NEOCON REALISM IS ANTI-KISSINGERISM- NCOCON FOREIGN POLICY- (3) KALKI GAUR
Monday, September 11, 2006 12:30:29 AM
(3) Author: Kalki Gaur, “Manifesto of Neo-Conservatism”. (3) Neo-Cons Rejects Kissinger-type Realism
(1) OPPOSING KISSINGER-TYPE REALISM: One. The eleventh and final conviction that imparted a distinctive twist to the views of second-generation Neo-Conservatives was their hostility toward Kissinger-type realism, whether manifesting itself as a deficit of democratic ideals and surfeit of hidden iconoclast patriarchal agenda as in the case of Henry Kissinger or an excess of caution as in the case of Colin Powell. As long as the Cold War had persisted, Neo-Conservatives and Kissnger-type realists had maintained an uneasy alliance, based on their common antipathy for the Soviet Union. But once the Cold War ended, so too did end any basis for cooperation between the two groups, namely morally “right” Neo-Conservatives and morally “wrong” Kissinger-type realists with hidden patriarchal agenda. From the Neo-Conservative perspective, amoral Kissinger-type realism constituted a problem. Kissinger’s Realism was about defending American national interests, by balancing adversaries, not transforming the global order or to promote American hegemony. Kissinger-type amoral Realists had a marked aversion to India, and crusades for democracy and a marked respect for limits of American power and declared propensity to use covert operations to bring down democratically elected governments in the Non-Aligned World. Neo-Conservatives resented the hidden iconoclast patriarchal agenda of Secretaries Kissinger, Brzezinski and Albright.
(2) REALISTS AS PESSIMISTS:
Two. In the Neo-Conservative lexicon, the very notion of "limits" was anathema. Neo-Cons believed that to the extent that realists after the Cold War retained influence in White House foreign policy circles, they were likely to obstruct Neo-Conservative ambitions. So second-generation Neo-cons trained their gun-sights on Kissinger-type amoral realism and shot to kill. The problem with Kissinger-type amoral realists was that they were professional pessimists and were on the payroll of Communist China. In that regard there had always been "something about realism that runs directly counter to the fundamental principles of American society, democratic secular traditions, which gave Kissinger’s America a nick-name of "Butcher of Democracy,” in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, South Korea and South Vietnam. The essential issue for Neo-Cons is this: "if the United States is founded on universal principles, how can Americans practice amoral indifference when those principles are under siege around the world? And if they do profess indifference, how can they manage to avoid the implication that their principles are not universal?" To Neo-Conservatives the answer is self-evident: indifference to the violation of American ideals abroad is not simply wrong; it is un-American. Worse, such indifference pointed inevitably down a slippery slope leading back toward the 1960s or even the 1930s. An authentically American foreign policy must reject amorality and pessimism; it must refuse altogether to accept the notion of limits or constraints, in crusades for democracy.
(3) NEOCONS PURGED KISSINGER-STYLE REALISM:
Three. Neo-Conservative Jews directing Secretary Rice’s Neo-Conservative foreign policy agenda pay the price of purging the Neo-Conservatism of Judeo iconoclast patriarchy. America is a multi-ethnic, multi-racial and multi-religion idea because the only alternative is plain luck, or Divine Providence. Neo-Cons believe that Americans are a historically unique and chosen people, just as Jews believe that they are unique people. Hardly any Neo-Conservative is not a Jew, but then again, hardly any Jew is a conservative. Neo-Conservative Jews are above all critics of other Jews: they cannot be explained by their Jewishness unless it is Jewishness rightly understood by a very few. The American idea is democracy, a form of government that permits a man, to say that he is a Jew or an Indian before affirming he is an American. Most Jews are liberals, because they think that the secular humanism of liberals will guarantee Jews against anti-Semitism and make America their home. But the price exacted by liberalism is to transform Judaism into secular humanism, is the price is prohibitively high for Jews and for liberals as well, since a Jewish man is essentially a religious or "theotropic" man. Neo-Conservatism, when purged of its Judeo particularity becomes a universal philosophy, also relevant for democratic India. The department of State led by black woman Secretary Condoleezza Rice thinking politically purged the Kissinger-style realism, purged the hidden anti-democracy and anti-pagan agenda of iconoclast patriarchal Judeo-Christian religious right conspiracy, and in the process unshackled the Neo-Conservatism and transformed it into a vibrant world-philosophy that filled the vacuum created by the demise of Communism in the Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and transformed America into a revolutionary democratic power that seeks to usher in democratic revolution worldwide. Purging American State Department of Kissinger-Brzezinski-Albright style amoral “wrong” realism is a turning point in world history that shall define United States foreign policy in decades to come. Though Jews dominate the Department of Defense and the White House, they do not dominate the US Department of State during the second Bush administration.
(4) BUSH & RICE REJECT KISSINGER’S APPROACH:
Four. Black women Secretary Condoleezza Rice and President Bush's foreign policy in the second Bush Administration, after Bush charmed Indians with nuclear deal is distinctly Neo-Conservative policy and has ejected the hidden patriarchal iconoclast agenda of Kissinger-type amoral realism. In the Bush administration Protestant Neo-Conservatives formulate American foreign policy. The Neocons accomplished this, by selling their idealist ideology to a strong-willed president who does not belong to fundamentalist Christian religious right conspiracy, unlike President Ford, President Carter and President Clinton. Yet, the authors of essay “The Neo-Conservative Convergence,’ argued that none of the president's most influential foreign policy counselors--not Dick Cheney, not Donald Rumsfeld, not Condoleezza Rice--was considered a Neo-Conservative prior to 9/11. Secretary Rice, in fact, is the protégé of Brent Scowcroft, a leading proponent of the opposing foreign policy school known as Rooseveltian Realism." Dick Cheney, too, had been associated with that Rooseveltian Realism School through his key role in the "realist" administration of the first President George H.W. Bush. However, none of the member of the present ruling elite- Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld – was considered a member of the Kissinger-type amoral realism, with hidden iconoclast patriarchal agenda. The argument that the strong-willed Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rice were brainwashed by Neo-Conservatives in lower levels of the current administration is too implausible to entertain. Thus, one or both of two things must be true: either they switched to the Neo-Conservative approach in response to the events of 9/11 "mugged by reality," or the second Bush administration's approach is un-first administration and distinctively anti-Kissinger-type amoral realist and distinctly Neo-Conservative.
(5) NEOCONS ANTI-KISSINGER:
Five. Anti-Kissingerism is the principal contribution of Neo-Conservatism to American foreign policy. Neo-Conservatives scored their first important triumph challenging Nixon and Kissinger's realism. The Nixon-Kissinger strategy was aimed at drawing the Soviet Union into a new "structure of peace" through the balance of power with China and exchanging trade for diplomatic and military cooperation. The Kissinger had a secret religious right conspiracy agenda that he implemented without the consent of anti-Semite President Richard Nixon. Neo-Conservative foreign policy rested on illusions about the imminent Soviet threat and the window of vulnerability that would open if the United States did not rapidly accelerate its strategic weapons development. Neo-Conservatives also played a role in postponing rather than accelerating the end of the Cold War, which is not to be confused with the end of the Soviet Union itself. Neo-Conservatives focused on their opposition to Senator George McGovern and President Jimmy Carter and opposed the amoral iconoclast policies of Secretary Kissinger, Secretary Brzezinski and secretary Madeleing Albright, which was very important to their development as a vital Republican political force and their impact on American foreign policy.
(6) REJECTS KISSINGER-STYLE REALISM:
Six. Neo-Conservatives were against Kissinger-style realism, balance of power and détente that Secretary Kissinger designed to bring about the orderly decline of the United States after its dismal defeat in the Vietnam. In 1973 Neo-Conservatives began a campaign to link trade concessions to the Soviet Union to explicit Soviet concessions on Jewish emigration. Neo-Conservatives were concerned about Jewish emigration, but they were equally, if not more, determined to derail détente, which they thought was based on a false picture of the world and the Soviet Union. Neo-Conservatives rejected Kissinger's realism in the same spirit that Trotskyists had earlier rejected Stalin's nationalism. Neo-Conservatives insisted on passing Jackson-Vanik, and the Soviets then balked at complying with its terms, and détente, from that moment, was dead. Then onwards the United States could seek agreements with the Soviet Union based on mutual interest, but it could not pursue a general strategy aimed at ending the Cold War. Neo-Conservatives argued that the Soviet Union had used détente as a cover for its imperial aims. The Watergate scandal may have made it impossible for Nixon, Kissinger, and Gerald Ford to carry out their end of a détente strategy. By killing détente, the Neo-Conservatives encouraged the Soviet Union to undertake the military buildup and expansion of its influence overseas that the Neo-Conservatives later used as proof of their theories. Neo-Conservatism was a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it helped precipitate the crisis in U.S.-Soviet relations that it then claimed to uncover the Soviet military build-up and response to the end of detente. Nixon-Ford detente with the Soviet Union shortly after American defeat in the Vietnam was a total sell out of American national interests by Secretary Kissinger. Neo-Conservatives should be complimented for their bold initiatives that derailed the Kissinger-led sell out of American national interests.
(7) NEOCONS HATE KISSINGER-STYLE REALISM:
Seven. Neo-Conservatives have unadulterated contempt and hatred for Ashkenazi Jewish Kissinger-Brzezinski-Albright Nexus that misused the White House to promote a hidden extra-constitutional iconoclast patriarchal agenda. The neocons have contempt for dialogue and negotiation - for the minutiae of politics. Henry Kissinger came in for special reproach. Kissinger believed that the United States should ally with anyone if it enhanced the power of the United States after defeat in the Vietnam. Secretary Kissinger harnessed the commonality of Judeo-Communism and iconoclast patriarchy of Judeo-Christianity to bring about the first Sino-US joint venture that resulted in installing Catholic Pol Pot regime in Buddhist Cambodia and caused the genocide of 2 million Buddhists to great delight of those that wanted to Christianize Laos, Cambodia and the Vietnam. Republican Neo-Conservatives hated Secretary Kissinger’s role in the demise of democracy in Chile and Argentina and the subsequent loss of many thousands lives. Democratic Neo-Conservatives were aghast at Evangelical President Jimmy Carter’s ugly role in the overthrowing secular modern Pahlevi Monarchy as well as the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Shahpur Bakhtiar in Iran and replacing it by ultra-conservative regime of Ayatollah Khomeini. Such Kissinger-Brzezinski-Albright type amoral realism with hidden iconoclast patriarchal agenda is anathema to the Neoconservatives. The Neo-Conservative foreign policy agenda is to enhance America’s military power with lliance with major democratic powers such as India to meet the challenge of Communist China and to use America’s military power to reshape the world in the image of capitalist democracy and to establish liberal democratic governments in the Islamic Middle East to permanently destroy the breeding grounds of barbarian extremist fundamentalist militant Islamic terrorism.
(2) Neo-Cons War on Islamic Terrorrism
(8) TERROR IS NEW KIND OF WAR:
One. Conventional War against global Islamic terrorism no longer a practical option by great powers as conventional war on the Islamic world shall not be a plausible way of achieving American national goals, as the cost conventional of war against elusive Islamic terrorists, even for the victor may exceed the benefits of victory. One of the first and foremost pieces of the "old world" and "old thinking" to be tossed on the trash heap of history by Neo-Conservatives is the idealist view of human institution of war. Conventional War as an instrument of foreign policy in the idealistic view was a proper instrument for achieving national interest goals, but not any more in the global war on Islamic terror. Former President Woodrow Wilson was the founder of idealism or Wilsonian Idealist approach to foreign policy. Idealism is also marked by the prominent role played by international law and international organizations in its conception of policy formation.
(9) GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:
Two. Neo-Conservatism stands for a global war against Islamic terrorism. Whatever alternatives are proposed to replace the neo-conservative paradigm must effectively address the gritty reality of fighting Wahhabi terrorism on a global scale. All proposed alternatives to Neo-conservative agenda must pass a fundamental litmus test, they must offer a viable plan to solve the Middle East’s Wahhabi problem of religious fundamentalism, extremism and solve it in a permanent fashion, so that never again the barbarians of the Arabia invade and attempt to destroy civilizations. The Middle Eastern problem is quite simply that, the region exports radical Islamic terrorism and religious extremism and fundamentalism that directly threaten the safety of the United States and India. In the post-Cold War world in India and in the post-September 11th world in the United States, the Wahhabi terrorist threat constitutes the single greatest danger to Indian and American national security and to world civilization itself. The prospect of a Saudi Arabian or Iran financed Islamic terrorist nuclear weapon being detonated in an American city is horrifying but it is also not far fetched.
(10) NON-RATIONAL TERROR:
Three. Whereas the Soviet nuclear threat during the Cold War could be effectively contained and deterred through concepts such as "Massive Retaliation" and "Mutual Assured Destruction," the terrorist threat cannot. Men who view suicide bombing as a path to martyrdom are not persuaded through a rational cost-benefit calculus analyzing the destructive power of our arsenals versus their own. Unlike the Soviets, the Islamic terrorists themselves have little to lose. International terrorists provide few targets, other than themselves and the hidden infrastructure that supports them. In the mind of Neo-Conservatives the September 11 attacks made abundantly clear that American must undertake preemptive attacks on homelands of Islamic terrorism to vanquish them and followed by proactive democratic nation-building and society-building of the homelands of the Islamic terrorism in the Middle East that enforced western liberal traditions and equality of women. Successfully engaging and ultimately defeating such terrorists is a multi-faceted long-term endeavor, necessitating full mobilization of resources of democratic civilizations.
(11) PREEMPTIVE USE OF FORCE:
Four. The conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War that by implication, Neo-Conservatives were no longer inclined to employ force only after having exhausted all other alternatives. The Neo-Conservatives of the 1990s did not qualify as warmongers, but once having gotten a whiff of gunpowder during the Persian Gulf War of 1990–91, Afghan War of 2002 and Iraq War of 2003, Neo-Cons developed a hankering to repeat the experience. In the 1970s and 1980s, the proximate threat posed by the Soviet Union had obliged the United States to exercise a certain self-restraint. Now, with the absence of any counterweight to American power, the need for self-restraint fell away. Indeed, far from being a scourge for humankind, war itself even, or perhaps especially, preventive war became in Neo-Conservative eyes an efficacious means to serve democratic idealistic ends and morally “right” tasks. The problem with Bill Clinton in the 1990s was not that he was reluctant to use force but that he was insufficiently bloody-minded and that Secretary Madeleine Albright had a hidden anti-pagan, anti-democracy iconoclast patriarchal agenda. In Haiti, in Somalia, and elsewhere" where the United States intervened, President Clinton had the stomach only to be halfway imperialists, and when the heat was on, they Clinton to look for the exits. Such half-heartedness suggested a defective appreciation of what power could accomplish. Neo-Conservatives knew better. "Military conquest has often proved to be an effective means of implanting democracy. The best democracy program ever invented is the U.S. Army." "Peace in this world only follows victory in war."
(12) ASSERTIVE USE OF POWER:
Five. The Neo-Conservative complaint about Operation Desert Storm (1990-91) was that President George H. W. Bush and his commanders had failed to press the attack. In Neo-Cons’ eyes, the Persian Gulf War demonstrated that the Pentagon was a superb military instrument wielded by excessively timid officers, of whom General Colin Powell was the ultimate embodiment. "One of the Gulf war's important lessons is that America's military leadership is far too cautious. Indeed, promoting the assertive use of American military power became central to the imperial self-definition devised by second-generation Neo-Conservatives.
(13) ENHANCE AMERICAN SUPREMACY:
Six. The tenth conviction animating second-generation Neo-Conservatives was a commitment to sustaining and even enhancing American military supremacy. Using American force to advance the prospects of peace and democracy implied that the United States ought to possess military power to spare. Neo-Con historians even charged that the United States was repeating the folly of Great Britain in the period between the world wars by engaging in de facto unilateral disarmament. With the Cold War now history, it seemed, the world was becoming even more dangerous, and the United States therefore needed more military power than ever before. Whether or not a proximate threat existed, it was incumbent upon the Pentagon to maintain the capability "to intervene decisively in every critical region" of the world. To Neo-Cons, the prospect of conflict without end beckoned, because of the global threat of Islamic terrorism. Surveying the world, Neo-cons concluded in 1999, "America must be able to fight Iraq and North Korea, and also be able to fight genocide in the Balkans and elsewhere without compromising its ability to fight two major regional conflicts. America must be able to contemplate war with China or Russia some considerable (but not infinite) time from now. The peace that followed victory is to be a long time coming.
(14) MILITARY STRENGTH & MORAL CLARITY:
Seven. As the 1990s unfolded, Neo-Conservatives pressed their case for "an American policy of military strength and moral clarity," emphasizing the use of armed force to promulgate American values and perpetuate American primacy. Most persistently Neo-Conservatives throughout the Clinton years lobbied for decisive American action to rid the world of Saddam Hussein. From a Neo-Conservative perspective, the Iraqi dictator's survival after Desert Storm exposed as nothing else the cynicism and shortsightedness of the realists who had dominated the administration of George H. W. Bush and who had prevented the American army from completing its proper mission, pursuing the defeated Iraqi army all the way to Baghdad. Topping the agenda of the second-generation Neo-Conservatives was a determination to correct that error, preferably by mobilizing America's armed might to destroy the Baathist regime. "Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough." It was time for the gloves to come off, and that means using air power and ground forces, and finishing the job left undone in 1991." Neocons yearned to liberate Iraq, as an end in itself but also as a means to an eminently larger end. "A successful intervention in Iraq would revolutionize the strategic situation in the Middle East, in ways both tangible and intangible, and all to the benefit of American interests." A march on Baghdad was certain to have a huge demonstration effect. Iraq War puts dictators around the world, including Iran’s Ayatollahs on notice either to mend their ways or share Saddam's fate. Neo-Cons should silence doubters who questioned America's ability to export its values, its Creed via crusades for democracy.
(15) FINAL TRIUMPH OF AMERICAN CREED:
Eight. With American power now fully refurbished and vindicated by the outcome of the Cold War, the demise of Communism in the Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and the capitalist inroads into Communist China, the second generation Neo-Cons went a step further, promulgating the notion that the Neo-Conservative moment was now ripe for the United States to use that power, especially military power, to achieve the final triumph of American ideals and creed, especially the Wilsonian Idealism to promote and propagate democracy worldwide. In this sense, the Neo-Conservatives who gravitated to the Weekly Standard showed themselves to be the most perceptive of all of Woodrow Wilson's disciples. For the real Wilson (in contrast to either the idealized or the demonized Wilson) had also seen military power as an instrument for transforming the international system and cementing American primacy.
(16) BENIGN IMPERIUM:
Nine. Efforts to promote "a neo-Reaganite foreign policy of military supremacy and moral confidence" found expression in five convictions that together form the foundation of second-generation Neo-Conservative thinking about American statecraft. The first conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War is the certainty that American global dominion is, in fact, benign and that other nations necessarily see it as such. Thus, America is not just any hegemon. America runs a uniquely benign imperium. This is not mere self-congratulation by Neo-cons; it is a fact manifest in the way other nations welcome American power, so long it is used to promote or nurture democracy rather than install military dictators and tyrants. The baby-boomer neocons believe that other nations actually yearn for the United States to lead and to sustain its position as sole superpower. Other nations see American dominance as both compatible with their own national interests and preferable to any remotely plausible alternative such as the Chinese dominance or Islamic dominance.
(17) SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME:
Ten. The second conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War that any failure on the part of the United States to sustain American Imperium or Pax-Americana or Petro-Imperialism would inevitably result in global disorder and New Global Dark Age may descend on the earth, due to growing nexux of Islamic terrorism fundamentalism and global drug trade. Despite "all bleating about hegemony, no nation really wants genuine multipolarity." "Not only do countries such as France and Russia shy away from the expense of creating and preserving a multipolar world; they rightly fear the geopolitical consequences of destroying American hegemony." The cold hard reality of U.S. supremacy was sure to have "a calming effect on the international environment, inducing other powers to focus their energies and resources elsewhere." Rather than eliciting resistance, American dominance could be counted on to "have a soothing effect on the rest of the world." With the passing of the Cold War, "an ideologically pacified North seeks security and order by aligning its foreign policy behind that of the United States. This is the shape of things to come." Failure on the part of the United States to sustain its imperium or Pax-Americana or Petro-imperialism would inevitably result in global disorder, bloody, bitter, and protracted.
Eleven. The third conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War that as a result, proposals for organizing the world around anything other than American power elicited derision for being woolly-headed and fatuous. Nothing, therefore, could be allowed to inhibit the United States in the use of that power. "The United Nations is guarantor of nothing. Except in a formal sense, it can hardly be said to exist." As a result, "when serious threats arise to American national interests unilateralism is the only alternative to retreat." Or more extreme still, "The alternative to unipolarity is chaos." The incontrovertible fact of unipolarity demanded that the United States face up to its obligations, "unashamedly laying down the rules of world order and being prepared to enforce them."
(19) DANGEROUS 21ST CENTURY:
Twelve. The fourth conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War that on the one hand loomed the prospect of "a decline in U.S. power, a rise in world chaos, and a dangerous twenty-first century"; on the other hand was the promise of safety, achieved through "a reassertion of American power and moral leadership." To the Neo-Cons there existed "no middle ground," either you are with us or with them, either you are with America or against the America.
(20) NOTHING WORKS LIKE FORCE:
Thirteen. The seventh conviction animating second-generation Neo-Conservatives related to military power and its uses. In a nutshell, they concluded that nothing works like force. Europeans, might imagine themselves that with the new constitution of the 25-member European Union, the Europe "entering a post-historical paradise of peace and relative prosperity, the realization of Kant's ‘Perpetual Peace.'" American Neo-Conservatives know better, and in Neo-Con’s judgment, the United States remained "mired in history, exercising power in the anarchic Hobbesian world where international laws are unreliable and where true security and the defense and promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possession and use of military might." In the mind of the Neo-Cons employing America’s military might with sufficient wisdom and determination could bring within reach peace, prosperity, democracy, respect for human rights, and American global primacy in partnership with democratic allies like India, extending to the end of the 21st Century. The operative principle was not to husband power but to put it to work to take a proactive approach. "Military strength alone will not avail," if America does not use it actively to maintain a world order which both supports and rests upon American hegemony."
(21) TRANSFORM THE WORLD:
Fourteen. The conviction animating Neo-Conservatives after the Cold War that for Neo-Conservatives, the purpose of the Defense Department is no longer to defend the United States or to deter would-be aggressors but to transform the international order by transforming its constituent parts. The Neo-Cons and the liberal architects of the Iraq war and Afghan war should be "only too willing to tell other countries exactly how to organize their political and economic institutions," for the good of target country’s society and nation. For the younger generation of Neo-Conservatives, instructing other nations as to how to organize their countries, even by employing coercion if need be, is not evidence of arrogant stupidity; it was America's job or America’s Manifest Destiny in the 21st Century.
(22) AMERICA IS A REVOLUTIONARY FORCE:
Fifteen. Neo-Cons should discredit skeptics who claimed to see lurking behind Neo-Conservative schemes the temptations of empire, the dangers of militarism, and the prospect of exhaustion and overstretch, by openly advocating the benefits Arab society especially Arab women would get under colonial Western legal system. By forcibly overthrowing Saddam Hussein affirmed the irresistibility of American military might. As such, the armed liberation of Iraq transformed American foreign policy, by not preserving the status quo but promoting revolutionary democratic change, which thereafter defined the main purpose of American statecraft. The United States was "the most revolutionary force on earth," its "inescapable mission to fight for the spread of democracy," and the operative word is fight. Mao was precisely correct in stating that revolution springs "from the barrel of a gun." The successful ouster of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, during first Bush administration opened up whole new vistas of revolutionary opportunity in the second Bush administration in Iran and Sudan.
(23) NEOCONSERVATISM IS THE REIGNING IDEOLOGY OF THE 21ST CENTURY:
Hegelian philosopher Kalki Gaur belonging to the school of German Idealism is the patron Saint and philosophical Father to the political ideology and philosophy Neoconservatism. Hegelian Neocoservatism is the Revolutionary Ideology of the 21st Century and shall reign throughout 2000 years of the Aquarius Age. There are three political world philosophies in the world, namely, Neoconservatism, Communism and Fascism. Karl Marx was a prostitute philosopher and he produced shit-philosophy of Marxism and Communism, which his tribesmen over 100 years coated the shit Marxism in gold-plated and sugar coated capsules. Neoconservative political parties shall take control of the political power in over 100 countries of the world before 2050 AD. Neoconservatives should join forces to elect a Republican Neoconservative as the President of the United States in elections 2008 and also in India, Britain, Canada, Australia, Ireland, France, Germany and Japan.
Author: Kalki Gaur, “Manifesto of Neo-Conservatism”. © Copyrights 2006; Email: Dilomatkalkigaur@yahoo.com; Weblog http://360.yahoo.com/NeoconservativeManifesto Page 17, Chapter 1.