N is for Neoconservative
“The tragedy of the Bush era is that there was never any depth under its absurd surface—and when the ridiculous exterior washed away, in scandal and indictment and disaster and failure and ignominy, we were left with nothing but emptiness, disorganization, and chaos.”
- Matt Taibbi
Neoconservative (noun); the only Marxists with any kind of influence still intact.
Contrary to the name, neoconservatives are not, in fact, conservatives in the normally understood sense of the word. Much like many fundamentalist groups end up in a parody of their imagined golden age, Neoconservatives like to imagine a perfect past – in this case the 19th century – and try to emulate it without even really understanding it properly.
Like most Marxists, Neoconservatives believe in the inevitability of class warfare. The difference between the two is in which side they believe will win (see: BUSINESS SCHOOLS).
The similarities with Marxism do not stop there, however. The essential Neoconservative belief is that wholesale change in society can only come about via wholesale change in the structure of society, the faster the better.
Much like Bolsheviks, Neoconservatives like to gather in relatively small groups, bound together by a simple, abstract ideology that promises all the ANSWERS to the political problems that plague the modern world. Seeking practical paths to power, they inevitably fail when attempting to implement their vision.
Starting out by establishing their intellectual credibility, Neoconservatives created a number of think tanks devoted to the task of manufacturing impressive FACT sheets demanding a return to 19th century “pure” capitalism. In fact, they did not only demand it, but professed that it was a historical necessity and natural inevitability.
After establishing a reputation for academic rigour, neoconservative coup d'etats took place in governing conservative parties in America, the UK, Canada, Australia and other countries, though Anglophone states seemed especially vulnerable to such attacks. Entering the political fray, they managed to seize power and then use their position to redefine the political spectrum in such a way that their ideas occupied the right to centre ground, with the former conservatives castigated as “wets”, “radical Tories” and “liberals”, the liberals as socialists and the socialists as Communists.
The governing method of Neoconservative governments seems to be drawn strongly from the example of MUSSOLINI and CORPORATISM, whereby “free enterprise” is promoted, bureaucracy and unemployment payments are seen as economic obstacles, a strongly implied approval of increasing social inequality and a stupid, aggressive foreign policy.
One would think after the disastrous 2000-2008 period, where Neoconservative ideas flourished, the ideology would be found wanting. However, the successful redefinition of the political field means many formerly liberal and left-wing parties have come to implicitly accept the Neoconservative framing of political issues and to compete with them for votes, rather than offer an alternative that could lead to the doubt they have all the ANSWERS to our current political woes.
