Neocons in Exile

Abstract

For more than twenty-five years, starting in 1980, neoconservatives stood at the intellectual forefront of a conservative coalition that controlled the national government. Drawing inspiration from Leo Strauss’s political philosophy, neocons earned their prominent position by leading an assault on the hegemonic pluralist democratic regime. Pluralist democracy accepts ethical relativism: individuals and interest groups press their own interests and values in the democratic arena, without any interests and values being deemed inherently superior. From the array of competing interests and values, the government chooses to pursue those goals that emerge through certain established processes. While attacking pluralist democracy, neocons simultaneously advocated for a return to republican democracy, which had predominated before the 1930s. According to republican democratic theory, virtuous citizens and officials pursue the common good rather than their private interests. Thus, neocons rejected the ethical relativism that supports the pluralist democratic regime and instead championed traditional American virtues that were to direct us toward the common good. But given the election results of 2008, neoconservatives find themselves shorn of power in Congress and the executive branch. Yet, they are not completely impotent: exiled neoconservative justices will continue to control the Supreme Court for years to come. This Article explores how these justices have shaped constitutional adjudication over the previous years, and how they will do so in the future. The Article concludes by examining how progressives might confront the challenge of a largely neoconservative Court.