the nativist, protectionist, isolationists once represented by ex-Republican "paleoconservative" Pat Buchanan.

Interestingly, this movement has morphed from a centrist Democrat movement, into the Reagan Democrat movement, into the Mid-Western United States intellectual movement of today.

In short, Neo-cons are more politically centrist than either traditional conservatives or liberals except for their aggressive stance on foreign policy.

But domestic policy does not define neoconservatism; it is a movement founded on, and perpetuated by an aggressive approach to foreign policy, free trade, opposition to communism during the Cold War, support for beleaguered liberal democracies such as Israel and Taiwan and opposition to Middle Eastern and other states that are perceived to support terrorism. Thus, their foremost target was the conservative but pragmatic approach to foreign policy often associated with Richard Nixon, i.e., peace through negotiations, diplomacy, and arms control, détente and containment (rather than rollback) of the Soviet Union, and the beginning of the process that would lead to bilateral ties between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the U.S. Today, a rift still divides the neoconservatives from many members of the State Department, who favor established foreign policy conventions.

Anyone that takes their political positions seriously and likes to debate politics should read this in order to better understand what these mis-understood people stand for.

Wikipedia has a wonderful outline of Neo-conservatism found here.
More on this at another time.