HAWKS VS. HAWKS….I agree with Tapped: this column by Ronald Brownstein is a pretty good primer on the ideological battle between the neocons and the “tough doves”:
The neo-cons want to frighten the bad guys in rogue states by demonstrating U.S. power and resolve. The tough doves want to unify the civilized world against emerging dangers by demonstrating the value of what Blair has memorably called “a new doctrine of international community.” The two camps are marching into battle together, but their own conflicts have just begun.
For some reason, Brownstein didn’t want to use the phrase “liberal internationalists,” and I assume he had good reason, but there’s got to be a better term than “tough doves.” At any rate, since that’s the camp I seem to be in, I’d sure like to see a better name for it.
You know, I’ve read a bunch of columns by Brownstein lately and they’ve all been pretty good. He seems like a sharp guy.
POSTSCRIPT: Another Matt Yglesias comment. He likes Brownstein’s column too but complains that:
….”neoconservative” carries heavy connotations of “Jewish,” as evidenced by the fact that Bill Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz are constantly cited as leading neocons while goyische Senator John McCain who seems to share their foreign policy views is not.
I dunno. The best known self-described neocons really are Jewish, aren’t they? ? so I’m not sure how you get away from this connotation. Does John McCain describe himself as a neocon? I really need to read up on this whole neocon thing and find who they really are and what they really think.
UPDATE: The Daily Review has some thoughts about this too, although in fairness I don’t think Matt suggested that the term “neocon” shouldn’t be used. He just….well, I’m not sure what he suggested, actually. Maybe he’s taking innuendo lessons from InstaPundit!