The piece by Martin Jacques in the Guardian that Trunk linked to below –“The Neocon Revolution” — is less objectionable than I expected. For example, Jacques recognizes that President Bush’s foreign policy is not driven by a single-minded ideological commitment either to unilateralism or to regime change. Rather, administration policy, though informed by certain basic principles, is formulated rationally on a case-by-case basis.
I do wonder, though, what Jacques and others mean when they characterize the administration as “neo-conservative.” The people in charge — President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretaries Rice and Rumsfeld — were not, to my knowledge, considered neo-conservatives in the past. And the administration’s emphasis on the pursuit of democracy stands in contrast to the views of original neo-conservatives like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, who vigorously opposed
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.