North Carolina Society for Ethical Culture

"An Odyssey: Left to Right Wing - THE NEOCONS"
By Enid Handler
A platform talk given on October 3, 2004

What I will share with you this morning is a distillation of my modest research into the neoconservative movement. There is an enormous quantity of material available--from obscure literary journals to popular magazines, from mainstream press and daily newspapers to TV's talking heads and talk radio, from internet publications and bloggers, from scholarly texts heavy with foot-notes to catchy-titled best-selling books --that it's likely to produce information fatigue. Neocons are presented, discussed and analyzed with relentless fervor both favorable and unfavorable. Therefor what I'll present is greatly condensed, and I hope to deliver it with as much neutrality and objectivity as I can muster. My talk will focus on three aspects of the neocons: the origins of the movement and the group of early founders of what today is called neo-conservatism; the basic underpinnings of their philosophy of government's role in modern society; and the primary locus of contemporary neocon writing, research, think tanks and foundations funding the movement.

The early founders Although not everyone agrees that neoconservatism is a political movement, for the purposes of today's talk let's not split hairs and use the 'handle' of a movement for convenience sake. Socio-political movements do not spring forth full blown and burst spontaneously upon contemporary events. They germinate, evolve gradually, sometimes ebb and flow or lie dormant for a while and then have a renaissance. As the movement evolves it gathers adherents, sharpens its focus, leaders emerge and the movement progressively matures. That makes it hard to clearly define one specific beginning point so a certain degree of arbitrary choice is needed. I've chosen the late 1960's as my point from which ideas that had been percolating among a group of New York left-wing intellectual men and women began to take a cohesive form and evolve perceptively, 4 decades later, into the neocon movement which is now, in October, 2004, shaping American culture, society and foreign policy.

Irving Kristol is considered the god-father of the neocons. A gifted writer, brilliant thinker, Irving Kristol grew up in Brooklyn, NY in modest circumstances. He attended CCNY, and married Gertrude Himmelfarb, who received a grant to study at the U. of Chicago. She became a noted writer-historian of Victorian society. In Chicago IK was enormously influenced by a magnetic, charismatic professor of classical philosophy, Leo Strauss. His interpretations of Plato and Aristotle were to influence two - some say three - generations of American political power players. When Gertrude & Irving returned home to NYC, their circle of friends and peers included Norman Podhoretz, his wife Midge Dechter, Daniel Moynahan, sociologist Daniel Bell, author Saul Bellow, writer and educator Lionel Trilling and his wife Diana Trilling, Nathan Glaser, and perhaps a few others. What binded this group ­what Norman Podhoretz called "The Family" (capital F) was the paramount importance of ideas, intellectual thinking, the conviction that literature and literary criticism could have a significant impact on social issues. Another fervant belief which persists to today is the neocons' conviction that politics can change the world. In contemporary terms that means democracy is a liberating philosophy which is good for all mankind, and America is the power to accomplish creating global democracy. Their ideas and ideals were held so dear that deviation could lead even to the point of rending apart heartfelt, meaningful relationships. In his book Ex-Friends Norman Podhoretz tells a fascinating story of his deep friendships during the heady liberal days of the 1950's and early 60's and how, one by one, with the exception of the Kristals, all of the Family became his Ex-Friends. His book details 6 of these once close friendships: Norman Mailer, Allen Ginsberg, Lillian Hellman, Diana & Lional Trilling and Hannah Arendt. Truly a 'who's who' of erudite thinkers and gifted writers, discarded by Mr. Podhoretz because of his diverging views.

As part of the intellectual left, the group had been at first sympathetic to the goals of Socialism. Their social concerns were traditionally liberal. Support of The Democratic Party in the US was a given. As the Soviet Union came more under the dictatorship of Stalin and the threat of Communism became clearer, though, disillusion set in. Largely Jewish in composition - although not exclusively - the Family were strongly pro-Israel and fiercely eager to have the Democrats nominate a staunch supporter of the new State. They were strong supporters of the cold war and pro a hard line anti-Communist stance. In the 1970's they supported the hawkish Sen. Scoop Jackson. They distrusted the peacenik wing of the Democratic Party, and scoffed at containment as the equivalent of Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler. During the Viet Nam war era, anti-war demonstrations by young radicals were seen as unpatriotic, disloyal and profoundly unAmerican. The Democratic Convention in 1968, when the Chicago riots took place, was a watershed event for the former liberals whose thinking was being nudged ever more toward the right. They were revolted by the radical lifestyle, the hippie culture's views on love, mating and marriage. Members of the group with academic credentials were appalled by the universities' acceptance of student takeovers and demonstrations, which they found totally unacceptable. A distrust of academia set in. When the radical counter-culture movement was in full throttle, a surge of resentment and antagonism swept over this group. By the time Ronald Reagan began his run for the White House, the 'Democrats for Reagan' tide was launched and swept the Republicans into office.

Jeanne Kirkpatrick and William Bennett, players who had joined the outer fringes of the group, now moved to central roles in government. She, as many of you will remember, was appointed Ronald Reagan's Ambassador to the UN, and William Bennett was Sec. of Education before committing his moral dictums to paper in the best seller, The Book of Virtue.

This snapshot of the gradual transition from a small group of leftist intellectuals to an emerging right-wing movement contains at least 4 major components of the developing neocon philosophy. Unwavering support for Israel, a hawkish opposition to Communism, making the importance of cultural values central to their philosophy (in the 60's it was the abhorence of the counter culture movement), and a firm belief that only good can come from exporting democracy. How these ideas were further refined and became a prominent part of today's culture is what we will consider next.

The 'Three Pillars' of the neocon philosophy are culture (meaning social issues and values), economics, and foreign affairs. I think we are all pretty familiar with what is now called the 'culture wars'. To give just a few examples of where politics and this social concern converge, we can look at family issues. Disapproval of single women bearing children is a major matter in the culture wars. And so efforts to encourage women to marry have been proposed through tax incentives and welfare reform. Bans on homosexual marriage is the newest instance of legislation being used to preserve the traditional family structure. An amendment to the constitution is being attempted, while states are writing their own legislation. Eliminating the marriage penalty in the tax code falls into this category as well.

While this emphasis on family values is considered relatively new, in fact GH had been writing for years, expounding a conservative view of welfare and comparing today's lack of values with what she views as a better time, the Victorian era. Her book titles read thus: Poverty and Compassion: The Moral Imagination of the late Victorians, Marriage and Morals Among the Victorians, The Idea of Poverty: England in the Early Industrial Age, and The De-Moralization of Society: From Victorian Virtues to Modern Values. I think the titles give you an inkling of her drift.. There is just a hint that poverty is primarily a moral issue. She.espouses charity, as in Victorian society, to take the place of our entitlement programs. I'm sure we are all reminded now of Bill Clinton's pledge to "change welfare as we know it". Certainly not a neocon himself, Clinton nevertheless felt the pressure to make substantial changes in the direction of reducing that entitlement, while trying to add incentives like day care vouchers, which have subsequently been cut back. A view shared by the neocons today, is that our culture has mistakenly substituted bureaucratic government programs in place of the far more desirable care of loving family, friends and church. These are the resources that should be extended. This provides a neat segue into the whole topic of religion which maintains a prominent place in neocon thinking.

An unlikely partnership developed in the 1980's between the neocons and the religious right which was an important core constituency for Ronald Reagan. Within this coupling there is disagreement, but it is a strong connection and differences are smoothed over. Abortion is a primary issue for the religious right, not necessarily for the neocons. But faith based initiatives, as the current Pres. Bush has proposed, is something they agree on enthusiastically. Irving Kristol and the founding neocons all shared the view that religion was being denigrated in our modern society, and belonged in public life. They feel it should have a more prominent role in all aspects of American life. In political terms, we see the court's confirmation of the phrase "under God" remaining in the pledge of allegiance. Religious organizations no longer are denied funding if they require employees to adhere to their beliefs if they provide social services under Pres. Bush's faith-based initiatives. The influence of Leo Strauss is clear here, since he felt that religion is the glue that holds society together, an idea embraced by Irving Kristol. An idea, endorsed by our current President, who made a point early in the current Iraq war of visiting a Moslem Mosque.

One final example of the culture wars is in an area of personal passion for me, the arts. Lynne Cheney, VP Cheney's wife was, under Pres. Reagan, the Director of the National Endowment of the Arts, which provides federal grants to artists and arts organizations. Strong efforts were made during her tenure to dismantle the entire structure with the justification that the government had no proper role in financially supporting the arts. There was an attempt to defund the National Public Broadcasting System, and end support for experimental theatre but a tremendous outcry from the public prevented that from taking place. Nevertheless the culture wars still roil over questions of what is acceptible art, what works artists will be permitted to display with public moneys and so on.

Let's turn now to the second pillar of neocon philosophy, economics. It is an intential tactic of the neocons to use economic incentives for purposes beyond pure fiscal concerns. And, in fact, we have already looked at several ways in which financial incentives and disincentives have been put in place to further political and idealogical goals. On a broader scale, government in general is viewed as a burden, and one that is ever-growing. Like the entire conservative spectrum, the neocons see government as too big and too costly. Taxes are the worst evil because they inhibit capital spending of entrepreneurs and lead to more social programs which are detrimental to independence and self-sufficiency. Neocons are supply-siders and those of us old enough to remember Reagonomics are experiencing deja vue all over again. Briefly, the basic goal is to cut marginal tax rates for upper incomes and thereby increase production (supply). Taxes discourage investment. The idea is to move capital away from public investment to private investment, which will lead to improved economic results, otherwise known as the 'trickle-down theory'. Hence the often used phrase "starve the beast". The government, of course, is the beast. By starving it, ie tax reductions and/or shifts to other categories, money is denied for social programs which are largely undesirable anyway. Under this construct, it is both unwise and unnecessary to campaign against federally funded popular programs, like social security and medicare. Instead, by reducing moneys available to fund these programs they wither away and die. This explains the rationale for privatizing Social Security, and creating private health plans as an alternative to medicare.

The primary category in which federal money is justified and necessary, of course, is defense of the nation. And that leads us directly to the third and final foundation of neoconservatism, foreign affairs.

The neocon movement has taken front and center stage under the current President primarily because of his foreign policy and his reliance on neocon thinkers. Many key government officials are second and third generation neocons - I'll talk briefly about them later. I've shown that in addition to having been around a long, long while, neocon principles have been effective in a wide spectrum of political and social areas. But in the aftermath of 9/11 and the subsequent need to focus on foreign affairs, the neocon movement has truly been in the spotlight. To explain it briefly and succinctly, I've decided not to use my own words, but to read to you a two paragraph description from a Christian Science Monitor article called Neocon 101.

"What does a neoconservative dream world look like?

And so you have what the critics view as the imperial stance of American Democracy. From this quote you can easily understand the reluctance to UN involvement. In this context the Iraqi invasion becomes, for me, more understandable and much more a piece of a larger global picture and a coherent philosophy. As explained by Max Boot, a conservative writer in the Wall St. Journal, the Defense Dept.'s strategy is "hard Wilsonianism". He states: "Like Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, "hard Wilsonians" want to use American night to promote American ideals."

Much of this thinking derives quite rationally from the classical philosophy taught by Leo Strauss in Chicago, ingested by a wide band of his young students in Chicago, who then traveled to Washington DC and germinated these ideas. They are derived primarily from Plato and Thomas Hobbes. But to pursue that requires a much longer, in depth study than we can do today.

Instead, I will provide a list of many of the key figures who were influenced by these concepts and brought them to their writing, political analyses and government service. Regardless of the outcome of 2004 election, they will remain a presence in our political life for years to come.

KEY NAMES IN NEOCON THINKING and WRITING

Forebear Leo Strauss Classical philosophy teacher

Founders Allan Bloom, Saul Bellow, Irving Kristol, Gertrude Himmelfarb, Harvey Mansfield taught

Descendents Andrew Sullivan and Bill Kristol (son of Irving and Gertrude). Both are highly influential writers and editors:. The New Republic, The Weekly Standard

Another Major influence: Lionel Trilling taught one of the founders, Norman Podhoretz who married Midge Dechter. She sits on several neocon think-tank boards, while their son, John Podhoretz, is an editor of The Free Press, as is Adam Bellow, son of Saul Bellow.

Also at the U. of Chicago, Prof. Albert Wohlstetter. Mathematician and nuclear strategist. He taught Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Sec. of Defense, and Richard Perle, ex-chairman of the Defense Policy Board, now a member and also Prof. Wohlstetter's son-in-law. Zalmay Khalilzad, Pres. Bush's special envoy to Iraq.

Also influenced by Strauss: Clarence Thomas, Francis Fukuyama (student of Bloom), William Bennett, and Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics.

Foundations: The Heritage foundation (Midge Dechter, William Bennett Scaife Family Trusts (William Bennett)

Think Tanks: Committee for the Free World (Midge Dechter), American Enterprise Institute, (Robert Bork, Irving Kristol, Jeanne Kirkpatrick) Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy (Elliott Abrams, son-in- law of Irving Kristol, currently in Bush administration, Ken Starr, Thomas Bork) Project for a New American Century (Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney) Hudson Institute

Periodicals: National Review, Commentary, Weekly Standard, New Republic, Public Interest

Other writers: David Frum, David Brooks, Michael Lind, Michael Novak

Other publications/media: Rupert Murdock, Fox Broadcasting, NY Post.