Neoconservatism: Demythologizing the Truth
by Timothy Little, Domestic Affairs Staff Writer
Before the start of the Iraq War in 2003, comments in the “blogosphere” and the media circulated on a growing trend in American politics known as neoconservatism. Since the popularization of that term in the media, this trend in political thought has been egregiously misunderstood. Indisputably, the Bush Administration has been a catalyst for the implementation of neoconservative policies. However, concurrent to these policy implementations has been the attempt to transform the Republican Party, and American conservatism in general, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to govern a modern democracy. [i]
The Beginning of American Neoconservatism
One of the most influential thinkers on neoconservatism was University of Chicago professor Leo Strauss. At its philosophical roots, neoconservatism is a critique of liberalism focusing on a return to classical “wisdom” in order to derive a just regime. [ii] Although neoconservatives have no specific philosophical doctrine, their beliefs come from an understanding and interpretation of history. The favorite neoconservative text on foreign policy is Thucydides’ history on the Peloponnesian War. [iii]
Most neoconservatives of the Bush administration were former officials in either Ronald Reagan’s or George H. W. Bush’s administration. After the defeat of George H. W. Bush, a neoconservative think-tank, known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), was officially formed in the spring of 1997. A fraction of its members and supporters, such as Dick Cheney, I. Lewis Libby, Paula Dobriansky, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and John Bolton, all received high-level positions in the George W. Bush administration. [iv]
The founding principles of PNAC were to position the United States as a global leader with a military able to meet present and future challenges and to adopt a foreign policy that promotes American principles abroad. [v] PNAC is largely responsible for the creation of neoconservative foreign policy. The organization has openly supported regime change and the toppling of dictators in order to ensure America’s global leadership position. [vi]
Neoconservative Domestic Policy
Neoconservatives cite the centerpiece of the government’s fiscal policy is the deficit and argue that deficits do not affect interest rates and are a poor indicator of economic success. [vii] A fiscal policy that will speed economic growth is simply one that keeps government spending only to essentials, keeps marginal tax rates as low as possible, keeps the dollar sound, and avoids imposing unnecessary regulation and costs. [viii] This is not to say that deficits should not be of concern; only that they should no longer be the centerpiece of fiscal policy.
Regarding welfare, neoconservatives recognize that there needs to be a difference between ‘mothers on welfare’ and ‘welfare mothers.’ Mothers on welfare are those that have been widowed, divorced, or abandoned. They tend to be on welfare no more than two years because they do not like it; they are not a problem population and deserve sympathy. Welfare mothers are those that are on welfare because of their own actions and are not frightened of the prospect because they see it as an opportunity. [ix] This kind of welfare state needs reforming to fit a conservative vision based on basic American principles.
Lastly, neoconservatives make an argument in favor of censorship, believing that censorship has ceased to exist and democracy has become equal to obscenity. Gresham’s Law holds that when two currencies of different quality are allowed to circulate, “bad money drives out good.” The same can be said of literature. [x] Censorship within the United States has existed for over a century with laws censoring pornography. Freedom is indivisible; as such, pornography should be made “illegal and available to anyone who wants it so badly as to make a pretty strenuous effort to get it.” [xi] Neoconservatism neither favors completely abandoning liberalism nor complete censorship, but a return to traditional moral values to prevent “bad” literature from outweighing the good.
Neoconservative Foreign Policy
The neoconservative foreign policy relies on three principles: first, that patriotism is natural and should be encouraged; second, that world government leads to tyranny; and third, statesman, above all others, should have the ability to distinguish friends from enemies. [xii] This view of foreign policy can be considered a realist approach to liberalism in international relations theory. [xiii] Neoconservatives firmly believe that a well-funded and ready defense is vital to ensure America continues its role as a global leader. [xiv]
Condoleezza Rice entered the Bush administration as National Security Advisor and a realist, but soon after becoming Secretary of State in Bush’s second term, Secretary Rice adopted a more liberalist notion of international relations and the transformational theory of democracy. [xv] It is not the intention of Bush’s foreign policy to impose democracy on other nations, but to create conditions that will allow democracy to flourish because the United States has the responsibly to make the world more secure. [xvi]
When it comes to the use of international organizations, neoconservatives consider the United Nations (UN) weak and slow to act. Thus, when the United States becomes dependent on the UN, it too becomes slow to act. [xvii] The policy of the United States is to prefer international consensus before action, but also to recognize that it may still act without such consensus. Untied States unilateralism is multilateral in that an unfavorable resolution from the UN coupled with America’s eventual actions forces other states to face the reality of US intervention. [xviii] Consequently, the US uses the UN and other international organizations to its advantage before taking unilateral or multilateral action.
Neoconservatism: An Assessment
Neoconservatism has been harshly criticized as having infiltrated American conservatism as a vast conspiracy promoting perpetual conflict and the dominance of America around the world. This cannot be further from the truth. Neoconservatism is a relatively new movement in American politics that seeks to ensure America’s global leadership in an increasingly interconnected world. The Iraq war has given this new movement some bad press, but this movement will not be limited to the Bush administration. If neoconservatives appear to be increasingly militaristic, it is only because both law and liberty must be backed by force. [xix]
The Iraq conflict was successfully executed and a nefarious regime was quickly toppled; however, the post-conflict transition was not properly executed. This is a failure of the administration, but it is by no means a failure of neoconservatism. In the end, the United States is ultimately safer when international threats are fought in their home state instead of being engaged on American soil. The United States was attacked on September 11th, 2001, announced a global war on terrorism, and threatened all states that harbored terrorists. With the noted failure of the UN to compel states to act and the increasing motivation of Iran to start a nuclear weapons program, the United States will be compelled to intervene militarily again if the international community fails to act.
The Bush administration’s neoconservative policies will ultimately improve the Republican Party over time. When a new political ideology is introduced, people are naturally skeptic; with the failings in Iraq, it is only natural that people want something to blame. Neoconservatism as a political ideology has not fully been intertwined with the Republican Party, but it is certainly a large part of it. As in the past, the Republican Party has redefined and realigned to adapt itself to the changing political and international environment. In the end, neoconservatism will become the dominant school of thought within the Republican Party.
Share your thoughts on this article on the GW Discourse Discussion Board
[i] Irving Kristol, “The Neoconservative Persuasion,” The Weekly Standard. (August 25, 2003), 23
[ii] Grant Havers, “Political Philosophy and the Love Of Wisdom: Leo Strauss and the “New” Conservatism,”Dialogue & Universalism. (2005:Vol. 15), 121
[iii] Irving Kristol, “The Neoconservative Persuasion,” The Weekly Standard. (August 25, 2003), 24
[iv] William Kristol, “Statement of Principles.” Project for the New American Century. (March 11, 2007), <http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm>
[v] William Kristol, “Statement of Principles.”
[vi] William Kristol, “Letter to President Clinton”. Project for the New American Century. (January 26, 1998), <http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm>
[vii] Robert Bartley, “The Dread Defecit,” The Neocon Reader, Ed. Irwin Stelzer. (Grove Atlantic: New Yotk, 2004), 191
[viii] Robert Bartley, “The Dread Defecit,” 183
[ix] Irving Kristol, “A Conservative Welfare State,” The Neocon Reader, Ed. Irwin Stelzer. (Grove Atlantic: New York, 2004), 147
[x] Irving Kristol, “Pornography, Obscenity, and the Case for Censorship,” The Neocon Reader, Ed. Irwin Stelzer. (Grove Atlantic: New York, 2004), 191
[xi] Irving Kristol, “Pornography, Obscenity, and the Case for Censorship,” 180
[xii] Irving Kristol, “The Neoconservative Persuasion,” The Weekly Standard. (August 25, 2003), 24
[xiii] Jack Snyder, “One World, Rival Theories,” Foreign Policy. (Nov/Dec2004), 54.
[xiv] Donald Kagan andGary Schmitt. “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Resources, and Force for a New Century,” Project for the New American Century. (September 2000), 69-76
[xv] Condoleezza Rice, “The Promise of Democratic Peace : Why Promoting Freedom Is the Only Realistic Path to Security,” The Washington Post. (11 December 2005), B07
[xvi] Condoleezza Rice, “The President’s National Security Strategy,” The Neocon Reader, Ed. Irwin Stelzer. (Grove Atlantic: New York, 2004), 82
[xvii] William Kristol and Vance Serchuk, “ End the Genocide Now, ” The Washington Post. (22 September 2004), A31
[xviii] Robert Kagan, “ Multilateralism, American Style ,” The Washington Post. (13 September 2002), A39
[xix] Anne-Marie Slaughter and G. John Ikenberry, “Forging A World of Liberty Under Law,” The Princeton Project on National Security. (Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs: Princeton University, 2006), 29