Be very wary of neo-conservatives

In Mona Charen's recent column deifying Norman Podhoretz's book, she fails to inform the reader that she is a neo-conservative, and that Mr. Podhoretz is one of the fathers of neo-conservatism. Without this information, the reader may think that Ms. Charen approaches the book as an impartial critic, rather then a sycophant.

For the reader's benefit, I note the following major components of neo-conservatism:

1) The amalgamation of Russian communist and Germanic (without the Nazi anti-Semitism) authoritarianism layered on top of Socratic authoritarianism.

2) Those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right - the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.

3) The use of an "enemy," both within and without, to create fear in order to keep the masses under control; this is evidenced by Mr. Podhoretz's view in the book under discussion that we are in a war against Islamofacists (whoever they are, while I thought we were concerned with stateless terrorists who conduct terror attacks around the world) and war resisters (presumably any American against the war in Iraq).

4) The people are told what they need to know and no more in order to foster "perpetual deception" between the rulers and the ruled, or more plainly, the neo-conservatives are great believers in the efficacy and usefulness of lies.

So the next time you read a column by Mona Charen, Norman Podhoretz, Charles Krauthammer, Victor David Hanson, Jonah Goldberg, William Kristol, Cal Thomas, John Podhoretz or from the Hoover Institute, American Enterprise Institute or Project for a New American Century, to name just a few, be very, very skeptical.

Tom Bartlett-Svehla

Mundelein