Dominance of Neoconservative Ideology in Washington

LewRockwell.com

The distant and abstruse roots of neoconservative thought have been explored, for example, in a 2003 article by Frachon and Vernet. Others have explained how neoconservatives “conquered Washington”. They have indeed conquered Washington. Every time that the Congress in both Houses votes with near unanimity for sanctions against Iran, Russia and other countries, we see the neoconservative ideological dominance. Every time that the Congress by wide margins appropriates funds for its Middle Eastern wars, we see that the neoconservative dominance runs deeply through the entire government. Every time the government produces its National Security Strategy, we see the hand of neoconservative thought. And every time we notice the closeness between the foreign policies of Obama in office and Romney’s prospective policies, we see Washington’s thought in thrall to neoconservative ideas.

The neoconservative dominance needs to be pointed out because their ideas have produced continual wars at enormous costs and continual defeats without benefits. Neoconservative policies operate out of ideology. These policies are simple-minded, naive, and cruel. They are coercive and imperial, attempting to achieve hegemony mainly by force, a method doomed to failure. They disregard the politics, social issues and peoples of other lands. In Iraq, for example, 500,000 Iraqis have died because of the U.S. attack, according to a new study.

Having destroyed the existing state, the U.S. occupation attempted to create a new state. This could not be accomplished without gaining the consent of the Sunni minority of some 20-30%. But the U.S. proceeded to marginalize this group. De-Ba’athification created this result and worse. In addition, the Kurdish population, another 10%, has a fragile relationship to the dominant Shiite group. The U.S. produced such a fragile state that ISIS is vying or competing to create a state, and it is doing so in two simultaneous ways. It is using force to conquer and intimidate, so as to support its hegemony. This is a war of movement. This cannot succeed by itself unless it also gains consent of people under its rule. Therefore, at the same time it is attempting to institute longer-term institutions. This is a war of position.

The U.S. administration did not have an understanding of how a state grows consensually out of a society and how internal groups maintain hegemony domestically. If it had and if this had mattered to it, it would never have attacked Iraq or Libya or be attempting to get rid of Assad in Syria, which will produce another failed state and opportunity for jihadists. This lack of understanding persists to this day, as shown in U.S. actions in Libya, Syria and again in Iraq.

The main reason for the neoconservative lack of this understanding is the prevalence of ideology in their thought. Knowledge of actual relations in a society doesn’t matter to them. Neoconservatives are ideologues. They think that world order requires one state to maintain hegemony and they think that the U.S. is that state. For them, it is good by definition for the U.S. to expand its dominance anywhere and everywhere. For them, the U.S. is both exceptional and morally right in using power of all kinds to get its way. With this attitude held firmly, they cannot recognize or acknowledge defeats arising from their policies. They instead blame exogenous factors. They criticize individuals or the military or presidents for failing to carry through their recommendations. To them, the world is wrong and the neoconservative ideology is right.

Neoconservative ideology is propagated throughout America and has a strong foothold. Terror threats keep it alive. Public opinion is volatile. There was substantial disaffection over Iraq and Syria. At the moment, ISIS has turned that around because a large majority of Americans are very or somewhat concerned over a threat to themselves from ISIS. If Americans had active militia and if Americans were armed with AK-47s that they kept at home, then perhaps they wouldn’t be so easily scared of ISIS. But this is the opposite of the case. Americans are not actively engaged in their own defense. They are, in fact, cowed by their own police forces.

It is very important not to let neoconservatives shift the blame to others for the fiascoes that they have created and continue to create.