Neo-con jihadis

Paul Gottfried explains here that of course neo-cons are imperialists. He uses the word imperialism as if it were a bad thing, when in its time British imperialism did a huge amount of good, as well as some bad things. The neo-cons had idealistic motives for wanting to export their values to the world but unlike the great Clive of India, who was not idealistic at all, their legacy is disastrous. 

Vladimir Putin is a bad man, as was Peter the Great. Putin's bloodless invasion of the Crimea and the bloody proxy wars he wages in Eastern Ukraine are completely unjustified, but his perception that he is combating US and EU imperialism is accurate enough. 


The EU and Nato extended their borders to close to St. Petersburg, albeit because the Balts wanted protection from the bear. The EU and US were working to help Ukrainian civil society find a way of preserving democratic values under an unpleasant pro-Russian government and this helped the overthrow of his regime, undoubtedly by the wish of much of the population. Bringing liberal values is a sort of imperialism, as the Arabs see most clearly.

From Paul Gottfried's article:

It might be argued (and has been by neoconservatives many times) that the U.S. is both morally superior and less dangerous than ethnically defined societies because we advocate a “value” or “creed” that’s accessible to the entire human race. But this is hardly a recipe for peace as opposed to what Krauthammer called a “value-driven” relationship with the rest of the world. British journalist Douglas Murray, in his intended encomium Neoconservatism: Why We Need It, tries to praise his subjects but ends up describing a kind of global democratic jihadism. While Douglas admits that “socially, economically, and philosophically” neoconservatism differs from traditional conservatism, he insists that it’s something better. He commends neoconservatives for wishing to convert the world to “values.” Their primary goal, according to Murray, is the “erasing [of] tyrannies and [the] spreading [of] democracy,” an arduous task that requires “interventionism, nation-building, and many of the other difficulties that had long concerned traditional conservatives.” 

Please tell me this is not what it obviously is: an invitation to war and empire building. The quest for hegemony always looks the same, no matter what moral labels some choose to give it.