Neoconservatism is a political ideology that emerged in the United States, advocating for a robust, assertive foreign policy and the global propagation of democracy. Its adherents often describe themselves as "Democratic revolutionaries".
Origins and Core Tenets
The philosophical underpinnings of neoconservatism are heavily influenced by the theories of Leo Strauss, who argued that liberal societies, by fostering excessive individual freedom, risked leading to [[Nihilism]] and the questioning of all values and moral truths, thereby jeopardising the shared societal fabric.
Strauss posited that politicians should assert powerful and aspiring myths, which, even if not literally true, were necessary illusions to inspire and unite the populace and provide purpose to their lives. This concept of a "noble lie" became a cornerstone of Neocon strategy.
Many young students of Strauss, including Paul Wolfowitz, Francis Fukuyama, and William Kristol, became instrumental in the development of neoconservatism, particularly after encountering academic environments perceived as unreceptive to conservative viewpoints.
These individuals shared a common scepticism regarding the trajectory of liberal progress. The term "neoconservatism" was used even before the 1960s by figures such as William Buckley, who defined it as "CIA conservatism" or an establishment position explicitly aligned with state interests.
Key Characteristics and Goals
Neoconservatives strongly advocate for military intervention and a open borders, endorsing the concept of a "proposition nation." This approach involves imposing some extreme left ideas, such as America becoming a global "bin," by those who identify as conservative yet aren't genuinely right-wing. Ben Wattenberg, a prominent figure, explicitly articulated the necessity to "bring the whole world into America".
Initially, neoconservatives viewed themselves as idealists aiming to counteract social disintegration believed to be a consequence of liberal freedoms. Their objective was to unite the nation by establishing a shared purpose, often by recreating the myth of America as a unique country destined to combat evil worldwide.
Historical Implementation
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was designated as the primary source of evil within this narrative. Neoconservatives formed lobby groups, such as the Committee on the Present Danger, to disseminate their views, frequently employing tactics that depicted America as being under threat from hidden forces. This committee's specific allegations regarding Soviet weapon systems were entirely unfounded.
This strategy culminated during Ronald Reagan's administration, where neoconservatives held influential advisory positions. In 1983, Reagan signed a secret directive to engage in covert wars to counter the perceived Soviet threat, characterising Soviet-controlled governments as the "focus of evil in the modern world". The neocon propaganda of the 1980s was notably effective, employing powerful good-versus-evil narratives in popular culture, exemplified by portraying He-Man as America and Skeletor as the Soviet Union.
However, the actual collapse of the Soviet Union was primarily due to internal decay rather than American government actions, a reality that the neocon narrative distorted. This perceived triumph, nevertheless, reinforced their conviction that aggressive American power could transform the world and spread democracy.
Tactics and Controversies
Neoconservatives have consistently worked to marginalise libertarian elements within the American right, viewing them as a threat to their influence. Figures like Rothbard were systematically excluded from political organisations and academia. The concept of controlled opposition suggests that any nascent opposition movement must be co-opted or neutralised.
Their approach often involved politically mobilising religion and framing their agenda through moral fables, which, to them, functioned as necessary myths for social order.
This strategy was evident in the Republican party's embrace of policies on Abortion, gay rights, and Multiculturalism in the early 1990s, during which traditional conservative values of individual freedom were downplayed. Yet, this harsh moralism frequently alienated mainstream Republican voters, prompting them to support figures likeBill Clinton.
A fundamental characteristic of neoconservatism is its belief that its ideal of freedom is an absolute, thereby justifying deceit and exaggeration to enforce its vision.
This was exemplified by the Office of Public Diplomacy, which disseminated "White propaganda"—fabricated stories and dossiers—to manipulate public perception and generate support for aggressive foreign policies, such as the funding of the Contras in Nicaragua, despite the Contras' involvement in murder, assassination, torture, and alleged cocaine smuggling. Even dealings with adversaries, such as Iran in the Iran-Contra affair, were pursued to achieve their objectives.
Contemporary Manifestations
The September 11th Attacks were exploited by neoconservatives to advance their political agenda, transforming terrorism into an all powerful boogeyman that facilitated state action.
They adapted the concept of Soviet Communism as evil and applied it to new threats, particularly Islamists, portraying them as an evil network seeking to infiltrate society and impose their beliefs.
The stupid and simplistic notion that "since we know it's evil, let's just kill it and that will make it go away", justifies any military action,
A recurring aspect of modern politics influenced by neocon thought is the promotion of conflicting narratives: advocating for Nationalist movements abroad (e.g., in Ukraine or Israel) while simultaneously pushing for diversity and minority leadership at home.
This creates a paradox where traditional national identities are undermined even as their proponents are expected to fight for foreign causes. The deliberate removal of patriotism and the adoption of bureaucratic language in military and public service, initially intended for rational efficiency, inadvertently created a void subsequently filled by politically correct ideologies.
See: Neoconservatism and Radical Islamism
Neoconservatism in MAGA era
An emerging split is evident within the MAGA movement, differentiating a "third faction" from neocon elements - a workers' movement, advocating for anti-war and anti-globalisation positions.
Conversely, neoconservatives, who are the "Israel firsters", "permanent security state," "deep state,"* or *"the swamp," are actively asserting their representation of the "real MAGA" and "America First" agenda.
This includes efforts to discredit dissenting voices, such as portraying figures like Tucker Carlson as traitors, recipients of Qatari funds, or compromised by radical Islam.
Prominent figures associated with the neocon stance, some of whom previously opposed Donald Trump's candidacy, are now presented as embodying the principles of "Making America Great Again". This redefinition attempts to align MAGA's core tenets with the politics historically associated with figures like John McCain or Mitt Romney, contrasting with the movement's original anti-establishment and anti-war sentiments.
Concurrently, there are attempts to Manufacturing Consent for military interventions, such as an invasion of Iran. Propagandistic efforts, including the potential use of automated accounts on social media, aim to amplify pro-intervention narratives and drown out anti-war voices**.
Despite these efforts, a significant majority of Americans do not support prolonged military engagements. This ongoing dynamic highlights a serious division within contemporary conservative political movements, reflecting a persistent influence of the Neocon permanent establishment.
The Mechanics of Market Discipline
The contemporary political landscape, particularly within the online right-wing sphere, operates according to a cynical set of market tactics designed to enforce Conformity and protect specific interests. This phenomenon, often described as the Neoconservative playbook, functions through a mechanism of superficial identity politics and exclusionary social signaling rather than substantive debate. When individuals engage in the market of ideas, particularly those attempting to critique the nexus of billionaire donors such as Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and Bari Weiss, they often encounter a specific form of dismissal. This tactic involves the weaponisation of identity traits, such as race or sexuality, to discount the speaker as someone who should not be listened to.