The developing Neoconservative perspective – smiles and smirks

The Neoconservative strategy of the 1980s was about smiles – and Reagan was the perfect accomplice. He fooled everyone to some degree, and had between decent and high approval ratings throughout his tragic presidency. How an empty-headed PR (public relations) rep can do that is an amazing accomplishment in itself, and must have made PR reps all over the world smile in glee.

When Bush II rolled around things really changed, and the smile became a smirk. The repeated condescending beatdowns and abuse didn’t seem to faze the American people for a while, then they started to get angry. In contrast to somewhat similar policies followed by Reagan (except a large-scale war), the Bush Administration is widely hated by Americans.

One explanation for why the extremely successful formula of Reagan plus smiles wasn’t just re-used is that the underlying socialist desires of the Neoconservatives are more fully emerging and the smirk is the next step in the process. Another is that 9/11 changed the PR vision of the executive to scowls and smirks – a cross between Darth Vader and Montgomery Burns. The Neoconservatives are all about political theater and they may have seen 9/11 as the beginning of a new act.

I’d very much like to see whether smirks and obvious condescension were used by Neoconservatives prior to 9/11 to test this theory.

3 Responses to “The developing Neoconservative perspective – smiles and smirks”

  1. Mr. Roach Says:

    There’s no similarity. Neoconservatism, realism, and other strains of conservatism all demanded containment and rollback of Soviets in the Eighties. Only the neos demanded world empire post-cold war. You’re pretty ignorant observations are not that interesting, nor is your psychologizing of Bush and Reagan.

  2. mad dog Says:

    This guy actually thinks Lew Rockwell is a Neoconservative.

  3. briankoontz Says:

    Neoconservatism is far-right Corporatism, which is why it’s so often thought of as Fascist. It has little to do with conservatism.

    The entire Cold War (and the entire American elite therein) was about containment and rollback of the Soviets, long before the Neocons came to town.

    As far as world empire post-cold war, that’s not true. Clinton (not a Neocon although an ally in Neoliberalism) pursued world empire post-cold war, just not with the kind of exuberance for military domination that the Neocons wanted. Guns, bombs, corpses, victims, and slaves, all for profit, are what the Neocons are about. Their black and white world always features red. As the current Bush says, “Bring it on!”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: