Jump to content

Talk:Neoconservatism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cema (talk | contribs) at 15:59, 26 April 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I scraped a vile piece of garbage in favor of this completely new article. Why didn't the original authors come out and just call it "Jewish conservatism" and allude to Zionist conspiracies? I loath the neoconservatives, but the old piece was an anti-Semitic diatribe.

Some of that content was good, but a lot of seemingly anti-Semitic biases slipped in the article.

172


Is this neoconservatism something that only occurs in the USA? If that is not the case, this article seems way too US-centric. If it is the case, then it might be a good idea to say so more clearly in the first line. - Kimiko 07:27 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)


Well, essentially the answer is yes. It’s very much a US movement started by an elite clique of US foreign policy circles (largely in New York and Washington, not even throughout the whole country). Now maybe the article can discuss the parallels to Thatcher in Britain. In fact it should. I’ll get to that. 172


I made a few changes, mostly typos, and removed one word (realistic) as POV. One thing that does bother me a bit is the oversimplification of the pre-WW2 debate. Internationalists were not Interventionists, and socialists in the US were of various minds during the pre-war debate. Soviet-aligned Communists certainly changed their mind regarding intervention in Europe based on Nazi Germany's relationship with the Soviet Union. Yes, it is a tangential side issue, but it sort of sticks out to me (maybe because I've been studying this debate for the past few months). Oh, and the roots of Iraq war go farther back than even the Vietnam war (something I am trying to clarify in my articles on early Iraqi prime ministers). Other than that, I cannot see the older article in the history, so I cannot compare it, except on the basis of the edits. I will take a closer look at it though. Thanks for the heads up, 172. Danny


This article is heavily leaning towards foreign policy. Neocons have had strong opinions about domestic issues too. Someone please add this. --Cema 15:59 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)