[FoRK] "You shall know them by their fruits..."

[Jeff Bone]

One last bit on the neo-con thread;  it's not enough to attempt to  
draw distinctions between neo-con and otherwise simply on the basis of  
apparent attitude, world-view, or even actions.  The term, as I prefer  
it, refers to a *specific group of individuals.*  They comprise a  
multi-generational and impressive conspiracy in the truest sense of  
the term.  How then can one determine who is, and is not, a neo-con?

Basically it's a simple but exhaustive process.  There's a sort of neo- 
con genealogy that is grounded out in a group of former Trotskyites  
who studied under Strauss, notably Allan Bloom, Abram Shulsky, and  
others including Irving Kristol (William's father.)  Through the  
course of the next several decades this group grew through  
affiliations primarily in various Washington think tanks (PNAC most  
recently being the hub of these) -- through secondary (but still  
influential) civil service appointments, overlapping stints in various  
(primarily defense-oriented) private companies, and --- in the  
vanguard --- through an active and coordinated effort at demagoguery  
both in captive journals and magazines (National Review, The National  
Interest, The Weekly Standard, etc.) and in other independent  
publications (Foreign Policy, notably.)

Point being, there's a finite list that can be drawn up through social  
network and citation analysis.  The term has specific meaning;  either  
you are one, or you aren't.  But the conspiracy is enumerable.

jb