One of the podcast in my feed is The Dangerous History Podcast. The host has an unholy obsession with certain figures like Woodrow Wilson but then he also stumbles into some real jewels as well. This episode is one of those. I never even knew that neo-conservative was a thing until I listened to this.
For sure, it is a thing. Wikipedia has an in-depth article that lays it all out. Neo means new and Con is short for conservative. As the story goes, neo-cons originated from the left side of the political spectrum that splintered off from the mainstream left over disapproval of counter-culture and a very hawkish stance on foreign policy in the 1960s. Think JFK/LBJ and the escalation of Vietnam.
There are a couple of other key identifiers of neo-cons. The movement was started by former World War II OSS operatives that have exclusive, educational pedigree. This would be people none other than the likes of George HW Bush. If you follow my work, then you will be familiar with my generational analysis and how the GI generation remained in power until the early 1990s. This means that the neo-neocons are the new neo-cons since there are not too many WWII generation people around, let alone in power.
I have to hand it to CJ. This is some of his best work (that I have heard at least). I do think that it is worth a listen, but I must warn that it is almost four hours long. It is also very detailed and so you might find yourself lost if you are not sharp on mid-century politics and history as well as political science definitions.
If you want to know about the term ‘deep state’, this is a good place to start. CJ does a good job linking the institutions to the administrations. In some cases they are one and the same (GHW Bush) while in others they are a series of stair steps of succession. But generally speaking, the deep state are shadow organizations that fluidly move and interact with the ruling political groups.
The neo-con heyday was post WWII through the Vietnam era. Pure public pressure unseated their influence temporarily (Ford/Carter) but to be restored via Reagan. Reagan was not specifically but his VP GHW Bush was. They retooled and continued their reign through Obama. While the name contains the term conservative, it is important to know that this is not a left/right descriptor.
Many socialist leaning thinkers have solidly adopted the idea of the neo-con. Think about it, if you have the balls to think that you know better than society of the social order and economics issues, why wouldn’t that be the same with foreign policy? Really Clinton, GW Bush and Obama were all neo-cons. All you have to do is look at the historical actions to know.
In my mind, neither Biden nor Trump were not a neo-cons. However, the president does not necessarily have to be if he turns over actions to others that are. So while I would say that Trump is not a neo-con, we will have to wait and see how all of this plays out because Ukraine, Gaza, Iran/Huthis are all sort of teetering on the brink of meddling foreign affairs. While the individual may not be neoconservatism, the legacy certainly might (Biden).
This is a deep and complicated topic. In my mind, this completely explains why GW Bush’s presidency was one of the worst in the two term era. That is not an endorsement of Clinton or Obama but to say the campaign promises and party platform seemed to have no influence whatsoever on the actions once in office. At least we knew that Obama was a race baiter when he was campaigning.
Why is this important? I will tell you why and it comes down to this. Candidates outwardly label themselves in one ideology or another. We think that allows us to process their beliefs and actions. Neoconservatism does not side with Republican or Democrat. It also doesn’t distinguish any sort of domestic economic policy other than to say that if America is top dog internationally, that will work itself out economically. Consequently, it really doesn’t matter which party is in power.
Trump is a disrupter and not a neo-con because he comes from the outside. As much noise that has been made about tariffs and DOGE, very little is different. Neo-cons do not want a Gaza paradise, they are more interested in continuous war. This benefits the military industrial complex and provides the smoke screen for test operations, weapons and political scape goats. This by no means means that we are safe. Rubio is a neo-con and so don’t be surprised if by the end of his term we collectively feel like another dose of the same.
I would say this, the people that have Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) would do well to cast this aside. If they want a real outsider to break the stranglehold of the deep state, this is the best chance there has been in my lifetime. An economic win in Ukraine to end the conflict certainly benefits both sides and is very anti neo-con. I cannot eloquate how ignorant fighting against him solidifies the status quo. That my friends is by design of the deep state, they wouldn’t have it any other way.
End Your Programming Routine: This is the missing link for me. This is what I have not understood about US politics in my entire life. It is the reason that both parties are the same and it is a large reason why I have given up on election hope. Even if we elect a non neo-con, there is no guarantee that a neo-con won’t be installed in an influential position. In fact, it would be highly likely that we will get one especially because we cannot seem to see the forest from the trees.
Recent Comments