A question for conservatives of all stripes . . .

Would any of you answer to the term "neoconservative?" I've just been made aware of the term "neoliberal," which I've never seen in any liberal news source—but at the same time, I'm used to liberal news using the term "neoconservative" in place of "conservative." (More neutral news sources just name the parties.)

Neoconservatives are basically (before the term degraded) the Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/etc- foreign policy conservatives who want to spread democracy American influence through war, correct? The prime example being Iraq.

In the possibly futile hope of heading off some of the usual shenanigans that arise when talking about the right, some definitions, from Merriam-Webster Online:

neoconservative

neoliberal

(Both, please note, existed long before either President Bush, by a healthy margin. 1954 for nc, 1945 for nl.)

No to both definitions given above.

I'm not a neocon - I'd rather we didn't waste taxpayer money, but if we do, using it to invade Iraq is even more of a waste than using it on welfare and harebrained schemes to fix society's problems.

Also, I don't think Democracy is that awesome to start with (the praise of democracy you get in the media and school are similar to the praise of kings back when monarchy was Da Thing - flattering those with power with the hope of getting a drop of it), especially in unstable countries with weak institutions.

I don't think "neoliberal" is related to "liberal" in the American sense (unlike how "neoconservative" is related to "conservative"); it's more like "liberal" in the European sense, i.e. pro free-market.

I'm probably closer to libertarians and paleocons than to neocons.

edited 9th Aug '11 11:16:40 PM by SlightlyEvilDoctor

I'm not a neocon.

I'm not even a paleocon, as they cling to newfangled 19th century ideas like racism.

I'd say I'm a Tory, but that's the nickname of an extant political party that's slid left with the Overton window. So call me a reactionary or a royalist.

You are one of a kind, Rottweiler.<3

Bleh, as an isolationist—compare to the apparent definition of pro-expansionist—no, I wouldn't answer to that...

Not a neocon. A neoliberal economically, sure, but then, so are most politicians in both parties. I'm a social conservative.

Also not a neocon. Far too "we need to stay out of other countries' drama" for that.

Naaah. I like the label "evolutionary conservative", which by some accounts may not even be a conservative.

I'm only fiscally conservative for the most part, overall I'm a left leaning centrist though, so no.

(Not a conservative, btw, so feel free to ignore)

I think the term "neoconservative" is probably less popular at the moment even than "liberal" in the contemporary US, so you may be unlikely to see many people claim to be one. Two of my parents' friends STILL support immediate military intervention in Iran despite our current engagements and all the crap going on domestically and shun the label neoconservative. If that doesn't define a neo-con, I don't know what would, short of wanting to simultaneously spread Democracy to all of the countries in the Middle East at gunpoint within the next ten years.

edited 10th Aug '11 2:24:13 PM by ForlornDreamer

I'm definitely a liberal, but I would like to say that Doma Doma described himself as a neoconservative in another thread.

"Neo-conservative" seems to be a bit of a pejorative term imposed on random right wing people hated by the left wing person speaking at the time, typically "justified" by singling out specific aspects of the targets views, quite possibly flanderising them first.

As anyone in OTC knows I'm very liberal, but from that perspective would rather avoid calling anyone a neo-con, and would be somewhat surprised to see people want to be known by that term.

I don't think the lack of self-described neocons is only due to the fact that it's a pejorative label - I don't mind being called a paleocon or a reactionary yet those don't have positive connotations either.

I think the "neocon" label grew unpopular as the failure of the Iraq invasion became apparent (Iraq is arguably better off now than it was before the invasion, but the difference may not have been worth the cost in US dollars and lives, and the loss in Iraqi lives. I've heard a lot of right-wingers say that OK, maybe that "invade Iraq" thing was a mistake in hindsight.

edited 11th Aug '11 2:06:45 PM by SlightlyEvilDoctor

@OP: No, I'd describe myself as a libertarian fiscal conservative.

Where I tend to disagree with the neocons is that I believe cultural osmosis may be a more powerful weapon than nationbuilding.