Back in March of this year, I wrote a diary titled Hillary W Bush is a neocon. The title was meant to be satirical, but also provocative. And in that, it was a success, though the diary also had its tip jar hidden by Clinton supporters who also called me a liar or called for me to be kicked off of this site. That said, I stand by what I wrote then.
So, I was particularly interested when I came across an op-ed published in Truthout today, written by Pierre Guerlain, a professor of American studies at Université Paris Ouest, Nanterre, France, with the title of Hillary Clinton: The Neocon in Democrat's Clothing. Guerline covers a number of points, ranging from Bill and Hillary helping to swing the Democratic Party to the right to specific policy issues like welfare reform and foreign policy, concluding with
So Hillary Clinton, the Republican, is poised to win in November, but her Republicanism is closer to George W. Bush's and even more conservative than Ronald Reagan's -- except on the societal issues that have now reached a kind of quasi-consensus like same-sex marriage. She is a pro-business, Koch-compatible lover of Wall Street who uses feminism like some pinkwashers or greenwashers use progressive agendas to sell regressive policies. Author Diana Johnstone calls her the "Queen of Chaos." Clinton is the queen of deception, faux feminism and faux progressivism, whose election will be made easier by her loutish, vulgar, sexist loudmouth of an opponent.
In his book The Deep State, Mike Lofgren quotes H.L. Mencken, who gave away what explains the success of the political circus: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the neoconservatives were past masters at this creation of hobgoblins, but now Hillary Clinton, the opportunist, can outdo them and out-Republicanize them. I think Ike would not like her; she might now be even more reactionary than Goldwater. Indeed, Charles Koch (whose hatred of progressivism is well documented by Jane Meyer in her book, Dark Money) expressed some admiration for Bill and Hillary Clinton and said he could vote for Hillary this time around.
The GOP is dying, but a reactionary Republican in faux progressive clothing, loved by the wolves of Wall Street and the wolves of the Kochtopus, will most probably win.
While Guerline perhaps goes a bit further than I would choose, to, his point is pretty clear. In spite of this election year having been referred to as the “year of the insurgent,” at this moment, the two party establishment is in the driver’s seat. And I agree with him when he characterizes Clinton as a “pro-business, Koch-compatible lover of Wall Street who uses feminism like some pinkwashers or greenwashers use progressive agendas to sell regressive policies.” That said, she is very much the likely nominee. I do think that Trump is worse. But I also stand by the idea — expressed in this Guerline piece — that Hillary is two sorts of neo — neo-liberal on economics and neo-con on war, militarism and foreign policy. Saying this is not a “right wing talking point,” as the right hates her but the right is joined at the hip to these two neos.