The Paranoid Style in American Politics, Essay Example

Richard J. Hofstadter’s text “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” suggests that contemporary American political discourse has increasingly become characterized by a certain irrationality that is now almost ubiquitous. Hofstadter discerns a rise in what he terms “heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy”, (1) qualities that are present not only in the political viewpoints of politicians, but are constitutive of the political viewpoints of the general populace. For the author, this indicates a “style” of practicing politics, a style which may be compared to any form of art (1): this style is a particular form that political debate takes, according to which typical content is interpreted according to this “paranoia.”

The author notes that his analysis is intended to be a critique of the turn that American political life has taken. It is precisely the paranoid style that prevents dialogue, as the partner in political debate is not approached in a constructive manner. Rather, from the outset the partner in political debate is considered to be the enemy. Such a presupposition indicates the hostility inherent to the political discourse formed by paranoia. This paranoia is the continual inscription of a dividing line between “us and them”. Conspiracy is thus crucial to the paranoid style, as it invokes “a gigantic and yet subtle machinery of influence set in motion to undermine and destroy a way of life.” (29) Accordingly, insofar as such a paranoid style is present, there is an impossibility to contemplate any possible reconciliation across different viewpoints, as the political space itself is defined in terms of a fundamental antagonism.

As Hofstadter notes, however, this is not merely a phenomenon of contemporary America. He stresses the international scope of this phenomenon, and also the historical nature of this style of discourse in America, for example, McCarthyism. Nevertheless, what is explicit in Hofstadter’s text is the notion that such a form of political discourse is inherently anti-democratic. It begins from the presupposition of conflict, as opposed to the notion that the democratic political space offers the very possibility for dialogue itself. Accordingly, such a paranoid style, even when claiming to advance democratic values, in reality undermines the essence of democracy by presenting the political space in terms of such conflict. The movement away from such a paranoid style would simultaneously be a return to the ideals of democracy itself, as the political space would be posited as an organic whole working towards a common good.

Works Cited

Hofstadter, Richard J. “The Paranoid Style of American Politics.”