Paranoia in Politics - Several Primers

I thought I'd refer my readers to two excellent books that practically define the discussion of paranoia in politics; and one that discusses psychological defense mechanisms in general.

The first is the classic essay by Richard Hofstadter, "The Paranoid Style In American Politics" which can be found in the book of the same name.



The main essay in this book was based on a lecture delivered at Oxford University in 1963. Hofstadter says:

I call it the paranoid style because no other word adequately evokes the qualities of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness or conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind. In using the expression "paranoid style," I am not speaking in a clinical sense, but borrowing a clinical term for other purposes.

Hofstadter's gives an historical perspective of paranoia in politics. This "style" is characterized by "the feeling of persecution as central, and it is indeed systematized in the form of grandiose theories of conspiracy." Hofstadter separates groups that entertain the paranoid style (and maintain that the "conspiracy" is against the nation, or culture and not any one individual personally; and individuals who have the paranoid style. Hofstadter believes that groups with this style appear more rational and disinterested to the observer than an individual with the style would. The former can appeal to unselfish patriotism and express moral indignation, while the latter cannot.

Having lived through the days when it was the Right that exemplified the classic paranoid stance (e.g., remember Joe McCarthy? or the John Birch Society?), I have no compunction in saying that the pendulum has shifted with the tides of political fortune. As the Right (e.g., the Republicans) gained more and more political power in the 80's and 90's (despite a brief interval when Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in charge), the paranoia that had once been so prominent on the Right passed into the minds of the newly powerless--the Democrats and the Left. The emergence of organizations like Moveon.org and the mainstreaming of personalities like Michael Moore and other extreme Leftists, enabled the conspiracy theories to begin to blossom in full bloom from that side of the political spectrum.

There is a nice essay in the Weekly Standard by one of the bloggers at Power Line that discusses Hofstadter's book and its relevance to the political situation today.

This kind of paranoid style has always and will always exist in politics, particularly among those groups and individuals who feel disenfranchised or marginalized in the political power heirarchy.
Paranoia remains a frequent--albeit infantile--method to psychologically cope with feelings of impotence, rage, and marginalization. Denial, projection and displacement also are common; and without the intervention of rational thought and a modicum of psychological insight, it can be extremely distructive to a rational discussion of important issues on a national level.

The second must-have book to understand paranoid psychopathology in politics is Robert Robins and Jerrold Post's Political Paranoia: The Psychopolitics of Hatred.



Robins and Post deal in detail with the psychopathological mechanisms that underlie the paranoid in politics. They offer several case studies, including one of Richard Nixon (probably one of the more paranoid presidents in recent times) and Oliver Stone as well as evaluations of such tyrants as Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot,Idi Amin, and Hitler.

Finally, a third book that I believe is extremely useful in understanding the "tools" of the paranoid, i.e., the psychological mechanisms of denial, projection, distortion, and displacement that are essential for the developement of scapegoating and conspiracy theories; is a more general classic by George Vaillant, Adaptation to Life .



In this wonderful and readable book you will find extensive discussion of all the psychological defense mechanisms--both healthy and unhealthy--and how people use them in their everyday life.

It is important to remember that any of these psychological processes--paranoia, projection, denial, distortion--can be used by anyone, regardless of where they may be on the political spectrum. Understanding the psychological process of defense mechanisms and the reasons why people choose paranoia, denial and other infantile defenses --instead of ones that are more productive and healthy--goes a long way to developing strategies for countering them when you have to deal with their consequences in public life.

At the present time, the Left (especially more moderate Democrats) would do well to carefully reconsider their paranoid stance. In my personal opinion (which you can take or leave as you wish) the Democratic party has been hijacked by extremists who --in spite of what they say--care very little for the health of their country and would rather it be destroyed--than abandon their feelings, and re-examine their ideological premises. A little psychological insight would go a long way here.