[FoRK] At the risk of inflaming JB and others ...

il-young son <il.young.son at gmail.com> on Sat Mar 29 18:51:55 PDT 2008

On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
>
>  On Mar 28, 2008, at 8:10 PM, James Tauber wrote:
>
>  >
>
> > I think Hitchens, while not taking the label "neocon" would say he
>  > and the neocons have the same views on foreign policy.
>
>  I'm not so sure about that.  The very succinct version of neo-con
>  foreign policy view is that America specifically has both a right and
>  an obligation to impose global American hegemony by any means
>  necessary.

i'm not sure if this is what their actual motivation is although in
action it is what they're achieving, at least not in the sense of
imposing global hegemony just for the sake of it, there's a more
fundamental reasoning there.  remember these guys are direct
descendants of New Deal liberalism, they've merely extended it beyond
domestic affairs into foreign policy stance - in fact makes foreign
policy the sole focus.  in effect the reasons hitchens gives for
foreign military intervention/US military presence abroad is
essentially a neocon stance, in that US basically is functioning as a
force of stability and order - perhaps this is extended to a reason
for maintaining sole global dominance post-USSR and perhaps this is
where hitchens may disagree (i'm not sure how he exactly feels about
that).

>  Hitchens views may coincide with the neo-cons on specific
>  actions or issues, but --- at least as far as I have recall --- I
>  don't think he goes so far as to share their ultimate goal, therefore
>  any similarity is in fact simply coincidental.
>




>
>
>  jb
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  FoRK mailing list
>  http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>

More information about the FoRK mailing list