Neoconservatism as discourse: Virtue, power and US foreign policy

Abstract

Neoconservatism in US foreign policy is a hotly contested subject, yet most scholars broadly agree on what it is and where it comes from. From a consensus that it first emerged around the 1960s, these scholars view neoconservatism through what we call the '3Ps' approach, defining it as a particular group of people ('neocons'), an array of foreign policy preferences, and/or an ideological commitment to a set of principles. While descriptively intuitive, this approach reifies neoconservatism in terms of its specific and often static 'symptoms' rather than its dynamic constitutions. These reifications may reveal what is emblematic of neoconservatism in its particular historical and political context, but fail to offer deeper insights into what is constitutive of neoconservatism. Addressing this neglected question, this article dislodges neoconservatism from its perceived home in the '3Ps' and ontologically redefines it as a discourse. Adopting a Foucauldian approach of archaeological and genealogical discourse analysis, we trace its discursive formations primarily to two powerful and historically enduring discourses of the American self: virtue and power, and illustrate how these discourses produce a particular type of discursive fusion that is 'neoconservatism'. We argue that to better appreciate its continued effect on contemporary and future US foreign policy, we need to pay close attention to those seemingly innocuous yet deeply embedded discourses about the United States and its place in the world, as well as to the people, policies, and principles conventionally associated with neoconservatism.

The International Discourses and Governance of Fake News

“…This study builds on previous research showing how varied understandings of both national (Tandoc et al, 2019), and international policy issues (Beasley et al, 2012; Pan and Turner, 2017; Turner, 2011), can foster different understandings of the issue and lead to starkly different policy outcomes. Recognising how multiple discourses compete within the public sphere is critical in a political sense (Oppermann et al, 2019).…”

A Critical Analysis of Western Intervention in Foreign Nations: A Case Study of Ukraine and Venezuela

“…167 the unpopular war coupled with the economic downturn blemished the republican Party resulting in the landslide electoral victory of President Barrack Obama opened a new window of opportunity to undo the geopolitical damage caused by the Neoconservatism of the Bush regime. 168 however, this political change was a mere cosmetic facelift after President Obama and hilary Clinton agitated for the ultimate airstrike against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi under the guise of averting the dire humanitarian situation in the Libya. 169 Just like iraq this humanitarian mission morphed into failed regime change after Libya became a safe haven of isis sympathizers, human traffickers and slave and organ traders.…”