Neoconservatism frames its ideology as realism while remaining detached from actual policy outcomes.

Evidence

What neocon readings of the film must overlook is that this is exactly the same in geopolitical reality: far from being unpalatable but necessary, the Iraq misadventure, Guantanamo Bay, extraordinary rendition, etc. have either achieved no results or made things worse. What’s interesting here is the doggedness of the neocon fantasy, which is precisely a fantasy of “being realistic” — astonishingly, elements of the American right appear to actually still believe that the Bush administration’s policies are successful, and that the American public has rejected them on the grounds of high-minded (liberal) ethical qualms rather than for pragmatic-utilitarian reasons (too many of our boys being killed). — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 569

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Fisher’s broader Capitalist Realism thesis about ideology surviving disconfirmation; also ch33’s denial-reinforcing-denunciation note. — connects to: Realist and neocon foreign policy camps differ in tactics not imperial goals — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 463; Neocons valued regional destabilization for its own sake, not democratic ends — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 439
• SEED: Angle: the ‘fantasy of being realistic’ — how ideological factions borrow realism’s prestige while immunizing claims from feedback.

Broader Connections

• Realist and neocon foreign policy camps differ in tactics not imperial goals #expands (0.80) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 463
• Neocons valued regional destabilization for its own sake, not democratic ends #complicates (0.75) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 439