Gang of Paranoids

Paul Krugman discusses the Foley scandal as it relates to the psyche of the Republican Party generally, in The Paranoid Style. As only he could, Krugman provides the historical background and context to this political movement. In explaining Hastert's reaction to the Foley scandal, he notes that:

[It] exemplifies what the historian Richard Hofstadter famously called “the paranoid style in American politics.”

Hofstadter’s essay introducing the term was inspired by his observations of the radical right-wingers who seized control of the Republican Party in 1964. Today, the movement that nominated Barry Goldwater controls both Congress and the White House.

As a result, political paranoia — the “sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy” Hofstadter described — has gone mainstream. To read Hofstadter’s essay today is to be struck by the extent to which he seems to be describing the state of mind not of a lunatic fringe, but of key figures in our political and media establishment.

The “paranoid spokesman,” wrote Hofstadter, sees things “in apocalyptic terms. ... He is always manning the barricades of civilization.” Sure enough, Dick Cheney says that “the war on terror is a battle for the future of civilization.”

According to Hofstadter, for the paranoids, “what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil,” and because “the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated.” Three days after 9/11, President Bush promised to “rid the world of evil.”

The paranoid “demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals” — instead of focusing on Al Qaeda, we’ll try to remake the Middle East and eliminate a vast “axis of evil” — “and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration.” Iraq, anyone?

Regarding the Foley scandal, he adds:

The immediate response by nearly everyone in the Republican establishment — wild claims, without a shred of evidence behind them, that the whole thing is a Democratic conspiracy — may sound crazy. But that response is completely in character for a movement that from the beginning has been dominated by the paranoid style. And here’s the scary part: that movement runs our government.

This phenomenon has been attributed to the party in power for some time. That is, the style of the Republicans is to act like martyrs, even though they are the party in control. This stance justifies a reaction to any form of dissent or disagreement as evidence of partisan politics or bias. See, e.g., Criminalization of Politics.

Krugman has just put a name to it. GOP certainly is subject to many variations. Gang of Paranoids may be one of the most appropriate.

(Article also available at The Unknown Candidate)

Tags: Commentary, Politics, Krugman