Leading Conservatives Astray

Do you know the difference between a conservative and a neoconservative, or neocon?

This is not just a question of semantics. It’s far more important than that. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that the future of our country depends on understanding the crucial differences between the two philosophies – and rejecting the latter.

All of this was brought home to me most forcefully when a longtime friend sent me a copy of the speech he delivered at the Constitution Party’s annual convention in Missouri last week. I’ll tell you more about John F. McManus and the organization he heads in a moment. But first, let me quote extensively from his very thought-provoking remarks. (For ease of reading, I’m going to skip beginning quotes or putting Jack’s remarks in italics. But they start now.)

I congratulate you good Americans for labeling your effort the “Constitution Party.” How sad it would have been had you named your endeavor the “Conservative Party.” The formerly praiseworthy term “conservative” has been stolen. The thieves are the neoconservatives. And it is one of my purposes here to discuss what being a neoconservative means – and who are the neoconservatives.

Let’s first define neoconservatism. For that, we turn to the man who has joyfully accepted the label, “godfather of neoconservatism,” Irving Kristol. In 1995, he wrote Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea. He claimed that the “small but talented group,” of which he was a part, drifted away from liberalism and proceeded toward “a more conservative point of view.” More conservative? Not really. He described the view he had the nerve to call conservative. He said it “accepted the New Deal in principle and had little affection for the kind of isolationism that then permeated American conservatism.”

Ladies and gentlemen, the New Deal of Franklin Delano Roosevelt – which Kristol approvingly identified himself with, and thereby identified all his followers with – is socialism, the very antithesis of the Americanism spelled out in the Constitution. And while we’re discussing godfathers, let me point out that socialism’s godfather was Karl Marx. In fact, communists and socialists argue over who is more pure when it comes to following the program attributed to Marx. Recall that it wasn’t the Union of Soviet Communist Republics that murdered millions, enslaved more millions, and destroyed the independence of dozens of countries for decades. It was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

In his definition of neoconservatism, Irving Kristol further stated that neoconservatives rejected “isolationism.” For the ill-informed American public, fastening that term on anyone is the equivalent of saddling him or her with the Black Plague. Whenever I get accused of isolationism, I respond, “I’m not an isolationist. I’m a non-interventionist with your son, your daughter, and your wallet.” That usually stops the name-calling. But when neocons attack “isolationism,” they are providing a good example of the way these people deceive with language. You are supposed to be a bad person, and even a bad American, if you disagree with their program that urges using America’s military might to police the world in undeclared wars.

Neocon Godfather Kristol is also on record advocating a “conservative welfare state.” How’s that for an oxymoron? I wonder if he likes dry water, or bright darkness. He included in his “conservative welfare state” Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, even a cash allowance for unwed mothers. There’s nothing conservative about any of that. Nor is there anything in the Constitution that would authorize it.

It is important to realize that the leading neoconservatives all came out of our nation’s Trotskyite movement. Hardcore leftists all, they claimed to have become disillusioned with the excesses of 1972’s Democratic Presidential candidate George McGovern. They actually labeled McGovern an isolationist – a real stretch if there ever was one. So these future neoconservatives gravitated to the Republican Party and brought their affinity for Trotskyite socialism and internationalism with them.

A neoconservative is someone who likes socialistic big government and meddling militarism. With that in mind, let me read to you the thoughts of a man who could correctly be described as a neoconservative before the term was even coined. Let us go back to 1952 and a magazine article authored by a man you’ve all heard of. I’ll tell you who wrote these words after reading them.

We have got to accept Big Government for the duration – for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged except through the instrumentality of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores. [We must] support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant centralization of power in Washington.

Did you catch all of that? He’s advocating a totalitarian bureaucracy, large standing armies, war production boards, and the centralization of power in Washington. Ladies and gentleman, that’s neoconservatism in spades.

Who wrote those words in 1952? None other than William F. Buckley, Jr. Was Bill Buckley a neoconservative? Irving Kristol believed he was. And so do I, even though he had me fooled for a while. Also fooled for a time was a man named Medford Evans. He would later state of Buckley, “If he had not done a considerable amount of good, he could never have done so much harm.”

Let me give you an example of the harm he did, and the help he supplied to neoconservatism. Back in 1991, Buckley’s National Review sponsored a three-day meeting for top Republican conservatives. Kristol reported with delight that the result of the gathering was that its attendees arrived as conservatives but left as Republican-first neoconservatives. The alliance between Buckley and a host of neoconservatives grew deeper and deeper.

Neoconservative Charles Krauthammer once urged the formation of a “new universalism [which] would require the conscious depreciation not only of American sovereignty but of the notion of sovereignty in general.” Get rid of national sovereignty? That’s what he said. He even insisted that his willingness to cancel sovereignty wasn’t “as outrageous as it sounds.” Yes, it was.

Another favorite term the neoconservatives use to deceive the unwary is globalism, or getting along in a globalist world. This is really the opposite of independence, and independence is inherently a part of our constitutional system.

To a man, neocons applauded the elder Bush’s call for a New World Order. He always said that new world order included deference to the United Nations. Neocons not only love the idea of “democracy,” they want to “export” it and will do so by force if allowed to.

Kristol would later credit neoconservatism for helping to “modernize” the Republican Party. He heaped praise on Ronald Reagan as the “first Republican President to pay tribute to Franklin D. Roosevelt.” Later Newt Gingrich would shower FDR with similar praise, and he received the thanks of the neoconservatives for doing so.

Over recent years, besides godfather Irving Kristol, prominent neoconservatives have included Norman Podhoretz and his wife Midge Decter, Ben Wattenberg, the late Robert Bartley of the Wall Street Journal, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams and Kristol’s son William. Today’s neocons include the leaders of the Bush administration, who slavishly follow neocon thinking both domestically and in their foreign-policy adventurism.

Let me sum up. Neoconservatism means socialistic big government and internationalism. It dislikes national independence and favors world government under the United Nations. It urges the use of the U.S. armed forces in UN peacekeeping missions, policing the world, and getting bogged down in undeclared wars. It champions NAFTA, CAFTA, the World Trade Organization and the new drive toward a North American Union. It likes socialism at home and internationalism abroad. And it has control of the George W. Bush administration lock, stock and barrel.

If you love America for its history of limited government and strict independence, you have to realize that neoconservatives are your enemy. And you have to realize that the current administration is replete with un-American neoconservatism.

Is there any hope that we can stop the drive toward socialism and world government? Of course there’s hope. The American people don’t want this and there are still tens of millions who can be reached and energized. Add to this the fact that the Constitution still stands. Requiring those who swear a solemn oath to it to obey that oath can be achieved in many areas of this country.

We can begin the taking back of our country through the House of Representatives, the body of government that holds the power of the purse. Article I, Section 7 states, “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House….” If 218 members of the House refuse to vote to fund foreign aid, the UN, undeclared wars, education, housing, and so much more, that’s it. There’s nothing the Senate, the President, the Supreme Court, or The New York Times can do about it. The House is where the effort of concerned Americans ought to be directed.

Can it be done? Of course! But keep in mind that success in politics follows successful educational work. Thomas Jefferson knew the value of creating an educated electorate. Hear what he had to say:

I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of the abuses of constitutional power.

Jefferson was correct. We must inform “the people themselves” by education. And from good education will come good politics, good citizens, and good government.

Let’s take our country back!

John F. McManus is the president of one the staunchest (and thus one of the most maligned) educational/activist organizations in the country, the John Birch Society. He is also the publisher of their excellent fortnightly news magazine, The New American. You can get more information about the group’s objectives and activities by going to their website, www.jbs.org.

Thanks, Jack, for giving me permission to reprint part of your speech today.

Chip Shots

* Yes, it was a fake. But a funny one. Thanks to several Alert Readers who wrote to tell me that the photograph I reprinted in last week’s issue of Straight Talk was faked. One even included the link to Snopes.com with the true story. You can find it at http://www.snopes.com/photos/signs/bombus.asp. Sorry I passed on a hoax to you all. But it was still funny.

* Thanks for the memories. And thank you, too, to several readers whose memory is obviously much better than mine. (I sure wish I could remember to take those memory pills!) Now that you tell me, of course I remember that it was Dean Martin who concluded his weekly television show with the appeal to “keep those cards and letters coming in.” And what a fun time we had with him every Sunday night.

* More about Jimmy Carter’s new friends. Words cannot express the disgust I feel with former President Jimmy Carter over his decision to meet with the two top leaders of Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist organization. Here’s a story that tells you all you need to know about Mr. Carter’s new friends. A few weeks ago, Hamas TV aired a cartoon whose hero was a little boy who accuses President Bush of complicity in the murder of his family. Bush then invites the child to the White House for a discussion. But the boy replies that, thanks to the victorious jihadists, the White House has been converted to a mosque and the president cannot enter because he is an infidel. The lad then draws a weapon and stabs Bush to death with “the sword of Islam.” God save us from your new friends, Jimmy.

* Do you feel a little freer this week? Somehow, Tax Freedom Day slipped by me without a mention in these pages. In case you’re not familiar with the event, it’s when you’ve stopped working for government and can start working for yourself. The Tax Foundation calculates that, over the course of a year, government will take the equivalent of every penny you earn between January 1 and April 22. Thus, April 23 was Tax Freedom Day this year.

This Week in History

“Cinco de Mayo” has become a time when every Mexican restaurant in the U.S. offers specials on margaritas, burritos, and other tasty treats. But what is the origin of this national celebration south of the border?

It was on May 5, 1862, when a badly outnumbered and under-supplied Mexican army, under the leadership of General Ignacio Zaragoza, defeated a French army that was attempting to capture Puebla de Los Angeles. No, not the city in southern California, but a small town in east central Mexico. The battle lasted from daybreak until early evening. By the time the French retreated, they had lost nearly 500 soldiers, compared to less than 100 for the Mexicans.

Although the town itself was of little strategic importance, the battle represented a great moral victory for the Mexicans. It proved that the country could successfully defend itself against a powerful foreigner. Thus, the country still honors the memory of “Cinco de Mayo.”

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

Chip Wood

*************************************************

Straight Talk is a weekly commentary written by Chip Wood.
For many years Chip was the host of an award-winning radio
talk show in Atlanta, Georgia. He is the founder of Soundview Publications and serves as an MC at several investment conferences. His weekly rants and raves are free for the asking
at www.straighttalkletter.com.

To ask a question or to comment on something you've read in Straight Talk, please write to Chip@StraightTalkLetter.com

We have a strict anti-spam policy. We know how important your privacy is to you. That's why we do not share your email address with anyone.

If someone forwarded you this email and you'd like to receive Straight Talk every week, please go to http://list.soundpub.com/subscribe/straighttalksignup.htm

or, send a blank email to: subscribe@straighttalkletter.com

To contact us:

Straight Talk

P.O. Box 467939

Atlanta, Georgia 31146

800-728-2288

770-399-5617

Chip@StraightTalkLetter.com

To unsubscribe from future mailings, please send an email to:

unsubscribe@straighttalkletter.com