John Tabin is right: Sullivan is wrong to call AmSpec paleocon. To its credit, AmSpec has various perspectives in it, including some paleo or at least paleo-friendly articles, but criticising bad, tendentious neocon readings of history does not in and of itself make anyone or anything paleocon. But Sullivan is especially wrong to call it that because of this review of Kagan’s Dangerous Nation. As Mr. Tabin correctly points out, Angelo Codevilla is wildly, intensely hawkish and hegemonist; he is one of those people who will bear the label imperialist as a badge of honour. No one who has any sense of the various factions and arguments on the American right would ever confuse a Codevilla piece with anything related to paleos. The Codevilla piece is mostly unobjectionable, which I find shocking to admit, since I normally feel myself breaking out in hives on those occasions when I have read Codevilla in the past. It turns out that Kagan has written such a terrible book about American history and foreign policy that it even offends the historical sensibilities of a Claremont man. That takes some real doing.
Update: In case the absurdity of the paleo-Codevilla equation wasn’t completely obvious, here is the assessment of the elder Pod of Codevilla and the “superhawks”:
On the Right though it obviously is, this neighborhood of superhawks is as distant from the precincts of paleoconservatism as it is from the redoubts of the anti-American Left.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 21st, 2007 at 10:05 pm
Matt Zeitlin
Now, I’ll understand if you findmy starstuckedness and obsequois annoying, but I feel like I’m obligated to link to this, http://whippersnapper.blogspot.com/2007/05/two-wrongs-dont-make-right-comparitive.html,
my own take on the Coedvilla article I am also suprised that a book whose mission is to support the hegemonic, interventionist neocon agenda and place into the oldest traditions of American history. The book must have really been crap, we’d expect nothing less from Kagan
May 21st, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Matt Zeitlin
Oh wow, that comment was total crap, upon rereading it looks like I managed to express zero clear thoughts. Let’s try that again.
Now, I’ll understand if you find my starstuckedness and obsequiousness annoying, but I feel like I’m obligated to link to this, http://whippersnapper.blogspot.com/2007/05/two-wrongs-dont-make-right-comparitive.html, It is my own take on the Coedvilla article, where I compare the Kagan view of american history to the Zinnesque leftist, marxian view and find shocking, well not that shocking considering the roots of many neocons, similarities.
I am also suprised that a book whose mission it is to support the hegemonic, interventionist neocon agenda and try to place it into the oldest traditions of American history was so panned by a someone who is “wildly, intensely hawkish and hegemonist”. The book must have really been crap; I guess we’d expect nothing less from Kagan
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:00 am
Christopher B. Hayes
Several have tried to claim the title Dangerous Nationalists, but to avoid confusion are going to just stick with the titles “The biography of Ann Coulter”, “The biography of Sean Hannity” etc…