[FoRK] At the risk of inflaming JB and others ...
<jbone at place.org> on
Sat Mar 29 21:04:16 PDT 2008
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:27 PM, James Tauber wrote:
> On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:51 PM, il-young son wrote:
>> New Deal liberalism
> Okay, I still can't work out what Americans mean by "liberalism".
Neither can all but a few Americans.
Its least-useful but most-common definition is the one promoted by the
right-wing American propagandists: anyone who disagrees with some
limited (and vague, shifting) subset of the actions of the current
administration specifically; more generally those who criticize or
oppose the Republican party.
In any case it's a false dichotomy; clearly the political landscape
has multiple dimensions. By compressing everything down into this
false left-right axis you get all kinds of unlikely bed fellows, along
with the occasional abomination such as "neo-conservativism." You get
weird brain damage like the (apparently common, at least in America)
idea that the left-right axis "wraps around" --- i.e., go far enough
to one extreme and you find yourself on the opposite extreme.
IYS's point is an accurate one in a historical sense; the neo-cons
are indeed converted liberals. But I'd take it further; I'd say they
have their roots not in New Deal liberalism per se, but *actually* in
hard-core left-wing revolutionary thought and action. They just came
up with an interesting new angle on how to fight the revolution. They
(or at least the recognized founders of the neo-con cabal) are, quite
literally and of their own admission, "former" Trotskyites.
Proving the old adage that converts are the most zealous.
More information about the FoRK