Paranoia Strikes Deep: While the paranoid style isn’t new, its role within the G.O.P. is
Raymond
The G.O.P. has been taken over by the people it used to exploit.
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Op-Ed Columnist
NY Times
Published: November 9, 2009
Last Thursday there was a rally outside the U.S. Capitol to protest
pending health care legislation, featuring the kinds of things we’ve
grown accustomed to, including large signs showing piles of bodies at
Dachau with the caption “National Socialist Healthcare.” It was
grotesque — and it was also ominous. For what we may be seeing is
America starting to be Californiafied.
The key thing to understand about that rally is that it wasn’t a
fringe event. It was sponsored by the House Republican leadership — in
fact, it was officially billed as a G.O.P. press conference. Senior
lawmakers were in attendance, and apparently had no problem with the
tone of the proceedings.
True, Eric Cantor, the second-ranking House Republican, offered some
mild criticism after the fact. But the operative word is “mild.” The
signs were “inappropriate,” said his spokesman, and the use of Hitler
comparisons by such people as Rush Limbaugh, said Mr. Cantor,
“conjures up images that frankly are not, I think, very helpful.”
What all this shows is that the G.O.P. has been taken over by the
people it used to exploit.
The state of mind visible at recent right-wing demonstrations is
nothing new. Back in 1964 the historian Richard Hofstadter published
an essay titled, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” which
reads as if it were based on today’s headlines: Americans on the far
right, he wrote, feel that “America has been largely taken away from
them and their kind, though they are determined to try to repossess it
and to prevent the final destructive act of subversion.” Sound
familiar?
But while the paranoid style isn’t new, its role within the G.O.P.
is.
When Hofstadter wrote, the right wing felt dispossessed because it was
rejected by both major parties. That changed with the rise of Ronald
Reagan: Republican politicians began to win elections in part by
catering to the passions of the angry right.
Until recently, however, that catering mostly took the form of empty
symbolism. Once elections were won, the issues that fired up the base
almost always took a back seat to the economic concerns of the elite.
Thus in 2004 George W. Bush ran on antiterrorism and “values,” only to
announce, as soon as the election was behind him, that his first
priority was changing Social Security.
But something snapped last year. Conservatives had long believed that
history was on their side, so the G.O.P. establishment could, in
effect, urge hard-right activists to wait just a little longer: once
the party consolidated its hold on power, they’d get what they wanted.
After the Democratic sweep, however, extremists could no longer be
fobbed off with promises of future glory.
Furthermore, the loss of both Congress and the White House left a
power vacuum in a party accustomed to top-down management. At this
point Newt Gingrich is what passes for a sober, reasonable elder
statesman of the G.O.P. And he has no authority: Republican voters
ignored his call to support a relatively moderate, electable candidate
in New York’s special Congressional election.
Real power in the party rests, instead, with the likes of Rush
Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin (who at this point is more a
media figure than a conventional politician). Because these people
aren’t interested in actually governing, they feed the base’s frenzy
instead of trying to curb or channel it. So all the old restraints are
gone.
In the short run, this may help Democrats, as it did in that New York
race. But maybe not: elections aren’t necessarily won by the candidate
with the most rational argument. They’re often determined, instead, by
events and economic conditions.
In fact, the party of Limbaugh and Beck could well make major gains in
the midterm elections. The Obama administration’s job-creation efforts
have fallen short, so that unemployment is likely to stay disastrously
high through next year and beyond. The banker-friendly bailout of Wall
Street has angered voters, and might even let Republicans claim the
mantle of economic populism. Conservatives may not have better ideas,
but voters might support them out of sheer frustration.
And if Tea Party Republicans do win big next year, what has already
happened in California could happen at the national level. In
California, the G.O.P. has essentially shrunk down to a rump party
with no interest in actually governing — but that rump remains big
enough to prevent anyone else from dealing with the state’s fiscal
crisis. If this happens to America as a whole, as it all too easily
could, the country could become effectively ungovernable in the midst
of an ongoing economic disaster.
The point is that the takeover of the Republican Party by the
irrational right is no laughing matter. Something unprecedented is
happening here — and it’s very bad for America.
jheard
And which Congressman called the other party's health care plan a
"Holocaust" on the floor of the House?
Oh yeah, Democrat Grayson!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/Grayson_calls_health_care_crisis_holocaust.html