SILVIU PETRE

The conservative mind

SPR IV

The Neocon Revolution

Introduction

It may seem a little bit awkward to talk about a conservative revolution. Each student of
political science knows that, resented by the right revolution is a matter associated left-
wing ideologies. But, on the other hand, those who ponder to the experience of the XXth
century must take into consideration the fact that ideologies are instruments used by
political actors in very unexpected ways. He may find out that the totalitarian left wing
regimes have become petrified bureaucracies and finally they died out while the coming
to power of a right wing conservative movement in Britain in the ‘80s generated an
administrative revolution.
The noun “neoconservative” has two major significations. In the broadest way it is used
to describe the contemporary postwar conservatism in contrast with the older version
predating before 1945. 1
In a narrower sense, discussed in this essay it portrays an American corpus of thinking
which generated a certain political agenda associated with the last three Republican
presidencies at the White House: Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.
I use the term revolution to describing the neoconservative phenomena for two reasons.
First, the term revolution is felt or suggested by the post 9/11 public rhetoric, summarized
in quotes such as “the world will never be the same again” announcing a new approach in
defining the American role on the world stage.2 Second reason can be considered a
corollary to the first one, just mentioned above. The neoconservative foreign policy

1
Brian Girvin, Introduction: Varieties of Conservatism in Brian GIRVIN, The transformation of
contemporary conservatism, SAGE Publications, Inc.,1988, pp. 1-13
2
President Delivers Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy at West Point,
Mitchie Stadium, United States Military Academy at West Point, West Point, New York, Office of the
Press Secretary, May 27, 2006, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060527-1.html,
accesed in April 2008. See also Mike Allen, Bush warns of Iraq disaster, 5/13/08,
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10314.html, accessed in May 2008
approach is embedded in the Wilsonist tradition which itself is rooted in a deeper
American tradition, dating perhaps to the philosophy of the Founding fathers.3
In the recent years, an ever growing literature about the American supremacy has
flooded most of the libraries, bookshops and many of our homes. The present republican
presidential administration at the White House has been the subject of many debates
because of its neoconservative branch. Many things have been said about the
neoconservatives, their reputation being the subject of many conspiracy theories which
have flourished in the media.4 In the anti-semitic symbolism the dark face of the neocon
presence has been articulated around the person of Leo Strauss, a Jewish-German
philosopher who emigrated from Germany because of the Nazi persecution and
established himself in the USA. One of the most profound thinkers of the American
postwar academic life, Strauss passionately defended the heritage of the Ancient Greek
philosophy against the behaviorist stream.5 Strauss work consists of a series of long and
dense essays about illustrious thinkers such as Aristotel, Machiavelli, Hobbes and so on.
According to the conspiracy theories, Professor Strauss, a very mysterious fellow played
a Faustian part- he taught his supposed doctrine to a certain number of gifted pupils who
were instructed to became high rank civil servants in the US Government and shape the
American society according to Strauss vision. His Jewish influence inflamed even more
the hostility towards the American-Jewish community accused of influencing the
Washington foreign policies in a pro-Israeli fashion and against the Arabic countries from
the Middle East.
Leo Strauss is considered to have professed a neo-Machiavellian philosophy which
considered that society must be lead by an shadow elite away from the public eye.6

3
Congressman John J.Duncan, Bush’ Irak intervention is unconservative, Speech given in the House of
Representatives, September 10, 2003,http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/duncan2.html; accessed in April
2008

4
Michael Lind, How neoconservatives conquered Washington and launched a war- 10. 04, 2003;
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html. Accessed in January 2008. Also see John B. Budis, Trotskyism
to Anachronism: The Neoconservative Revolution, Foreign Affairs, July/August 1995;
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19950701fareviewessay5058/john-b-judis/trotskyism-to-anachronism
5
Francis FUKUYAMA- (translation from Romanian) America at the crossroads, Antet, Prahova, 2006
6
Leo Strauss- The Neo Con inspiration. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3l0ceOoxujk. Added on the 30th
of March 2007. Accessed in January 2008
 Francis Fukuyama, disciple of Strauss and ex-neocon argues that Leo Strauss wasn’t as
influential as his enemies portray him and that he did not have any concrete political
affiliation except his anti-totalitarian views.7 On the other hand the Bush II administration
does not contain straussian disciples except maybe Paul Wolfowitz who studied a while
with Leo Strauss himself and afterwards with Allan Bloom, Strauss’s student. But
Wolfowitz didn’t considered himself a protejé of Leo Strauss.8 Many people even do not
know who Leo Strauss really was or his philosophy was about. Finally, even on the
intellectual realm not al the neocon writers are straussian- see for example Robert Kagan
who confesses in a now famous article his lack of understanding of Leo Strauss’s
philosophical perspectives.9

The intellectual roots of neoconservatism

What is label these day as neoconservatism is an intellectual corpus of thinking created
by a group of young intellectuals, most of them of Jewish origins who attended City
College in New York (CCNY) in the late 30s and early ‘40s during the Roosevelt Era.10
Their choosing CCNY is explained by their rather low, working class origin which did
allow them at that time to attend more high rank universities such as Columbia or
Princeton.11 Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Nathan Glazer
and Daniel Bell are the most proeminent names within this group.
Living in a period of great ideological turmoil, in some way boosted by the New Deal,
many of them started their ideological career from the Left, embracing Trotskyism as a
way of opposing Stalinism and Communist totalitarianism. At that time Leon Trotsky, the
former Red October Russian revolutionary was in Mexico. For many his Fourth
International heralded an ideological alternative to Stalin’s bureaucratic despotism and
stood as the safeguard of the orthodoxy of a generous socialist movement aiming at

7
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., pp.26-30
8
Idem
9
Robert Kagan, I am not a straussian,Weekly Standard, 02/06/2006, Volume 011, Issue 20
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/656lwsoy.asp?pg=1
10
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p.21. Irving KRISTOL, Reflexions d’un néoconservateur, PUF, Paris,
1983, pp. 7-14 . See also Irving Kristol, American conservatism, 1945-1995, Thirty years anniversary issue,
Public Interest, Fall 1995, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_n121/ai_17489596, accessed in
May 2008, p.3
11
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p. 21
improving the lives of ordinary people all over the world containing also a romantic
appeal to the intellectuals to join the cause.12
During the ‘40s and the ’50, after World War II, the future neoconservatives moved step
by step to the right side of the spectrum. Irving Kristol made the largest leap while his
colleagues, Glazer, Moynihan and Daniel Bell stop in a medium position. 13 They reach
full maturity during the wild sixties. The neoconservative ideas were forged in the battle
against the New Left Movement and against what the neoconservative writers perceived
to be counter-culture that professed a secular doctrine based on culture repudiation,
anarchical tonalities and moral and subsequently sexual hedonism.14 They started
spreading their ideas in magazines and reviews such a The Commentary and Partisan
Review. In the ‘60s Irving Kristol co-founded The Public Interest along with Daniel Bell,
later replaced as co-editor by Nathan Glazer.15 The Public Interest became the leading
review of the American conservative thinking during that period. 16 The group of
intellectuals just mentioned above highlighted the internal social problems to become
later involved in a critique of totalitarianism and of the way that Nixon-Kissinger couple
were handling the relation with the Soviet Union.17
First the internal problems. Children of the Great Depression of the ‘30s the
neoconservatives knew the Roosevelt New Deal along with its limits. In sharp contrast to
what was labeled as traditional conservatism or paleo-conservatism, the neoconservatives
had a cheerful, optimistic view of the future, moving beyond what they considered to be
counterproductive pessimism.18 The neocons attacked the paleo-conservative wing within
the Republican Party that offered no solution and ranked economic issues over political
ones. Frequent readers of Locke and Tocqueville while distrusting Rousseau, the neocons
believed in a society which used moderation a the major way of managing the public
affairs thus fearing revolution and radical Jacobine-style solution as the street and student
riots of the ‘60s were.19 They also believed in the primacy of politics over economics,

12
Ibidem, pp.21-22
13
Ibidem, p. 22
14
Irving KRISTOL, op.cit., p.
15
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p. 23
16
Idem
17
Ibidem, p. 37
18
Irving Kristol, art.cit., p.4
19
Irving KRISTOL, op.cit., p. 46
considered a science of limits which narrows the horizon of human gaze into the realm
of knowledge. Against the common opinion of the paleo-conservatives, the neocons
credited the welfare-state created by New Deal but were skeptical about its effectiveness.
They were not ready to embrace the idea that a social welfare program could reach the
capilarities of the society. Society was seen as an autonomous system gifted with self-
regulatory capabilities. That’s way the state should not embark on ambitious plans that
risk to disturb the natural orders of things in a way that might prove to be beyond repair. 20
Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society reform was held as a failure because did not help the
enhancement of the public opportunities for the poor and the black citizens. Instead it
generated perverse effects, contrary to those initially intended by its makers.21
Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Nathan Glazer made studies and wrote articles to
demonstrate that unwisely social care help for mono-parental families didn’t reduce
unemployment because it encouraged the single parents to become free-raiders at the
expense of the social system provided by the government.22 More than that, they
concluded that there is a culture of poverty- a behavioral pattern which didn’t allow poor
and black people to improve their material condition and leave behind poverty. In order
to solve all those problems, concluded Moynihan and Glazer the state should use funds to
modify the mores and the mentality of the persons in need.
A fundamental dimension to the matter was the rate of crime. According to Moynihan
police force should pay as much attention for the small theft and robberies as they to for
major crimes because there is a spiral of breaking the law, from the mild forms up to the
most severe and damaging ones.23
The reflexion concerning external affair is in a very much part vassal to the internal one.
Focal to the neoconservative view is the term regime, a result of their readings from
Plato, Aristotel and Montesquieu. According to those philosophers the political body is a
very complex and intertwined relation between people, rulers and institutions. Thus, the
inner structure of a regime may account for its foreign diplomacy. Therefore democratic
regimes are peace-loving while absolutist and totalitarian ones are more prone to wage

20
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p. 24. See also Daniel Patrick MOYNIHAN, Family and nation, HBJ
Publishers, New York/London, 1987, p.xii
21
Ibidem, pp.1-10
22
Ibidem, p.13. Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p.24
23
Idem
wars.24 That’s way there can be no peace between the two major ideological superpowers,
even if they can reach some sort of compromise here and there. To quote Raymond Aron
one can reconcile practical interests but not philosophies themselves.25 In the early ‘70s
the neoconservatives such as Kristol were staunch critiques of Kissinger relaxing policy
believing that USSR is a “special kind of evil” and the danger it posses would not
disappear until it collapses.26 Kristol and his pen fellows advocated a strong rollback
against communism.27

Intellectual and factual history

With Reagan’s election in the early ‘80s one can talk about two kinds of
neoconservatism. One is the intellectual one, still presided by men like Kristol, Glazer,
Podhoretz and Moynihan and the one really applied by the Republican administration.
In the late ’70 and early ‘80s much of the neoconservative ideas reach the Republican
ranks and influenced them in such measure that they become a part of the Republican
party political ideology, although not embraced by al of its members.
There are certain differences between the theoretical corpus and the applied form. It was
often said that we are dealing with a “Marxism” form of neoconservatism and a more
“Leninist” one that has been put to work.28
The neoconservatives, as advocates of political preeminence did not have very good
relations with big business and the financial environment. Secondly they were nor against
the New Deal as principle nor did they desired the dismantling of he welfare state, but a
repositioning of is major issues in a way that could allow ore freedom to the private
initiative, although not in a libertarian form, such as advocated by Hayek or Milton
Friedman.29
The Reagan administration hosted the link between high politics and big business,
especially oil. Critiques of the American system or foreign policy such as Chalmers

24
Ibidem, p. 28
25
Raymond ARON, (Translation from Romanian) The Opium of intellectuals, Curtea Veche, Bucharest,
2007, p.177
26
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., p.30-31
27
Ibidem, pp.37-38
28
Ibidem, p. 50
29
Irving KRISTOL, op.cit., p. 108
Johnson saw here the appearance of that military-industrial complex Dwight Eisenhower
Farewell Address was warning against.30
On the other hand reaganomics is critiqued to have dismantling the welfare state beyond
the moderation initially supported by neocons.31
The strong hand political agenda of Reagan won the Cold war over the Soviet Union but
is the same time brought US might on the brink of over-extention. The heavy burden was
taking its toe. From a capital and credit borrower US still was in the’70s it became the
nation with the widest debts in the world which heavily depended on the Japanese banks
in the early ‘90s. 32
Reagan’s style, which was partially influenced by the Republican Party imbued with
neoconservatism, became in turn the model for a new generation of neocons, such as
William Kristol, the son of Irving and Robert Kagan, son of another neocon- Donald
Kagan or Francis Fukuyama. Especially the first two reshaped neoconservatism as neo-
reaganism adopting a more hawkish overview of international relations.33
In the ‘90s those young men believed United States enjoyed a unipolar moment as the
first truly global superpower. They advocated a foreign policy that should help America
use the respiro to maintain is status-quo and preserve the supremacy for the foreseeable
future by shaping international environment according to their views.34 Many saw their
statements as an open declaration of imperialism.35
They neo-neocons have criticized Clinton administration for cutting military spending
and preached the topple of Saddam Hussein. The Project for a New American Century
(PNAC) involving many leading neoconservative thinkers wrote a memo called
“Rebuilding America’s Defense” which stated what they view as the items that are to be

30
Noam CHOMSKY, (Translantion from Romanian)Failled states, Antet, Prahova, p.2007, pp.226-230
31
Ibidem, p.266-276. See also Ghiţă IONESCU, (Translantion from Romanian) Men of state in an
interdependent world, All, Bucureşti, 1998, pp.255; 279-280
32
Interview with Chalmers Johnson, author of the “Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy and the end of
the Republic”; (posted: 21 august 2006), accessed in December2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=TgnKZ5UgYS0&feature=related. See also Michel ALBERT, (Translation from Romanian) Capitalism
against capitalism, Humanitas, Bucharest, 1994, pp.57-59. See also G.H.BENNETT, (Translation from
Romanian) American presidents (1945-2004), Luceafărul, Bucharest, 2004, p.332
33
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., pp. 40-41
34
Idem,
35
Idem,
followed by the American establishment in order to maintain the supremacy for the next
generation.36
Their dream was fulfilled by the 9/11 event which triggered a new orientation in
American policy. How I have sad before the Bush II administration contains only a few
number of neoconservative thinkers in its high-ranking positions but many of the hawkish
pro-active views matched those o the neocons.
It is both ironic and interesting to see that several intellectuals and political figures
advocated the present Iraq war since the ’90 but after 2003 intervention and the toppling
of Saddam they became rigorous blamers of Bush II administration. One can wonder
whether the anti-Saddam Wilsonist opinion paid well in the ’90 only to become a
stigmata after 2003. Zbigniew Brzezinski (who is not a neocon) in The Great Chessboard
advised the priorities of the American government that are to be taken to secure the
dominant position in Eurasia.37 A few years later, in the Crisis of the American
Superpower he turned critique to an American presidency that was following the purpose
his earlier views.38 Fukuyama itself seems to be in a similar position when advocating a
hard-Wilsonist position only to distance himself from the rest of the neocons because of
their imperialist actions.39 Niall Ferguson, the young British historian who acquired a
Western-wide fame after 2000 saw in the Unites States a new British Empire and
advocated the Iraq 2003 intervention now is among those who criticize the war.40

36
See The Project for a New American Century- Rebuilding America’s Defenses,
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf.

37
Zbigniew BRZEZINSKI, (Translantion from Romanian) The great chessboard. Univers Enciclopedic,
2000
38
Zbigniew BRZEZINSKI, (Translantion from Romanian) The second chance. Three presidents and the
crisis of American superpower, Antet, Prahova, 2006. See Zbigniew Brzezinski on Late News,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtNi5qIL1u8, posted on 18th of March 2007; accessed in March 2008.
See also Charlie Rose in dialogue with Zbigniew Brzezinski, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLdt0a2-
O6s&feature=related, posted on the 24 of August 2007, accessed in March 2008

39
Francis FUKUYAMA, op.cit., pp.7-9
40
David Smith- Niall Ferguson, the empire rebuilder;
http://education.guardian.co.uk/academicexperts/story/0,,1800972,00.html
Altgough is labeled as neoconservative (for that see
Johann Hari, There can be no excuse for Empire
Niall Ferguson is a court historian for the American hard right - and an apologist for mass death,
The Independent, 12/06/2006. http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=903
The matter may be regarded from several standpoints. One hand the behavior of those
can be labeled as a mixture of naivité, idealism and hypocrisy. On the other hand tier
behavior might be seen as the incoherence of the American foreign policy who was
always struggling to find a right place in the world, a moderate place between noble goals
and desire for power. Last but not least the retreat of those ex-neocons and ex-Iraq war
supporters is a sign of health judged in the long term. Maybe a society made of
philosophers (now encompassed with the vague term intellectuals) is not a flawless world
but has the chance to become a world were mistakes are fixed in rational and reasonable
terms. Let’s not forget that prudence is one of the most important, if not the most
important features of conservatism, whether that is old or new. The neocons show a
discrepance between the prudence regarding social reforms and the impetuosnes of their
foreign policy view. The words of Raymond Aron are worthy of being remembered:
history shows ,that not cynicism but prudence is the most august virtue in this sublunar
world.41

REFERENCES
1. ARON, Raymond- République imperiale. Les États-Unis dans le monde 1945-1972,
Calmann-Lévy, 1973
2. ARON, Raymond- The Opium of intellectuals, Curtea Veche, Bucharest, 2007, p.177
3. ALBERT, Michel- Capitalism against capitalism, Humanitas, Bucharest, 1994
4. BENNETT, G.H.- American presidents (1945-2004), Luceafărul, Bucharest, 2004
5. BRZEZINSKI, Zbigniew- The great chessboard. Univers Enciclopedic, 2000
6. BRZEZINSKI, Zbigniew- The second chance. Three presidents and the crisis of
American superpower, Antet, Prahova, 2006
7. CHOMSKY, Noam- Failled states, Antet, Prahova, 2007

) Niall Ferguson does not conider himself as such but a conservative torry. See his conference: Niall
Ferguson: a Conservative critique of US foreign policy, Conference held at Hoover Institute, Harvard,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjV1cUJgULo, posted on the 29 of October 2007, accessed in
December 2007

41
Raymond ARON, République imperiale. Les États-Unis dans le monde 1945-1972, Calmann-Lévy,
1973, p.328
8. FUKUYAMA, Francis - America at the crossroads, Antet, Prahova, 2006
9. Brian GIRVIN, The transformation of contemporary conservatism, SAGE
Publications, Inc.,1988
10. IONESC, Ghiţă- Men of state in an interdependent world, All, Bucureşti, 1998
11. KRISTOL, Irving- Reflexions d’un néoconservateur, PUF, Paris, 1983
12. MOYNIHAN, Daniel Patrick - Family and nation, HBJ Publishers, New
York/London, 1987
13. President Delivers Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy at
West Point, Mitchie Stadium, United States Military Academy at West Point, West Point,
New York, Office of the Press Secretary, May 27, 2006,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060527-1.html, accessed in April
2008
14. Mike Allen, Bush warns of Iraq disaster, 5/13/08,
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10314.html, accesed in May 2008

15. Congressman John J.Duncan, Bush’ Irak intervention is unconservative, Speech given
in the House of Representatives, September 10,
2003,http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/duncan2.html; accessed in April 2008

16. Michael Lind, How neoconservatives conquered Washington and launched a war- 10.
04, 2003; http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html. Accessed in January 2008
17. John B. Budis, Trotskyism to Anachronism: The Neoconservative Revolution,
Foreign Affairs, July/August 1995;
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19950701fareviewessay5058/john-b-judis/trotskyism-to-
anachronism
18. The Neo Con inspiration. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3l0ceOoxujk. Added on the
30th of March 2007. Accessed in January 2008

19. Robert Kagan, I am not a straussian,Weekly Standard, 02/06/2006, Volume 011,

Issue 20
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/656lwsoy.asp?
pg=1
20. Irving Kristol, American conservatism, 1945-1995, Thirty years anniversary issue,
Public Interest, Fall 1995,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_n121/ai_17489596, accessed in May 2008

21. Interview with Chalmers Johnson, author of the “Sorrows of Empire: Militarism,
Secrecy and the end of the Republic”; (posted: 21 august 2006), accessed in
December2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgnKZ5UgYS0&feature=related
22. The Project for a New American Century- Rebuilding America’s Defenses,
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf.

23. See Zbigniew Brzezinski on Late News, http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=OtNi5qIL1u8, posted on 18th of March 2007; accessed in March 2008.

24. Charlie Rose in dialogue with Zbigniew Brzezinski, http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=FLdt0a2-O6s&feature=related, posted on the 24 of August 2007, accessed in March
2008

25. David Smith- Niall Ferguson, the empire rebuilder, The Independent, 12/06/2006.
http://education.guardian.co.uk/academicexperts/story/0,,1800972,00.html
26. Johann Hari, There can be no excuse for Empire
Niall Ferguson is a court historian for the American hard right - and an apologist for mass
death
http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=903
27. Niall Ferguson: a Conservative critique of US foreign policy, Conference held at
Hoover Institute, Harvard, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjV1cUJgULo, posted on
the 29 of October 2007, accessed in December 2007