David Brooks: Voters, Your Foreign Policy Views Stink

New York Times:

“The C.A.P. researchers asked 2,000 registered voters what America’s foreign policy priorities should be. The top priorities were protecting against terrorist threats, protecting jobs for American workers and reducing illegal immigration. These are all negative aspirations: preventing bad things from hostile outsiders.

The lowest priorities were promoting democracy, taking on Chinese aggression, promoting trade, fighting global poverty and defending human rights. The things Americans care least about are the core activities of building a civilized global community.

The C.A.P. study estimates that less than a fifth of voters are traditional internationalists. The Eurasia Group study estimates that only 9.5 percent are. …”

It is a frustrating time to be a neocon.

John Bolton and Mike Pompeo are in the saddle in the Trump administration, but have been unable to start a new war in Venezuela and Iran because public opinion is trending so strongly toward against liberal internationalism. The political class is afraid of crossing the public on that issue which is sick and tired of the endless wars for democracy in the Middle East.

The United States would have been better off avoiding every single war of the 20th century – the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War. The result of all of those wars was any number of unforeseen consequences and getting sucked into a quagmire from which we will never escape until liberal internationalism is repudiated. The sequence of events has been that every war seems to lay the groundwork for the next war.

About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. No one wants another cockamamie war sending our young men into a meat grinder because David Brooks wants to pretend that the end of history is here and that we have some divine mandate to spread liberal democracy across the globe while he and his buddies speculate on the outcome of the war and see massive gains in their financial portfolios watching the whole thing play out from their penthouse apartments in NY city.

    • Wish this were true. Just listening to bar talk and Bible Belt Conservatives – they do love war provide it isn’t a long ground war – bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, Syria even the Serbs – that’s always popular.

  2. If the U.S. had stayed out of WW1, then WW2 might not have happened, or might have been the war to destroy Communism in Russia.

    • Thats an interesting thing to think about. If there hadn’t been a WW1 and the bad deal the Germans were forced to live under after it, the rise of the National Socialist Party might not have happened. I wonder if the Europeans could have resisted the Communists without Hitler? They certainly couldn’t have done it if the conservatives ruled all of Europe.

      • That’s actually a very good point.

        We tend to see ww2 as universally awful.


        Germany did largely remove Matzoh from Europe and crippled the Red Army.

        Churchill, Hindenburg, or figures like Mussolini and the Kaiser couldn’t have done this.

        The triumph of the Second Reich might have lead to communist and Jewish revolt within a German dominated Europe post ww2 period. Most ply sci observers think the Kaiser would have presided over an entity that turned into the EU.

        Reminds me of the idea that the rise of Hitler was necessary on a very metaphysical level. He was the best possible Hitler in a best possible scenario.

  3. As long as conservatives stupidly keep encouraging white men to join the Army and Marines these wars will continue. Why fight for a culture and government that hates your guts and wants you eliminated?

Comments are closed.