Paranoids Do Have Enemies

Saw a new bio on Richard Hofstadter the other day. Not going to buy it. Historians, to me, are next to economists among the academics who have screwed this country to the porch, and Hofstadter was one of the classic examples of someone who brought an unfortunate blend of politics and personality to the stories we tell to explain ourselves and our world. Having gone through the indoctrination of a doctorate, I've seen the "intellectual" type up far too close, the verbally talented malcontents and egotists who mistake cleverness for wisdom and snark for insight. Hofstadter's greatest sin was giving weapons to these too prevalent scholars in a couple of his unjustly awarded works, The Paranoid Style in American Politics and Anti-Intellectualism in America.

Hofstadter was a cynical, anti-capitalist malcontent on America, seeing everything through the opposite prism of the unrequited boosters and other Pollyanna interpreters of American life. Lincoln was nothing but a politician, America was a facade of freedom, yada, yada. His main contribution was to cast permanent derision on anyone who understood that there were people in the world who would want power, just to have it or to shape everyone else's lives, so much that they would form combinations to, uh-oh, CONSPIRE to get and keep that power, no matter what laws or Constitutions were broken or ideals or lives crushed. Hofstadter fitted everyone who believed that sometimes horrible political things didn't "just happen" into the same category with people waiting for spaceships behind comets. It became part of being "intellectual" to knee-jerk knowingly whenever you heard someone propose a theory that people would, gasp, conspire for power and cover up their efforts.

The problem, of course, is that conspiracies do happen, and the knee-jerkers have been not only been left clueless when a Watergate or an Iran-Contra or an Enron burst through their curtains (although, in fairness, many of these "intellectuals" are very good at seeing conspiracies among business types). They have also been major contributors to those who would conspire. Any time a Cheney or a Wolfowitz wants to smear accusations against what turns out later to be proven true, they know they can haul out "conspiracy nut" or "paranoid" and the "wise" people will automatically start bobble-heading their disgust and consternation at the accusers.

Much of what many of us lament as the smug cluelessness of the DC types is nothing more than Hostadter as Conventional Wisdom. "Bloggers are lunatics, just listen to their crazy theories and irrational cursing." "Bush isn't really trying to undermine our system of government, that's tin-foil talk." "Smart," "sophisticated" people know that conspiracies don't happen in America. In Mexico or Russia or the Congo, sure, but not in America. Because only paranoids see conspiracies in America, not the free and open nation where things like that just don't happen.

A very good example of the silliness of the "anti-anti-intellectuals" can be seen in a forum going on at Kos right now on the paranoia and nuttiness of those moaning about how, if problems with the actual process of voting aren't cleared up, much of what the Kossites want politically in 2006 will go down the tubes. Susan G has led a very accomplished Richard Cohen chorus of pooh-poohers who are tired of the conspiracy charges and who want the nay-sayers to shut up and to take action to stop electronic theft of elections by, yes, being poll-watchers. A little like telling people who are concerned about global warming to join the Peace Corps. The Kossites are having a field day belittling what people just as smart and just as concerned about this country as they are are screaming should be the highest priority of anyone wanting to save our system, guaranteeing the integrity of the votes we cast. It's been fun trying to figure out who is the most absurdly smug and self-absorbed this week, the White House Correspondents or the Kossites convinced that you can stop electronic voter fraud by having people at the polls.

A couple of points. Stealing elections by stealing votes is the oldest and most direct form of power-grabbing in democracies, and the determined opposition to alert others to try to stop it by people who claim to value our system is just a mystery to me. We raise our eyebrows high when we hear how badly election "results" in some other country don't match pre-election and exit polls, but, since believing it could happen here is the thought of paranoid anti-intellectuals, just ignore it when you see it in GA in 2002 or key states in 2004 (although the polls were oddly correct in non-key states, hmmmmmm). You're left with the conclusion that the Kossites are more personally invested in the verbal battles than the technical (and more boring) details of making sure each vote cast is accurately counted and reported. There is no way that, after FL in 2000, the number one issue for Dems should not have been election integrity, but they, in their usual show of strength and wisdom, let "Sore Loserman" scare them off. That and the fact that asserting that officials might steal or fake votes make them sound, you know, oh, no, . . . paranoid. Better to be ignorant and cheated.

The other thing is this, and historians of the Hofstadter ilk have done their greatest damage in graying this up--there are people who want power enough to do anything for it and they recognize strength in combination. Stealing elections electronically is even easier than the old-fashioned ways. Stopping that should be the greatest concern and effort of every believer in the American legacy. Kos and his people have concentrated on sideshows and denigrated as "nuts" the people who want the spotlight on the main event. They ask us to believe that the Kenneth Blackwells and Katherine Harrises out there in key states won't do it again in 2006, that we should just trust our authorities because only "conspiracy theorists" wouldn't.

Richard Cohen couldn't say it any better.

UPDATE: No one gets what's going on better than Digby, yet a post today shows that even this Dean of sensible bloggers (most certainly not to be confused with the Dean of insensible Broders) hasn't quite accepted where the logic takes us. He notes that what would have been conspiratorial nutjob beliefs just a few years ago are now commonplace but then concludes with confidence in our voting system:

there are so many crimes the Republican leadership has committed that they have a tremendous incentive to do whatever it takes to remain in power, if for no other reason than to avoid long incarceration. It is going to a long, ugly, expensive, and potentially dangerous summer for the United States. But it cannot be avoided and all of you need to vote, to get involved with campaigns you feel you can support (even if they are not perfect), and to get your friends and neighbors to go to the polls to vote these bastards out.

Yes, they will do anything to stay in power but screw with very screwable machinery (hardware and software) to pull it off. If Digby can't see it, then no wonder the poor souls whining and crying pointlessly to Susan G feel so despondent. Do you really want to bet your life savings on having not one single key state end up with election results that violently contradict what pre-election and exit polls say?

I'll take you up on it on right now. And plan what I'm going to buy. (How much do you have saved, by the way?)