The extremism that we see today is nothing new, and Hofstadter sums it up well here. The difference is that it seems the paranoids have gained enough power in government to make every issue, no matter how small, an existential struggle for survival regarding which only total victory is an acceptable outcome.
Originally shared by +WIST – Wish I’d Said That:
As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a militant leader. He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes.
— Richard Hofstadter (1916-1970) American historian and intellectual
“The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” Herbert Spencer Lecture, Oxford (Nov 1963)More …
Hofstadter, Richard – “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” Herbert Spencer Lecture, Oxford (Nov 1963) | WIST
As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a mili
Wow. Good find.
The full article (thanks, +Ginny Gibbs) can be found at http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/