海角大神

In assessing Donald Trump's appeal, some go to phrase 'paranoid style'

But the phrase has become wearisome to non-Democrats, who consider it worthy of clich茅 status.

鈥淧aranoid style鈥�:聽a phrase from a famous 1964 essay that Democrats increasingly invoke to explain the appeal of Donald Trump and others with whom they vehemently disagree.

Historian Richard Hofstadter, in an that later became a book, coined the phrase 鈥減aranoid style in American politics鈥� to connote 鈥渢he sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy鈥� that have marked some political movements since the 18th century. It was published in Harper鈥檚 Magazine around the time that conservative Barry Goldwater edged out the more moderate Nelson Rockefeller for the GOP presidential nomination. (Goldwater later would lose overwhelmingly to President Lyndon Johnson, but laid the groundwork for what evolved into the modern conservative movement.)

鈥淎merican politics,鈥� Hofstadter presciently began his article, 鈥渉as often been an arena for angry minds.鈥�

Hofstadter sought to make clear that he wasn鈥檛 speaking to a pathology applying only to people with 鈥減rofoundly disturbed minds,鈥� but 鈥渢he use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people.鈥� The 鈥渟tyle,鈥� he wrote, had several elements: 鈥渁 vast and sinister conspiracy, a gigantic and yet subtle machinery of influence set in motion to undermine and destroy a way of life鈥�; an 鈥渁pocalyptic鈥� mentality that 鈥渢raffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values鈥�; and the firm insistence on seeing all political differences as 鈥渁 conflict between absolute good and absolute evil.鈥�

For the past half century, the essay often has been trotted out to dissect the behavior of those on the right. 鈥淧aranoia isn鈥檛 on the fringe anymore, like it was in Hofstadter鈥檚 day,鈥� Todd Leopold on CNN in 2012, citing the ubiquity of social media. 鈥淚t鈥檚 now closer to the beating heart of the mainstream.鈥�

University of California-Berkeley linguist Geoffrey Nunberg, in his 2006 鈥淭alking Right,鈥� argued that it鈥檚 prevalent in conservatives鈥� gripes about media bias. 鈥淭here鈥檚 the deafness to humor, satire and metaphor that puts a [David] Letterman gag on the same level as a New York Times report,鈥� Professor Nunberg wrote. 鈥淭here鈥檚 the way that the right talks about 鈥榯he media鈥� as a monolithic entity, an undifferentiated 鈥榯hey,鈥� effacing the differences between sources and formats.鈥�

These days, though, the phrase keeps popping up in the litany of 鈥渨hat鈥檚 Trump鈥檚 appeal鈥� analyses. 鈥淸I]t鈥檚 helpful to position Trump in the long tradition of what Hofstadter had termed in 1964 鈥榯he paranoid style in American politics,鈥� 鈥� CNN national security analyst Peter Bergen after the bombastic billionaire made his controversial comments on barring Muslim immigrants.

Writing in Inside Higher Ed, Tracy Mitrano used the expression in of a Times analysis of Mr. Trump鈥檚 rhetoric. And in The Washington Post, Christopher Federico that 鈥淭rump and his fan base revive the paranoid style in American politics,鈥� tossing in a clip of Black Sabbath鈥檚 heavy-metal classic 鈥淧aranoid鈥� to underscore the point.

Meanwhile, it鈥檚 been deployed in connection with two other leading GOP candidates 鈥� neurosurgeon and Texas Sen. Times liberal columnist Paul Krugman in discussing many Republicans鈥� refusal to acknowledge humans鈥� contributions to climate change. And it鈥檚 to the Koch brothers, another fat target of Democrats鈥� enmity.

As you might expect, all of this has become wearisome to non-Democrats, who consider it worthy of clich茅 status. 鈥淭he Paranoid Style idea was so attractive because it masqueraded as sober history,鈥� Philip Jenkins in The American Conservative two years ago. He noted that Rutgers professor of history and media studies David Greenberg that 鈥渢here should probably be a moratorium鈥� on the expression鈥檚 use, because Professor Greenberg said it鈥檚 among the ideas of Hofstadter鈥檚 that commentators 鈥渕ay simplify or mangle.鈥�

Nunberg, in a recent e-mail, agreed that 鈥減eople have pulled the phrase out too often over the years. It usually explains less than it seems to, and it can be condescending.鈥� Although he said it connotes provocateur Glenn Beck as well as the uproar over the this fall, he added, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know that I鈥檇 apply the phrase to the simplistic xenophobia that鈥檚 out there now.鈥�

Chuck McCutcheon writes his "Speaking Politics" blog exclusively for Politics Voices.