From an article pointed out by an commenter at Eschaton,
The Paranoid Style in American Politics written in 1964:
As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully
obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a militant leader. He does not see social
conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since
what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is
not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being
totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated –if not from the world, at
least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for
total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are
not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid?s sense of frustration. Even
partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in
turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes.
Sounds familiar?