Consider the source of the definition.
The first part of the definition is based upon the fact that the word is derived from the combination of the term neo, meaning new, and conservative. Have you ever considered that the definition is based entirely on the root meaning of the word?
The second definition specifies the word's relation to the American political system. That's why Merriam Webster has listed two definitions for the word. One in relation to the American system of government, the other is basically a definition of the term with no relation to this system of government.
The formation of the ideology was based on a group of liberals leaving the Democratic party in the early 1970's. Now the term is more synonymous with a split in the conservative party, based upon ideas of tax cuts, stronger government, and a larger military.
It's no longer used to signify those who change party affiliations. It's main use is based on a faction within the conservative party.
You may want to do a little more research before you pose a question. Merriam Webster defines research as:
To search and investigate exhaustively.
I think that means that you should look for information in more than one place.
2007-02-04 13:13:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by taa 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
Are you brainwashed to believe that the dictionary actually gives precise definitions of titles and labels and that definitions don't change through time? Please, look up neoconservative in other sources, more complete sources. For example, you saying that these people were former liberals is true. But they swung in the exact opposite way and this basically nullifies anything liberal about them. also, many of them are part of the PNAC and espouse the New American Century which basically promotes America as Empire. This is something no one should be happy about. I know exactly who these neocons are and what the espouse and no television media told me who they are, because they don't care if the audience knows this. I read and I read alot. And, it's not USA today I read, it's the economist, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Fortune, Wired magazine, The Nation, L.A Times, The New York review of Books, Mother Jones, and many many books. Now you should go read something and not presume all people on these boards are stupid and get all their information from the idiot box.
2007-02-04 21:30:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
While it's true that I've never bothered to look up the definition the problem with neo-conservatives is listed in the definition.
"A conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and U.S. national interest in international affairs including through military means."
So promotion of the U.S. by any means including military is a good thing huh? That sounds like a group that favors Empire to me. How about the live and let live party?
2007-02-04 21:49:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by last_defender 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
You'd be surprised how many "liberals" know what a neoconservative is.
I notice you refer to "liberalism" in the American sense of the word, which is not what liberalism (look it up) really means to most of the world or in political theory circles.
I agree neoconservatism is seen as an insult to those who don't agree with the political philosophy...much like the term "liberal" (or communist) is used by neoconservatives, is used in the perjorative sense. Personally, I don't agree with neoconservatism on military or social policy, though I do agree with neoconservatives on economic policy. Give me a neocon over a paleocon any day of the week.
Interesting fact: neoconservatives are also neoliberals (look it up), but not all neoliberals are neoconservatives (like me).
2007-02-04 21:13:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jamie 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I guess you've never looked at the other side of the coin...
I'm tired of neo cons using the word Liberal like it was a curse word just because they heard something on Rush Limbaugh or FOX TV and want to sound sophisticated and knowledgeable. Do neo-cons realize how ignorant they sound to anyone with real intellegence?
I'll bet 9 out of 10 Neo-cons don't even know what Liberal means.
Flip that coin over little brother!
2007-02-04 21:07:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
2⤋
I know what it means and I don't use it. On the other hand, do conservatives realize that not all liberals are democrats? I am very liberal and I am not a democrat. Ignorance belongs to both sides.
2007-02-04 21:19:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'm very liberal (green party), and I have always understood neocon to have the second meaning above, and I find it terrifying. The "assertive promotion of democracy" seems to include starting illegal wars on lies, overthrowing heads os state (1953 Iran, 9/11/1973 Chile's Allende, Chavez and Castro if they can get away with it), arming and training the militaries of repressive regimes, all in the name of "spreading democracy". Well I don't want my tax money used to spread democracy. Who are we to tell the world what to do? How arrogant and ugly is that?
2007-02-04 21:10:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by firefly 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
That's part of why it's so insulting to be a neoconservative! You had things right to beging with and then some how your mind got twisted. It wouldn't be bad if you really became conservative, but neoconservatism isn't real conservatism.
Neoconservatism is a mental illness.
2007-02-04 21:20:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by zipboing 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Ding Ding!
I dont use the word neo con as an insult. I have seen alot use it though. Doesnt mean I think neo con is a good thing though.
There is no liberal media doing any brainwashing of anyone. The only brainwashing going on is the brainwashing of the right by the GOP propaganda machine otherwise known as FOX.
2007-02-04 21:03:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Perplexed 7
·
6⤊
4⤋
The world is full of good and evil, and the balance between the two makes the dynamics of American politics.
neo-Cons are definitely the worse kind of evil in history. they are made from 30% population of uneducated, selfish, arrogant, vicious small business owners and farmers and their unemployed children, not all belong to Christian rights.
2007-02-04 21:59:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tia T 3
·
2⤊
1⤋