Thoughts & Commentary on the Obama Administration

[Louis VI the Fat]

There's Glenn Beck and the Teaparties.

And the homeschooling.
And the 'liberal bias' of the press.
And anti-intellectualism.
And racism.
And fear of being 'undermined by socialistic and communistic schemers'.
And 'the foreign agent' trying to bring down America. (whether they be, in rough historical order, Jews, communists, UN, terrorists).
And their helpers, 'not merely outsiders and foreigners as of old but major statesmen who are at the very centers of American power'.
And the aggresive posturising against all of this.
And the paranoia.

Hofstadter doesn't trace it back to 1964. He traces it back to the 19th century, to the beginning of America. That's the beauty of it.
To paraphrase Hofstadter - it has been thought since the beginning. So if it were true, then America has been undermined since the beginning. So why did it come to be such a large, succesful, autonomous, capitalist country?

The language of the rightwing resistance to Obama has deep roots. And these roots cross over between the paranoid hardright and the mainstream right.
The fruitcakes are a fringe. A rather large fringe, but fringe nonetheless. The crossover with the mainstream right is what is troublesome.

Then again, I suppose here too Hofstadter applies - if it has been crossing over all this time, then apparantly the mainstream right is resilient to being taken over completely by complete paranoia.

~~-~~-~~<<oOo>>~~-~~-~~

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000908
Here's an essay about Hofstadter's essay. Not by a leftwinger, by an author who detests big government himself. And who rightfully points out that Hofstadter describes not merely a rightwing peculiarity:

Hofstadter is very clear that the “paranoid style” is something with deep roots in American culture. Something almost universal, in fact. In Hofstadter’s view this “paranoid style” was not necessarily right-wing, or the province of the G.O.P. Moreover the G.O.P. had arisen and been nurtured as a counter-movement to one of the earliest manifestations of the paranoid style, a political movement derided by Abraham Lincoln

Here's the chilling part:

And finally we come to what was certainly the most stunning, indeed, shocking aspect of Hofstadter’s study, namely, the process of psychological projection. The paranoid political advocate crafts a villainous enemy and imbues the enemy with horrendous traits. And to counter this, he crafts an organization which mimics the enemy and copies its traits.


It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is on many counts the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him. The enemy may be the cosmopolitan intellectual, but the paranoid will outdo him in the apparatus of scholarship, even of pedantry. Secret organizations set up to combat secret organizations give the same flattery. The Ku Klux Klan imitated Catholicism to the point of donning priestly vestments, developing an elaborate ritual and an equally elaborate hierarchy. The John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through “front” groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy. Spokesmen of the various fundamentalist anti-Communist “crusades” openly express their admiration for the dedication and discipline the Communist cause calls forth.

If only everybody involved in the War on Terror had read Hofstadter...

And what is Fox - 'fair and balanced' - but a perverse mirror image of the rightist perception of the 'biased mainstream media'? To counter what was perceived as unremitting liberal bias, a mirror image to it was build, with an unremmiting rightwing bias.

[rvg]

So tell me then, how come even though the rightwingers have been so powerful in America since day one, they haven't been able to pervert the American society into their way of thinking, completely taken over the government and turned America into a totalitarian police state? Surely, they've had plenty of time and resources, but yet somehow they always fail.

[Lemur]

The fruitcakes are a fringe. A rather large fringe, but fringe nonetheless. The crossover with the mainstream right is what is troublesome.

Some of the loopiest stuff is no longer fringe. Depending on which poll you believe, between 42% and 58% of Republicans now believe that President Obama was not born in the United States. That's half of all Republicans believing that the last election was a fraud that put a foreigner in control of the executive branch.

If that's not paranoid, then I'm the Queen of Norway.

[Aemilius Paulus]

So tell me then, how come even though the rightwingers have been so powerful in America since day one, they haven't been able to pervert the American society into their way of thinking, completely taken over the government and turned America into a totalitarian police state? Surely, they've had plenty of time and resources, but yet somehow they always fail.

Because they are so inept . Just as they are so inept that they are in such a deep electoral hole right now. White, Southern, older/middle-aged, Christian males are not exactly a gargantuan demographic...

Some of the loopiest stuff is no longer fringe. Depending on which poll you believe, between 42% and 58% of Republicans now believe that President Obama was not born in the United States. That's half of all Republicans believing that the last election was a fraud that put a foreigner in control of the executive branch.

If that's not paranoid, then I'm the Queen of Norway.

Sadly true. If at the start of the Obama elections I still identified more with Republicans despite my centrism, then now I do not wish to even associate myself with anything Republican. Conservatism is a splendid philosophy when applied to fiscal and purely political matters, although I most certainly do not support social conservatism.

[rvg]

So, they are powerful and dangerous yet inept and helpless all at once.

[Aemilius Paulus]

So, they are powerful and dangerous yet inept and helpless all at once.

They are not "powerful", well, depending on the definition. There are only two major political parties in US, thus every party is powerful - because they are only two. Democrats, at this point, are much stronger. Quite importantly, most celebrities and most of the media is liberal.

In general, in most educated group of people, it seems that Republicans are unpopular. And considering I live in Northwest Florida - Alabama-like countryside and typical Floridian beach resort cities, that is saying much. Or so my impression is. But I cannot associate Democrats with being unpopular as Republicans are. Hell, just saying that that almsot all the intelectuals support Democrats already indicates grim thoughts... If America was not made primarily of well, you know..., then Democrats would win every election.

Republicans are a party of religious zeal and anti-intellectualism. Their candidates reflect that. Obama vs McCain. Bush vs Kerry. Bush vs. Gore. Always a man not noted for his sharpness of thought, or a war hero, against the ever-unchanging intellectual. If you do not believe me, why do you think on February 18th, 2004, sixty two scientists, including forty-two Nobel laureates released that report? Bush is making a joke of science, twisting and manipulating it when not entirely ignoring science?

[Louis VI the Fat]

I am not quite sure what to answer to your questions, rvg.

Let's say that the rightwing has not turned America into a police state because if Hofstadter is correct and it has been crossing over all this time, then apparantly the mainstream right is resilient to being taken over completely by complete paranoia.

Why is it resilient? Because Hofstadter describes but a single aspect. US (rightist) political discourse has many aspects. Which ones make it resilient (is it? will it be?), I have some ideas but after trying to pinpoint earlier what I meant about the paranoia of the right, I am spend for the day.


I'm not on a witch hunt [size=1](me, I'm not paranoid ) against America, or the US right, or even the hardright. I am trying to understand what I see. And then suddenly I remembered that what I see has a name, and that it is not my own thoughts, but lingering memories of a famous essay. That is, I did not find a name to what I see, I saw what I did because I knew it had a name.

Hofstadter is the origin of this earlier quote of mine from last page:

That they must protect America from the Jews and Bolshevists because Goebbels says so...erm, I mean: from the liberal-marxist dictatorship.

And I'm not alone in this interpretation, in seeing this connection. The connection is the paranoid style. Others have derived this connection from Hofstadter too, from my earlier link:

And then we have the one really commanding example – the country in which the “paranoid style” perhaps went the furthest and had the greatest impact. That would be Germany in the period from roughly 1880 to the end of World War II. Hofstadter’s Columbia colleague, and my friend, Fritz Stern, wrote what may be a definitive application of the Hofstadter thesis in The Politics of Cultural Despair: A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology

[Lemur]

I'm still amazed that the only people consistently making fun of Obama are The Onion. Sure, John Stewart has taken some whacks, and SNL tries (lord how they try), but the only people squeezing comedy gold out of the current admin is America's Most Trusted News Source.

Healthy, Happy Obamas Out of Touch With Miserable Americans

And my all-time favorite: Obama Disappointed Cabinet Failed To Understand His Reference To 'Savage Sword Of Conan' #24

[Lord Winter]

The comparison to late 19th century France is a good one. Look at the Dreyfus affair for example. There are those today who will point to a great conspiracy against the american way of life. It doesn't matter if they call it the syndicate or the evil secular liberal progressives(how those terms have been perverted by the right). We as a nation believe that there is a religion set up for the sole purpose of destroying our society. Both Americans and these past French men glorify the military as the embodiment of every value we hold dear and both see any insult to it as treason. We both have the same sensationalist media ready to find any conspiracy in any action. Facts? Why do you need those when our safety could be at stake? Besides even if there was a mistake how dare we insult the brave men who serve our country? While we may not be showing the same level of hatred displayed in the Dreyfus affair the same symptoms are there.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I'm still amazed that the only people consistently making fun of Obama are The Onion. Sure, John Stewart has taken some whacks, and SNL tries (lord how they try), but the only people squeezing comedy gold out of the current admin is America's Most Trusted News Source.

Healthy, Happy Obamas Out of Touch With Miserable Americans

And my all-time favorite: Obama Disappointed Cabinet Failed To Understand His Reference To 'Savage Sword Of Conan' #24

Heh, interesting that you note. The Economist ran an article on that this spring.

[Banquo's Ghost]

So tell me then, how come even though the rightwingers have been so powerful in America since day one, they haven't been able to pervert the American society into their way of thinking, completely taken over the government and turned America into a totalitarian police state? Surely, they've had plenty of time and resources, but yet somehow they always fail.

I don't they have failed at all. They have perverted American society into just what you say.

Tell me, which party likely to have real influence does someone of Jeffersonian aspiration nowadays vote for?

One that stands for (and would actually deliver) fiscal responsibility, freedom of choice for the individual, freedom from federal control, tolerance and equality of opportunity, pro-States' rights, effective checks and balances between the arms of government, avoidance of foreign entanglements and the upholding of the inalienable rights of Man?

[Tribesman]

They have perverted American society into just what you say.

Yep , where they burn books and dispute science in favour of myth, get so hung up over anything to do with sex...and of course think some brainless idiot from alaska is a good candidate because she is just like them.

anti intellectualism, the pride in being as thick as pig excrement

[rvg]

Yep , where they burn books and dispute science in favour of myth, get so hung up over anything to do with sex...and of course think some brainless idiot from alaska is a good candidate because she is just like them.

anti intellectualism, the pride in being as thick as pig excrement

There's nothing wrong with burning books as long as you buy them first. Nobody is required to like any given book, and if they bought a book, they are free to read it or ignore it, worship it or burn it. It is a valid form of protest.
As for the Intelligent Design, it is a fine philosophical theory but has no place in the science classroom because it isn't science. I don't know about other states but in Michigan specifically, it is not apart of public school curriculum.
As for the brainless idiot, that brainless idiot was smart enough to become governor, so I'd hesitate to call her brainless. She *will* sink any republican presidential aspiration if nominated, but then again if republicans nominate her, they deserve to lose.

As for the anti-intellectualism, it is not at all a universal trait in the American society.

[Strike For The South]

There's nothing wrong with burning books as long as you buy them first. Nobody is required to like any given book, and if they bought a book, they are free to read it or ignore it, worship it or burn it. It is a valid form of protest.
As for the Intelligent Design, it is a fine philosophical theory but has no place in the science classroom because it isn't science. I don't know about other states but in Michigan specifically, it is not apart of public school curriculum.
As for the brainless idiot, that brainless idiot was smart enough to become governor, so I'd hesitate to call her brainless. She *will* sink any republican presidential aspiration if nominated, but then again if republicans nominate her, they deserve to lose.

As for the anti-intellectualism, it is not at all a universal trait in the American society.

Even if you purchase it you must see the affront to enlightenment ideals thats is. Simply becuase you disagree with an idea does not mean you can burn it.

In the day of the printing press we have become callous to this but burning books used to be a very big deal.

IMO anyone who burns books is not protesting but killing America.

It's not even a good from of civil discourse. Instead of debate you simply burn, how is that ok?

[rvg]

Even if you purchase it you must see the affront to enlightenment ideals thats is. Simply becuase you disagree with an idea does not mean you can burn it.

Well, that's the thing: ideas do not burn. Which is why burning books is nothing more than a form of speech. Now, if we were talking about a government sanctioned extermination of an idea, then yes, it would be horrible. As it is, the writers of those books are laughing all the way to the bank, since they get paid regardless of whether their books end in a library or in a landfill. Heck, if I had an idea for a book so bad that I knew that people would burn it en masse, I would be a millionaire. You buy the book, you own it. read it, burn it, wipe your ass with it, it is not my place to tell you what to do with your property.

[Strike For The South]

Well, that's the thing: ideas do not burn. Which is why burning books is nothing more than a form of speech. Now, if we were talking about a government sanctioned extermination of an idea, then yes, it would be horrible. As it is, the writers of those books are laughing all the way to the bank, since they get paid regardless of whether their books end in a library or in a landfill. Heck, if I had an idea for a book so bad that I knew that people would burn it en masse, I would be a millionaire. You buy the book, you own it. read it, burn it, wipe your ass with it, it is not my place to tell you what to do with your property.

I agree that it should be legal. I just think it's small minded and not a good way to espouse your displeasure. When you need to resort to burning books you've lost the arguement

[rvg]

Sure, it is small minded. This is America though, and people here can be as small minded as they wish to be. They are free to be wordly as well, if they choose to. Just because it is *better* to be wordly doesn't mean that we should strip the people of their right to be small minded.

[Tribesman]

As for the anti-intellectualism, it is not at all a universal trait in the American society.

No one said it was , it was said about the paranoid freaks who often call themselves the Republican Base.

As for the brainless idiot, that brainless idiot was smart enough to become governor, so I'd hesitate to call her brainless.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Tell me, which party likely to have real influence does someone of Jeffersonian aspiration nowadays vote for?

One that stands for (and would actually deliver) fiscal responsibility, freedom of choice for the individual, freedom from federal control, tolerance and equality of opportunity, pro-States' rights, effective checks and balances between the arms of government, avoidance of foreign entanglements and the upholding of the inalienable rights of Man?

I'm going to say none of them.

[Lord Winter]

Sure, it is small minded. This is America though, and people here can be as small minded as they wish to be. They are free to be wordly as well, if they choose to. Just because it is *better* to be wordly doesn't mean that we should strip the people of their right to be small minded.

Yes, they have the right to be small minded but it doesn't mean they should be. Just as they have a right to be racist it is not something our society should encourage or idealize.

[Xiahou]

Some of the loopiest stuff is no longer fringe. Depending on which poll you believe, between 42% and 58% of Republicans now believe that President Obama was not born in the United States. That's half of all Republicans believing that the last election was a fraud that put a foreigner in control of the executive branch.

If that's not paranoid, then I'm the Queen of Norway.

Maybe you better go look at your polls again and see what they actually say, because what you're claiming isn't in them. As a matter of fact, it looks like both your links reference the same poll.

[Beskar]

Republicans are only kicking off because Obama is black.

I mean, Mc Cain wasn't even born in the United States*

[Crazed Rabbit]

SNL makes fun of Obama's lack of accomplishments.

CR

[The Stranger]

Some of the loopiest stuff is no longer fringe. Depending on which poll you believe, between 42% and 58% of Republicans now believe that President Obama was not born in the United States. That's half of all Republicans believing that the last election was a fraud that put a foreigner in control of the executive branch.

If that's not paranoid, then I'm the Queen of Norway.

polls are never to be trusted anyway, untill you know how many people theyve polled and in which variety. and then still they shouldnt be trusted...

[The Stranger]

There's nothing wrong with burning books as long as you buy them first. Nobody is required to like any given book, and if they bought a book, they are free to read it or ignore it, worship it or burn it. It is a valid form of protest.
As for the Intelligent Design, it is a fine philosophical theory but has no place in the science classroom because it isn't science. I don't know about other states but in Michigan specifically, it is not apart of public school curriculum.
As for the brainless idiot, that brainless idiot was smart enough to become governor, so I'd hesitate to call her brainless. She *will* sink any republican presidential aspiration if nominated, but then again if republicans nominate her, they deserve to lose.

As for the anti-intellectualism, it is not at all a universal trait in the American society.

books are way too powerful, most people tend to believe that anything that is written down is true, specially when it has been written down a few hundred years ago and no one knows for sure who wrote it. however the big sin of burning books is in the knowledge that is lost, to burn a harry potter book is an entirely different thing than burning the last harry potter book or any other last copy of a book. its beside the matter wether whats in it is considered true or not.

[Xiahou]

This is depressing:
Officials: Obama advisers are downplaying Afghan dangers

As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al Qaida , U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy .

One phrase that always comes up in the administration's strategy sessions is "public opinion," one participant told McClatchy .

For more, listen to CBS News' Afghanistan correspondent describe how Obama's "strategy" on Afghanistan risks disaster.

[Lemur]

Once again, The Onion shows why it is the only entity capable of mocking Obama effectively.

[seireikhaan]

Obama authorizes extra 13,000 military personnel to be deployed in Afghanistan.

[KukriKhan]

Obama authorizes extra 13,000 military personnel to be deployed in Afghanistan.

For what it's worth, those "extra" GI's are mostly ones who've already been to either Iraq or Afghanistan, or both, repeatedly. Like my son. Some of his co-workers are preparing for their 6th year-long deployment in 8 years.

[Xiahou]

It seems like even Gates may be getting fed up with Obama's dithering on Afghanistan.

The Obama administration needs to decide on a war strategy for Afghanistan without waiting for a government there to be widely accepted as legitimate, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday.

Gates' comments put him at odds with top White House and NATO officials who are balking at ordering more troops and other resources to Afghanistan until the disputed election crisis there is resolved.

The Pentagon chief called the Afghan elections — and the larger issues of curbing corruption in its government — "an evolving process."

"We're not just going to sit on our hands, waiting for the outcome of this election and for the emergence of a government in Kabul," he told reporters en route to Tokyo.

Meanwhile, Obama can continue to weigh "public opinion".....