While Neocons are chided for being naive in their methods, I still hold to the main objectives of supporting democracy and freedom as the best answer to extremist ideologies. I do believe we are in the great ideological struggle of our time. There is a lot of room for discussion, for how forward leaning and active we are in promoting these goals. This blog’s purpose is to support the goals of the Neoconservative movement with an openness to critical thinking about methods.
Update: Neo-NeoCon writes better than I can:
Democracy, its spread, and the neocons (Part I).
Neocons believe that the spread of liberal democracy–democracy with safeguards for human rights and liberties–would be of general benefit to the US, to the citizens of the countries involved, and to the world.
Although I’m sure there are some exceptions, most neocons also believe that the spread of liberal democracy to countries that have not known it before, or that knew it only briefly and/or erratically, is neither inevitable nor easy. But they believe it is possible rather than impossible.
Contrary to the notion of some critics, however, neocons neither prefer nor require that such transformation to democracy be accomplished by force–a peaceful evolution, relatively sudden or relatively gradual, is far superior. However, neocons are unwilling to rule out force under certain circumstances. A circumstance that could justify the use of force would be a country or leader constituting a serious threat to the US or its allies, one that doesn’t appear containable by other means. Neocons most definitely do not advocate warring on nation after nation for the sole purpose of installing democracies…
…But there’s no denying that the present form of liberal democracy in both Germany and Japan are direct results of their defeat in war, and a subsequent occupation and rebuilding effort spearheaded by the US. So it’s at least possible, under certain circumstances. (14 Feb 2007)