Neocons: Who They Are and Why It Matters

President Donald Trump has hijacked the slogan “America First.” Once upon a time, it stood for nonintervention in foreign wars, now it stands for neocon intervention and forever war. The Trump presidency has embraced the neocon ethos of murder and “creative destruction,” based on the teachings of an arcane philosopher, Leo Strauss. The German Jewish emigre believed deception and permanent war are the foundation of the state, a state led by a sociopathic elite. Strauss believed, as Thomas Hobbes before him, that humans are inherently aggressive. He said this aggressiveness should be channeled into hostility and war against other people and nations. The neocons as of yet do not have a direct role in a Trump executive, but they are influencing the Trump administration through their foundations and think tanks, most notably the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Donald Trump is a man with zero guiding or animating principles, but for one: the pursuit of adulation. The neocons, or some of them at least, gave him the praise he so desperately needs after he bombed Syria, canned the Iran nuke deal, loudly and abusively confronted North Korea and its eccentric hereditary leader, and has slowly but surely moved into the camp that believes Russia is a threat to America. The neocons are behind the scenes pulling strings that result in forever war and a body count now surpassing a million and a half souls.

*Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

**Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

Watch Episode Preview

Watch Members Only Full Episode Here

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to see the full video




Featured Video MP3 Audio Clip

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to listen to the audio


Show Notes

How 'America First' Got Its Nationalistic Edge

The Value of Values: Soft Power Under Obama

Leo Strauss' Philosophy of Deception

Neoconservatives Declare War on Trump

Obama Urged Trump To Continue Neoconservative Foreign Policy

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Bad Moon Rising

Trump's foreign policy team baffles GOP experts

White House downplays Trump's meeting with John Bolton

Trump ran as a foreign-policy realist. Instead he’s become another interventionist neocon

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. “The neocons as of yet do not have a direct role in a Trump executive, but they are influencing the Trump administration through their foundations and think tanks, most notably the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.”

    Incorrect.

    Neocons are Zionists. Kushner is a staunch Zionist (as is most of the Trump family). Kuchner’s portfolio includes foreign policy issues. Therefore, neocons have a direct role in the Trump administration.

    • Shadia Drury’s polemic of Leo Strauss is featured prominently in all critiques of Strauss. It should be noted for the sake of accuracy that Drury takes some considerable liberties in interpreting his work, rising at times to the level of intellectual dishonesty. To get a more complete understanding of his work, read the primary sources; or in addition to Drury, read other more even-handed examinations of Strauss:

      The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism: An Introduction to the Thought of Leo Strauss
      by Leo Strauss

      Leo Strauss: An Introduction to His Thought and Intellectual Legacy
      by Thomas L. Pangle

      The Truth about Leo Strauss: Political Philosophy and American Democracy
      by Catherine H. and Michael P. Zuckert

      • Thank you for these links. If you yourself were to summarize Strauss, what would you mention?

        • Pinning down what Strauss is all about is a bit like flattening out a bead of mercury – it keeps breaking apart into smaller beads. For example, I studied under a second generation Straussian, and he would often point out that neoconservatives offer a misreading of Strauss’s work, and misinterpret its political implications in the world of public policy and national security. When asked for specific examples, slippery explanations were given, leaving one with more questions than answers. That being said, three primary philosophical problems dominate the balance if his work: the ancients vs. the moderns; poetry vs. philosophy; and perhaps the most central, revelation and philosophy (the theological-politico problem).

          The most clear and direct public explanation of Strauss from a Straussian comes from Harvey Mansfield. YouTube has a number of videos of him describing his experience studying under Strauss. They help to elucidate his views of esoteric writing and the notion of elite classes in society. If you listen carefully to his explanations, you will notice how nuanced and slippery his arguments are in relation to the above. Thomas Pangle’s introduction of Strauss is the most clearly written explanation of his work (listed above).

          A fare example of what Straussian policy prescriptions look like in the real world is Bill Kristol’s assertions on what should and should not happen vis-à-vis American foreign policy – which Mr. Nimmo pointed out. Straussian’s generally fall into two camps: those that think the work of philosophy should be done in secret in order to avoid persecution by the masses, and should not be involved in public policy; and those that seek to bring Strauss’s work into the pragmatic world of politics, which see the necessity of presenting the world in Manichean terms in order to further the esoteric goals of government – which they do not view as nefarious, but instead the exultation of the highest virtues of man. For the uninitiated, overt Straussians (from the second camp) are best understood as Trotskyites. Alternatively, a not uncommon phenomenon is for social Darwinists to be attracted to the Straussians of the first camp (perhaps they fear backlashes when considering main-lining their bell curve agenda).

          • Elucidating and intruiging (or should I say, tongue in cheek, illuminating). Thank you for balancing Kurt’s scale on this specific topic.

  2. John Miranda says:

    Kurt, another home run.

    THIS is the so-called “Deep State,” more accurately defined as the Neo-Nazi Empire US MI Complex, not the Democratic party, although the Democrats are, with a few exceptions, in lock step with the Neo-Nazi puppet masters, who, as you accurately point out, completely control Trump’s foreign policy.

    And that is why they rigged the 2016 election to put him in the presidency. He better reflects their male oriented domination by profitable violence.

    I was surprised and dismayed that so many of the Newbud staff got hoodwinked by Trump. It was appalling to see such intelligent and brave people to have the wool pulled over their eyes by such an obvious charlatan.

    The bad news is that now that the government can no longer regulate the corporations, the Neo-Nazi corporate management teams, under the direction of the original Nazis who provided Hitler with seed money for his global empire mission, the Swiss Central Banksters, have complete and unrestricted freedom to pursue their objectives of global dominance, as outlined in their seminal document, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses for the 21st Century.”

    The Central Banksters dominate through the ultimate Ponzi scheme, fractional banking and debt as currency. “Give me control of a nation’s currency and I care not who makes the laws.”

    The simple and obvious fact is that the election of 2016 ushered in the Corporate Fascist Fourth Reich of the New World Order, previously envisioned by neocons Henry Kissinger and George H. W. Bush.

    You can academically describe and sugar coat it all you like, but we are today living in an autocratic and authoritarian Neo-Nazi regime with the illusion of democratic principles.

    • spiro skouras says:

      Hi John,
      Your comment saying “I was surprised and dismayed that so many of the Newbud staff got hoodwinked by Trump. It was appalling to see such intelligent and brave people to have the wool pulled over their eyes by such an obvious charlatan.” Is completely inaccurate. Newsbud has remained non partisan all throughout the election to present day. I do not recall a single pro trump article or video, if you know something I don’t, please let me know. What is appalling to me, is how many people still think Trump is any different than the others. Thanks for the comment and for your support.
      Spiro

      • Hi Spiro, first of all a big thank you to the whole team for their great news bringing. Forgive me my critical note below, but then life would be boring if we all agree 😉
        How can you state that “Newsbud has remained non partisan all throughout the election to present day” and then continue with “I do not recall a single pro trump article or video”?
        Non-partisan in my opinion would mean non-biased and I find it hard to believe that no positive aspects at all about the Trump platform can be found. In fact, you state yourself that you are biased … “have the wool pulled over their eyes by such an obvious charlatan”. You may or may not be right in your opinion, but surely, you must admit that you are being biased here?

        I for one do think Trump is different than many of his predecessors. I think he has great flaws and I certainly do not agree with either Mike Pence’s anti-GLBT views, or Trump’s anti-environmental dictates, or his grandiose weapon sales. That being said: the political system is so corrupt, that the swamp does need to be drained and, perhaps contrary to many here, I do believe he is truely trying to achieve that.
        I don’t think the president has that much power and we shouldn’t be surprised that a lot of the appalling greed politics continue as usual. It would have with Bernie Sanders (whom I admire) as well. The president is a puppet of deeper, darker forces, but at least this puppet is trying.
        My impression is that nihilism – here, that no president could ever be any good – has crept into the hearts of many here. It has into mine. But the ultimate consequence of that would be a drastic regime change and that is not going to happen – for which I for one am thankful. We don’t need an American Spring and the ensuing system collapse. We need an increasing momentum for transparancy and honesty, while keeping what is worthwhile.
        Trump has many flaws and viewpoints with which I do not agree, but he, in my opinion, is not a charlatan – or, should I say, far less of a charalatan than the Clintons, Bushes and Obamas.

        Truly hoping that this independent platform succeeds,
        Alison

  3. David E Burden says:

    Excellent Kurt.
    Sadly, it is going to take a lot more, including time, to wake up the millions of people who took the Trump bait. They are so desperate for a savior that they only pay attention to that which they think he is doing right. Most of it is not right, although he may throw them a bone once in a while, and his policies are dictated to him just as Obama’s and Bush’s before him were. The puppet masters have been around for many decades and influenced many, if not all former presidents, With exceptions. They just went into overdrive once they got away with murdering a sitting president in 1963.
    This was an exceptionally good presentation, laid out in proper sequence and easy to follow. I intend to borrow bits and pieces of it when talking to Trump fans in the future, if you don’t mind. I can only hope that if enough of us keep up the pressure by pointing these things out, and shedding light on the real facts, that those people who are currently fawning over “The Donald” will start to see the discrepancies between who he claims to be, as opposed to who he really is. The more blunders he makes, and the more aggressive actions he takes, will hopefully aid us in opening people’s eyes to reality.
    So far, I have not been able to get through to very many of his fawning followers, but I have managed to instill some doubts in many of their minds, and I intend to continue. The truth, and examples such as you listed in this piece are helping. I am certain you feel the same, as evidenced by one expose after another. Every week I know that you will produce another quality eye opener, and I have come to anxiously anticipate your weekly contributions, as well as those of numerous others.
    Thank you for consistently bringing the truth to the Newsbud community. Fortunately, most Newsbud community members are not so easily fooled as the masses, and as the news spreads of the quality of content and expert personnel here, (that cannot be found elsewhere), our community will continue to grow. Thereby resulting in more people to spread the truth, and wake up the sheeple.
    There simply is no valid comparison to the level and quality of News & Information presented by Newsbud with any corporate Lame Stream News organization.

  4. janiece turner says:

    The growing body count wrecks me. My heart breaks for people who’ve lived in any of the various regions where simply surviving American Foreign Policy is a losing battle, regardless of which POTUS is in the Oval.

  5. thomasotoole says:

    Very interesting production all around. No matter what you say, about Trump, I’m grateful every day that Clinton lost. And I’m sorry for the victims of US foreign policy all over the world under both parties. It seems no progress will be made since everyone who wanted Clinton fails to admit her flaws, and everyone who wanted Trump fails to admit his. And it is back to attack ad politics, with no resolution in sight.

  6. I’ve really enjoyed Kurt’s past presentations and I look forward to enjoying the coming ones. This one however? In my opinion, a smear based upon a smear. While I did learn some things about the neo-cons that are revealing and while I do frequently disagree with Trump’s policies, this smear against him was based on MSM smear (such as the Guardian) to distill the essence of smear. Sorry, it doesn’t stick.
    I am in no way a Trump specialist – I have other things to do with my life -, but my impression is that he is a pragmatist who is trying to work with what has been handed him. And, yes, he appears to have made some serious appointing mistakes. It is possible however to admit to one’s self that one cannot be a specialist in all areas and therefore needs specialists. That, in my opinion, is what Trump has done: he has depended on specialists (perhaps too much on the wrong ones) and he is above all a pragmatic.
    I don’t like either the extreme pro_Trump media, or the extreme anti-Trump media and I had hoped to come here and find neutral, nuanced ground. Alas, better luck next presentation …

Speak Your Mind