It's simple: does the state pose a political threat to the US? Yes? Then believe most of what the State Department says about it, just like they used to with the USSR (and still do retrospectively).

My best interpretation is that they see global hegemony as the solution to conflict by globalizing commerce and industry. Thus, they need a powerful state to wage such hegemony. I mean, GWB is the canonical elected neocon, and look at his not-so-small-gubmint DOHS or the TSA. Or conservatives general obsession with strong military and foreign encroachments. This put the neocons at odds with the libertarians regarding "foreign entanglements" -- instead of entanglement, neocons see hegemony.

Same here. I guess it's a confusing place to be, you feel like you're doing well meaning stuff but because you're ideologically brainwashed and prohibited from making logical dialectical conclusions nothing really makes sense.