Richard Hofstadter’s "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" and "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" are two of the most penetrating studies of American political culture ever written, and this Library of America edition, which pairs them with a selection of his essays, makes a compelling case for their enduring relevance. Hofstadter’s central concern—the tension between reasoned discourse and the darker impulses of populist resentment, conspiratorial thinking, and distrust of expertise—feels unnervingly contemporary. What many today mistake for new developments in American politics are, as Hofstadter demonstrates, deeply ingrained patterns, recurring with almost cyclical inevitability.

"Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" traces the historical roots of American skepticism toward intellectual elites, from the early evangelical distrust of learned clergy to the mid-20th century’s suspicion of "eggheads" in politics. Some readers may find the early sections slow, as Hofstadter meticulously lays his groundwork, but the payoff is a richly detailed analysis that remains startlingly applicable to modern debates over education, media, and political leadership.

"The Paranoid Style in American Politics", meanwhile, is perhaps even more directly resonant today. Hofstadter’s dissection of political movements driven by apocalyptic fears, conspiratorial fantasies, and a sense of embattled victimhood reads like a diagnosis of our current moment. His examples—from the anti-Masonic agitation of the 19th century to the McCarthyism and far-right extremism of his own time—illustrate how the paranoid style transcends ideology, manifesting wherever politics becomes a struggle against imagined enemies rather than a contest of ideas.

Hofstadter’s uncollected essays, selected and introduced by Sean Wilentz, add further depth to this volume. These pieces—on topics ranging from FDR’s legacy to the rise of modern conservatism—showcase Hofstadter’s versatility as a historian and public intellectual. A particularly illuminating essay reflects on the craft of history itself, weighing the merits of analytical depth against narrative sweep. If there is a minor flaw, it is that some of the later essays occasionally revisit similar ground, particularly in their critiques of Barry Goldwater and the emerging conservative movement, but this repetition does little to diminish their insight.

I'm most struck by Hofstadter’s belief in the importance of intellectual humility and historical perspective. He writes not as a polemicist but as a diagnostician, probing the contradictions and anxieties that have shaped American democracy. His work is often cited by those seeking to understand today’s political fractures, but it transcends mere topicality—it is a meditation on the fragility of rational discourse in a society where emotion and identity frequently override reason.

Thank you to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a temporary digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.

You can't imagine how revealing it is to read these works in this era. What we think of new isn't new at all. The roots of what we complain of today - whatever your political leanings - began long ago. Richard Hofstadter is cited by conservatives for liberalism but really, what we read here transcends. He writes as an historian interested in the life of the mind, whether it be how people view the learning of other adults (remember Mitt Romney being criticized for speaking French?) and in the way we view education and the shaping of young minds. He is liberal only in the sense that he values lifelong learning and seems mystified when others do not.

We studied Hofstadter in college but I had forgotten the wealth of information here. The in-line references are a joy. Thank you editor Sean Wilentz.

FYI, the book starts out a bit slow and contains a bunch of references contemporary to the time it was written. Put reservations aside and just keep reading. Soon you will be enthralled.

Hofstadter's writing was what originally captivated my attention for good writing in history. While I don't necessarily agree with every argument he makes, I think it's pretty clear that he's an example of a very readable historian. Much can be said about "Anti-Intellectualism" and "Paranoid Style"- they're bedrocks of consensus history; and although they were written in a different context, I think they speak to us today.

This collection also contains some lesser known and unpublished works by Hofstadter that are good reads as well. I particularly liked his essay on the nature of historical writing, questioning whether historians should focus on analytical monographs or narrative histories that tell a larger story. His answer is that great history blends both (a feat much easier stated than produced).

If you are looking for a collection to do deep dive into a famous historian, look no further. Wilentz, an eminent historian himself, has produced a great volume that certainly will let us see Hofstadter's changes, in what he writes about and how. The only drawback is that I wish there would have been something from the Age of Reform, Hofstadter's first major work that brought him recognition. I feel that a lot of that work finds its way into his subsequent writing. However, this is a great collection from a historian that continues to be the focus of historiographical exploration.

I had previously heard much of Richard Hofstadter but never got around to reading any of his work until #LibraryOfAmerica published this volume of some of his most vital works, which I obtained through #Netgalley. Just a handful of pages into Anti-Intellectualism In American Life and I was both stunned and disheartened as to how little has changed in this nation in the centuries since our founding down through contemporary times. His message there and in many of the other essays collected in this volume, especially The Paranoid Style in American Politics and any of the numerous essays on Goldwater is unfortunately even more relevant now than at the time of writing. I would highly recommend this to anyone who is interested in understanding how the Republican party has come so dangerously close to flirting with fascism and authoritarianism.

The only flaws are mild in nature. A long discourse on the Free Silver movement failed to hold my interest for its entire length. There were also multiple essays on Goldwater and higher education, such that many passages and information ended up being repeated between these.