Indeed, I remember a time when "revolutionary war" was what the Left called for, while conservatives (not to mention Catholics) were highly skeptical that the Millennium could be brought about by political revolutions. For every American revolution resulting in a stable free society (give or take a Civil War and an Indian genocide or two), there seem to be dozens and dozens of French, Russian, Nazi, Khmer Rouge, Maoist, and tinpot African dictator revolutions. Not a promising track record. How did such thinking manage to become parroted by conservatives, much less Catholic enthusiasts for Ledeen?
Probably because the type of democratic revolution championed by Ledeen is a very different thing from that championed by the communist left. As he makes explicitly clear in the NRO piece that Mark referenced:
To those who say it cannot be done, we need only point to the 1980s, when we led a global democratic revolution that toppled tyrants from Moscow to Johannesburg. Then, too, the smart folks said it could not be done, and they laughed at Ronald Reagan's chutzpah when he said that the Soviet tyrants were done for, and called on the West to think hard about the post-Communist era. We destroyed the Soviet Empire, and then walked away from our great triumph in the Third World War of the Twentieth Century.
Good thing we didn't take Mark's paleocon advice about the lack of viability of democratic revolution during the 1980s or the Iron Curtain would still be standing. Then again, that appears to be what Ron Paul is still arguing today, so maybe that's Mark is such a supporter.