Ron Paul - We've Been Neoconned

[carolaa]

This is a speech Ron Paul gave in 2003. It's long, but there are many gems to be found in it. I found it to be very educational about what is going on within our country, particularly over the last 50 years. I'm wondering if anyone here is knowledgeable about the neo-conservative movement and what your thoughts are.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

[Jeannieb43]

Ron Paul was five years ahead of his time. Most of the things he talks about in this speech are coming true - in spades.

The neocons have had the Bush administration in their grasp, and GWB has kowtowed to everything they told him. Now we're seeing the results -- a failed economy, bankrupt financial businesses, huge unemployment, and an economy in debt to the next three generations.

[carolaa]

I have never heard/seen a more clear and thorough description of neo-cons anywhere. It's very educational and helps me understand a few people on this forum a little better. GW is the neo-cons' puppet, for sure.

[carolaa]

Here is the excerpt describing exactly what the philosophy of the neocons is....

More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.

They express no opposition to the welfare state.

They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.

They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

[John317]

Do you accept Ron Paul as an authority? It sounds like you do or at least that you put a lot of stock in his thinking.

I don't see any evidence that the Neocons agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution. Do you? What do you think Trotsky was saying?

You will notice that some things in the list are favorites of liberals and Democrats.

Generally speaking, it's not a good idea to get your understanding of the views of someone from those who oppose them. Since Ron Paul obviously opposes neocons, he probably isn't the best source of information on what they stand for or believe.

I myself am not totally opposed to Ron Paul. I like some of his ideas, and I have a cousin who campaigned for him and has been after me to join him.

All I am saying here is that I wouldn't be too quick to judge neocons by Ron Paul's words. It's a bit like people getting their ideas of Seventh-day Adventists or the Investigative Judgment from those who opposed them. I'd be much more interested in what the main spokesmen of the neocons say.

Who are the primary spokespeople of neocons these days, anyway? As a kid, I used to enjoy reading Barry Goldwater's book, Conscience of a Conservative. That was before I got into Karl Marx, V. Lenin and Leon Trotsky. I know what Trotsky taught about permanent revolution, and I don't see any similarity between Trotsky's idea and the ideas of neocons.

If you know what any of those similarities are, I wish you or anyone else would describe them.

[carolaa]

I don't know if he's an authority, but he has certainly explained the philosophy better than anyone else I have seen. It's pretty much the same way that Wikipedia describes it, only more clear, I thought. It doesn't seem like you actually read the link, because he explains clearly that many of both Democrats and Republicans are on board with this philosophy - which actually explained a lot of why I have felt there isn't much difference between the two major parties. I would encourage you to read the link and tell me what you think of it.