DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Neoconservatism Still Matters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Why Neoconservatism Still Matters POLICY PAPER Number 20, May 2010 Foreign Policy at BROOKINGS Why Neoconservatism Still Matters Justin Vaïsse POLICY PAPER Number 20, May 2010 Foreign Policy at BROOKINGS Why Neoconservatism Still Matters Justin Vaïsse This paper, originally published by the Lowy Institute in its “Perspectives” series and reprinted with its permission, is based on and expands upon the author’s forthcoming Neoconservatism: The Biography of a Movement, Cam- bridge, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, May 2010 (transla- tion by Arthur Goldhammer), especially chapter 7. Why Neoconservatism Still Matters ii F OREIGN P OLICY AT B ROOKINGS W HY N EOCONSERVATISM S TILL M AT T E R S he world started paying attention to the exis- WHAT NEOCONSERVATISM MEANS TODAY tence of American neoconservatives in 2002- T2003, as they stepped up their campaign in The label “neoconservative” was first used in the ear- favor of an invasion of Iraq. In the following years, ly 1970s by friends and enemies of a group of New their trajectory was generally seen as a short-lived ab- York intellectuals who were critical of the leftward erration, a rapid rise and fall ending in the failure turn that American liberalism had, in their view, tak- that was the Iraq intervention, discrediting once and en in the previous decade.1 What these intellectuals for all their idealistic militarism. In other words, neo- reacted against was a mix of social movements—like conservatives are now seen as something of the past. student protests, counterculture, black nationalism, radical feminism and environmentalism—and gov- This conventional view, however, is inaccurate on ernment overreach through Lyndon Johnson’s “War two counts. First, the neoconservatives never had the on Poverty” programs. While in no way defenders kind of overbearing influence on the Bush adminis- of the free market or the night-watchman state like tration many opponents credit them with, including the true National Review conservatives, they stressed on the Iraq war. Second, not only had this school of the limits of social engineering (through transfers of thought been active in American foreign policy de- wealth or affirmative action programs) and pointed bates for three decades before the Iraq episode, but out the dangers that the boundless egalitarian dreams it actually never left the Washington political and in- of the New Left had created for stability, meritocracy tellectual scene—even at the time of its greatest ebb, and democracy. Intellectuals such as Nathan Glazer, in 2005-2007. On the contrary, neoconservatism Seymour Martin Lipset, James Q. Wilson and Dan- remains, to this day, a distinct and very significant iel Patrick Moynihan coalesced around The Public voice of the Washington establishment. Interest, a magazine created by Irving Kristol and Daniel Bell in 1965, and a few years later around After offering a presentation of what neoconser- Commentary, whose editor was Norman Podhoretz. vatism really means, and contrasting it with other schools of thought in American foreign policy, this These original neoconservative were New York-based paper lays out the main reasons behind their contin- intellectuals, primarily interested in domestic issues, ued influence in the Obama era—their institutional, and they still regarded themselves as liberals. That is intellectual and political dynamism—and argues why the disconnect could not seem more complete that neoconservatives will play a meaningful role in between them and the latter-day neocons, who are shaping American foreign policy in the future. Washington-based political operatives identified with 1 “Neoconservatism” used in a friendly way: see Robert Bartley, “Irving Kristol and Friends,” Wall Street Journal, May 3, 1972, p. 20; as an epithet, see Michael Harrington, “The Welfare State and Its Neoconservative Critics,” Dissent, Autumn 1973, pp. 435–454. For other sources and historical aspects, see my Neoconservatism, op. cit., chapter 2. Why Neoconservatism Still Matters 1 F OREIGN P OLICY AT B ROOKINGS the right, interested exclusively in foreign policy, and Moscow, thereby, from the neoconservative perspec- who have a solid, if not excessive, confidence in the tive, legitimizing the Soviet regime rather than try- ability of the American government to enact social ing to change it. change—at least in Iraq or Afghanistan.2 There ex- ists, nonetheless, a tenuous link between the two Since the much tougher line they advocated failed groups, which explains why the label has travelled to win the favors of the Democratic Party (Jimmy through time. This link is provided by a third, inter- Carter remained, in their view, way too dovish), the mediate family of neoconservatives, the Scoop Jack- Scoop Jackson Democrats crossed party lines and son Democrats of the 1970s and 1980s—named went to work for the Ronald Reagan administra- after Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, a Democrat tion. They inspired part of Reagan’s foreign policy from Washington state—and the real ideological an- —including support for the “freedom fighters” to cestors of the contemporary neocons, the ones who harass the Soviet empire, especially in Afghanistan literally invented neoconservative foreign policy. and Central America, the defense build-up, the hard line on arms control, the “evil empire” rhetoric, and The Scoop Jackson Democrats were also born of a the creation of the National Endowment for De- reaction to the New Left, but this time, inside the mocracy. But ultimately, Reagan distanced himself Democratic Party, when Senator George McGovern from this line, especially during his second mandate, won the nomination to be the Democratic candi- not unlike the way George W. Bush did with the date against Richard Nixon in 1972. McGovern was neocons after 2005. seen by traditional Democrats as way too far to the left, both in domestic policy (he supported massive For all their differences, the first two families of neo- social programs and affirmative action through quo- conservatives—the New York intellectuals and the tas) and in foreign policy, where he advocated a hasty Scoop Jackson Democrats—had a few things in com- retreat from Vietnam, deep cuts in the defense bud- mon. They fought the same enemies, including left- get, and a neo-isolationist grand strategy. Coalescing ist liberalism, moral relativism and anti-Americanism. around Commentary, Scoop Jackson’s Senate office They shared journals and institutions (such as Com- and a group called the Coalition for a Democratic mentary, the Wall Street Journal opinion pages, and the Majority, Democratic operatives and intellectuals American Enterprise Institute). And a few neoconser- such as Richard Perle, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Eugene vatives of the first family, such as Pat Moynihan, Nor- Rostow, Ben Wattenberg, Joshua Muravchik, Elliott man Podhoretz, Midge Decter, and Nathan Glazer, Abrams, and others, tried to steer the Democratic became full-fledged neoconservatives of the second Party back to the center. They wanted to get back to family, while some Scoop Jackson Democrats such as the tradition of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman Jeane Kirkpatrick got much closer to the original neo- and John Kennedy: progressive policies at home, conservatives on domestic issues. That is why the label muscular anti-communism abroad, including the ended up covering the two groups, even though many defense of human rights and fellow democracies. original neoconservatives, especially Irving Kristol, the That is why they found themselves battling not only most important figure of the movement, did not share the left wing of the Democrats, but also Nixon and the beliefs of the Scoop Jackson Democrats—and The Kissinger’s realist policy of détente, which included Public Interest, the flagship journal of the original neo- de-emphasizing ideological concerns and engaging conservatives, never dealt with foreign policy.3 2 On the contradiction between the original neoconservative criticism of social engineering at home and the current neoconservative support for nation-building in Afghanistan, Iraq or the Balkans, see Francis Fukuyama, America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. 3 On Irving Kristol’s differences with other neoconservatives, especially on foreign policy, see my article “Was Irving Kristol a Neoconservative?” Foreign Policy website, September 23, 2009, available at <http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/09/23/was_irving_kristol_a_neoconservative>. Why Neoconservatism Still Matters 2 F OREIGN P OLICY AT B ROOKINGS Then, in the mid-1990s, at the very moment when years, have been close to this school of thought. neoconservatism was being declared dead because Neoconservatism has no religious, regional or eco- the Cold War had been won, a third family of neo- nomic base. It is in no way an organized force with conservatives appeared: the latter-day neocons, who a central authority. It is at most a network of think- coalesced around The Weekly Standard (launched ers sharing an intellectual outlook, or even simply in 1995), the American Enterprise Institute, the a “persuasion” or “tendency,” as Irving Kristol and Project for the New American Century (PNAC, Norman Podhoretz sometimes described it.4 Last 1997-2006), and figures such as Bill Kristol, son but not least, one should always keep in mind the of Irving Kristol, Robert Kagan, Gary Schmitt, versatility and fickleness of labels, and never make Max Boot and Doug Feith. They are the ideologi- a fetish of them. No two neoconservatives think cal heirs of the Scoop Jackson Democrats, but with the same on all issues, and many object to being some differences. First, they are now firmly located called neoconservatives in the first place. These are within the Republican family. The newcomers, the famous examples of people who are incorrectly la- younger neocons, were never Democrats or liber- beled neocons—such as John Bolton—but also per- als. It means, among other things, that they have sons whose views are not well ascertained, or have to somehow reconcile their foreign policy stance changed over time.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Albert Wohlstetter's Legacy: the Neo-Cons, Not Carter, Killed
    SPECIAL REPORT: NUCLEAR SABOTAGE ALBERT WOHLSTETTER’S LEGACY Wohlstetter was even stranger than the “Dr. Strangelove” depicted in the 1964 movie of that name. An early draft of the film was titled “The Delicate Balance of Terror,” the same title as Wohlstetter’s best-known unclassified work. Here, a still from the film. tives—Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and Zalmay Khalilzad, to name a few. In Wohlstetter’s circle of influence were also Ahmed Chalabi (whom Wohlstetter championed), Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson (D-Wash.), Sen. Robert Dole (R- Kan.), and Margaret Thatcher. Wohlstetter himself was a follower of Bertrand Russell, not only in mathematics, but in world outlook. The pseudo-peacenik Russell had called for a preemptive strike against the Soviet Union, after World War II and before the Soviets developed the bomb, as a prelude to his plan for bully- ing nations into a one-world government. Russell, a raving Malthusian, opposed economic development, especially in the Third World. Admirer Jude Wanniski wrote of Wohlstetter in an obituary, “[I]t is no exaggeration, I think, to say that Wohlstetter was the most influential unknown man in the world for the past half century, and easily in the top ten in importance of all men.” “Albert’s decisions were not automat- ically made official policy at the White House,” Wanniski wrote, “but Albert’s The Neo-Cons, Not Carter, genius and his following were such in the places where it counted in the Establishment that if his views were Killed Nuclear Energy resisted for more than a few months, it
    [Show full text]
  • Discriminate Deterrence
    DISCRIMINATE DETERRENCE Report of The Commission On Integrated Long-Term Strategy Co -C. I lairmea: Fred C. lkle and Albert Wohlstetter Moither, Anne L. Annsinmg Andrew l. Goodraster flenry /1 Kissinger Zbign ei Brzezinski fames L. Holloway, Ur Joshua Lederberg William P. Clark Samuel P. Huntington Bernard A. Schriever tV. Graham Ciaytor, John W. Vessey January 1988 COMMISSION ON INTEGRATED LONG-TERM STRATEGY January 11. 1988 MEMORANDUM FOR: THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS We are pleased to present this final report of Our Commission. Pursuant to your initial mandate, the report proposes adjustments to US. military strategy in view of a changing security environment in the decades ahead. Over the last fifteen months the Commission has received valuable counsel from members of Congress, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Service Chiefs. and the Presdent's Science Advisor, Members of the National Security Council Staff, numerous professionals in the Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency, and a broad range of specialists outside the government provided unstinting support. We are also indebted to the Commission's hardworking staff. The Commission was supported generously by several specialized study groups that closely analyzed a number of issues, among them: the security environment for the next twenty years, the role of advanced technology in military systems, interactions between offensive and defensive systems on the periphery of the Soviet Union, and the U.S, posture in regional conflicts around the world. Within the next few months, these study groups will publish detailed findings of their own.
    [Show full text]
  • AN ANALYSIS of POST-COLD WAR CONCEPTS in AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY: CONTINUITY OR CHANGE? by Ana Maria Venegas a Thesis Submitted
    AN ANALYSIS OF POST-COLD WAR CONCEPTS IN AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY: CONTINUITY OR CHANGE? by Ana Maria Venegas A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Global Security Studies Baltimore, Maryland December 2014 © 2014 Ana Maria Venegas All Rights Reserved Abstract This thesis investigates post-Cold War concepts in US foreign policy. At the end of the Cold War, prominent political scientists and commentators argued, for various reasons, that the strategic environment was so dramatically different that the United States would no longer be able to engage the world as it had in the past. In an attempt to understand the ramifications of the evolution of the strategic environment, this thesis asked the question: Have the three post-Cold War presidents, William J. Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack H. Obama, continued to engage the world in ways consistent with previous administrations or have the broken from traditional concepts in American foreign policy? To answer this question, declaratory foreign policy as articulated in national security strategy documents and key foreign policy engagements were analyzed and compared to nine traditional concepts in American foreign policy identified by prominent historians and political scientists. The post-Cold War administrations continued to develop foreign policy consistent with the concepts identified by historians and political scientists suggesting a measure of consistency in the way the United States engages the world. Additionally, each president developed foreign policy that exhibited unique characteristics inconsistent with the traditional concepts. These policies were characterized by the importance placed on multilateral consensus; an emphasis on multilateral agreements and alliances to foster a stable international order; and the reliance on international organizations to address regional and global issues.
    [Show full text]
  • The Brookings Institution
    1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION Brookings Briefing PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY: WHY MORALITY MATTERS IN POLITICS Tuesday, January 24, 2006 MICHAEL SANDEL WILLIAM GALSTON CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER E.J. DIONNE, JR., Moderator [TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED FROM A TAPE RECORDING] MILLER REPORTING CO., INC. 735 8th STREET, S.E. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20003-2802 (202) 546-6666 2 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. DIONNE: [In progress] —become important to their time not by seeking in a contrived and silly way something called relevance, they become important to their time by thinking clearly systematically and insightfully about public issues and public problems. And by that measure, Mike Sandel is truly one of our moment's most important political and public philosophers. So I loved it when Mike finally put out this collection called "Public Philosophy," of which we in general and, I personally believe, liberals in particular are very much in search of. I just want to read one brief passage from the beginning of Mike's book, which gives you a sense of how relevant his discussion is to our moment. He notes that the Democrats have been struggling for awhile over what some call the "moral values thing." "When Democrats in recent times have reached for moral and religious resonance," he writes, "their efforts have taken two forms, neither wholly convincing. Some, following the example of George W. Bush, have sprinkled their speeches with religious rhetoric and biblical references. So intense was the competition for divine favor in the 2000 and 2004 campaigns that a Web site, beliefnet.com, established a God-o- meter to track the candidates' references to God.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlie Sykes
    CHARLIE SYKES EDITOR-AT-LARGE, THE BULWARK Quick Summary Life in Brief Former conservative radio host and Wisconsin Hometown: Seattle, WA Republican kingmaker who gained national prominence as a leading voice in the Never Trump Current Residence: Mequon, WI movement and created the Bulwark website as a messaging arm for like-minded conservatives Education: • BA, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, • Love for journalism and politics heavily influenced 1975 by his father • Self-described “recovering liberal” who criticizes Family: both political parties for inflexibility and for • Married to Janet Riordan alienating those who reject status quo • Three children, two grandchildren • As conservative radio host, cultivated significant influence in Wisconsin GOP politics – quickly Work History: becoming a go-to stop for Republican candidates; • Editor-at-Large, The Bulwark, 2019- drew significant attention to issues like school Present choice • Host, The Daily Standard, 2018 • Became national figure after refusing to support • Contributing editor, The Weekly Donald Trump Standard • Co-founded the Bulwark with Bill Kristol, which • Contributor, NBC/MSNBC, 2016-present has become a leading mouthpiece of the Never • Host, Indivisible WNYC, 2017 Trump conservative movement • Editor-in-Chief, Right Wisconsin • Considers himself a “political orphan” in the era of • Radio show host, WTMJ, 1999-2016 Trump after exile from conservative movement • Radio host, WISN, 1989-93 whose political identity has changed many times • PR for Dave Schulz, Milwaukee
    [Show full text]
  • Conversations with Bill Kristol Guest: Charles Murray, Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
    Conversations with Bill Kristol Guest: Charles Murray, scholar, American Enterprise Institute Table of Contents I: 0:00 – 5:55 II: I: (0:15 –) KRISTOL: Hi, I’m Bill Kristol. Welcome back to CONVERSATIONS. I’m very pleased to be joined today again by Charles Murray, scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, author of many important books: Losing Ground – when was that? 1984? – The Bell Curve in the mid-90s, and Coming Apart, about four years ago. I would say, I’m not sure there’s a social commentator who’s written as many important books over the last few decades as Charles so it is a great pleasure and honor to have you here. And you’re going to explain the current moment, right? MURRAY: With that kind of introduction I suppose I’m obligated to. KRISTOL: Exactly right. So what – this is the very beginning of August of 2016. People are – someone wrote something in the New York Times yesterday giving you credit for presciently seeing that Trump or Trumpism, I guess, was going to happen. Did you see it, and what do you make of it? MURRAY: I knew that we were going to have a problem with the white working class, and actually, I guess I’ll blow my own horn and say in 1993 for The Wall Street Journal, I had a long article called “The Coming White Underclass.” If you go back and read that – but this is not rocket science, it simply was the trend lines for out-of-wedlock births among working-class whites at that point had been spiking upward.
    [Show full text]
  • Record of the Communications Policy & Research Forum 2009 in Its 2006 National Security Statement, George W
    TWITTER FREE IRAN: AN EVALUATION OF TWITTER’S ROLE IN PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND INFORMATION OPERATIONS IN IRAN’S 2009 ELECTION CRISIS ALEX BURNS Faculty of Business and Law Victoria University [email protected] BEN ELTHAM Centre for Cultural Research University of Western Sydney and Fellow, Centre for Policy Development [email protected]) Abstract Social media platforms such as Twitter pose new challenges for decision-makers in an international crisis. We examine Twitter’s role during Iran’s 2009 election crisis using a comparative analysis of Twitter investors, US State Department diplomats, citizen activists and Iranian protestors and paramilitary forces. We code for key events during the election’s aftermath from 12 June to 5 August 2009, and evaluate Twitter. Foreign policy, international political economy and historical sociology frameworks provide a deeper context of how Twitter was used by different users for defensive information operations and public diplomacy. Those who believe Twitter and other social network technologies will enable ordinary people to seize power from repressive regimes should consider the fate of Iran’s protestors, some of whom paid for their enthusiastic adoption of Twitter with their lives. Keywords Twitter, foreign policy, international relations, United States, Iran, social networks 1. Research problem, study context and methods The next U.S. administration may well face an Iran again in turmoil. If so, we will be fortunate in not having an embassy in Tehran to worry about. From a safe distance, we can watch the Iranian people, again, fight for their freedom. We can pray that the clerical Gotterdamerung isn’t too bloody, and that the mullahs quickly retreat to their mosques and content themselves primarily with the joys of scholarly disputation.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008
    Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Paul Harold Rubinson certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War Committee: —————————————————— Mark A. Lawrence, Supervisor —————————————————— Francis J. Gavin —————————————————— Bruce J. Hunt —————————————————— David M. Oshinsky —————————————————— Michael B. Stoff Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War by Paul Harold Rubinson, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2008 Acknowledgements Thanks first and foremost to Mark Lawrence for his guidance, support, and enthusiasm throughout this project. It would be impossible to overstate how essential his insight and mentoring have been to this dissertation and my career in general. Just as important has been his camaraderie, which made the researching and writing of this dissertation infinitely more rewarding. Thanks as well to Bruce Hunt for his support. Especially helpful was his incisive feedback, which both encouraged me to think through my ideas more thoroughly, and reined me in when my writing overshot my argument. I offer my sincerest gratitude to the Smith Richardson Foundation and Yale University International Security Studies for the Predoctoral Fellowship that allowed me to do the bulk of the writing of this dissertation. Thanks also to the Brady-Johnson Program in Grand Strategy at Yale University, and John Gaddis and the incomparable Ann Carter-Drier at ISS.
    [Show full text]
  • Trend Analysis the Israeli Unit 8200 an OSINT-Based Study CSS
    CSS CYBER DEFENSE PROJECT Trend Analysis The Israeli Unit 8200 An OSINT-based study Zürich, December 2019 Risk and Resilience Team Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study Author: Sean Cordey © 2019 Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich Contact: Center for Security Studies Haldeneggsteig 4 ETH Zurich CH-8092 Zurich Switzerland Tel.: +41-44-632 40 25 [email protected] www.css.ethz.ch Analysis prepared by: Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich ETH-CSS project management: Tim Prior, Head of the Risk and Resilience Research Group, Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Deputy Head for Research and Teaching; Andreas Wenger, Director of the CSS Disclaimer: The opinions presented in this study exclusively reflect the authors’ views. Please cite as: Cordey, S. (2019). Trend Analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich. 1 Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study . Table of Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Historical Background 5 2.1 Pre-independence intelligence units 5 2.2 Post-independence unit: former capabilities, missions, mandate and techniques 5 2.3 The Yom Kippur War and its consequences 6 3 Operational Background 8 3.1 Unit mandate, activities and capabilities 8 3.2 Attributed and alleged operations 8 3.3 International efforts and cooperation 9 4 Organizational and Cultural Background 10 4.1 Organizational structure 10 Structure and sub-units 10 Infrastructure 11 4.2 Selection and training process 12 Attractiveness and motivation 12 Screening process 12 Selection process 13 Training process 13 Service, reserve and alumni 14 4.3 Internal culture 14 5 Discussion and Analysis 16 5.1 Strengths 16 5.2 Weaknesses 17 6 Conclusion and Recommendations 18 7 Glossary 20 8 Abbreviations 20 9 Bibliography 21 2 Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study selection tests comprise a psychometric test, rigorous Executive Summary interviews, and an education/skills test.
    [Show full text]
  • The Religious Right and the Rise of the Neo-Conservatives, in an Oral Examination Held on May 10, 2010
    AWKWARD ALLIES: THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT AND THE RISE OF THE NEO-CONSERVATIVES A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Social and Political Thought University of Regina By Paul William Gaudette Regina, Saskatchewan July 2010 Copyright 2010: P.W. Gaudette Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-88548-2 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-88548-2 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter One: Postwar Resentment and the Invention of Middle America 10
    MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Jeffrey Christopher Bickerstaff Doctor of Philosophy ________________________________________ Timothy Melley, Director ________________________________________ C. Barry Chabot, Reader ________________________________________ Whitney Womack Smith, Reader ________________________________________ Marguerite S. Shaffer, Graduate School Representative ABSTRACT TALES FROM THE SILENT MAJORITY: CONSERVATIVE POPULISM AND THE INVENTION OF MIDDLE AMERICA by Jeffrey Christopher Bickerstaff In this dissertation I show how the conservative movement lured the white working class out of the Democratic New Deal Coalition and into the Republican Majority. I argue that this political transformation was accomplished in part by what I call the "invention" of Middle America. Using such cultural representations as mainstream print media, literature, and film, conservatives successfully exploited what came to be known as the Social Issue and constructed "Liberalism" as effeminate, impractical, and elitist. Chapter One charts the rise of conservative populism and Middle America against the backdrop of 1960s social upheaval. I stress the importance of backlash and resentment to Richard Nixon's ascendancy to the Presidency, describe strategies employed by the conservative movement to win majority status for the GOP, and explore the conflict between this goal and the will to ideological purity. In Chapter Two I read Rabbit Redux as John Updike's attempt to model the racial education of a conservative Middle American, Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom, in "teach-in" scenes that reflect the conflict between the social conservative and Eastern Liberal within the author's psyche. I conclude that this conflict undermines the project and, despite laudable intentions, Updike perpetuates caricatures of the Left and hastens Middle America's rejection of Liberalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Nathan Glazer—Merit Before Meritocracy - the American Interest
    Nathan Glazer—Merit Before Meritocracy - The American Interest https://www.the-american-interest.com/2019/04/03/nathan-glazer-... https://www.the-american-interest.com/2019/04/03/nathan-glazer-merit-before-meritocracy/ WHAT ONCE WAS Nathan Glazer—Merit Before Meritocracy PETER SKERRY The perambulating path of this son of humble Jewish immigrants into America’s intellectual and political elites points to how much we have overcome—and lost—over the past century. The death of Nathan Glazer in January, a month before his 96th birthday, has been rightly noted as the end of an era in American political and intellectual life. Nat Glazer was the last exemplar of what historian Christopher Lasch would refer to as a “social type”: the New York intellectuals, the sons and daughters of impoverished, almost exclusively Jewish immigrants who took advantage of the city’s public education system and then thrived in the cultural and political ferment that from the 1930’s into the 1960’s made New York the leading metropolis of the free world. As Glazer once noted, the Marxist polemics that he and his fellow students at City College engaged in afforded them unique insights into, and unanticipated opportunities to interpret, Soviet communism to the rest of America during the Cold War. Over time, postwar economic growth and political change resulted in the relative decline of New York and the emergence of Washington as the center of power and even glamor in American life. Nevertheless, Glazer and his fellow New York intellectuals, relocated either to major universities around the country or to Washington think tanks, continued to exert remarkable influence over both domestic and foreign affairs.
    [Show full text]