This is what President Trump has to contend with on the Right …
By TLB Contributing Author: Ken LaRive
“Neo-Conservatism: Another finger on the progressive hand strangling America.”
Neo-Conservative: “A former liberal espousing political conservatism; first used in 1952.” (via Websters Dictionary) The “Neo-con” is a “new” conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means. Originally, neo-conservatives were liberal socialist Democrats, and the movement made great gains in the 1960’s.
Following World War 2, Neo-conservatism became the new enlightened thread infiltrating the Republican party. However, “Republican conservatism”, originally conducive to that movement no longer exists in conjunction with the Neo-cons. Neo-Conservatism is now pro big government, pro big spending, and wholly progressive at its core. Seemingly opposed to a welfare state, the Neo-cons advance redistribution of wealth with government controlling incentives.
Republicans, in order to distinguish themselves from the Neo-Cons, often refer to them as “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. Holding neither a Libertarian nor Paleo-Conservative belief system, Neo-cons have betrayed the core values of the Republican party. Some Republicans have accused Neo-Cons of furthering communism and socialism, while being controlled by banking consortiums and international big business while sacrificing America’s best interests. Promoting a one world order, right along with their liberal Democratic counterparts, the Neo-cons are totalitarian internationalists by nature.
Others suggest that due to unwarranted and inconsistent use, the term “Neo-con” has lost its true meaning. For example: Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, and Donald Rumsfeld have all been identified as leading Neo-conservatives despite being life-long conservative Republicans. Others argue that socio-economic policies define a Neo-conservative, suggesting both Cheney and Rice, having supported Irving Kristol’s ideas, should be considered as such.
Republican ( and former Libertarian ) Congressman Ron Paul, a long time critic of the Neo-conservative movement, has written emphatically that Neo-conservatives attack freedom and liberty while shredding the U.S. Constitution. On the House floor, Dr. Paul commented on the historical roots of the movement, asserting that Neo-conservatism is neither new nor conservative. These speeches can be easily found on YouTube.
According to Wikipedia:
“Neo-conservatism is a political philosophy that supports using economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries. In economics, unlike paleo-conservatives and libertarians, neoconservatives generally support a limited welfare state and “free” trade agreements; the free market, with which they are more than willing to interfere by government mandate and sanctions for overriding social and economic purposes using undeclared preemptive war.
Critics on the right attack Neo-conservatism for involving the United States with wars in the Middle East, promoting of American exceptional-ism by policies in the area that align the United States with Israel.”
The book, “The Neo-conservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy”, is the first defined history of the development of American Jewish political conservatism and the rise of a group of Jewish intellectuals and activists known as Neoconservatives. It describes the growth of perhaps a dozen such figures in the 1940s and 50s, including Irving Kristol, Nathan Glazer and Norman Podhoretz, to several hundred younger people such as Paul Wolfowitz, David Brooks and Charles Krauthammer who have had a powerful impact on American public policy, including driving the US to a preemptive war with Iraq.
Author’s note: Disputes over Israel’s church/state Zionist movement is in sharp conflict with Paleo-conservatives who continue to argue that neoconservatives are an illegitimate addition to the conservative movement, and that they do not serve America.
Pat Buchanan called Neo-conservatism “a globalist, interventionist, open borders ideology.”
This political rift can be traced back to a defining moment in 1981. Ronald Reagan’s nomination of Mel Bradford to run the National Endowment for the Humanities, was thwarted by neoconservatives who complained that he had once criticized Abraham Lincoln. Bradford withdrew. This is one defining moment, but to me, a student of history, the ultimate defining moment was the Russian Revolution. That set the stage for Communism, all around the world, and it originated by Progressives from New York. I suggest you study, what is not taught properly in out Government run schools, from first grade to University. They have rewritten history and definitions, to fit their narrative. Quite genius.
Are you old enough to remember this …
Though most Americans know nothing of these distinctions, it is the root of many of the policy changes in America that have created an unresponsive top-heavy government.
Please take the time to watch these germane videos …
From the Author, Ken LaRive – We in the Liberty movement have been fighting to take back this country for less than a decade, peacefully and with the love of God and country in our hearts. Our banner has been trampled on and displaced by a multitude of distractions, further eroding our nation and the cause for Liberty. And so, as we are pulled by forces we cannot fathom, powerful entities with unlimited resources stolen from our future, unaccountable trillions printed out of thin air and put on our backs as debt, we must formulate the most pitiful of all questions any patriot might ask in the final hour: Are we going to fight for our master’s tyranny, or are we going to demand the return of our civil liberties and Constitution? Are we going to choose The Banner of Liberty, or the shackles of voluntary servitude? Will it be a war for corporate profit, or a war to regain our ability to self govern, as the blood and toil of our forefathers presented to us, their children, as a gift? I fear that decision is emanate. I fear that any decision will be a hard one, but my greatest fear of all is that the decision has already been made for us.
Ken LaRive – Facets: It’s a simple but beautiful metaphor. Our soul is likened to an uncut diamond, pure, perfect, and unrealized. Each learned experience cleaves a facet on its face, and leaves it changed forever. Through this facet, this clear window, new light, new questions and ideas take shape and form. This process is our reason for being …
More information about Ken LaRive.
Click on the image below to visit TLB Project on twitter …