Ross Douthat had a column in the NYT about two weeks ago in which he divided GOP thought on foreign policy into four groupings: neoconservatives (use force to promote American values abroad); paleoconservatives (isolationists); realists (national interests prevail over values); and hawks (use force as a first option for almost any reason). His model has merit. The questions for today are:
- Do his divisions correspond to my four GOP factions?
- Where does Trump fit in?
My responses are as follows:
- Yes, they do. Neoconservatives are CDs. Paleoconservatives (a small minority) are CLs–think Rand Paul. Realists are, of course, PBPs. The connection between Reactionaries and hawks is a little more tenuous, given that the Reactionaries tend to turn against lengthy wars which involve “nation-building,” but Reactionaries do tend to respond as requested to displays of swagger.
- The only thing you can say for sure about Trump is that he isn’t a neoconservative. He loves bluster, but he hates nation-building, and he definitely wants to use American military and market power to make deals that involve money. The inconsistencies that plague our foreign policy are largely attributable to this confusion.