Apparently one of your mistakes is believing that “academics and journalists” aren’t advocates. There’s no profession whose members are inherently dispassionate. Anybody who isn’t an advocate for something has nothing of value to say. There are people who really do strive to be fair and objective, but they are the exceptions in all walks of life.

To your point, however. I think the majority of people on the opposite side of the debate — the neocons and others — are in fact earnest in their beliefs. It’s quite possible for human beings to be earnest and disingenuous at the same time. One can be as earnest as hell about one’s beliefs, and equally disingenuous when trying to convince others to adopt those beliefs.

Those words chill me to the bone even today, four years hence. I think you mistake these people for academics or journalists. They are ADVOCATES, their role is more akin to lawyers representing their donor/clients. You shouldn’t/can’t even rightly call them realists, liberals, conservatives, whatever. They are advocates on the take or with a stake in the game. If not, there are a few religious or other ideologues, but they aren’t capable of discussion either.

What totally burns my ass is the suggestion that there’s any concern about democracy. DEMOCRACY, all of our allies are dictators! The only ones fooled by this democracy, freedom, liberty talk are Americans, this is all domestic propaganda. (that’s PERIOD)

Liberals no more have a special history of encouraging free debate than do conservatives. Personality and not ideology determine whether an individual really cares about the other fellow’s opinion and whether that opinion will further rational discourse. Liberals aver that conservatives are close-minded, and the opposite is equally true. And both sides are largely correct! It’s the rare individual who really tries to see all round a subject. Few of us are natural skeptics.

As regards the people referred to in the piece, we can only speculate as to motives. Groupthink? After all, it’s hard to be against “human rights and democracy.” Let’s face it, on many matters both wings of the establishment march in lockstep.

I agree with you that the views that will be excluded from this conference probably command the support of a majority of Americans. That, however, has never moved the establishment, particularly the foreign policy establishment. These men and women do not, after all, mix with average folks. And to some extent they don’t care what the average American thinks. “We know better . . .” — they may not say it out loud, but they surely think it.