For all of you, english spoken people, what is the meaning of neo-con?

thanks,

Probably is neo conservatives.It is a political term.

Neo conservative. It originally meant specifically former liberals who have become conservative, but the meaning has broadened somewhat, it appears, to mean conservatives who are not the traditional, states-rights wing of the Republican party but a more activist branch w/ a 'moral'/ideological agenda in domestic & international affairs.

for those of us who never abandoned our leftist orientation - Neocon is a four-letter word....

yeah all rolling stones are neo Conservatives, I think----and thats not bad..

Lets not go there...

"yeah all rolling stones are neo Conservatives, I think----and thats not bad"

Hmmm...Logical words from a person who loves the Pope!

No they aren't Havo. Fortunately...

Neo means 'new' or 'modern' as in neo-Nazi. There has never been any affiliation with 'anything' liberal. They are not here to 'liberate' us.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.

RankOutsider:

But, as John R correctly points out, this Neocon base is primarily made up of former liberals.

Defintions in Wikipedia -

[en.wikipedia.org])

"The neoconservatives, often dubbed the neocons by critics, are credited with (or blamed for) influencing U.S. foreign policy, especially under the administrations of Ronald Reagan (1981–1989) and George W. Bush (2001–present). Neoconservatives have often been singled out for criticism by opponents of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, many of whom see this invasion as a neoconservative initiative. Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an aggressive moralist stance on foreign policy, a lesser social conservatism, and weaker dedication to a policy of minimal government, and a greater acceptance of the welfare state, though none of these qualities are necessarily requisite."

I guess it's the Iraq invasion that gets the most attention and draws the anger that the song purportedly conveys.

For those of you who are automatically opposed to the war, I suggest you read the articles found from the following links:

[www.washingtonpost.com]

[www.opinionjournal.com]

One is from the Washington Post ( a leading newspaper hated by conservatives and loved by liberals) written by a fairly liberal think tank. The other is from the Wall St. Journal (conservative).

Bottomline - The Sunni insurgency overshadows the overthrow of a ruthless, mass-murdering dictator that it supported (nevermind Baathists, even Zarqawi was allowed to operate under Saddam). Face it, there are many Islamic extremists who like to kill people in office buildings and trains, and they'll never negotiate with anyone (Atheist, Christian, Hindu,Shiite Muslim etc.) who doesn't believe women belong in burqwas (and out of school) or who even shaves.

Such people need to be rooted out and dealt with, even if the cost appears to be high. People who don't think so would likey have been pacifists and isolationists during World War II!!!

Hey...before you respond...at least read the articles I provided.

I'm sure we're all well-versed in the reasons we're in Iraq. And I don't think anyone on this forum is going to change anyone's opinions of the BushCo administration and/or its policies.

You're sure everyone is well-versed in ALL of the information?

Not looking to change minds, but some people need more information than whatever CBS and CNN tells them in 5 minute soundbites. I just offered some good information. Hope you take some time to read it.

I'll listen to Neocon for the music, but pretty sure the words will make me wince.

By the way, here's what Bono said on Bush and Aids funding:

[news.bbc.co.uk]

Here's Bob Geldof on Bush and African aid:

[www.freerepublic.com]

The neocon foreign policy includes fighting poverty and democratizing those nations who wish to belong to the free world. Count me in.

Dont always agree w T&A re the RS, so its nice to agree on something

T&A, Where do you get this: But, as John R correctly points out, this Neocon base is primarily made up of former liberals.


Where and how did you come up with this insight? I think if you check the track record of the people in the Bush Administration that make up this group, you won't find many things liberal about them. The neo-cons are a renegade group, (most traditional conservatives don't like them either), who's primary vision is that of world domination by the U.S., hence the invasion of Iraq.

Heh, someone here seemed to demonstrate by personal exemplar what is the meaning of 'neo-con'. Keeping that in my mind, now all I need is to hear the song.

- Doxa

I don't believe they would release album with this name. The Stones have no guts to do this.

padenis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't believe they would release album with this
> name. The Stones have no guts to do this.


Well, I don't think it is a question of having guts. Namely there are always some dangers in labelling a whole record with a politically laden or temporally cheap (think "England's Newest Hit Makers") notion. For example, how would people react into or interpret that? In this case, the danger of misguidence is easily available. You know, it's like Bruce with "Born In The USA".. many people still (me included) take the song to be an anthem for Reagan era patrionism. It's the old truth that it really doesn't matter what they write about you in the page 69 as far as your face is in the front page - in a pop song it's the chorus or the key phrases that matters, not what you say in verses. Just think "Born in the USA" or "Satisfaction". No matter how critical or cynical or ironical The Stones perhaps intend to be if they would name the record as 'Neo-Con', there is a fear that they will make an ode to economical neo-liberalism, current international political trend or whatever (of course, some people could be very happy of that ), and they will target themselves for easy attacks; the press will have new material for headlines instead of old and tired "You Can't Always Get What You Want" or "I Can't Get Nop Satisafaction" ones... And I think in some peculiar way the meaning of "ex-liberals turning to conservatives" might suit quite well to the current Stones. Honestly, if I would be a tabloid journalist I couldn't resist to use this opportunity to slam the Stones with this label...

- Doxa

Not sure Mick wants to piss off the Neocons who have money to spend just to please the liberals who live off government handouts taken from the hard working. Mick knows who butters his bread and fills his bank account. He is a better business man than that.

RankOutsider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> T&A, Where do you get this: But, as John R
> correctly points out, this Neocon base is
> primarily made up of former liberals.
>
>
> Where and how did you come up with this insight?

I'm not talking about Bush's henchmen - I'm talking about the base of his party - that demographic profile fits many if not most. I know alot of people who fit this discription to a T.

Star star Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For all of you, english spoken people, what is the
> meaning of neo-con?
>
> thanks,


its purely an American expression. It doesnt exist in the UK

Steven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure Mick wants to piss off the Neocons who
> have money to spend just to please the liberals
> who live off government handouts taken from the
> hard working.

Watch it Steven. I consider myself a liberal - and I'll put my "hard-working" credentials up against yours or anyone else's.

If the Stones are going to get political I wish they would take on Al Qaeda and the regime in North Korea...

NO--- NEVER the STONES would get Political, otherwise This would be the first Stones-record I wouldnt buy since 64

I know, lets start a political thread!

The stones may call it that but the lyrics will probably be subtle compared to other bands who have political themes in their music.

this is an absolute terrible name for a new album. especially when you have done one in 8 years.

it seems unlikely the stones would want to lean in any particular political direction to turn off any possible income by venting opinions.

i certainly hope this is just a rumour. i think i liked the 'manhattan beach' idea better.

The Stones aren't into propaganda, ideology - a big part of their 'politics'(when you can say they venture into such territory) imo have to do w/ personal freedom, irony, poking at hypocrisy (as in their class-awareness evident at least from 'Play With Fire'). SFM, SFTD, Salt of the Earth, GS, etc are all poweful and somewhat ambiguous, and even 'Highwire' wasnt anthemic enough for a rousing anti-war embrace, so I doubt 'Neocon' will be one dimensional, but such a title is by no means foreign to their sensibilities, even if it is more direct than usual. They capture their lives & times from their own perspective, & they're intelligent cosmopolitan men of the world. Mick's most crude lyrics (Sparks Will Fly) seem to come from a lusty guy who has never been a typical monogamous family man, & never pretended to be. Even 40 years ago they were (Brian included, as I recall from interviews) anti gay discrimination, pro abortion, pro choice on drugs, anti racism, etc. Sorry if this seems too obvious...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-07-22 05:46 by john r.

Thank you Robert Stones1 for the great links. I will use them in discussions on other boards to raise awareness of the brilliant leadership of George W!

Simply put, neo-cons are the BAD GUYS! The Bush supporters, the faux-CXhristian right wing Anti-Stem Cell, Anti-women, Anti-Freedom of choice party!

After reading all your silly posts tonite, I kinda think of joining the neo-cons because of their women's program point.