BOOKS
287
came to
be
seen as irreconcilable by certain political actors. When group
conflicts seem negotiable, the paranoid strain recedes; when catastrophy
or the fear of catastrophy seems to threaten, the paranoid style reemerges.
Bargain and compromise then seem inappropriate, especially to those
who fear to
be
the catastrophy's chief victims.
In his earlier writings, Hofstadter, along with co-thinkers like Daniel
Bell and Seymour M. Lipset, introduced the term
status politics-which
they contrasted with class politics in order to explain the appeal of the
New American Right in the fifties. They contended that class lines and
·economic interests may be the major divisive forces in periods of eco–
nomic distress and scarcity, but that in a relatively affluent society the
demands of groups considering themselves at a disadvantage in the dis–
tribution of scarce status may become the center of political attention.
Status anxieties rather than class interests were hence seen as the major
propelling force in the rise of McCarthyism. This was a suggestive
interpretation, even though it suffered from a certain vagueness and was
often stated in so generalized a form that one could hardly think of any
data that might concretely disconfirm it; after all, there is hardly a
group which could not possibly be said to suffer from one or another
form of status anxiety. In the present work, Hofstadter, without abandon–
ing this approach, agrees to some of its limitations and contends that
no matter what the specific sources of political conflict, whether they
are located in class, status, religious or ethnic confrontations, they may
all give rise to paranoid styles on the part of men who feel that their
way of life, their accustomed mental and moral framework is in danger
of being irrevocably submerged by a wave of hostile and alien forces.
"Coin" Harvey and other silverites, expressing the resentment of
Western farmers, focused their collective paranoia on British bankers
and Wall Street conspirators. Fears of Masonic or Catholic plots
flourished among common men on the Eastern seaboard in the last
century, and paranoid anxiety over the Communist menace on the
domestic scene may flourish alike among D. A. R.'s fearing to lose status
in the modern world and among certain immigrant groups strug–
gling to gain higher status. Despite the variety of specific sources of dis–
satisfaction, all these groups of men, and many others besides, felt them–
selves at bay, psychologically unable to deal with overpowering anxieties
·and conflicts through the normal channels of political debate. Hence
their recourse to conspiratorial explanations for the felt loss of power,
status or influence in the nation.
These essays are not meant
to
be definitive; they are, however,
highly suggestive. All that Hofstadter can give us here are examples of
the paranoid style. He is no doubt aware that, as Daniel Bell likes to
