Richard Hofstadterの米国政治のパラノイドスタイル (1964)

米国Columbia Universityの米国史教授Richard Hofstadterは、1963年に「米国政治のパラノイドスタイル」についての講義を行った。その内容が、1964年11月にHarper's Magazineに掲載された。そこに示された1960年代の米国の右翼の姿は、時代に紐づく固有名詞は違えど、現在と何ら違わない姿だった。
American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing.


The basic elements of contemporary right-wing thought can be reduced to three: First, there has been the now-familiar sustained conspiracy, running over more than a generation, and reaching its climax in Roosevelt’s New Deal, to undermine free capitalism, to bring the economy under the direction of the federal government, and to pave the way for socialism or communism. A great many right-wingers would agree with Frank Chodorov, the author of The Income Tax: The Root of All Evil, that this campaign began with the passage of the income-tax amendment to the Constitution in 1913.

The second contention is that top government officialdom has been so infiltrated by Communists that American policy, at least since the days leading up to Pearl Harbor, has been dominated by men who were shrewdly and consistently selling out American national interests.

Finally, the country is infused with a network of Communist agents, just as in the old days it was infiltrated by Jesuit agents, so that the whole apparatus of education, religion, the press, and the mass media is engaged in a common effort to paralyze the resistance of loyal Americans.

現代(1960年代)の右翼思考の基本要素は、以下の3つに集約できる。第1は、ニューディール政策でクライマックスに到達し、自由事本主義を蝕み、経済を連邦政府の指令下に置き、社会主義あるいは共産主義への道を固めるという、一世代以上続き、今は身近な陰謀が存在する。非常に多くの右翼が、"Income Tax: The Root of All Evil"(所得税、諸悪の根源)の著者であるFrank Chodorovを支持しており、このキャンペーンは、1913年の所得税についての憲法修正に始まる。



[ Richard Hofstadter: "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964/11) on Harper's Magazine ]

Here is Senator McCarthy, speaking in June 1951 about the parlous situation of the United States:


How can we account for our present situation unless we believe that men high in this government are concerting to deliver us to disaster? This must be the product of a great conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man. A conspiracy of infamy so black that, which it is finally exposed, its principals shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all honest men. . . . What can be made of this unbroken series of decisions and acts contributing to the strategy of defeat? They cannot be attributed to incompetence. . . . The laws of probability would dictate that part of . . . [the] decisions would serve the country’s interest.

この政府上層部が協調して、我々を災厄へと運ぼうとしていると考える以外に、我々の現在の状況を説明する方法があるだろうか?これは、人間の歴史のいかなる危険も矮小化されるほど巨大なスケールの大陰謀の帰結なのだ。この恥ずべき陰謀はあまりにも黒く、最終的には暴露され、首謀者たちは、すべての正直者たちの呪詛に永劫さらされることになる。何が、敗北戦略に寄与する一連の切れ目ない決定と行動を作り上げているのか? それは無能に起因するものではありえない。国益を左右する決定の一部を確率法則が支配している。

Now turn back fifty years to a manifesto signed in 1895 by a number of leaders of the Populist party:


As early as 1865–66 a conspiracy was entered into between the gold gamblers of Europe and America. . . . For nearly thirty years these conspirators have kept the people quarreling over less important matters while they have pursued with unrelenting zeal their one central purpose. . . . Every device of treachery, every resource of statecraft, and every artifice known to the secret cabals of the international gold ring are being used to deal a blow to the prosperity of the people and the financial and commercial independence of the country.


Next, a Texas newspaper article of 1855:


. . . It is a notorious fact that the Monarchs of Europe and the Pope of Rome are at this very moment plotting our destruction and threatening the extinction of our political, civil, and religious institutions. We have the best reasons for believing that corruption has found its way into our Executive Chamber, and that our Executive head is tainted with the infectious venom of Catholicism. . . . The Pope has recently sent his ambassador of state to this country on a secret commission, the effect of which is an extraordinary boldness of the Catholic church throughout the United States. . . . These minions of the Pope are boldly insulting our Senators; reprimanding our Statesmen; propagating the adulterous union of Church and State; abusing with foul calumny all governments but Catholic, and spewing out the bitterest execrations on all Protestantism. The Catholics in the United States receive from abroad more than $200,000 annually for the propagation of their creed. Add to this the vast revenues collected here. . . .


These quotations give the keynote of the style. 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. I do not propose to try to trace the variations of the paranoid style that can be found in all these movements, but will confine myself to a few leading episodes in our past history in which the style emerged in full and archetypal splendor.


[ Richard Hofstadter: "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964/11) on Harper's Magazine ]

The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms—he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization. He constantly lives at a turning point. Like religious millennialists he expresses the anxiety of those who are living through the last days and he is sometimes disposed to set a date fort the apocalypse. (“Time is running out,” said Welch in 1951. “Evidence is piling up on many sides and from many sources that October 1952 is the fatal month when Stalin will attack.”)


As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a militant leader. He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated—if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes.


The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman—sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced. The paranoid’s interpretation of history is distinctly personal: decisive events are not taken as part of the stream of history, but as the consequences of someone’s will. Very often the enemy is held to possess some especially effective source of power: he controls the press; he has unlimited funds; he has a new secret for influencing the mind (brainwashing); he has a special technique for seduction (the Catholic confessional).


[ Richard Hofstadter: "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964/11) on Harper's Magazine ]
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.


[ Richard Hofstadter: "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964/11) on Harper's Magazine ]




If, after our historically discontinuous examples of the paranoid style, we now take the long jump to the contemporary right wing, we find some rather important differences from the nineteenth-century movements. The spokesmen of those earlier movements felt that they stood for causes and personal types that were still in possession of their country—that they were fending off threats to a still established way of life. But the modern right wing, as Daniel Bell has put it, feels dispossessed: 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. The old American virtues have already been eaten away by cosmopolitans and intellectuals; the old competitive capitalism has been gradually undermined by socialistic and communistic schemers; the old national security and independence have been destroyed by treasonous plots, having as their most powerful agents not merely outsiders and foreigners as of old but major statesmen who are at the very centers of American power. Their predecessors had discovered conspiracies; the modern radical right finds conspiracy to be betrayal from on high.

もし、パラノイドスタイルの歴史的不連続の後に、我々が今や、現代の右翼へと、大きく飛躍しているとするなら、我々は19世紀の運動との間に、重要な差異を見出せる。それら初期の運動の代弁者たちは、米国を所有する大義と個人のために、代弁しているのだと感じていた。すなわち、人生の確立された道筋に対する脅威から、身をかわしている個人のために。しかし、現代の右翼は、歴史学者Daniel Bellが指摘するように「奪われた」と感じている。「彼らや、その同類から、米国の多くが奪われており、取り戻そうとしていて、最終的破壊を阻止しようとしている。古き米国の美徳は、コスモポリタンと知識人たちに食い荒らされた。古き競争的資本主義は、社会主義及び共産主義的なスキームによって次第に蝕まれた。古き国家安全保障と独立は、アウトサイダーや外国人のみならず、米国の力の中心にいる、老いているが主要な指導者たちを強力なエージェントとする、反逆者の陰謀で破棄された。彼らの前任者たちは陰謀を発見した。現代のラディカル右翼は、陰謀が権力の頂点の裏切りであることを発見した。」

[ Richard Hofstadter: "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964/11) on Harper's Magazine ]