DOCSLIB.ORG

1 PS 188-02: Neoconservatives And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 PS 188-02: Neoconservatives And PS 188-02: Neoconservatives and American Foreign Policy, Fall 2010 Tony Smith Packard 208 [email protected] Office hours: Tuesday 9-10 and 12-2 and 1-2; by appointment Teaching Assistant: David Wallsh [email protected] Office hours: Wednesday, 9:45-10:45, Tisch Lounge To understand the logic of neoconservative thinking is critical to having a position on current and future American foreign policy. Here is the group whose thinking and organizing led directly to the Iraq War, believed by most students of the U.S. in world affairs to be one of the most momentous undertakings in the history of American foreign policy. To be sure, the neocons were not acting alone, and their ideas were consonant with major trends in the nation’s foreign policy tradition. Nevertheless, the neocons had the vision and the organization to see that the invasion of Iraq followed the American incursion into Afghanistan, once 9/11 opened the door to serious military action abroad. They were key players in this drama, first by articulating the terms of the Bush Doctrine, then by targeting Iraq for invasion. What, then, does it mean to be a neoconservative? There are those who say it is impossible to have much of a precise definition and suggest that it is nowadays often used as nothing but a term of abuse. But the material from this course will likely demonstrate that whatever the differences among those who belonged to this school, and whatever the evolution of individuals’ ideas over time, there was (and is) most certainly enough of a family resemblance intellectually and organization politically that we most can, and should, think of neoconservatism as a perspective on America’s role in world events that is of fundamental importance to explaining the logic of the invasion of Iraq. That this style of thinking continued to be evident in the campaign of John McCain for the presidency in 2008, and that some of those endorsing such thinking can be found around Barack Obama still today, means that we need to take most seriously the proposals this school makes for the deployment of American power in international relations. The course expects three papers from you. Your first paper, some six pages in length, will answer the question: what does it mean to be a neoconservative? Is there a profile, a family resemblance, a cluster of concepts and emotions that allow us to identify the argument as an ideology? The second paper asks for an analysis of the thinking of Robert Kagan and William Kristol between 1995 and 2001. How did they articulate and organize neoconservatism in the context of the decade of the 1990s (conceived of as a “long decade” lasting from 1988 to 2001)? Your third will be on a topic of your choice having to do with neoconservatism either in the past or as it has been since 2003. Among the many topics that you might choose are: neoconservatism and evangelical Christianity as a political force; neocons and the surge in Iraq and Afghanistan or on their military thinking in general; neocons and corporate 1 America; neocons and the Israeli right; neocons and the Democratic Party since 1995 with special attention to the Progressive Policy Institute of the Democratic Leadership Council; neocons close to Obama, but who, of course, say they are not neocons (such as Michael Mcfaul, head of the Russian section of the National Security Council); neocons and the Republican Party today; neocons and John McCain; can President George W. Bush be called a neocon?; neocons abroad: the story of the Henry Jackson Society in Great Britain; neocons and the American media; reasons for the enduring appeal of the neocon argument after Iraq; are neocons really conservatives?; does it tell us anything that all leading neocon thinkers with respect to foreign policy are Jewish?; neocons and the role of ideas in American foreign policy thinking—how do ideas matter, or do they?; the political biography of a leading neocon such as Kristol or Kagan (although as your second paper is on them, you would need to make it since 2001), Charles Krauthammer, Norman Podhoretz, Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle; the neocons versus the CIA from the 1970s through 2003; the neocons and the Defense Department with special attention to Donald Rumsfeld; the neocons and Dick Cheney. Toward the end of the semester, new material may be added. Should you run across something you think of interest for the course, let us know about it and it may be included. BOOK FOR THE COURSE: Gary Dorrien Imperial Designs 0415949807 Routledge, Taylor, Francis Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke America Alone 0521838347 Cambridge Robert Kagan Of Paradise and Power 1400040930 Knopf [note: be sure you have the second edition of this book 2004, not its first printing 2003, which lacks an important Afterword] Robert Kagan The Return of History Knopf 030726923X Lawrence Kaplan and William Kristol The War over Iraq Encounter 1893554694 Tony Smith A Pact with the Devil 041595245X Routledge, Taylor Francis Suggested and must be ordered by you at Amazon or by visiting the Harvard UP office in Harvard Square: Justin Vaisse, Neoconservatism: The Biography of a Movement, Harvard, 9780674050518 Check the Blackboard for most of the articles assigned to be read, although you can easily locate most of them yourself on the internet. Where an essay is on the Blackboard at the time of this writing, BB appears after its title. Note, however, that some of the assigned material is not on the BB because it couldn’t be moved and that it may be easier to access the BB from Tufts than off campus. You might want to check the list over early and download what you find. SYLLABUS Some material may be added (and others dropped) later in the semester if new material becomes available. You are expected to have done the reading before coming to class. 2 For understandable reasons, many students put off reading until shortly before papers/exams come due. But that won’t work for this course. Be prepared. 1. Sept. 7: Introduction: Why neoconservatism matters and the structure of this course. Hand out the kagan and kristol pieces on Russian invasion to point out structure of argument. 2. Sept. 9: Pat Buchanan, “Whose War?” The American Conservative, March 24, 2003, www.amconmag.com BB Robert Lieber, “The Neoconservative Conspiracy Theory: Pure Myth,” The Chronicle Review, May 2, 2003 BB Part I: Neoconservatism: The Early Years 3. Sept. 14: S. Walt and J. Mearsheimer, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, chpt. 8 BB J. Muravchik, “In Defense of Neocons,” Commentary 9/2003, BB 4. Sept. 16: G. Dorrien, Imperial Designs, Introduction, chpt. 1; J. Vaisse, Introduction and final chapter to Neoconservatism: The Biography of a Movement, BB 5. Sept. 21: S. Halper and J. Clarke, America Alone, Intro, chpts 1-2 6. Sept. 23: What is Ideology? How important is ideology? R. Kagan, “Neocon Nation’: World Affairs Spring 2008 BB; “An Exchange: Neocon Nation?” World Affairs, Summer 2008 BB 7. Sept. 28: T. Smith, A Pact with the Devil, Preface, Intro, Chpts. 1-2, and 231-35 8. Sept. 30: Review session, Muravchik vs Walt in the National Interest 9/2008, BB. 9. Oct. 5: paper due: What does it mean to think like a neoconservative about world affairs? Paper due in class at its opening. Late papers will be downgraded. Film: “Arguing the World.” Part II Neoconservatism: From Reagan to George W. Bush (1980-2001) 10. Oct. 7: Reagan’s speech at Westminster, June 1982; Obama’s Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech, December 2009. 11. October 12: Dorrien, chpts. 2-3; 3 12. Oct. 14: Kristol and Kagan, “Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy,” Foreign Affairs, July-August 1996 BB; Kristol and Kagan, eds., Present Dangers, Introduction BB. Read the biographical profiles of Kagan and Kristol from Right Web and from Wikipedia (4 essays) BB 13. Oct. 19: Dorrien, chpt. 4 14. Oct 21: Halper and Clarke, chpts. 3-6 15. Oct. 26 : Defense Planning Guidance, 1992, excerpts, Patrick Tyler, New York Times, (hereafter NYT), March 8, 1992 BB; Richard Cheney, “Defense Strategy for the 1990s” (1993) BB; Rebuilding America’s Defenses, PNAC 2000—there was an update of this statement issued after Bush’s victory in the 2000 election, entitled Preserving Pax Americana, Jan. 2001, which is what you will find on the BB 16. Oct. 28: PNAC website: newamericancentury.org: “Statement of Principle” BB; January 1998 “Letter to Clinton on Iraq” BB; September 1998 Wolfowitz testimony on Iraq before the House National Security Committee BB [this needs to be saved, then opened]; Kagan and Kristol “A Green Light for Israel,” 8/27/2001 BB Take the time to look over the pnac website to see what else of interest you find. Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, Jerusalem: “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” BB 17. Nov. 2: George W. Bush, “The National Security Strategy of the United States,” September 2002, BB; Kagan and Kristol in the Weekly Standard, 2001-2003 as well as the Progressive Policy Institute, ppionline.org—peruse the websites for yourself, dipping in here and there to see if you come up with a common world view held by certain Republicans and certain Democrats. 18. Nov. 4: Kaplan and Kristol, The War over Iraq, entire; the National Security Strategy of the United States, September 2002 (whitehouse.gov) BB 19. Nov. 9: Kagan, Of Paradise and Power, entire (be sure you have the revised edition, 2004, which has an interesting epilogue not present in the first edition, 2003) THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 11: VETERANS’ DAY NO CLASS 20.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Leftist Case for War in Iraq •fi William Shawcross, Allies
    Fordham International Law Journal Volume 27, Issue 6 2003 Article 6 Vengeance And Empire: The Leftist Case for War in Iraq – William Shawcross, Allies: The U.S., Britain, Europe, and the War in Iraq Hal Blanchard∗ ∗ Copyright c 2003 by the authors. Fordham International Law Journal is produced by The Berke- ley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj Vengeance And Empire: The Leftist Case for War in Iraq – William Shawcross, Allies: The U.S., Britain, Europe, and the War in Iraq Hal Blanchard Abstract Shawcross is superbly equipped to assess the impact of rogue States and terrorist organizations on global security. He is also well placed to comment on the risks of preemptive invasion for existing alliances and the future prospects for the international rule of law. An analysis of the ways in which the international community has “confronted evil,” Shawcross’ brief polemic argues that U.S. President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were right to go to war without UN clearance, and that the hypocrisy of Jacques Chirac was largely responsible for the collapse of international consensus over the war. His curious identification with Bush and his neoconservative allies as the most qualified to implement this humanitarian agenda, however, fails to recognize essential differences between the leftist case for war and the hard-line justification for regime change in Iraq. BOOK REVIEW VENGEANCE AND EMPIRE: THE LEFTIST CASE FOR WAR IN IRAQ WILLIAM SHAWCROSS, ALLIES: THE U.S., BRITAIN, EUROPE, AND THE WAR IN IRAQ* Hal Blanchard** INTRODUCTION In early 2002, as the war in Afghanistan came to an end and a new interim government took power in Kabul,1 Vice President Richard Cheney was discussing with President George W.
    [Show full text]
  • Assange, Snowden Pardons Can Expose 2016-2020 Russiagate Hoax Dec
    III. Imperial Shadow Over U.S. Election Exonerate LaRouche! Assange, Snowden Pardons Can Expose 2016-2020 Russiagate Hoax Dec. 18—The possibility that Presi- dent Donald Trump may pardon WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, now being slowly killed in a London prison—especially in the aftermath of the recent resignation of Attorney General William Barr—has raised a number of tantalizing questions: Will the Russiagate “computer hack that never was,” so central to the present Assange incarceration and torture, finally be brought to light if he is released from prison? Will the criminal conspiracy against CC/Ordercrazy the U.S. Presidency that involved By pardoning Julian Assange (left) and “Five Eyes” intelligence agencies, Edward Snowden (right), President and City of London/Wall Street fi- Trump can free them to expose the ongoing criminal conspiracy against nancial interests, be exposed, the U.S. Presidency. Creative Commons through the declassification and re- lease of all documents essential to revealing the Russia- and fixed elections throughout the planet for decades— gate hoax? Will these documents include relevant por- regardless of where the chips may fall—Donald Trump tions of the tens of thousands of pages Ty Clevenger has could yet be inaugurated President in January 2021. learned that the FBI has just acknowledged to exist in If the truth of the campaigns of 2016 and 2020 were their files that are relevant to his request in a Freedom of finally told to the American people, whoever does that Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit regarding information will have earned their undying support. And that truth- on Seth Rich? Will we perhaps finally see the release of ful explanation will instantly reveal the bloody face of these and other documents through the firings and/or the Obama-Bush Administrations joined at the hip resignations of CIA Director Gina Haspel and FBI Di- through their advocacy of war as the primary tool of rector Christopher Wray, following William Barr? diplomacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard V. Allen Papers
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt696nf2n3 No online items Register of the Richard V. Allen papers Finding aid prepared by Hoover Institution Library and Archives Staff Hoover Institution Library and Archives © 2009, 2016 434 Galvez Mall Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-6003 [email protected] URL: http://www.hoover.org/library-and-archives Register of the Richard V. Allen 2007C17 1 papers Title: Richard V. Allen papers Date (inclusive): 1948-1999 Collection Number: 2007C17 Contributing Institution: Hoover Institution Library and Archives Language of Material: English Physical Description: 123 manuscript boxes, 9 oversize boxes(59.1 Linear Feet) Abstract: Contains correspondence, speeches, interviews, legal files, subject files, photographs, audio and video recordings, clippings, and notes relating to Allen's work in American politics and government. As a specialist in security and foreign policy, Allen worked on the Nixon and Reagan campaigns and held posts on the National Security Council under each of them. Topics of note include: Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Richard Nixon, foreign policy, national security, political campaigns, Iran hostage crisis, Republican National Committee, libel and media abuses, Korea, and Taiwan. Creator: Allen, Richard V. Hoover Institution Library & Archives Access Boxes 3, 13-18, 36-42, 51-53, 60-61, 77, 85-88, and an audiocassette in Box 105 closed during the lifetime of Richard V. Allen. The remainder of the collection is open for research; materials must be requested at least two business days in advance of intended use. Publication Rights For copyright status, please contact the Hoover Institution Library & Archives. Acquisition Information Acquired by the Hoover Institution Library & Archives.
    [Show full text]
  • On Strategy: a Primer Edited by Nathan K. Finney
    Cover design by Dale E. Cordes, Army University Press On Strategy: A Primer Edited by Nathan K. Finney Combat Studies Institute Press Fort Leavenworth, Kansas An imprint of The Army University Press Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Finney, Nathan K., editor. | U.S. Army Combined Arms Cen- ter, issuing body. Title: On strategy : a primer / edited by Nathan K. Finney. Other titles: On strategy (U.S. Army Combined Arms Center) Description: Fort Leavenworth, Kansas : Combat Studies Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Center, 2020. | “An imprint of The Army University Press.” | Includes bibliographical references. Identifiers: LCCN 2020020512 (print) | LCCN 2020020513 (ebook) | ISBN 9781940804811 (paperback) | ISBN 9781940804811 (Adobe PDF) Subjects: LCSH: Strategy. | Strategy--History. Classification: LCC U162 .O5 2020 (print) | LCC U162 (ebook) | DDC 355.02--dc23 | SUDOC D 110.2:ST 8. LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020020512. LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020020513. 2020 Combat Studies Institute Press publications cover a wide variety of military topics. The views ex- pressed in this CSI Press publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Depart- ment of the Army or the Department of Defense. A full list of digital CSI Press publications is available at https://www.armyu- press.army.mil/Books/combat-studies-institute. The seal of the Combat Studies Institute authenticates this document as an of- ficial publication of the CSI Press. It is prohibited to use the CSI’s official seal on any republication without the express written permission of the director. Editors Diane R.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:13-Cv-03994-WHP Document 42-1 Filed 09/04/13 Page 1 of 15
    Case 1:13-cv-03994-WHP Document 42-1 Filed 09/04/13 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION; AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION; NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION; and NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION, Plaintiffs, v. No. 13-cv-03994 (WHP) JAMES R. CLAPPER, in his official capacity as Director of National Intelligence; KEITH B. ALEXANDER, in his ECF CASE official capacity as Director of the National Security Agency and Chief of the Central Security Service; CHARLES T. HAGEL, in his official capacity as Secretary of Defense; ERIC H. HOLDER, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States; and ROBERT S. MUELLER III, in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defendants. BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND 18 NEWS MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Of counsel: Michael D. Steger Bruce D. Brown Counsel of Record Gregg P. Leslie Steger Krane LLP Rob Tricchinelli 1601 Broadway, 12th Floor The Reporters Committee New York, NY 10019 for Freedom of the Press (212) 736-6800 1101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1100 [email protected] Arlington, VA 22209 (703) 807-2100 Case 1:13-cv-03994-WHP Document 42-1 Filed 09/04/13 Page 2 of 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii STATEMENT OF INTEREST ....................................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT…………………………………………………………………1 ARGUMENT……………………………………………………………………………………2 I. The integrity of a confidential reporter-source relationship is critical to producing good journalism, and mass telephone call tracking compromises that relationship to the detriment of the public interest……………………………………….2 A There is a long history of journalists breaking significant stories by relying on information from confidential sources…………………………….4 B.
    [Show full text]
  • By Philip Roth
    The Best of the 60s Articles March 1961 Writing American Fiction Philip Roth December 1961 Eichmann’s Victims and the Unheard Testimony Elie Weisel September 1961 Is New York City Ungovernable? Nathan Glazer May 1962 Yiddish: Past, Present, and Perfect By Lucy S. Dawidowicz August 1962 Edmund Wilson’s Civil War By Robert Penn Warren January 1963 Jewish & Other Nationalisms By H.R. Trevor-Roper February 1963 My Negro Problem—and Ours By Norman Podhoretz August 1964 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 By Alexander M. Bickel October 1964 On Becoming a Writer By Ralph Ellison November 1964 ‘I’m Sorry, Dear’ By Leslie H. Farber August 1965 American Catholicism after the Council By Michael Novak March 1966 Modes and Mutations: Quick Comments on the Modern American Novel By Norman Mailer May 1966 Young in the Thirties By Lionel Trilling November 1966 Koufax the Incomparable By Mordecai Richler June 1967 Jerusalem and Athens: Some Introductory Reflections By Leo Strauss November 1967 The American Left & Israel By Martin Peretz August 1968 Jewish Faith and the Holocaust: A Fragment By Emil L. Fackenheim October 1968 The New York Intellectuals: A Chronicle & a Critique By Irving Howe March 1961 Writing American Fiction By Philip Roth EVERAL winters back, while I was living in Chicago, the city was shocked and mystified by the death of two teenage girls. So far as I know the popu- lace is mystified still; as for the shock, Chicago is Chicago, and one week’s dismemberment fades into the next’s. The victims this particular year were sisters. They went off one December night to see an Elvis Presley movie, for the sixth or seventh time we are told, and never came home.
    [Show full text]
  • Staff Column: Trump’S Sisyphean Task
    Staff Column: Trump’s Sisyphean Task You all remember Sisyphus, history’s first rock star. Or maybe you don’t. He’s the king in Greek mythology who was condemned by some angry gods to roll a massive boulder all the way to the top of a steep mountain. The rock would immediately roll right back down and he’d have to start all over. For eternity. It is a slight overstatement to say that Donald Trump may be looking at Sisyphus with a touch of envy right about now, but the president-elect does face some daunting and hellish tasks. Chief among them is how to live up to his vow to ‘bring this country together.’ Sure, he now has a favorability rating of about 50%, way up from a few weeks ago. But that means about half the country still disapproves of Mr. Trump, and many of those folks will never, ever be swayed into thinking otherwise. Compared to Donald Trump, Barack Obama had a romantic and lusty honeymoon with the American people. Part of the Trump resistance comes from people who depend on government help, which is traditionally the domain of Democrats. About 100-million Americans receive some form of government assistance other than Medicare or Social Security. In other words, they’re ‘on the dole,’ to use a quaint expression that may now be considered hate speech. Welfare reform, enacted by Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, forced millions of Americans to find meaningful work, but the rules imposed by that law have been unraveled. ‘One of the most pernicious things that has happened in this country,’ Karl Rove lamented on The Factor this week, ‘is that President Obama has systematically and quietly undone a lot of what that welfare reform law did.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting the Jackson Legacy Peter Beinart
    Henry M. Jackson Foundation 1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1580 Seattle, Washington 98101-3225 Telephone: 206.682.8565 Fax: 206.682.8961 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.hmjackson.org Henry M. Jackson Foundation TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY LECTURE nterpreting the JacksonI Legacy in a Post-9/11 Landscape By Peter Beinart About the Foundation Since its establishment in 1983, the Henry M. Jackson Foundation has been dedicated to helping nonprofit organizations and educational institutions in the United States and Russia. The Foundation’s grants provide essential support and seed funding for new initiatives that offer promising models for replication and address critical issues in four areas in which the late Senator Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson played a key leadership role during his forty-three- year tenure in the United States Congress: Inter- national Affairs Education, Environment and Nat- ural Resources Management, Public Service, and Human Rights. About this Publication On the occasion of its twenty-fifth anniversary, the Henry M. Jackson Foundation hosted a dinner and conversation at the National Press Club in Wash- ington, D.C.. Journalist Peter Beinart was invited to share his thoughts on the Jackson legacy and the Foundation’s commemorative publication, The Nature of Leadership, Lessons from an Exemplary Statesman. Foundation Executive Director Lara Iglitzin served as moderator for the discussion that followed his remarks. nterpreting the JacksonI Legacy in a Post-9/11 Landscape WASHINGTON, D.C. • SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 y y Connoll r y Har Photo b PETER BEINART Peter Beinart is a senior fellow at The Council on Foreign Relations. He is also editor-at-large of The New Republic, a Time contributor, and a monthly columnist for The Washington Post.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Birmingham Why American Grand Strategy Has Not
    University of Birmingham Why American Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Porter, Patrick DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00311 License: None: All rights reserved Document Version Peer reviewed version Citation for published version (Harvard): Porter, P 2018, 'Why American Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit and the U.S. Foreign Policy Establishment', International Security, vol. 42, no. 4, 1, pp. 9-46. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00311 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: Article published in International Security on 04/05/2018 DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00311 Why America's Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit, and the U.S. Foreign Policy Establishment, Patrick Porter, International Security 2018 42:04, 9-46 General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.
    [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]
  • “Benevolent Global Hegemony”: William Kristol and the Politics of American Empire
    Gary Dorrien “Benevolent Global Hegemony”: William Kristol and the Politics of American Empire by Gary Dorrien ear the end of the Cold War a group of neo-conservative intellectuals and Npolicy makers began to argue that instead of cutting back on America’s vast military system, the United States needed to use its unmatched power to create a global Pax Americana. Some of them called it the unipolarist imperative. The goal of American foreign policy, they argued, should be to maintain and extend America’s unrivaled global dominance. The early advocates of unipolar dominance were familiar figures: Norman Podhoretz, Midge Decter, Charles Krauthammer, Paul Wolfowitz, Joshua Muravchik, and Ben Wattenberg. Their ranks did not include the godfather of neo-conservatism, Irving Kristol, who had no interest in global police work or crusading for world democracy. Though he later clarified that he was all for enhancing America’s economic and military preeminence, Irving Kristol thought that America’s overseas commitments should be determined by a classically realist calculus. His son William Kristol had a greater ambition for America, which he called “benevolent global hegemony.” In 1992, the New York Times revealed that Wolfowitz, then an undersecretary for defense, was drafting a new policy plan for the Pentagon that sought to prevent any nation or group of nations from challenging America’s global supremacy. President George Bush disavowed the controversial plan, and for the rest of the 1990s establishment Republicans did not speak of grand new strategies. But the neo-cons continued to argue for “American Greatness,” founded new institutions, and made alliances with hard-line conservatives such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bush Revolution: the Remaking of America's Foreign Policy
    The Bush Revolution: The Remaking of America’s Foreign Policy Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay The Brookings Institution April 2003 George W. Bush campaigned for the presidency on the promise of a “humble” foreign policy that would avoid his predecessor’s mistake in “overcommitting our military around the world.”1 During his first seven months as president he focused his attention primarily on domestic affairs. That all changed over the succeeding twenty months. The United States waged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. U.S. troops went to Georgia, the Philippines, and Yemen to help those governments defeat terrorist groups operating on their soil. Rather than cheering American humility, people and governments around the world denounced American arrogance. Critics complained that the motto of the United States had become oderint dum metuant—Let them hate as long as they fear. September 11 explains why foreign policy became the consuming passion of Bush’s presidency. Once commercial jetliners plowed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, it is unimaginable that foreign policy wouldn’t have become the overriding priority of any American president. Still, the terrorist attacks by themselves don’t explain why Bush chose to respond as he did. Few Americans and even fewer foreigners thought in the fall of 2001 that attacks organized by Islamic extremists seeking to restore the caliphate would culminate in a war to overthrow the secular tyrant Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Yet the path from the smoking ruins in New York City and Northern Virginia to the battle of Baghdad was not the case of a White House cynically manipulating a historic catastrophe to carry out a pre-planned agenda.
    [Show full text]