The split of the Neoconservative and the Neoliberals

Early Liberals in  USA

1840    Individualism[edit]

Transcendentalists believe that society and its institutions—particularly organized religion and political parties—corrupt the purity of the individual.[14] They have faith that people are at their best when truly self-reliant and independent. It is only from such real individuals that true community can form.[citation needed]

Influenced by Hinduism and Buddhism

Early lovrers of nature-The conservation of an undisturbed natural world is also extremely important to the Transcendentalists. The idealism that is a core belief of Transcendentalism results in an inherent skepticism of capitalism, westward expansion, and industrialization.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Henry David Thorax

Charles Elliot - President of Harvard

NeoCon

• American Legislative Exchange Council

• Americans for Prosperity Foundation

• Americans for Tax Reform

• Cato Institute

• Foundation for Government Accountability

• FreedomWorks

• The Heritage Foundation

• Tea Party movement

SPN - State Policy Network -1992 - A state Policy Think tank modeled off of the Heritage Foundation

-preceded by Madison Group (1986–1992)

Policy initiatives supported by SPN members have included reductions in state health and welfare programs, state constitutional amendments to limit state government spending, expanded access to charter schools, and school vouchers.[16][18] Another area of activity has been opposition to public-sector trade unions.[11] 

40 grant proposals from SPN regular member organizations. The grant proposals sought funding through SPN from the Searle Freedom Trust.

-the grant proposals in six states as suggesting campaigns designed to cut pay to state government employees; oppose public sector collective bargaining; reduce public sector services in education and healthcare; promote school vouchers; oppose efforts to combat greenhouse gas emissions; reduce or eliminate income and sales taxes; and study a proposed block grant reform to Medicare.[19][20][21][22][23]

SPN is largely funded by donations from foundations, including the Lovett and Ruth Peters Foundation, the Castle Rock Foundation, and the Bradley Foundation.[11] In 2013, The Guardian reported that SPN received funding from the Koch brothers, Philip Morris, Kraft Foods, and GlaxoSmithKline.[19] Other corporate donors to SPN have included Facebook, Microsoft, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Verizon, and Comcast.[28][29]

Between 2008 and 2013, SPN received $10 million from Donors Trust, a nonprofit donor-advised fund. In 2011, the approximately $2 million investment from Donors Trust accounted for about 40% of annual revenue.[30]

In 2021, the organization reported revenue of $24,770,462, expenses of $18,730,675, and donations of $24,340,115.[31]

Anti-Labor

The US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR), founded in 1998, is a separately incorporated affiliate of the United States Chamber of Commerce. The organization advocates for civil justice reform, commonly referred to as tort reform.

1983 National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a quasi-autonomous non-governmental organization in the United States founded in 1983 to advance democracy worldwide,[2][3][4] by promoting political and economic institutions, such as political groups, trade unions, free markets, and business groups.[5]the NED assumed some former activities of the CIA. Political groups, activists, academics, and some governments have said the NED has been an instrument of United States foreign policy helping to foster regime change.[

NED activity in the 1980s focused on direct challenges to autocrats by funding dissidents, opposition parties, and unions, the majority of 21st-century NED funding goes to technical programs 

1983, the House Foreign Affairs Committee proposed legislation to provide initial funding of $31.3 million for NED as part of the State Department Authorization Act (H.R. 2915), because NED was in its beginning stages of development the appropriation was set at $18 million. Included in the legislation was $13.8 million

According to sociologist William Robinson, NED funds during the Reagan years were "ultimately used for five overlapping pseudo-covert activities: leadership training for pro-American elites, promotion of pro-American educational systems and mass media, strengthening the 'institutions of democracy' by funding pro-American organizations in the target state, propaganda, and the development of transnational elite networks."[78] Criticizing these activities, Robinson wrote that "U.S. policymakers claim that they are interested in process (free and fair elections) and not outcome (the results of these elections); in reality, the principal concern is outcome."[78]In a 1991 interview with the Washington Post, NED founder Allen Weinstein said: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."

Writing in Slate in 2004, Brendan I. Koerner wrote that, "Depending on whom you ask, the NED is either a nonprofit champion of liberty or an ideologically driven meddler in world affairs."[71]

Political scientist Lindsey A. O'Rourke writes that the Reagan-era NED played a key role in U.S. efforts "to promote democratic transitions in Chile, Haiti, Liberia, Nicaragua, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, and Suriname," but did so to promote the success of pro-U.S. parties, not just to promote democracy, and did not support communist or socialist opposition parties.[78] The North American Congress on Latin America says that the NED engages in a "a very particular form of low-intensity democracy chained to pro-market economics--in countries from Nicaragua to the Philippines, Ukraine to Haiti, overturning unfriendly 'authoritarian' governments (many of which the United States had previously supported) and replacing them with handpicked pro-market allies."[79]

In August 2021, Malaysian human rights activist and Suaram adviser Kua Kia Soong criticized the opposition coalition Pakatan Harapan for accepting funding from the National Endowment of Democracy, which he described as a "CIA soft power front". Citing the US track record of supporting regime change abroad and racial discrimination against Black and Asian Americans, Kua urged Malaysian civil society organizations to stop accepting funding from the NED since it undermined their legitimacy, independence, and effectiveness. Kua's statement came after Daniel Twining, the president of the NED affiliate International Republican Institute, had made remarks in 2018 acknowledging that the NED had financially supported Malaysian opposition parties since 2002. Following the 2018 Malaysian general election Twining had also praised the newly elected Pakatan Harapan government for freezing Chinese infrastructural investments.[81][82]

In December 2020 China sanctioned the senior director of the NED, John Knaus, saying he "blatantly interferes in Hong Kong affairs and grossly interferes in China's domestic affairs".[92]

In May 2022, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused NED of funding separatists to undermine the stability of target countries, instigating color revolutions to subvert state power, and meddling in other countries' politics.[93]

Russian government officials and state media have frequently regarded the NED as hostile to their country.[83]

July 2015, the Russian government declared NED to be an "undesirable" NGO, making the NED the first organization banned under the Russian undesirable organizations law signed two months earlier by Russian President Vladimir Putin.[83]

•  Kinzer, Stephen; Bednarz, Christine. "What Is the N.E.D.'s Mission? | Christine Bednarz". New York Review of Books. Retrieved February 4, 2024. “The National Endowment for Democracy, which receives nearly all its funds from Congress, is a conduit through which the US government has given millions of dollars to political and other protest groups in countries from Albania to Haiti”

•  "Top lobbyists in the US". Retrieved 2015-12-30.

• ^ Allen, Jonathan (2009-10-20). "U.S. Chamber: $34.7 million in lobbying". Politico.

Politically, the US Chamber of Commerce is considered to be on the political right and promotes fiscally conservative policies. However, it is known to take positions that many Republicans (particularly populists) do not support such as immigration reform and free trade.[60]

Anti- Environment/ Climate Change Denyers

• Opposes the DISCLOSE Act, which aims to limit foreign influence on U.S. elections.[93] (House - 06/27/2018)[94]

Americans for Prosperity (AFP), founded in 2004, is a libertarian conservative political advocacy group in the United States affiliated with brothers Charles Koch and the late David Koch

- AFP helped transform the Tea Party movement into a political force.

Pro Military Grade Weapons

Propaganda

Former USIA director of TV and film service Alvin Snyder recalled in his 1995 memoir that "the U.S. government ran a full-service public relations organization, the largest in the world, about the size of the twenty biggest U.S. commercial PR firms combined. Its full-time professional staff of more than 10,000, spread out among some 150 countries, burnished America‘s image and trashed the Soviet Union 2,500 hours a week with a 'tower of babble' comprised of more than 70 languages, to the tune of over $2 billion per year". The USIA was "the biggest branch of this propaganda machine."[3]

The United States Information Agency (USIA) was a United States government agency devoted to the practice of public diplomacy which operated from 1953 to 1999.

From 1984 to 1990 the NED received $15–18 million of congressional funding annually, and $25–30 million from 1991 to 1993. At the time the funding came via the United States Information Agency. In 1993 the NED nearly lost its congressional funding, after the House of Representatives initially voted to abolish its funding. The funding (of $35 million, a rise from $30 million the year before) was only retained after a vigorous campaign by NED supporters

According to sociologist William Robinson, NED funds during the Reagan years were "ultimately used for five overlapping pseudo-covert activities: leadership training for pro-American elites, promotion of pro-American educational systems and mass media, strengthening the 'institutions of democracy' by funding pro-American organizations in the target state, propaganda, and the development of transnational elite networks."[78] Criticizing these activities, Robinson wrote that "U.S. policymakers claim that they are interested in process (free and fair elections) and not outcome (the results of these elections); in reality, the principal concern is outcome."[78]