Is neoconservatism dead?

[pecksniff]

So long as Kristol, Sykes, Goldberg, etc. can get dupes to sign up for cruises and have left-wing billionaires fund their unread mimeographed tracts, there will always be neocons.

The left-wing billionaires have nothing to do with this.

 

[pecksniff]

The price of military superiority . . .

. . . is not worth paying, to a country threatened by no serious enemies. China is a competitor, not an enemy, and Islamist terrorism is a policing problem, not a military problem.

 

[BluesDriver66]

A meaningless comparison. The budgets are diverse for a number of economic and political reasons too elementary to mention. The price of military superiority, and our national need and belief that we should remain that way, determine the politics and levels of expenditures.

The amount of money spent is a meaningless comparison? You're just being silly now. Also the law of diminishing returns means there is a tipping point at which spending more money does not increase security. It's just a waste of money and resources. We passed that bench mark decades ago.

 

[Rightguide]

The amount of money spent is a meaningless comparison? You're just being silly now. Also the law of diminishing returns means there is a tipping point at which spending more money does not increase security. It's just a waste of money and resources. We passed that bench mark decades ago.

What we spend on our defense has nothing to do with what other nations spend on their defense needs.

Identify for me the "benchmark."

 

[BluesDriver66]

What we spend on our defense has nothing to do with what other nations spend on their defense needs.

Well that doesn't make any sense but whatever.

Identify for me the "benchmark".

The day when we could blow up the planet more than once.

 

[pecksniff]

What we spend on our defense has nothing to do with what other nations spend on their defense needs.

It always has before.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Defining neoconservatism narrowly, as the idea that the U.S. should use military force to spread democracy and capitalism abroad. Nobody still appears to stand for that as such. PNAC shut down about ten years ago. Is this now a dead letter in American politics?

Capitalism is global.

We are seeing Capitalism in a Democratic Republic losing out to a form of State-Oligopoly Capitalism. That is what is playing out in the world stage and here in the US.

So, using military force to spread democracy is no longer viable. It has been rejected as a art of Capitalism.

 

[pecksniff]

Capitalism is global.

We are seeing Capitalism in a Democratic Republic losing out to a form of State-Oligopoly Capitalism. That is what is playing out in the world stage and here in the US.

So, using military force to spread democracy is no longer viable. It has been rejected as a art of Capitalism.

Well, that's not the sort of thing you can come out and admit in the pages of The Weekly Standard.