Nice article. Even if a bit hostile, I think his characterization of "neosocialism" as a counterpart of "neoconservativism" is quite accurate!
-- Ernie P. On Oct 30, 2012, at 1:46 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Still, the question remains, What do we call Obama’s “social-ism”? John > Judis’s formulation—“liberal socialism”—is perfectly serviceable, and so is > “social democracy” or, for that matter, simply “progressivism.” My own, > perhaps too playful, suggestion would be neosocialism. > > The term neoconservative was assigned—and with hostile intent—to a group of > diverse thinkers who had grown convinced that the open-ended ambitions of the > Great Society were utopian and, ultimately, counterproductive, even harmful. > At first, few neoconservatives embraced the label (as late as 1979, Irving > Kristol claimed he was the only one to accept the term, “perhaps because, > having been named Irving, I am relatively indifferent to baptismal caprice”). > But as neoconservatism matured, it did become a distinct approach to domestic > politics, one that sought to reign in government excess while pursuing > conservative ends within the confines of the welfare state. > > In many respects, Barack Obama’s neo-socialism is neoconservatism’s mirror > image. Openly committed to ending the Reagan era, Obama is a firm believer in > the power of government to extend its scope and grasp far deeper into > society. In much the same way that neoconservatives accepted a realistic and > limited role for the government, Obama tolerates a limited and realistic role > for the market: its wealth is necessary for the continuation and expansion of > the welfare state and social justice. While neoconservatism erred on the side > of trusting the nongovernmental sphere—mediating institutions like markets, > civil society, and the family—neosocialism gives the benefit of the doubt to > government. Whereas neoconservatism was inherently skeptical of the ability > of social planners to repeal the law of unintended consequences, Obama’s > ideal is to leave social policy in their hands and to bemoan the interference > of the merely political. > > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
