Whatever Happened To Neoconservatism?

Ed West wants to know, although it is quite clear that he would like a way out of it once and for all.

Neoconservatism is New York Trotskyism and the London sectarian Left gone rich and powerful in middle age and beyond. But it remains Marxist in its dialectical materialism, only changing the ending so that the bourgeoisie wins. It remains Leninist in its vanguard elitism, and in its identification of religious and other "Useful Idiots".

It remains Stalinist in its belief that a continental superstate should establish the dictatorship of the victorious class and then export that dictatorship around the world, including by force of arms, while vanguard elites owe their patriotic allegiance to that superstate instead of to their own respective countries. And it remains Trotskyist in its entryism, and in its belief in the permanent revolution.

Yes, that does involve a lot of Jews. Secular Ashkenazi Jews whose nationalism is Zionism. But the secular Ashkenazi birth rate is now in freefall in the Zionist State, land of Arabs, ultra-Orthodox, and the Mizrahi Jews who were an integrated part of Arab society, one third of the population of Baghdad, until the American Ashkenazim, who had little or no concept of their existence in the way that many people in the West have no concept of Middle Eastern Christianity, forced Britain to endorse Zionism as one of the conditions of American entry into the First World War. Another such condition was the partition of the United Kingdom, demanded by another ill-informed ethnic lobby on the Hudson River.

No wonder that the consistent opposition to neoconservatism has come from the Old Right on both sides of the Atlantic and from those who look to the populist, non-Marxist, often explicitly Christian roots of British Labour and the American Democrats. Where that leaves Ed West, only he can answer.