"NeoCons" Win Sweden Elections(TimesUK)

:P Too funny,must be Bush`s fault.Even radical socialist Sweden gets it :P

Swedes turn to Right to reshape role of the state

SWEDEN’S centre-right alliance won a narrow general election victory to end 12 years of Social Democrat rule last night after a campaign dominated by the future direction of Europe’s most generous welfare state.

Fredrik Reinfeldt, the youthful right-wing leader likened to David Cameron for the way he dropped traditional policies to modernise his party, saw off the veteran Göran Persson, Europe’s second longest- serving Prime Minister.

Mr Reinfeldt, 41, based his appeal around reforming rather than overhauling Sweden’s social welfare system, with plans to cut the sickness benefits that account for 16 per cent of public spending.

His attack on Sweden’s hidden unemployment among the long-term sick, the early retired and those on pointless government schemes struck a chord with younger Swedes struggling to find work.

Mr Reinfeldt’s campaign was watched closely by centre-right parties across Europe, who will have been buoyed by the way that he beat the left on their home territory of popular state-funded health, education and social care services.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...RSS&attr=World

Do you read this stuff before you cut and paste it?

"...likened to David Cameron for the way he dropped traditional policies to modernise his party..."

"...based his appeal around reforming rather than overhauling Sweden’s social welfare system..."

"...he beat the left on their home territory of popular state-funded health, education and social care services..."

The point of that story is that Reinfeldt won the election by moving the Moderate Party to the left.

And the title of your post is nonsensical. Sweden's Moderate Party and the Alliance for Sweden coalition that it leads have literally nothing in common with the neoconservative movement. Truly, not a single thing.

You should stick to demonstrating your ignorance of U.S. politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thombergeron

Do you read this stuff before you cut and paste it?

---

I was wondering the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thombergeron

And the title of your post is nonsensical. Sweden's Moderate Party and the Alliance for Sweden coalition that it leads have literally nothing in common with the neoconservative movement. Truly, not a single thing.

---

Agreed. While Reinfelt does want to deregulate/liberalize portions of the Swedish economy, and he does want to cut taxes, describing him as a neocon is just plain nonsense. The fact is, even though he is, by European and Swedish standards, a right leaning moderate – Reinfelt is to the left of Democratic Party’s few remaining moderates.

Frankly, I’m excited to see what he can do.

-Quinn

It`s fun to toss around that bugaboo word, "neo-cons",with reckless abandon.Just like the radical left does,not even knowing it`s meaning.

The intital cuts to the massive socialist state of Sweden will bear fruit.Resulting in greater cuts.Weaning the masses off of state socialist policies take time and baby steps.

The great reaction seen when big brother is cut is that free markets take off,federal revenues increase.Result,more cuts to big government resulting in even greater increases in the ability of free enterprise to create and,more federal revenues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by White_Male_Canada

It`s fun to toss around that bugaboo word, "neo-cons",with reckless abandon.Just like the radical left does,not even knowing it`s meaning.

---

Those of us who aren't sheep lining up at the trough to drink the neo-con kool aid would pretty much agree that today's neo-con is a war-mongering, war-profiteering, lying chickenhawk... :lol: :P

Understanding Neo-Con

What makes understanding Neo-Con language difficult is that much of its vocabulary is drawn from English words that have a somewhat different meaning. Three of the most common words in Neo-Con, for example, are the English words "loyalty", "morality", and "patriotism", yet none can be understood as having the same meaning they have in ordinary English.


(1) "Loyalty", in Neo-Con, means what we usually think of as "obedience". It means 100% agreement with authority at all times. It means never contradicting a boss or divulging facts which might contradict the boss's ideology or suggest that he is heading the ship of state toward an iceberg.

In English, on the other hand, "loyalty", like "cooperation" (another Neo-Con synonym for obedience), has meaning only between equals. "Loyalty" applies to relations between two individuals who have, or pretend to have, or desire to have, the same degree of power. It is a personal feeling, not a self-preservative response to someone with power over you. It is the feeling we have when unwilling to reject a friend who has misbehaved, or who is for some reason hated or despised or discriminated against by others. When a small business employer feels "loyal" to his employees it means he's willing to let his business suffer rather than lay them off--in other words, he's feeling, and pretending, that his employees are friends, and that he and they are "all in the same boat". (This is not the same as the employer who says "we're all family here", meaning, "I'm the parent and you're my children"). An employee may also be "loyal"--staying on when he'd be better off leaving. Like the "loyal" employer, he believes that he and his boss are friends.

(2) "Morality" in English has to do with behaving in ways that contribute to the well-being of others. "Love thy neighbor" is the sum of Christian teaching, for example. In Neo-Con, on the other hand, "morality" is just as likely to embrace hating and killing your neighbors, particularly if they are gay, Arab, or physicians who perform abortions.

"Morality" in Neo-Con means the suppression of sexual desire. And since sexual restrictions the world over have invariably been applied primarily to female sexuality, it requires no great leap to realize that "morality" in Neo-Con means the suppression of women. Neo-Con ideas about the proper role of women in society vary little from those of the Taliban. Neo-Cons, for example, have sought to ban abortions even when the life of the mother was in danger or a victim of rape or incest.

(3) "Patriotism" in English means loving your country and wanting it to be healthy and strong and respected globally.

In Neo-Con "patriotism" means giving unconditional support to the nation's political leaders even if their policies are undermining the nation's future, plunging it into debt, polluting its land, water, and air, alienating its friends, and multiplying its enemies. In Neo-Con, those who died in the bunker with Hitler were more "patriotic" than the generals who tried to save Germany by getting rid of him; Poles who supported the communist leaders in Poland were more "patriotic" than members of Solidarity; Serbs who supported Slobodan Milosevich were more "patriotic" than those who wanted to see him tried for war crimes.

But in English, "patriotism" means that if you care about your country's future it is your democratic duty to oppose a leader who seems bent on precipitating its decline. Feedback is a democratic duty. In a democracy like ours, remaining silent in the face of policies that you perceive as harmful to the nation, is shirking your civic responsibility as an American.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip...understanding-
neocon_b_21554.html


New Boys in Town: The Neocon Revolution and American Militarism
by Andrew J. Bacevich and Tom Engelhardt
Tom Dispatch


On Wednesday, I posted The Normalization of War, the first of two excerpts from a remarkable new book – Andrew J. Bacevich's The New American Militarism, How Americans Are Seduced by War. In the second excerpt, Bacevich takes up the subject of neoconservatism, which he terms "a singularly inapt label that suggests an ideological rigor that neocons have never demonstrated nor perhaps even sought." Speaking of the early neocons, including figures like Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz, he points out that, "from the outset, the neoconservative identification with the post-Vietnam Right was a marriage of convenience rather than a union of kindred spirits."

Below, in an excerpt adapted from the book and posted with the kind permission both of the author and of his publisher, Oxford University Press, Bacevich takes up the second generation of neocons, the new boys who moved to Washington and, from various think tanks and front groups, laid siege to governmental policy-making. Though the label neocon has increasingly become one of opprobrium, Bacevich suggests that "the heat generated by the term also stands as a backhanded tribute, an acknowledgement that the neoconservative impact has been substantial." As indeed it has – to the misfortune of us all. He suggests as well that "one aspect of the neoconservative legacy has been to foster the intellectual climate necessary for the emergence of the new American militarism." His discussion of that legacy follows.

http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=5709

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chefmike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by White_Male_Canada

It`s fun to toss around that bugaboo word, "neo-cons",with reckless abandon.Just like the radical left does,not even knowing it`s meaning.

---

Those of us who aren't sheep lining up at the trough to drink the neo-con kool aid would pretty much agree that today's neo-con is a war-mongering, war-profiteering, lying chickenhawk... :lol: :P

Understanding Neo-Con

What makes understanding Neo-Con language difficult is that much of its vocabulary is drawn from English words that have a somewhat different meaning. Three of the most common words in Neo-Con, for example, are the English words "loyalty", "morality", and "patriotism", ...?articleid=5709

---

Just how old are you ? Or has being intellectually beaten from pilllor to post relegated you to juvenile posts and replies now.

Irving Kristol , a neo-conservative said a neo-conservative is a "liberal who was mugged by reality".

Obviously,reality hasn`t stuck a gun in your face yet,being the oblivious person you are.

LMFAO....another brilliant rebuttal from the canadian chickenshit chickenhawk...

J Goebbels would be so proud...but the bible-bangers, and other neo-con stooges like yourself, still don't realize that they are like rodents following the pied-piper.... :lol: :P

People, you must understand that White_Male_Canada is in fact a radical serb (so called "cetnik"). As such,
he's always looking forward to see the entire west world being more radical, more christian,
more conservative and more fascistic in general. Every single move from red to the blue block
is something wonderful to him, in his understanding it is just a step closer to radicalisation
of the christian world. It sounds crazy, but that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by McManaman

People, you must understand that White_Male_Canada is in fact a radical serb (so called "cetnik"). As such,
he's always looking forward to see the entire west world being more radical, more christian,
more conservative and more fascistic in general. Every single move from red to the blue block
is something wonderful to him, in his understanding it is just a step closer to radicalisation
of the christian world. It sounds crazy, but that's it.

---

It sounds crazy because perhaps it is. I understand your neurosis.It happens to most on the extreme neo-marxist left.Losing again and again at the polls leads you to beleive there must be some sort of conspiracy.Why else would the proletariat vote against your ideals.The votes must be being stolen,any "rational" person would vote for socialist/marxist ideals

Now that said even Anglicans,not exactly right wing christians,are backing the Pope`s statements.So now what,Anglicans are part of the conspiracy too?

Carey backs Pope and issues warning on 'violent' Islam

By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent, and Richard Owen, in Rome



THE former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey of Clifton has issued his own challenge to “violent” Islam in a lecture in which he defends the Pope’s “extraordinarily effective and lucid” speech.
Lord Carey said that Muslims must address “with great urgency” their religion’s association with violence. He made it clear that he believed the “clash of civilisations” endangering the world was not between Islamist extremists and the West, but with Islam as a whole.



“We are living in dangerous and potentially cataclysmic times,” he said. “There will be no significant material and economic progress [in Muslim communities] until the Muslim mind is allowed to challenge the status quo of Muslim conventions and even their most cherished shibboleths.”

Lord Carey, who as Archbishop of Canterbury became a pioneer in Christian-Muslim dialogue, himself quoted a contemporary political scientist, Samuel Huntington, who has said the world is witnessing a “clash of civilisations”.

Arguing that Huntington’s thesis has some “validity”, Lord Carey quoted him as saying: “Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”

Lord Carey went on to argue that a “deep-seated Westophobia” has developed in recent years in the Muslim world.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...366419,00.html