Rating: 
Summary: Home Alone with Neocon babysitters?
Review: There are so many little mistakes - and slurs made - in the foregoing reviews that one shudders: the main one is that the neocons represent something new and unique in American politics. The neocons are not new, as anyone familiar with the history of American political thought realizes: Leftists moving to the right (after having been mugged by reality, as the saying has it) are nothing new. Many of these reviews are simply biased and inaccurate (there's even a review who refers to the neocons as a `perversion'; how highminded!)
I will now say something about the book itself. The authors write in that clear, British writing style usually associated with, say, the Economist. In fact, it is not inappropriate to mention that magazine, for the ideological slant of the two authors reviewed here is similar to that of the Tory, libertarian right.
There aren't many minor flaws in the book, as I see it, but there are some major, ideological ones. Here are the flaws:
-- The authors conflate Afghanistan and Iraq, arguing that both were adventures (whereas I'd see the latter only as an adventure, a speculative risk; the former -- Afghanistan -- was utterly necessary given the connections between al-Qaeda and the Taliban).
-- They argue that neocon criticism of militant Islam or Islamism is anti-Arab and anti-Islam -- and that this is the explicit goal of Pipes and Ledeen -- not taking care to notice that one can oppose the former without being anti-Islam.
- They also argue that the neocons came into power and then pushed the Bushies into aggressive posturing BEFORE Sept. 11th.
- Frum and Boot are mentioned, but there is no mention of Victor Davis Hanson, who has been an eloquent public contributer to debates over neoconservativism.
- They lump Bernard Lewis in with the neocons, but call others neocon sympathizers.
- They 'misunderestimate' (to use a Bushism) the Wilsonian component in neocon thought. It is the old right (conservatives and certainly Kissinger-style realists) who are against humanitarian intervention, exporting democracy and nation-building. The neocons are not a cabal of fanatics, as most Europeans think, but optimistic Jacksonian-Wilsonians who believe that America's national interest lies in speeding up change -- thereby incurring the wrath of Burkean conservatives -- in terms of removing despots and encouraging democracy.
So, to sum up, this is a fine but not indispensable volume, certainly to be read in conjunction with "The Rise of the Vulcans" by Mann, which lacks this book's eloquence but which I feel is more accurate in terms of chronicling the gradualism of the neocon rise. While the authors take neoconservativism seriously, and avoid the sneers at the hapless yet reckless Yanks that animates so much anti-Americanism, this book is not flawless. Demonizing the neocons is such standard fare these days -- most of it by Michael Moore, know-nothing types -- that it is good to get a critique that's not a hatchet job, but these are serious flaws.
Rating: 
Summary: Neo-Cons Exposed - or the Neo-Cons (Emperors) New Clothes
Review: This book shows the Neo-Con agenda to be the bankrupt policy that it truly is - a 21st Century fable of the "Emperor's New Clothes." Except people - American GI's, Iraqis and Afghans - are dying because of this fable. For anyone who wants to understand this administration's foreign policy - and just how it has been hi-jacked - this is the book! This is a concise recording of ideology over reality. The facts be damned. The ideological agenda is what is important - not the reality of the facts. "Damn the torpedoes - Full speed ahead." (And after all, those of us in Washington and Academia who espouse this theory aren't the ones who must do the bleeding and dying. We have others to do that for us.)
I think a few excerpts from the book explain our current foreign policy - and the reasons for the war in Iraq. A basic tenet of the Neo-Con movement is American Supremacy - military and other. Hence there is no need to be bothered with other nations or their interests. This is the famous "Unipolar Moment" which is now an "Era." This is the reason we need "no entangling alliances."
"Having, as we have shown, more or less abandoned international cooperation as a means of achieving American objectives, having an almost religious belief in military power, and living by a historically anomalous selfish interpretation of American leadership, Neo-conservatives prefer to go it alone." (pg 272)
On page 281 is a quote from a historical figure which is very apropos -
"As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil then the good becomes indistinguishable from the evil they set out to destroy" - John Locke. (pg 281)
We have very much come to this with the new permissiveness for the "invasion of privacy" under the PATRIOT and other laws put forward by this administration.
And most clear and concise of all is this Clausewitzian statement found on pg. 282, "Terrorism neither occurs in a vacuum nor is it generally a product of outside agitation or ideologies. Rather terror can be seen to follow Clausewitz's dictum as politics by other means. Placed in a political context, there can be no military conclusion to a counterterrorist campaign." (pg 282) Witness Algeria, witness Viet Nam, witness Northern Ireland, witness Basque Spain, and witness Iraq to come.
Neo-Conservatism is a bankrupt policy of military aggression and suppression. It can be explained to Iraqi's as "This is what is best for you." Is it no surprise that they reject it - and that our "allies" such as France, Germany, Korea and many others reject it also.
The book is a real eye opener. You should not miss it if America's future is something important to you.
Rating:
Summary: A Home Run
Review: You can expect a horde of neocons to log onto this site and submit a poor rating of this book. They are starting to squirm and get nervous at all the negative publicity that they are now receiving as people in Washington realize what a catastrophic foreign policy mistake the Iraq war really was.In hindsight, it is easy to see how an American public, which by its very nature is inward looking and self-centred, could have its foreign policy hijacked by a group of ideologically driven wingnuts - especially following 9/11. As several high ranking CIA agents and Richard Clarke have openly stated, Bin Laden is a savy strategist who no doubt welcomes this outcome. Sadly, most media pundits are only now starting to catch on. What we really need is an "America Alone for Dummies" - written for those millions of Americans who are oblivious to the complicated world of geopolitics - and the dangerous world which the neocons have created.
|
