OK Jeff, I’ll bite. If the Monroe Doctrine is
neoconservative, when did the United States intervene
militarily to spread a particular form of
government throughout Latin America? Or pursue regime
change in the hemisphere? Or wage preventive war, with or
without regime change, against the European powers who might
conceivably ignore the doctrine’s warning?
It took until the Polk administration for the Monroe Doctrine to
be applied in an especially expansionist fashion. After that there
was talk of forcibly removing the Spanish from Cuba and the
movement of U.S. troops to encourage an end to the French
occupation of Mexico. It wasn’t really interpreted as justifying
U.S. intervention in the internal affairs of Latin American
countries until Theodore Roosvelt — a good bit after the founding
generation.
I’ll grant that the Roosevelt
Corollary is a precursor to neoconservatism. But the Monroe
Doctrine was mainly a statement against European intervention
in the region, later invoked against Soviet intervention
during the Cold War. Noam Chomsky saw it as a statement of U.S.
hegemony, however.
Dai Alanye | 12.13.11 @ 12:13PM
Is bringing up Noam Chomsky supposed to strengthen your agument?
Red Phillips | 12.13.11 @ 9:42PM
Dai, Antle is suggesting that Lord is reading the Monroe Doctrine in the same way Chomsky does. But of course Woods, Gutzman et al are the "leftists" in Lord's feeble mind.