ميراث نومحافظه كاران و آينده آن در دولت اوباما

The Legacy of Neoconservatism and Itʹs Future in Obama Administration

Neoconservatism is a concept which has been abundantly referred to in the literature on international relations throughout the eight- year Bush administration. What is then neoconservatism? Is it an intellectual movement or a historical event and trend with an antiquity of seventy years and a combination of miscellaneous intellectual teachings which has been transformed into a complicated and ambiguous, but powerful mainstream? During the process in which new conservatism was evolved and powered on the state domain, it has resulted in the occurrence of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the making of fundamental decisions on the domestic domain. So, what occurs to the mind is a question of what intellectual potentiality there exists in neoconservatism, where it has managed to engender such actions on the two above-said levels. It follows that new conservatism has deep historical roots originated since from 1930s to 1940, which has come to have conceptual complexities due to a blender of mixed teachings like liberalism, conservatism, and socialism throughout its lifetime. Such ideologies include free market, democracy, individualism, equal rights, and finally advocating the Marxist theories like class struggle and increased interference by the state in the society. Also, due to American value teachings being inspired into the sphere of foreign policy which includes religion, human rights, and democracy, it has become clearly distinct from the mainstream of conservatism. Considering the remarkable social bases new conservatives enjoy in America, the active research and theoretical institutions of the new conservatives and the fundamental structures that continue to exist in Americaʹs foreign policy, the cases mentioned above may reveal why a few of the teachings of new conservatives in American foreign policy continue theoretically. Finally, we believe that new conservatism has transformed into a hard crust in Americaʹs foreign policy from which democrats will not be able to cross completely.