← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Ragnar
Thread ID: 6394 | Posts: 7 | Started: 2003-04-29
2003-04-29 09:38 | User Profile
[url=http://www.vdare.com/francis/rush_and_neocons.htm]http://www.vdare.com/francis/rush_and_neocons.htm[/url]
April 28, 2003
Rush Limbaugh Joins The Frumpurge
By Sam Francis
The wars among conservatives, if that's the right term for them, are by no means concluded. After neo-conservative David Frum's ill-conceived and even more ill-executed National Review article attacking "paleo-conservatives" (including me) earlier this month, we now have yet another installment of what passes for a neo-con idea by none other than professional gumbeater for the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh.
When neo-con ideas (so to speak) have dribbled down to Mr. Limbaugh's level, the paleos need to start worrying. The idea in this case is the claim that the very term "neo-conservative" is merely a codeword for "Jew."
That's a neat trick if you can get away with it, because it means that anyone criticizing neo-conservatives at all would merely be an anti-Semite and thereby beyond the pale of permissible discussion; therefore, there could be no criticism of neo-conservatism. It's a way to win the argument by name-calling instead of arguing, much like calling other names like "racist" or "homophobe."
What Mr. Limbaugh actually said on his radio program last week was:
"I'm getting a little tired of these media people speaking in their own code language. A case in point is their use of the term 'neo-conservative.' Whether they choose to hyphenate the label or not, it's a pejorative code word for 'Jews.' ââ¬Å
Anti-Semites Use "Neo-Con" Code Word, Rushlimbaugh.com
Admittedly, Mr. Limbaugh referred to "these media people," not the main critics of neo-conservatism, the paleo-conservatives who identify with the authentic conservative philosophy of National Review of the 1960s. But whomever he was talking about, the effect is still the sameââ¬âto muzzle criticism of the neo-cons before it can draw breath.
Mr. Limbaugh didn't come up with the idea that "neo-conservative" and "Jew" are secret synonyms, though. The first I heard of that was from a column by the erudite Mr. Frum last December. More recently, neo-cons Max Boot, Bill Kristol in the Washington Post, and John Podhoretz in the New York Post have all peddled it.
As someone who has been following and criticizing neo-conservatism for nearly 20 years, I believe it exists quite apart from its Jewish exponents. **But I have to admit that, looking at its chief exponents today, I can see how you might think it's exclusively Jewish. Take a look, for instance, at the main neo-con website, Neoconservatism.com.
There you will find links to 14 leading neo-con columnists, 10 of whom are Jewish.** There you will find articles such as "Profile of Irving Kristol in the Jerusalem Post," "Profile of Bill Kristol in the Washington Post," Mark Gerson's article on Norman Podhoretz, and an Interview with Richard Perle.
If you wanted to prove that "neo-conservative" is not synonymous with "Jewish," you would look in vain for guys named O'Shaughnessy and McTavish.
Nevertheless, while Jewish intellectuals are no doubt the most prominent neo-conservatives, there are plenty of non-Jewish ones. In fact, the slightest familiarity with paleo-conservative critiques of neo-conservatism shows that gentile neo-cons like Jack Kemp, William Bennett, Michael Novak, Richard Neuhaus and Newt Gingrich have been on the receiving end of the paleo hammer at least as much as Jews.
But, although not a few paleos also seem to harbor the notion that "neo-conservatism" is purely and simply an ideological vehicle for Jewish interests, it's not really. In fact, neo-conservatism is a watered down version of the New Deal-Great Society liberalism that National Review used to combat. The older neo-cons came out of that kind of liberalism or its social-democratic version. (It's not true they were all "Trotskyists"; as far as I know, only one or two were).
They broke with the liberal left because it was soft on communism and the New Left, but they never had much problem with the New Deal and only marginal critiques of the Great Society. With the main features of 20th century liberalismââ¬âthe civil rights movement, the welfare state, labor unions, open immigration, free trade, American interventionism, and Big Government in generalââ¬âthe neo-cons have never had any problem.
In fact, the main function of neo-conservatism has been to serve as a political formula for preserving the New Deal-Great Society regime, even as real conservatism began to rip it apart intellectually and win political battles against it with Richard Nixon, George Wallace and Ronald Reagan. **The rise of neo-conservatism has insured that the liberal hegemony that should by now have been dismantled still thrives. There are zillions of non-Jewsââ¬âblacks, Hispanics, and many, many non-Jewish whitesââ¬âwho have vested interests in making sure that hegemony is not endangered.
The real objection to neo-conservatism is not that it's Jewish but that it serves and protects those interests and that hegemony.**
If real conservatives want to rid their country of the disasters the liberal regime has inflicted on it, they (including Mr. Limbaugh) need to embrace real conservatism and not the fake variety the neo-cons offer.
2003-04-29 12:04 | User Profile
If Jews stridently deny being synonymous with 'neo-con' , and admitted neos deny such a category even exists (remember about a year ago, when nearly every prominent neo simply denied being one? ie, Richard Poe's "Why I Am A Paleoconservative"? Hey, stop laughing!).....
....then why do they have their own friggin' website?
Or am I just seeing the world through Red/Brown-colored glasses?
Good one by Sam, though.
2003-04-29 15:53 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ragnar@Apr 29 2003, 09:38 **What Mr. Limbaugh actually said on his radio program last week was:
"I'm getting a little tired of these media people speaking in their own code language. A case in point is their use of the term 'neo-conservative.' Whether they choose to hyphenate the label or not, it's a pejorative code word for 'Jews.' ââ¬Å
Anti-Semites Use "Neo-Con" Code Word, Rushlimbaugh.com
Admittedly, Mr. Limbaugh referred to "these media people," not the main critics of neo- conservatism, the paleo-conservatives who identify with the authentic conservative philosophy of National Review of the 1960s. But whomever he was talking about, the effect is still the sameââ¬âto muzzle criticism of the neo-cons before it can draw breath.**
It shows to what level talk radio and mainstream Republicanism has sunk that it is now using that totalitarian PC tactic of repression - the idea of "code words".
Attacking paleo's for criticizing "neoconservatism" as just a code word for antisemitism is a habit with a long history among Jews. During the height of communist influence in America many Jews tried to assert the thing thing about anticommunism - that it was inherently antisemitic.
2003-04-29 16:34 | User Profile
Rush's truckling to the Zionist establishment reaches an even higher level. He's competing with Sean Hannity, it seems.
I didn't realize his wife was a Jew, not that religion ever apparently mattered to him anyway.
2003-04-29 18:35 | User Profile
il
> **If Jews stridently deny being synonymous with 'neo-con' , and admitted neos deny such a category even exists (remember about a year ago, when nearly every prominent neo simply denied being one? ie, Richard Poe's "Why I Am A Paleoconservative"? Hey, stop laughing!).....
....then why do they have their own friggin' website? **
Slamdunk. But, another question:
If Jews undeniably represent the dominant "magnetic block" (Israel Shamir) in the "neocons" (*now politically disputed term), admitting, even gloating (Podhoeretz) at having pulled off the war,
<b>Why does it make any difference what division "Paleos" and "neos" diddled each other about 20 years ago, when they were clearing the way for the cancer?</b> How can this be another good one from Sam, when it calls attention away from what we have called attention to so sharply and definitively here?
If the culprits are in sight, what's with this continual carping, with old-time rancor, at "liberals?'-- I understand issues like "civil rights" as objectionabe -- as southerner; but it would pass, unless whipped up by Northern carpetbaggers. "The welfare state" will have to come back to purge religion-related institutions like Catholic Charities off the federal payrole -- not that they don't do good, but it is not dignified for a person to be hustled for his soup by Godomizers of any sort. "Labor unions"-- what is supposed to be wrong with those? (open immigration, free trade, American interventionism, Big Government -- certainly "bad" liberals -- not me -- support these -- along with many Bob Dole Republicans -- with neocons).
Is there another agenda here? Let Francis go review some other nation.
2003-04-29 18:39 | User Profile
You know where we're headed with this is that use of the word "neocon" is fine if you're a friend but prohibited if you're an enemy, particularly a paleoconservative.
Odd - in some ways "neocon" is starting to acquire the connotations in the Jewish world formally associated with their word for God (YHWH) which only the priestly elite could say.
Interesting counter story on this absurb claim that neocon's do not exist.
**Then he concluded: "Maybe our influence is really kind of an illusion."
But in truth, the neoconsââ¬âan intellectual school with roots in the City College of New York in the 1940ââ¬â¢sââ¬âhave been astonishingly well-coordinated, organized and consistent in their message.
([url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=28&t=7559&st=0&#entry37973]President Bush's Neoconservatives Were Spawned Right Here in N.Y.C., New Home of the Right-Wing Gloat[/url])**
2003-04-29 19:11 | User Profile
Wombat, it's a 'good one from Sam' in that he's starting to say "Jew", and with greater frequency. Maybe all that VNN prodding & poking finally provoked a reaction, after all.