Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Neoconservatism: Mainstream Voice of National Security!

Behold the coordinated attacks between the antiwar conservatives and their leftist brethren on the revival of neoconservatism at the Kristol/Kagan Foreign Policy Initiative (via Memeorandum):

First, the "realist" Stephen Walt, "Would you buy a used foreign policy from these guys?" (don't miss the worst-case photo illustration at the post). Then, Robert Farley, "Will They Get What They Want?":

I'm guessing that FPI is going to be a good deal less successful than PNAC. For one, not many people seem to be buying into the efforts of neocons to distance themselves from the Iraq War.
Then there's The Raw Story, "Scooter Libby shows up for neoconservative foreign policy summit." And also, Matt Duss at the Wonk Room, "Brose: Neocons Are Just Alright," which links to conservartive Christian Brose's, "Neo-cons gone wild!" (which has even more links). Duss is interviewed by Rachel Maddow at the YouTube above.

But for the first time in a long time, I'm happy to quote from Matthew Yglesias, "
The Inevitable Triumph of the Neocons":

The commanding heights of the information economy remain incredibly friendly to neocon perspectives. Kristol, Robert Kagan, and Charles Krauthammer are still all there op-edding away at The Washington Post. The Council on Foreign Relations is staffing up with neocons, adding Elliot Abrams to its arsenal. The Very Serious People at the Brookings Institution remain more likely to collaborate with neocons than with, say, Stephen Walt. And the FPI’s unveiling was validated by the attendance of Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and John Nagl, head of CNAS the left-of-center national security think tank of the moment. Basically, neoconservatism continues to be the mainstream voice of right-of-center national security—the perspective that establishment-oriented institutions feel compelled to shower with respect. The odds of a Republican president getting elected within the next 12 years are extremely high, and the odds of such an administration being heavily influenced by Foreign Policy Initiative ideas strike me as good.
I love it!

On this, I'm kind of like Yglesias: Where he thinks the neocons will have more influence than do all the other neocon-haters cited above (and that's including Brose), I think progressives like Yglesias and his nihilist netroots allies will have more influence than Ronald Brownstein allows in his recent essay, "
Why Obama Can't Satisfy The Left."

Brownstein says, for example, "The bottom line is that, compared to Republicans, Democrats are operating with a much more diverse electoral coalition - and one in which the party's ideological vanguard plays a smaller role." That may be so, based on exit polling data from the November election. But the mainstream of the Democratic Party is already so far to the left, with the Obama White House, and the Pelosi/Reid Congress, that any successes on the right of the spectrum are to be celebrated. (And check with Joe Lieberman before dismissing the "smaller role" of the party's vanguard.)

So, go


Dave said...

But the mainstream of the Democratic Party is already so far to the left, with the Obama White House, and the Pelosi/Reid Congress, that any successes on the right of the spectrum are to be celebrated.

I suspect there will be very few of these celebrations, if any, in the near future.

The extreme lefty globalists are now running the whole show, and maintaining the sovereignty of this nation is not among their priorities.

In fact, national sovereignty may just be rather high on their target list.


Law and Order Teacher said...

The problem with the dismantling of American foreign policy is that much as a parent who threatens and does nothing and appeasers who watched the build-up to WWII, it will be extremely difficult if not impossible to reestablish any credibility. When the Obamanauts are finished the US will most assuredly be a paper tiger.

dave in boca said...

I've read several of Robert Kagan's books and he is the smartest American foreign policy thinker in DC, if not the USA, IMHO [Now that Samuel Huntington is no longer with us].

Jane Harman was passed over for the Chair of the House Intelligence Cte because she is better looking than, and has 50+ IQ points, over Nancy Pelosi---who hates to be upstaged and appointed a nearly illiterate Hispanic from TX instead.

The clowns now running the Senate & House are so utterly corrupt on the Dem side, and colorless [except for Ryan, Cantor, & a couple of other young'uns] on the Repub side, that not a lot of real movement will happen unless events take over, and that will either make or break Obama.

How can the US maintain a foreign policy when a Harman can be supplanted [she had seniority, etc., by a clown ESL from TX? Just an example of how dysfunctional DC remains.

P.S., I'm reading Inside Stalin's Archives set during Yeltsin's rocky road in the Kremlin and now understand how a nasty dude like Putin can succeed. [Putin's grandpa was the chef to both Rasputin and then Lenin & Stalin, pretty fancy political footwork in lil Vlad the Empoisoner's DNA!]

courtneyme109 said...

One of the cool things about FPI is that they are not particularly interested in Donkie or GOP party people exclusively.

They are hot for any and all fans of GrEaT sAtAn and America Unbound.

Their mission statement totally rocked.

Also, it is absolutely sweet to hear all the realpolitik fanboys freak about FPI - acting like it's inconsequential - their very response once again proves that daemoneoconservatism has NO viable competitors or alternatives to answer - let alone challenge.

CS said...

Wow, nothing's changed around here. YOu all still beating a dead horse? Yep sounds like it.

Enjoy the self-gratifying orgy.