Daemoneoconess

Neocons and neoconism. Spoken in certain circles these powerful encantations may summon curses, spitting or faux obits - or worse - a retarded historical redux that will totally reinvent recent history to such a point that true and wanna be students find unrecognizable.

Critics tend to become nigh unhinged and try to paint risque landscape that such ideals are Trotskyish, unAmerican (code for Little Satan), dangerously arrogant, an eagerness to use the military to change regimes, attack enemies (real or imagined) and doomed to failure.

Neoism kinda promotes a moralist and idealist view of world affairs, a belief in America’s exceptional role as a promoter of the principles of liberty and democracy (Great Satan), a belief in the preservation and exercise of American Power - including military power, as a device/weapon/tool for defending and advancing moralistic and idealistic causes, and a healthy suspect of internat'l institutions (like the UN) and a natural tendency toward 'unilateralism.'

Anti Fans of America Unbound will generally deride daydreamy dreams like the essential "Case For Democracy" by Sharansky as a prelude to Imperial idiocy.

To those who fear Great Satan, the reasons are not merely idealistic but down right dangerous! (Just check in with Milosevic, Uday, Usay or Saddam - oh yeah - really can't check in with them - but their failed, played despotic wrecks of semi nation states can testify to that!)

So the wicked wacky Neocons are totally jazzed about the unlimited capacity of American power to effect positive change?

SwEeT!!

Even these deliberately retarded raison de etre create something recognizable, a foreign policy that combos an idealist’s moralism, with a realist’s belief in the import of power.

Where does neoism really come from?

America's commitment to universal principles built into Great Satan's founding framing docs. These principles are not debatable - indeed as Alex Hamilton laid it out- "... written in the stars by the hand of God..."

Americans know the truth, and do not admit alternate truths. Instead of playing the relevancy game Americans play 'Which one of these is not like the other?"

"Oh things for instance things like supremacy of democratic states over
tyrannies, which is just a very simply notion. The fact that there is not moral equivalence between a despot and a democratic leader, that we free people do not inhabit the same plane morally as terrorists"

Democracy is the only legitimate form of government, and America as the greatest democracy is the most legitimate of all.

Unbridled freedom and lawful ambition - for bling, prestige - and power - has taken Americans outward for like the last 3 centuries.

In fact, the expansive, idealistic, and at times crunk and disorderly militaristic American approach to foreign policy has produced some accomplishments of world historical import—like ripping the guts out of Nazism, Japanese imperialism, and collapsing Soviet style collectivism - and some 'My Bad! y'all! and disappointing disaappointments.

It's not like all the successes were created by a good America and all the failures created by bad America. They were all creations of the same America.

The achievements, as well as the failures, are not really from innocence or sweet gracious purity of motive, and not because Americans lived by a make believe code of conduct in the world.

These achievements were and are archived because of the myriad of qualities that put the Great in Great Satan.

A willingness to accumulate, acquire and use power, ambition and sense of honor, to actually go out into the world and strike down evil if the need or even opportunity arises.

America's nigh indefatiguable spirit in defense of interests, principles - fairness - America's rejection of the same o same o and America's belief in change is unique. Without class, sacred bloodlines or holy tribal turf.

Are we really jazzed about throwing up our hands and abandoning the course?

Or, shall we recog what we are - embrace it, upgrade it and implement it?