79-11-B2

- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1979

<< Previous Broadcast

Next Broadcast >>

Neoconservatives

Transcript A favorite pastime of academicians is to categorize and label what they see as significant trends or movements in American life. Sometimes, however, these labels are misleading or premature. Still, Dr. Peter Steinfels makes an admirable attempt to characterize a political and intellectual group called "neoconservatives" in a new book of that title. One reason that this label has gained such quick acceptance among political observers is that many "neoconservatives" welcome the title. They don't mind being called conservatives as long as you tack the "neo" on the front of it! Who are the "neoconservatives" and what do they stand for? Dr. Steinfels tosses out quite a few names, such as Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Irving Kristal, Daniel Bell, Daniel Boorstin, the late Alexander Bickel, Senator Henry Jackson, Zbigniew Brzezinski and many others. Steinfels claims that unlike other political labels, "neoconservatism" does signify a specific set of beliefs. Steinfels lists what "neoconservatives" believe. To begin with, he says, they are not hostile to the idea of the welfare state, but they are critical of the Great Society version of it. Second, they respect the market economy as the best way to allocate resources, though they are willing to interfere when they feel it is necessary. "Neoconservatives" distrust the so-called "counter-culture" of the 1960's and emphasize a return to traditional values of religion and the family. "Neoconservatives" are also highly critical of post-Vietnam war isolationism. They are suspicious of "detente" and advocate a strong national defense. Dr. Steinfels emphasizes the strong belief of the "neoconservatives" that the concept of social stability must be reaffirmed. Many "neoconservatives" could be described as New Deal Democrats who became disillusioned with American society and politics during the 1960's. They deplored what they saw as a decline of morality accompanied by a decline of institutions such as religion, the family and government. They are a pragmatic group, more interested in keeping the machinery of society working in an orderly way, rather than in any particular ideology. Steinfels does a good job defining the beliefs of "neoconservatives" and tracing their political and social backgrounds. He treats the group objectively, even though he reveals his own liberal perspective in the book's first paragraph when he makes this nebulous assertion: If "neoconservatism" should prevail, it "threatens to ... diminish the promise of American democracy." I suspect that Dr. Steinfels and other liberals take comfort in the growth of "neoconservatism"--a conservatism that does not rock the welfare state boat or question, basically, the role of government in our lives. He is quick to declare "neoconservatism" as: "the serious and intellectual conservatism America has lacked." Well, that's a curious assertion. I'm sure that William Buckley, Bill Simon, Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman and many others would be quite surprised to learn that their more traditional brand of conservatism is not 'serious and intellectual.' The author does not acknowledge the contribution of these leading conservative thinkers to the politcal dialogue. A discussion of the interesting relationship between standard conservatism and "neoconservatism" is sorely lacking. But despite this reservation, Peter Steinfels' book is a respectable attempt to define what has become a potent political and intellectual force--"neoconservatism." This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening.		Details Batch Number 79-11-B2 Production Date 07/27/1979 Book/Page Online PDF Audio Youtube? No
		Added Notes