4 ms·

The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1964)

100 points by mitchbob 1y ago

hotep99 1y ago
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.
- whotheywut1 1y ago
  Indeed: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-insecurity-of-workers-is-a-big-factor-in-fed-policy.html https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-insecurity-o...
- Stratoscope 1y ago
  My dad had a fun twist on this: "I'm not paranoid, but there's a bunch of paranoid people following me around."
  - bitwize 1y ago
    Overheard among insane asylum staff: "Have you heard about the new guy Joe?" "Yeah, he's the guy who thinks people are always talking about him, right?" "Boy, what a nutcase."
rcakebread 1y ago
I first read this after hearing the band, The Paranoid Style.
Unirely01 1y ago
[dead]
like_any_other 1y ago
[flagged]
- aredox 1y ago
  >The other problem is special pleading - the author adds more and more conditions on what constitutes the "paranoid style", until he's able to isolate the phenomenon to mostly the right half of the political spectrum. Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear. The author already answered in the second paragraph: "Of course this term is pejorative, and it is meant to be; the paranoid style has a greater affinity for bad causes than good. But nothing really prevents a sound program or demand from being advocated in the paranoid style. Style has more to do with the way in which ideas are believed than with the truth or falsity of their content." Or here: "In the history of the United States one find it, for example, in the anti-Masonic movement, the nativist and anti-Catholic movement, in certain spokesmen of abolitionism who regarded the United States as being in the grip of a slaveholders’ conspiracy, in many alarmists about the Mormons, in some Greenback and Populist writers who constructed a great conspiracy of international bankers, in the exposure of a munitions makers’ conspiracy of World War I, in the popular left-wing press, in the contemporary American right wing, and on both sides of the race controversy today, among White Citizens’ Councils and Black Muslims." >Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear. Yeah, there is a difference between blaming things on a shadowy tiny hidden cabal of vaguely-defined conspirators whose existence you don't even attempt to prove, and blaming... you know... the people actually in charge. I mean, the people in power during most of the last centuries and decades have been white, racist, colonialist and capitalists. That's a fact. That is how they defined themselves openly. So, you are in effect saying that "reality has a well-known liberal bias".
  - like_any_other 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - DangitBobby 1y ago
derbOac 1y ago
There's research pointing out "the paranoid style" is everywhere in the world, just controlled or checked to various extents in different places and different times. Still a good read for perspective.
- bryanrasmussen 1y ago
  Sure, but the paranoid style in politics will manifest differently in different cultures. This is about the Paranoid style in American Politics.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Duanemclemore 1y ago
Never going to NOT upvote this. Essential read on the US.
roenxi 1y ago
The most interesting part of this article is there doesn't seem to be any strong evidence that the paranoid people were wrong. Europe has spent most of the last 200 years under the control of a relatively small number of families and it is just common sense that there would be conspiracies to seize control of the US government and change its ideology. People debate which of them should gain the ascendancy every election. > John Robison ... saw [the Masons] as a libertine, anti-Christian movement, given to the corruption of women, the cultivation of sensual pleasures, and the violation of property rights... That is a pretty accurate description of where Europe ended up in the 1900s to today, so it seems a unreasonable to dismiss the man out of hand. 100 years for a big social project isn't that long a time given how slowly the world moved back then. It is reasonable to say that the Masons might have been a benign organisation - but they also might not have been. There is no contest that groups in Europe were trying and succeeding to push in that direction. The communists had their big breakout in the 1900s but the personality type always has and will exist and the intellectual groundwork was being laid at least as early as the 1850s. There is this weird social dynamic where people dismiss the idea that radical change is possible in foresight then shrug it off and basically don't care in hindsight. It results in remarkably small groups being able to achieve some incredible things, but it is a bit frustrating an attitude to argue with.
- aredox 1y ago
  Your post is like listing all the Jewish people in showbiz and politics to show that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion "might be reasonable". >That is a pretty accurate description of where Europe ended up in the 1900s to today Yes, women in Europe are very corrupted. Amazing insight there.
  - roenxi 1y ago
    I don't remember what is in it, but if you want to discredit the Protocols saying "it predicted X" when X then happened is not the easy path. The main counterargument is the idea that organisation could be race-based vs pointing at a voluntary society. If you blame Jews on racial grounds they can't very well disassociate from being Jews. > Yes, women in Europe are very corrupted. Amazing insight there. Not much of an insight, it's generally accepted. By the standards of conservative Europe in 1800AD they're probably more than corrupted, society seems to have gone through the most extreme cases for how they imagined change might evolve. It isn't a very accurately chosen word but if you dig in to what he would have meant the boxes got ticked. The stats I've seen suggest European women are mostly godless, probably don't respect men all that much and on average are not having enough children to sustain the population. These days we'd probably call all that a win, but he wasn't wrong that people were working to bring such a world around.
y0ned4 1y ago
Thanks for sharing this paper
amadeuspagel 1y ago
What seems uniquely american is less paranoia but meta-paranoia, a fear of other people's fear.
- DangitBobby 1y ago
  Fear of other people's fear is completely rational. The meta fear is that those with primary fear will allow (call for, even) rights to be dismantled in the name of security.
- justonceokay 1y ago
  A scared dog is the most likely to bite.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
user____name 1y ago
And it's now being exported worldwide by armies of grifters and bots. I am disturbed by the amount of fantastical thinking I see around me by people who watch some youtube or tiktok grifter with ai voiceover and seem to be blissfully ignorant that they're being manipulated by some vested interest. People believe what they want to believe and have always been easy to influence, but the scale at which it is happening today... God help us.

100 points by mitchbob 1y ago

hotep99 1y ago

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.

whotheywut1 1y ago
Indeed: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-insecurity-of-workers-is-a-big-factor-in-fed-policy.html https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-insecurity-o...
Stratoscope 1y ago
My dad had a fun twist on this: "I'm not paranoid, but there's a bunch of paranoid people following me around."
- bitwize 1y ago
  Overheard among insane asylum staff: "Have you heard about the new guy Joe?" "Yeah, he's the guy who thinks people are always talking about him, right?" "Boy, what a nutcase."

rcakebread 1y ago

I first read this after hearing the band, The Paranoid Style.

Unirely01 1y ago

[dead]

like_any_other 1y ago

[flagged]

aredox 1y ago
>The other problem is special pleading - the author adds more and more conditions on what constitutes the "paranoid style", until he's able to isolate the phenomenon to mostly the right half of the political spectrum. Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear. The author already answered in the second paragraph: "Of course this term is pejorative, and it is meant to be; the paranoid style has a greater affinity for bad causes than good. But nothing really prevents a sound program or demand from being advocated in the paranoid style. Style has more to do with the way in which ideas are believed than with the truth or falsity of their content." Or here: "In the history of the United States one find it, for example, in the anti-Masonic movement, the nativist and anti-Catholic movement, in certain spokesmen of abolitionism who regarded the United States as being in the grip of a slaveholders’ conspiracy, in many alarmists about the Mormons, in some Greenback and Populist writers who constructed a great conspiracy of international bankers, in the exposure of a munitions makers’ conspiracy of World War I, in the popular left-wing press, in the contemporary American right wing, and on both sides of the race controversy today, among White Citizens’ Councils and Black Muslims." >Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear. Yeah, there is a difference between blaming things on a shadowy tiny hidden cabal of vaguely-defined conspirators whose existence you don't even attempt to prove, and blaming... you know... the people actually in charge. I mean, the people in power during most of the last centuries and decades have been white, racist, colonialist and capitalists. That's a fact. That is how they defined themselves openly. So, you are in effect saying that "reality has a well-known liberal bias".
- like_any_other 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - DangitBobby 1y ago

derbOac 1y ago

There's research pointing out "the paranoid style" is everywhere in the world, just controlled or checked to various extents in different places and different times. Still a good read for perspective.

bryanrasmussen 1y ago
Sure, but the paranoid style in politics will manifest differently in different cultures. This is about the Paranoid style in American Politics.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Duanemclemore 1y ago

Never going to NOT upvote this. Essential read on the US.

roenxi 1y ago

The most interesting part of this article is there doesn't seem to be any strong evidence that the paranoid people were wrong. Europe has spent most of the last 200 years under the control of a relatively small number of families and it is just common sense that there would be conspiracies to seize control of the US government and change its ideology. People debate which of them should gain the ascendancy every election. > John Robison ... saw [the Masons] as a libertine, anti-Christian movement, given to the corruption of women, the cultivation of sensual pleasures, and the violation of property rights... That is a pretty accurate description of where Europe ended up in the 1900s to today, so it seems a unreasonable to dismiss the man out of hand. 100 years for a big social project isn't that long a time given how slowly the world moved back then. It is reasonable to say that the Masons might have been a benign organisation - but they also might not have been. There is no contest that groups in Europe were trying and succeeding to push in that direction. The communists had their big breakout in the 1900s but the personality type always has and will exist and the intellectual groundwork was being laid at least as early as the 1850s. There is this weird social dynamic where people dismiss the idea that radical change is possible in foresight then shrug it off and basically don't care in hindsight. It results in remarkably small groups being able to achieve some incredible things, but it is a bit frustrating an attitude to argue with.

aredox 1y ago
Your post is like listing all the Jewish people in showbiz and politics to show that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion "might be reasonable". >That is a pretty accurate description of where Europe ended up in the 1900s to today Yes, women in Europe are very corrupted. Amazing insight there.
- roenxi 1y ago
  I don't remember what is in it, but if you want to discredit the Protocols saying "it predicted X" when X then happened is not the easy path. The main counterargument is the idea that organisation could be race-based vs pointing at a voluntary society. If you blame Jews on racial grounds they can't very well disassociate from being Jews. > Yes, women in Europe are very corrupted. Amazing insight there. Not much of an insight, it's generally accepted. By the standards of conservative Europe in 1800AD they're probably more than corrupted, society seems to have gone through the most extreme cases for how they imagined change might evolve. It isn't a very accurately chosen word but if you dig in to what he would have meant the boxes got ticked. The stats I've seen suggest European women are mostly godless, probably don't respect men all that much and on average are not having enough children to sustain the population. These days we'd probably call all that a win, but he wasn't wrong that people were working to bring such a world around.

y0ned4 1y ago

Thanks for sharing this paper

amadeuspagel 1y ago

What seems uniquely american is less paranoia but meta-paranoia, a fear of other people's fear.

DangitBobby 1y ago
Fear of other people's fear is completely rational. The meta fear is that those with primary fear will allow (call for, even) rights to be dismantled in the name of security.
justonceokay 1y ago
A scared dog is the most likely to bite.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

user____name 1y ago

And it's now being exported worldwide by armies of grifters and bots. I am disturbed by the amount of fantastical thinking I see around me by people who watch some youtube or tiktok grifter with ai voiceover and seem to be blissfully ignorant that they're being manipulated by some vested interest. People believe what they want to believe and have always been easy to influence, but the scale at which it is happening today... God help us.