If you'd have read all the way to the end of that lengthy Wikipedia article from which you lifted the phrase "an American academic and social critic", you'd see that Paglia considers herself a "libertarian", which is to say, "a party of one".  You probably wouldn't want to call her a Democrat to her face.  I'd term her more of a social Bakuninist.

My assessment of Paglia is that her public life is basically just her private life writ large.  She thrives on chaos and over-the-top dramatics.  She terms herself a feminist mainly so she can take adversarial positions and start catfights with better-known feminists.  Histrionic personalities like hers don't impress me in the least.  They become boring very quickly, they have no shelf life and they utterly fail to enrich the public discourse.