Neoconservatism: Mainstream Voice of National Security!

Behold the coordinated attacks between the antiwar conservatives and their leftist brethren on the revival of neoconservatism at the Kristol/Kagan Foreign Policy Initiative (via Memeorandum):

First, the "realist" Stephen Walt, "Would you buy a used foreign policy from these guys?" (don't miss the worst-case photo illustration at the post). Then, Robert Farley, "Will They Get What They Want?":

I'm guessing that FPI is going to be a good deal less successful than PNAC. For one, not many people seem to be buying into the efforts of neocons to distance themselves from the Iraq War.

Then there's The Raw Story, "Scooter Libby shows up for neoconservative foreign policy summit." And also, Matt Duss at the Wonk Room, "Brose: Neocons Are Just Alright," which links to conservartive Christian Brose's, "Neo-cons gone wild!" (which has even more links). Duss is interviewed by Rachel Maddow at the YouTube above.

But for the first time in a long time, I'm happy to quote from Matthew Yglesias, "The Inevitable Triumph of the Neocons":

The commanding heights of the information economy remain incredibly friendly to neocon perspectives. Kristol, Robert Kagan, and Charles Krauthammer are still all there op-edding away at The Washington Post. The Council on Foreign Relations is staffing up with neocons, adding Elliot Abrams to its arsenal. The Very Serious People at the Brookings Institution remain more likely to collaborate with neocons than with, say, Stephen Walt. And the FPI’s unveiling was validated by the attendance of Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and John Nagl, head of CNAS the left-of-center national security think tank of the moment. Basically, neoconservatism continues to be the mainstream voice of right-of-center national security—the perspective that establishment-oriented institutions feel compelled to shower with respect. The odds of a Republican president getting elected within the next 12 years are extremely high, and the odds of such an administration being heavily influenced by Foreign Policy Initiative ideas strike me as good.

I love it!

On this, I'm kind of like Yglesias: Where he thinks the neocons will have more influence than do all the other neocon-haters cited above (and that's including Brose), I think progressives like Yglesias and his nihilist netroots allies will have more influence than Ronald Brownstein allows in his recent essay, "Why Obama Can't Satisfy The Left."

Brownstein says, for example, "The bottom line is that, compared to Republicans, Democrats are operating with a much more diverse electoral coalition - and one in which the party's ideological vanguard plays a smaller role." That may be so, based on exit polling data from the November election. But the mainstream of the Democratic Party is already so far to the left, with the Obama White House, and the Pelosi/Reid Congress, that any successes on the right of the spectrum are to be celebrated. (And check with Joe Lieberman before dismissing the "smaller role" of the party's vanguard.)

So, go FPI!