Given that Republicans will select their presidential nominee before we know it, and given that three of the four candidates in the GOP field are neoconservatives, it would behoove us to revisit neoconservatism.\u00a0<\/p>\n
By looking at specific thinkers widely recognized as representatives of neoconservatism, we will soon see that far from being an \u201canti-Semitic\u201d or any other kind of pejorative, and far from being but the latest version of conservatism, neoconservatism is a distinct intellectual tradition.\u00a0 Moreover, it is an intellectual tradition that embodies theories of knowledge, morality, and political philosophy that are not only different from but incompatible with those constituting conservative thought.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Neoconservatism<\/strong><\/p>\n Leo Strauss<\/em><\/p>\n It seems that no conversation of the theoretical trappings of neoconservatism is devoid of reference to Leo Strauss.\u00a0 Unfortunately, rare are those analyzes of the relationship between Strauss\u2019s thought and the neoconservative vision that accurately encapsulate just how the former supplied philosophical inspiration for the latter.\u00a0 More importantly, while Strauss has <\/em>exerted <\/em>a formative influence over neoconservative thought, he is hardly the sole or primary influence that he is typically made out to be.\u00a0 In fact, he himself gave expression to a much older tradition. \u00a0<\/p>\n This tradition is what we may refer to, for lack of a better term, as \u201crationalism.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Like any other philosophical vantage point, there is no exhaustive set of terms in which to define rationalism.\u00a0 It admits of multiple variations.\u00a0 However, in all of its versions, rationalism affirms a robust conception of human reason.\u00a0 At the very least, reason, from this perspective, is trans-historical: ultimately, it transcends the contingencies of place and time.\u00a0 Reason has access to \u201cprinciples\u201d\u2014moral <\/em>principles\u2014that are just as universal and timeless as reason itself.\u00a0 And in accordance with these principles, reason is capable of organizing whole societies.<\/p>\n Although Strauss styled himself an opponent of modern<\/em> or Enlightenment <\/em>rationalism, that he was a rationalist, albeit of pre-modern <\/em>sort, is something that he expressly admits.\u00a0 In fact, it was precisely in his critique<\/em> of conservatives<\/em> like Edmund Burke that his affinity for rationalism becomes unmistakable. \u00a0<\/p>\n In Natural Right and History, <\/em>Strauss remarks that Burke\u2014widely recognized as \u201cthe patron saint of modern conservatism\u201d\u2014may have been correct in opposing \u201cmodern \u2018rationalism,\u2019\u201d Strauss claims.\u00a0 But insofar as his opposition \u201cshifts almost insensibly into an opposition to \u2018rationalism\u2019 as such,\u201d Burke goes awry (313).\u00a0<\/p>\n Burke is among the most eminent champions of what Strauss refers to as \u201cthe historical school.\u201d\u00a0 Classical or traditional conservatives like Burke resolutely eschew rationalistic theories according to which reason and morality are dislodged from the flow of history.\u00a0 Rather, they tend to prefer more historically and culturally-sensitive approaches.\u00a0 Put more simply, conservative theorists have been partial to tradition-centered treatments of reason and ethics.\u00a0 For this, Strauss refers to them as members of \u201cthe historical school.\u201d<\/p>\n To his credit, though, Strauss recognizes the legitimacy of their aversion to rationalism.<\/p>\n \u201cYet the founders of the historical school seemed to have realized somehow that the acceptance of any universal or abstract principles<\/em> has necessarily<\/em> a revolutionary<\/em>, disturbing<\/em>, unsettling<\/em> effect as far as thought is concerned [.]\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The problem with recognizing \u201cuniversal\u201d and \u201cabstract\u201d principles is that such recognition \u201cforces man to judge the established order<\/em>, or what is actual here and now, <\/em>in the light of the natural or rational order; <\/em>and what is actual here and now is more likely than not to fall short <\/em>of the universal and unchangeable norm<\/em>\u201d (13 emphases mine).<\/p>\n In summary:<\/p>\n \u201cThe recognition of universal principles thus tends to prevent men from wholeheartedly identifying themselves with, or accepting, the social order that fate has allotted them.\u00a0 It tends to alienate them from their place on the earth.\u00a0 It tends to make them strangers, and even strangers on the earth<\/em>\u201d (12-13 emphasis mine).<\/p>\n In rejecting rationalistic conceptions of reason and morality, Burke and the conservative theorists who he inspired are guilty of ushering in \u201ca certain depreciation of reason.\u201d\u00a0 Their skepticism concerning reason\u2019s pretensions is most readily revealed in Burke\u2019s view of a constitution.\u00a0 <\/em>Burke\u2014incorrectly, according to Strauss\u2014\u201crejects the view that constitutions can be \u2018made\u2019 in favor of the view that they must \u2018grow\u2019,\u201d and he rejects \u201cin particular the view that the best social order can be or ought to be the work of an individual, of a wise \u2018legislator\u2019 or founder\u201d (313).\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n So, for Strauss, reason is trans-cultural or trans-historical, and it consists of moral principles that are just as universal and independent of the contingencies of place and time.\u00a0 In accordance with these principles, human reason is capable of \u201cmaking\u201d whole societies.\u00a0 Burke and the conservatives who followed him unequivocally reject these notions.\u00a0<\/p>\n Neoconservatives, we will now see, clearly back Strauss over Burke.<\/p>\n Allan Bloom <\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n Allan Bloom was a student of Strauss\u2019s.\u00a0 Bloom is also associated with neoconservatism.\u00a0 Like Strauss, Bloom has a penchant for the abstract and universal over the concrete and particular.\u00a0<\/p>\n In his, The Closing of the American Mind, <\/em>Bloom describes the United States as a country rooted in \u201cthe use of the rational principles of natural right,<\/em>\u201d for America promises \u201cuntrammeled freedom to reason\u201d (39 emphasis mine) [.]\u00a0 The Declaration of Independence embodies \u201cprinciples\u201d that demand liberation from \u201cthe kinds of attachments\u201d characteristic of \u201ctraditional communities [.]\u201d American patriotism, in contrast, consists in a \u201creflected, rational, calm, even self-interested loyalty,\u201d not to America as such, but to its \u201cform of government and its rational principles <\/em>[.]\u201d\u00a0 Considered in the light of \u201cnatural rights,\u201d \u201cclass, race, religion, national origin or culture all disappear or become dim\u201d (27 emphases mine) [.]<\/p>\n Bloom\u2019s rationalistic perspective on reason and morality lead him to precisely that <\/em>view that distinguishes neoconservatism as the particular species of Enlightenment rationalism that it is.\u00a0 There will not be peace in the world, Bloom insists, until every country has embraced \u201cthe best of modern regimes\u2014liberal democracy<\/em> [.]\u201d\u00a0 What Bloom calls \u201cliberal democracy\u201d is \u201cthe regime of equality<\/em> and liberty, of the rights of man<\/em>,\u201d and \u201cthe regime of reason<\/em>\u201d (259 emphases mine). \u00a0\u00a0Liberal democracies are populated by men (and women) of \u201crational principles<\/em>\u201d (53emphasis mine).\u00a0 The inhabitants of liberal democracies would never think to go to war with one another \u201cbecause they see the same human nature and the same rights applicable everywhere and to everyone<\/em>\u201d (202 emphasis mine).\u00a0<\/p>\n Other Neoconservatives<\/em><\/p>\n Douglas Murray\u2019s book, Neoconservatism: Why We Need It<\/em>? \u00a0<\/em>is as clear and comprehensive an apology for neoconservatism as any of which I am aware.Murray acknowledges the debt that neoconservatism owes to the likes of Strauss and Bloom, and he elaborates upon the cardinal tenets of the neoconservative persuasion.<\/p>\n Neoconservatives, Murray explains, not only hold \u201cliberal democracy\u201d to be the best form of government; they are convinced that world peace promises to be forever elusive until every country becomes a liberal democracy. Murraywrites that \u201cdemocracy is the desirable endpoint of all human societies [.]\u201d\u00a0 Although it cannot alone \u201cmake people good, it is the surest means of preventing nation-states [from] waging war on one another.\u201d\u00a0 This position, Murray declares, has \u201cbecome part of the neoconservative DNA (68) [.]\u201d<\/p>\n Neoconservatism and classical conservatism are eons apart.\u00a0 On this, Murray couldn\u2019t be more decisive.\u00a0 In fact, he tells us that \u201csocially, economically, and philosophically,\u201d neoconservatism offers \u201csomething very different from conservatism [.]\u201d\u00a0 Neoconservatism offers \u201crevolutionary<\/em> conservatism\u201d (38 emphasis mine).\u00a0<\/p>\n It is \u201crevolutionary\u201d primarily because of its recognition that the United States government cannot rest until the planet becomes an oasis of \u201cliberal democracy.\u201d\u00a0 Murray approvingly summarizes the founding Statement of Principles of The Project for the New American Century.\u00a0 The \u201csignatories,\u201d he writes, \u201cdeclared that the use of American power had been repeatedly shown over the previous century to be a force for good.\u201d Thus, it must remain such throughout the next century.\u00a0 By executing its \u201cglobal responsibilities\u201d via increases in \u201cdefense spending\u201d; strengthening its \u201cties with its democratic allies\u201d; challenging \u201cregimes hostile to American interests and values<\/em>;\u201d and promoting \u201cthe cause of \u2018political and economic freedom abroad,\u201d (82-83)\u00a0America will spend the 21st<\/sup> century \u201cerasing tyrannies and spreading democracy\u201d through \u201cinterventionism, nation-building, and many of the other difficulties that had long concerned traditional conservatives\u201d (73 emphasis mine).<\/p>\n That neoconservative foreign policy is inextricably linked to its rationalistic notions of reason and morality should by now be clear.\u00a0 But in case it isn\u2019t, there are other neoconservatives to whom we can turn who dispel all doubts.<\/p>\n Bill Bennett is one such figure.\u00a0 In Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism, <\/em>Bennett expresses his belief that America must be a force for good in the world.\u00a0 More specifically, he refers to \u201cthe War on Terror\u201d as a \u201cwar over ultimate and uncompromisable purposes, a war to the finish.\u201d This is \u201ca war about good and evil\u201d (45).\u00a0<\/p>\n More people would be capable of recognizing this if more people today had been educated to grasp \u201cthe superior goodness of the American way of life,\u201d (46) a goodness that consists in a \u201csteadfast devotion to the ideals<\/em> of freedom and equality\u201d (emphasis mine). These ideals in turn are inseparable from \u201cthe self-evident truth that all men are created equal,\u201d a basic principle to which America is the first country in all of history to be \u201cdedicated [.]\u201d\u00a0America is \u201ca country tied together in loyalty to a principle\u201d whose \u201cuniversality\u2026caught fire (26) [.]\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Neoconservative Walter Berns seconds this view.\u00a0 In Making Patriots, <\/em>he says that Americans derive their identity not \u201cfrom where we were born but, rather,\u201d from \u201cour attachment to those principles of government, namely, that all men are created equal insofar as they are equally endowed by nature\u2019s God with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (50) [.]\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Berns asserts that American patriotism \u201cis not a parochial patriotism,\u201d for it \u201ccomprises an attachment to principles that are universal,\u201d (8) principles to which \u201cany people might subscribe (5) [.]\u201d\u00a0 For this reason, \u201cto be indifferent, especially to the rights of others, <\/em>would be un-American\u201d (8 emphasis mine). \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n The logic of this reasoning is inescapable: if it is \u201cun-American\u201d for Americans to be \u201cindifferent\u201d to \u201cthe rights of others,\u201d then insofar as much of the world still lives under undemocratic governments, \u201cthe rights\u201d of most of the world\u2019s people are constantly under assault.\u00a0 Hence, American \u201cpatriotism\u201d requires that we incessantly intervene in the affairs of other countries until we remake them into \u201cliberal democracies.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n Neoconservatism is fundamentally different from conservatism proper.\u00a0 The former affirms rationalistic conceptions of reason, morality, and political philosophy that the latter rejects.\u00a0 For neoconservatives, reason consists of universal, abstract moral principles in accordance with which societies everywhere must be organized.\u00a0 For conservatives, in glaring contrast, reason and morality are embodied in culturally and historically-specific traditions.<\/p>\n Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.<\/p>\n originally published at The New American<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Given that Republicans will select their presidential nominee before we know it, and given that three of the four candidates in the GOP field are neoconservatives, it would behoove us to revisit neoconservatism.\u00a0 By looking at specific thinkers widely recognized as representatives of neoconservatism, we will soon see that far from being an \u201canti-Semitic\u201d or…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-372","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n