From Wikipedia:
Overview
Historically, neoconservatives supported a militant
anticommunism [28], tolerated more
social welfare spending than was sometimes acceptable to
libertarians and mainstream
conservatives, and sympathized with a non-traditional foreign policy agenda that was less deferential to traditional conceptions of diplomacy and international law and less inclined to compromise principles, even if that meant
unilateral action.
The movement began to focus on such foreign issues in the mid-1970s [
citation needed]. However, it first crystallized in the late
1960s as an effort to combat the radical cultural changes taking place within the United States. Irving Kristol wrote: "If there is any one thing that neoconservatives are unanimous about, it is their dislike of the
counterculture."
[29] Norman Podhoretz agreed: "Revulsion against the counterculture accounted for more converts to neoconservatism than any other single factor."
[30] Ira Chernus, a professor at the
University of Colorado, argues that the deepest root of the neoconservative movement is its fear that the counterculture would undermine the authority of traditional values and moral norms. Because neoconservatives believe that human nature is innately selfish, they believe that a society with no commonly accepted values based on religion or ancient tradition will end up in a
war of all against all. They also believe that the most important social value is strength, especially the strength to control natural impulses. The only alternative, they assume, is weakness that will let impulses run riot and lead to social chaos.
[31]
According to
Peter Steinfels, a historian of the movement, the neoconservatives' "emphasis on foreign affairs emerged after the
New Left and the counterculture had dissolved as convincing foils for neoconservatism . . . The essential source of their anxiety is not military or geopolitical or to be found overseas at all; it is domestic and cultural and ideological."
[32] Neoconservative foreign policy parallels their domestic policy. They insist that the U.S. military must be strong enough to control the world, or else the world will descend into chaos.
Believing that America should "export democracy," that is, spread its ideals of government, economics, and culture abroad, they grew to reject U.S. reliance on international organizations and treaties to accomplish these objectives. Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an
idealist stance on
foreign policy, a lesser
social conservatism, and a much weaker dedication to a policy of
minimal government, and, in the past, a greater acceptance of the welfare state, though none of these qualities are necessarily requisite.
Aggressive support for democracies and
nation building is additionally justified by a belief that, over the long term, it will reduce the
extremism that is a breeding ground for
Islamic terrorism. Neoconservatives, along with many other political theorists, have argued that democratic regimes are less likely to instigate a war than a country with an authoritarian form of government. Further, they argue that the lack of freedoms, lack of economic opportunities, and the lack of secular general education in authoritarian regimes promotes radicalism and extremism. Consequently, neoconservatives advocate the spread of democracy to regions of the world where it currently does not prevail, most notably the
Arab nations of the
Middle East, communist
China,
North Korea and
Iran.
Neoconservatives also have a very strong belief in the ability of the United States to install democracy after a conflict - comparisons with
denazification in Germany and installing a democratic government in Japan starting in 1945 are often made - and they have a principled belief in defending democracies against aggression. This belief has guided U.S. policy in
Iraq after the removal of the
Saddam Hussein regime, where the U.S. insisted on organizing elections as soon as practical [
citation needed].
[edit] Distinctions from other conservatives
Most people currently described as "neoconservatives" are members of the
Republican Party, but while neoconservatives have generally been in electoral alignment with other conservatives, have served in the same Presidential Administrations, and have often ignored intra-conservative ideological differences in alliance against those to their left, there are notable differences between neoconservative and traditional or "paleoconservative" views. In particular, neoconservatives disagree with the
nativist,
protectionist, and
non-interventionist foreign policy rooted in American history and once exemplified by the ex-Republican "
paleoconservative"
Pat Buchanan. As compared with traditional conservatism and libertarianism, which also sometimes exhibits a
non-interventionist strain, neoconservatism is characterized by an increased emphasis on defense capability, a willingness to challenge regimes deemed hostile to the values and interests of the United States, pressing for free-market policies abroad. Neoconservatives are strong believers in
democratic peace theory.
The support of neoconservatives for the
civil rights movement also marked it off from traditional conservatism.
[11][7]
Neoconservatives also differ with the traditional
"pragmatic" approach to foreign policy often associated with
Richard Nixon and
Henry Kissinger, which emphasized pragmatic accommodation with dictators; peace through negotiations, diplomacy, and arms control; détente and containmentrather than rollbackof the
Soviet Union; and the initiation of the process that led to ties between the
People's Republic of China (PRC) and the United States.
-It pretty much is the wackjobs that have hijacked the Repulican party and are hellbent on "exporting democracy."
here.
