Meaning: The quote by journalist Peter Brimelow touches upon the contentious issue of immigration and the reaction of neoconservatives to those who raise concerns about it. To delve deeper into the context and implications of this quote, it is essential to understand the backgrounds of both neoconservatism and the immigration issue, as well as the perspectives of Peter Brimelow.

Neoconservatism emerged as a political movement in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s, characterized by its hawkish foreign policy stance and strong support for American exceptionalism. Neoconservatives often advocate for a robust military, assertive interventionism, and the promotion of democratic values abroad. In the realm of domestic policy, they tend to prioritize free-market principles and a proactive approach to national security.

The issue of immigration has been a topic of heated debate, not only in the United States but also in many other countries around the world. Discussions surrounding immigration encompass a wide array of considerations, including economic impact, cultural integration, national security, and humanitarian concerns. Advocates for more restrictive immigration policies often argue that unchecked immigration can strain social services, depress wages, and dilute national identity, while proponents of more open immigration policies emphasize the economic and cultural benefits that immigrants bring to their new homes.

Peter Brimelow, the author of the quote, is known for his perspectives on immigration and its implications for the United States. As the founder of the website VDARE, which has been described as a platform for anti-immigration views, Brimelow has been a prominent voice in the debate over immigration policy. His stance on the subject aligns with the viewpoints of restrictionist immigration advocates who believe in curbing the flow of immigrants into the country.

In the context of the quote, Brimelow expresses a sense of personal disappointment and betrayal, as he notes that despite his personal friendships with many neoconservatives, they have responded to his raising of the immigration issue with what he describes as "extraordinary viciousness." This suggests a deep divide and animosity within conservative circles over the topic of immigration.

The quote sheds light on the complexities of ideological alliances and personal relationships in the realm of political discourse. It underscores the notion that even individuals with personal connections and affinities can find themselves in direct opposition on contentious issues. The use of the term "extraordinary viciousness" implies a level of hostility and aggression in the response of neoconservatives to Brimelow's advocacy on immigration, indicating a deep-seated discord within the conservative movement on this particular issue.

Furthermore, the quote raises questions about the dynamics of ideological conformity and dissent within political movements. It highlights the challenges faced by individuals who deviate from the prevailing orthodoxy within their own ideological camp and the potential consequences of doing so. Brimelow's experience serves as a poignant example of the internal rifts and conflicts that can arise when fundamental disagreements emerge on critical policy matters.

In conclusion, Peter Brimelow's quote encapsulates the tensions and divisions surrounding the immigration issue within conservative circles, particularly in relation to the response of neoconservatives to dissenting voices. It underscores the intricate interplay of personal relationships, ideological differences, and the broader dynamics of political discourse. The quote serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in navigating ideological fault lines and the challenges of advocating for contentious issues within one's own ideological community.