European conservatism is a coherent philosophy: the rich and well born rule and that is all there is to it. Everyone else must know their place.

Quite right.

The last fifty years of middle-class prosperity has in fact been an aberration of history, because all other human history has been characterized by a relatively small, wealthy ruling class dominating the rest of the population, virtually powerless and mostly poor.

Roosevelt was probably most responsible for the aberration of the middle class in the US, because before him there was hardly any middle class in the US. Having lost much of their domination in the 1930's and 1940's, the global banking class has since then militated to reclaim their domination. The goal is to restore the historical model, and they are well on-course to succeed.

Since the 1960s, neoconservatism has become another front for the hegemony of the global banking cartel. Neoconservatism has not gone away. It has put on a kinder, gentler face since neoconservative Bushism was discredited, but its goals have been accelerated by the global financial crisis. The old deceits are still there, including the pose of recycled liberal populism.

The last hope was that Obama would challenge the banks and initiate real reform, but no, he's done the opposite and has established reformist pretences instead. It's rather telling that Obama has continued all the policies of the Bush administration favoring the financial industry and favoring military imperialism. Unlike Bush, Obama appears to be a competent neoconservative.

The banksters own more than congress. They own the presidency. They own the US, and they're liquidating it as fast as they can because they have no use for the US as anything but a corpse to bleed dry of its wealth.

"There’s class warfare, all right," Mr. Buffett said, "but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html

... the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole."

For the last two and one half centuries wealth and power have been concentrating in the hands of fewer and fewer men and women. This wealth is now being used to construct and maintain the World Empire that is in the last stages of development. The World Empire is partly visible and partly invisible today.

Michael L. Chadwick

Introduction to Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. New York: The Macmillan Company (1966)

Conservative Intellectuals and Other Oxymorons

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

- John Stuart Mill

in its origins neoconservatism was a movement of the center-left

No, it never was "center-left" and didn't originate in the 1960's. That's propaganda issued by Irving Kristol since the 1960s to try to give neoconservatism credibility and was thoroughly discredited as a not-very-clever lie decades ago. Neoconservatism may have been adopted by ambitious persons who mouthed a little liberalism as a convenient political cover in the 1960s, but neoconservatism has always, always, always been totalitarian, and shares its roots with the European totalitarian movements of the early 20th century under Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin:

Although there are probably as many different interpretations of Strauss's teachings as there are Straussians, the three basic principles that the neocons glean from Strauss and Wohlstetter are:

1) There are a few superior people born to lead and the rest are merely followers who must be deceived and lied to if necessary by these leaders to be directed to the "right" path.

2) The powerful have the right to rule, and America must use its unchallenged power to control the rest of the world in order to enforce our own best interests and prevent any future rivals from emerging.

3) Religion is essential in the masses, as it makes them far easier to manipulate and control, but the true leaders should be free of religion and morality.

Neoconservatism, therefore, is inherently totalitarian.

The published, public policies of neoconservatism are in direct contradiction to US law and international law, and always have been.

US and International law explicitly prohibits military imperialism and specifically outlaws aggressive warfare - in fact, all warmaking except for defensive war against imperialism and aggressive warmaking. The intent of international law is to replace war with cooperation, negotiation, and compromise, through treaties, trade groups, and international courts, and to resolve differences between nations peacefully.

Neoconservatism, by contrast, seeks to impose order, hegemony, and dominance by a 'moral' nation over the world, by military force and political guile, for the 'good of humanity'. It does not compromise. Neoconservatism rejects international law as an intrinsic matter of policy. That's why neoconservatives hate the United Nations. The UN is just in their way. Far from regretting mass death, neocons justify it, since "Power requires Sacrifice".

Some of us aren't fooled by sugar-coated revisionism: neoconservatism, start to finish, is a crime against humanity, and in a just world would be prosecuted as such.

"We have to deliver growth to Wall Street and everyone knows exactly what is expected from us."

Translation: "The Market made me do it!"