was to show that the "neo-conservative" platform is the true conservative platform. It is consistent with the Federalists, Whigs, and Republican Party from its birth in 1856 to the present.
The only exception is the "old right," which I argue were a group of classical liberals (Robert Taft, etc) calling themselves conservatives within the Republican Party. They were largely a reaction to the "liberals" abandoning their platform under Wilson and FDR, leaving anyone with "libertarian" principles nowhere to go except to the Republican Party. The conservative philosophy has advocated big government, a wealthy elite with government privileges, and alignment with religion to control the behavior and thinking of the populace, and a military empire to dominate the world since at least Aristotle. Hobbes was only an Enlightenmnet argument for it. The Old Right was certainly better than anything else in the first half of the 20th century, but philosophically there are still flaws that lead to conclusions that are anti-liberty. That's where I'm coming from.
author of A Return to Common Sense: Reawakening Liberty in the Inhabitants of Amer
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved,