Commenting on Krugman's Blogpost, "Godwin Help Us"

[markpkessinger]

This is a comment I posted to Paul Krugman's blog post titled, "Godwin Help Us," a column about billionaire Tom Perkins' comparison of criticism of the rich on the subject of income inequality with Kristallnacht.

Mark Kessinger New York, NY 7 hours ago

This persecution complex seems to be a widely shared affliction among conservatives on many fronts, not just the rich. Religious and/or social conservatives, when called out on their intolerance of, for example LGBT persons or gay marriage, respond by insisting that it is they themselves who are the victims of intolerance. When Christian fundamentalists are reminded that the constitutional separation of church and state prohibits laws that give Christian preferences and practices the imprimatur of the state, they claim they are being 'persecuted' by godless atheists and liberals. Discussions about a saner, more rational approach to gun control are met with hysterical claims that President Obama is coming for the guns of responsible gun owners. And what can one possibly make of the right's perennial claim that Christmas itself is under siege, other than that it is yet another way many conservative Christians convince themselves they are the victims of secular persecution?

Robin Corey, in his book, "The Reactionary Mind," posits that the unifying principle that best explains the many conservative sub-factions -- which are at times seemingly at odds with one another -- is the perception of the imminent loss of something they value and hold dear. That thing might be money, or it might be the cultural dominance of their social peer group, or any number of other things. That, for me, explains a lot about this right's tendency to see themselves as victims of persecution.

There was one thought I would have liked to have fleshed out a little more, but couldn't because of the Times' character limit on comments. Specifically, with regard to whatever thing it might be that a conservative believes he is in imminent danger of losing, that is not to say that the particular thing, whatever it might be, is necessarily ethically defensible -- often it isn't -- but that it is nevertheless something -- tangible or intangible -- that these conservatives do indeed value and fear losing.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Well stated.

These people are really loopy. Sadly, they have power.

[markpkessinger]

2. Thanks, Manny n/t