[fiendishlibrarian]

From a strictly political science standpoint, neo-cons should more probably be referred to as neo-liberals (unfettered free markets, minimal state, etc. which comprises classical liberalism), whereas a neo-con (as in Conservative, as in traditional Tory conservatism) might more aptly be described as proto-Burkean neo-Tory...etc. etc.

*old poli-sci degree rearing its ugly head, move on please*

 

[bizorky]

You are correct, but the language usage evolved in a different way in the United States - with respect to neo-cons, neo-liberals, etc.

Uh, you're right. Let's move on.

 

[shumoon]

What is a Neo-Con? Are there Neo-Liberals, or Neo-NDPs? Is anyone who votes for the Conserative Party a Neo-Con?

In the U.S., a neo-con is one who would desire to remake the world into a better place, even if it means going to war. A neo-conservative would base this policy on ideology. George W. Bush and most of his Cabinet are examples of neo-cons.

This contrasts with "paleo-conservatives", who would favour a policy that is based on political realism or "realpolitik". Paleo-cons would opt for a policy that is more pragmatic. Examples of paleo-conservatives include Colin Powell, Brent Scowcroft and other members of the elder George Herbert Walker Bush's Cabinet.

Both groups arrive at their views using a moral compass. Neo-cons believe that when they are finished, the world will be safer and more democratic. Paleo-cons are trying to minimize war because of the inevitible loss of life, that comes along with it. They both agree that Saddam is a bad guy. Their disagreement is on the necessity of war and the war's ends justifying its means.

 

[EnviroTO]

The neo-con mentality you mention is very similar to that of the Iranian leader that the Apocalypse is the means to enter the new era of world peace. I guess there is some truth to it... once everything is wiped out it will probably be much quieter. One could also find such peace by simply moving to the moon.