There’s less to object to than I expected, actually, but that’s only because what Fukuyama is critiquing is a very broad caricature of neoconservatism. Does he really think that one must step beyond neoconservatism to grapple with how a democracy-promotion strategy should be circumscribed, or how to cope with anti-Americanism during the democratization process? If so, then various people generally counted within the neocon camp should be counted out of it (I’m thinking especially of Charles Krauthammer and Reuel Marc Gerecht, but there are many others). As with most discussions about neoconservatism, the labels tend to obscure rather than illuminate the ideas in play.
