It seems as if Newt Gingrich is borrowing a page from Pat Buchanan’s speech at the 1992 Republican National Convention.
In his upcoming book, To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular Socialist Machine, Gingrich writes;
The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.
In his 1992 convention speech, Buchanan stated the following:
There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself.
Gingrich recently explained his views in an e-mail to Politico:
I have asserted that the secular socialist machine is a mortal threat to the future of America as we have known it just as totalitarian regimes were mortal threats to the survival of America in the past. … In our generation the two mortal threats are radical Islam and secular socialism.
Whereas Buchanan spoke of a “struggle for the soul of America” in which “Clinton & Clinton” were the evil doers, Gingrich’s foes are, unoriginally, Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
Furthermore, whereas Buchanan’s key frame was “cultural war”, Gingrich’s newest catch-phrase is “secular-socialism.”
The common denominator is the effort to use religion as a wedge issue. Gingrich thus strives to create a political climate in which Democrats are framed as secular-minded socialists, while Republicans are cast as valiantly defending America’s traditional family values. In other words, Gingrich isn’t exactly reinventing the wheel here.
Nonetheless, Gingrich clearly masters scare tactics 101: Evoke ghosts from the past by painting a scary picture of the future. Essentially, a volatile cocktail of Reductio ad Hitlerum and Reductio ad Stalinum.
In the long haul, Gingrich’s paranoid style is not bringing any new solutions to Washington. Instead, he is stoking fear by borrowing a page from Buchanan. Obviously, Buchanan was by no means an originator, and both his and Gingrich’s tactics are part of the paranoid style in American politics so eloquently described by Richard Hofstadter.