- Paleo-conservatism (also Paleocon): conservative political philosophy in the United States emphasizing American nationalism, Christian ethics, and traditional conservative values. Sometimes referred to as “The Old Right.” Related to conventional libertarianism and populism.
- Neo-conservatism (also Neocon): a political movement among liberal/progressive “hawks” who promote foreign intervention, the military-industrial complex, and “peace through strength” spending.
There are no Paleo-conservative or Neo-conservative political parties. There are only two political parties of note within the United States: Democrats and Republicans. There are, however, several different classifications of political sentiments, usually expressed as a range beginning at a center-point on a horizontal line where the middle represents the political center. Divisions of “conservatism” are among these sentiments, along with libertarianism, Marxism, radical progressivism, etc.
It gets confusing when specific individuals who are generally known as leftists behave in ways that suggest something else besides their previously demonstrated political sentiments. For example, the term Neocon is usually associated with the administration of George W. Bush (a Republican), including his Vice President, Dick Cheney, and such policy wonks as Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Pearle, Paul Bremer, and Donald Rumsfeld. But others may surprise you: Hillary Clinton, who ran for the presidency as a Democrat, and John McCain (now deceased) and Liz Cheney of the Republican Party, all of whom are foreign interventionists, military industrialists, and all of whom focus more on their private wealth than they do the legitimate interests of the United States or its people. And then we must add George Soros — the leader of the pack.
People who claim to support Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, are actually supporting Hillary Clinton, the Neocon. It doesn’t have anything to do with a political party platform. It is all about politicians enriching themselves at the expense of innocent lives. As Hillary Clinton once admitted publicly, “What difference does it now make?”
If you believe economist Martin Armstrong, it does make a difference. Our country is a mess for nearly everyone EXCEPT the Neocons so firmly embedded into the government’s racketeering schemes. The only way to get rid of them is to shut down the federal government, re-examine them, and re-arrange federal departments and agencies. What does Armstrong tell us?
Back in 2014, Obama and his band of thieves were intent on choosing a new leader for Ukraine following the resignation of President Viktor Yanukovych … and as one may recall, Obama Neocons told the Ukrainians that unless they played ball with the United States, they’d get no goodies from the American Taxpayer. Well, who doesn’t want goodies from the American Taxpayer? This was when John McCain visited Ukraine and told the people, “I am with you.” It almost sounds like something Jesus of Nazareth might have said … but no, this was John McCain — one of the most corrupt members of the U.S. Senate. Armstrong tells us that we could have seen McCain doing this on YouTube until Google took it down. Google is part of the problem, folks. And all other media, including Fox News.
Of course, everyone remembers Victoria Nuland, right? She’s heading the Neocon movement inside the State Department. She’s up to her knickers in what’s happened in Ukraine — far more than those Bio-Warfare Laboratories at five or six different locations inside Ukraine. One wonders what else Nuland was up to … such as possibly Biden’s threat to withhold money from Ukraine unless they dropped their criminal investigation of Hunter Biden. You know … stuff like that.
Note: Armstrong assures us that Congress isn’t at fault this time. The foregoing was going on without Congress being in the loop — presumably because no one can trust Congress to keep its mouth shut. Let’s note that the Neocons are firmly in the Alinsky camp: they demonize anyone that stands up to them. Listen to how Democrats and their Neocon partners describe Vladimir Putin: insane, madman, brute, bully, tyrant, murderer. And they’re saying Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union. It’s pure B.S. And by the way, if Putin wanted to incorporate Ukraine back into the Russian Federation, do you think he could have already accomplished that?
Armstrong suggests a quick cross-reference. Measure how the Neocons reacted to Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin — and then review who came up with the fake Trump Dossier and the RUSSIA-RUSSIA-RUSSIA fairytale about the 2016 elections. Again, pure B.S., but it is instructive who’s behind that fairytale. Hillary Clinton created the dossier, and John McCain handed it to James Comey. Strange bedfellows? Apparently not.
Armstrong also tells us that the Neocons are a government within themselves. Proof of this? Note how quickly Senator Rubio changed the subject when questioning Nuland about bio-labs. And um … by the way, should we give some thought to the Covid fiasco and the work of the Neocons? Who benefitted most from the national shutdown?
Some things to think about if Americans are ever serious about “taking their country back.” But before anyone makes that attempt, have some idea about how deeply these Neocons got into the fabric of our society. The New York Metropolitan recently fired opera soprano Anna Netrebko, a Russian, because she knows Vladimir Putin. Meanwhile, one wonders how well the Clinton hedge fund investments are doing. You know, with Soros leading the charge — while the Neocons all have us arguing among ourselves, Dems vs. GOPers. Pretty neat scam, eh?
 Armstrong began publishing commodities market predictions at a young age, as a hobby. He subsequently developed an “Economic Confidence Model” suggesting that economic waves occur every 8.6 years. Investors who are aware of these waves fare better than those who do not, or so he suggested. Armstrong’s model successfully predicted economic trends through the 1990s. However, in the mid-1980s, Armstrong was found to have violated Commodity Futures Trading Commission Regulations by failing to advise clients of risks and failing to maintain proper records.