Naturally, I was right, but there's a back story worth hearing.
All the news here in Virginia is about the impending Obama Inauguration. It's dominating everything. If I heard correctly, even NPR is having an hour-long show about the transportation issues surrounding the BIG EVENT. I told some buddies I may head up north to D.C. just to see the "left-wing crazies" and take pictures, just for fun.
After insulting me like that-calling me a neo-con, he then went on to respond to my earlier comment, and managed to insult the intelligence of everyone in the room."The problem with America are the far-left crazies," he said, "and the far-right, gun-toting religious neo-cons." I stopped the conversation and explained to him what a neo-con is. Rather than bore you with my particular wording, I'll quote the ultimate, authoritative source on, well, everything: wikipedia:
Neo-conservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States.
Its key distinction is in international affairs, where it espouses an
interventionist approach that seeks to defend what neo-conservatives deem as
national interests. In addition, unlike traditional conservatives,
neoconservatives are comfortable with a minimally-bureaucratic welfare state;
and, while generally supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere
for overriding social purposes.
As you can see, being pigeonholed as neo-cons is considered a huge insult to us here at Founder's Porch. While there are certainly legitimate parts of neo-conservatism, I told this particular acquaintance, I was insulted to be considered so far to the left. At the risk of offending Pat-I know Steve will agree, I will say that Founder's Porch is often uncomfortable with the idea of interventionism in many regards. Often interventionism is not conservative. Often it is legitimate.
The neo-cons, simplistically speaking, have been on the correct side in some foreign policy choices the U.S. has faced. I am sometimes troubled with the idea of forcing a certain ideology on other nations in the name of diversity or democracy. It's inherently not. The neo-cons, though, seem to remain, largely, domestic liberals forced to adapt their liberal policies to global growth largely the result of people they disagree with.
One thing I will say for Founder's Porch is this: We certainly are not comfortable with a "minimal" welfare state. Having a "small" government is not the same as having a limited government. Limited government is what we support here at Founder's Porch.
Just because you put a "neo" in front of "conservative" does not make it more conservative. I always say words have consequences and ideas are made of words. Therefore, ideas have consequences. Be conservative with your word choices, you may say more than you intend.
Nota Bene: Sorry I was listening to NPR. I do it sometime to tune into the liberal mindset and to figure out what wavelength they're on.
3 comments:
haha, I'm not offended, but you're right I probably lean a little more towards the neo-cons than you guys.
and good point about "neo" not meaning "ultra," which is often the insinuation.
I'm afraid that "Neo-Con" is becoming the new "Liberal", in terms of a general, pigeonholed thing to call people you don't like. Since when did Liberal mean Big-government nanny/welfare state? Even now you're having to backpedal away from the word.
I like Dan's comment about liberalism. By any philosophical measure, I am a liberal. But now my political thoughts have been relegated to the pretentious sounding term "classical liberal". I actually prefer calling myself a "traditionalist paleo-liberal"; if you're going to turn your nose up, why not go all the way?
Post a Comment