Criticism of American exceptionalism
From Wikinfo
|
Arguments against American exceptionalism
Opponents of the notion of American exceptionalism argue that, while all societies differ in their history and social structures, the notion that the United States is uniquely virtuous overstates the importance of differences between American and other present-day First World countries. It ignores aspects of American history and society that contradict ideals of freedom and equality, such as slavery, segregation of schools in the South, the annexation by force of the Hawaiian islands, McCarthyism, the poverty and sometimes ghettoization of millions of citizens, the inequality of health care and education between rich and poor, and the genocide and displacement of the Native American population. Proponents of American exceptionalism counter that these examples indeed show the failure of America to live up to its putative ideals, but that on the strength of those ideals, later generations of Americans have admitted these errors and have made attempts to redress them, through programs such as affirmative action.
A typical argument against the American exceptionalist position is to identify positive qualities in specific other countries that correspond to allegedly unique qualities of the United States. These arguments are seldom convincing to proponents, who reply that the historical uniqueness of the United States is the result of a combination of many factors and not captured by particular aspects of the national character.
A further argument which can support an exceptionalist view, but not an innate exceptionalist view, is that accidents of geography (limited borders and a growing internal market), history (avoidance of the worst effects of 19th- and 20th-century warfare) and natural resources (for example, gold, oil, arable land, and fish stocks) have given the US an economic boost in the short term. This advantage can now be seen diminishing slightly but increasingly due to the effects of globalization, which has a mitigating influence on geographic differences.
The Wikipedia article "Canadian and American politics compared" explores this issue by contrasting a nation often considered similar to the United States that has had a quite different history.
Opposing views
- Additional work on this article is appreciated.
U.S. historians like Thomas Bender "try and put an end to the recent revival of American exceptionalism, a defect he esteems to be inherited from the Cold War".[1] Gary W. Reichard and Ted Dickson argue "how the development of the United States has always depended on its transactions with other nations for commodities, cultural values and populations",[2] while Joseph Lepgold and Timothy McKeown "demonstrate that there is little or no basis to the claims that US foreign policy has differed greatly from that of other large nations".[3] Roger Cohen asks, "How exceptional can you be when every major problem you face, from terrorism to nuclear proliferation to gas prices, requires joint action?"[4] Harold Koh distinguishes "distinctive rights, different labels, the 'flying buttress' mentality, and double standards. (...) [T]he fourth face - double standards - presents the most dangerous and destructive form of American exceptionalism."[5] Godfrey Hodgson also concludes that "the US national myth is dangerous."[6] Samantha Power asserts that "we’re neither the shining example, nor even competent meddlers. It’s going to take a generation or so to reclaim American exceptionalism."[7]
Opponents of the notion of American exceptionalism argue that, while all societies differ in their history and social structures, the notion that the United States is uniquely virtuous overstates the importance of differences between American and other present-day First World countries. It ignores aspects of American history and society that contradict ideals of freedom and equality, such as slavery, segregation of schools in the South, the annexation by force of the Hawaiian islands, McCarthyism, the poverty and sometimes ghetto-ization of millions of citizens, the unequal quality of health care and education, and the genocide and displacement of the Native American population. Proponents of American exceptionalism counter that these examples indeed show the failure of the United States of America to live up to its putative ideals, but that later generations of Americans have attempted to redress some of these injustices, through programs such as affirmative action. Opponents of American exceptionalism counter that the US was neither the first nor the only nation to attempt to rectify past and present injustices with such efforts.
A typical argument against the American exceptionalist position is to identify positive qualities in specific other countries that correspond to allegedly unique qualities of the United States, and that there are in fact none of the qualities associated to U.S. exceptionalism are exclusive to it. Proponents reply that the historical uniqueness of the United States is the result of a combination of many factors and not captured by particular aspects of the national character. Opponents however argue that the national character, resulting from all of its components, of each and every nation on earth is unique.
Canadian and American politics and economies compared explores this issue by contrast to the most similar nation, on the same continent, with a quite different history.
Opponents of American exceptionalism point out that there are many nations in the world that have considered themselves "exceptional." Many proponents do not consider this relevant, as it is the way in which America is exceptional that is relevant, not the mere fact that it is exceptional in some way.
Dissemination in popular culture
Critics point out that the idea of American exceptionalism is not so much manifested in an actual difference between the US and other countries in terms of outward behavior, but more in terms of a ‘truth’ about the mental and moral superiority of Americans being actively reiterated by American popular culture to the American public via movies, television and political rhetoric. To generalize, all Americans are told every day in the media that only they know how the world really works, and only they know how it should be worked. In this way, the myth is kept alive.[3]
Transnationality
Chicano studies and African diaspora scholars have long documented transnational movements, identities, and processes, although their work was often ignored by white historians. Had their vision been taken seriously a century ago, Robin D. G. Kelley notes, “It could have overthrown American nationalist, jingoistic historiography once and for all.” The framework, however, has attracted new champions in recent years. American studies scholars, alarmed by renewed U.S. jingoism, have taken aim against American exceptionalism. Transnational perspectives, they hope, will free citizens from the political trap of “with us or against us” as well as the intellectual delusion that the United States is the alpha and omega of history.[8]
The Americanist heresy
Pope Leo XIII, who denounced what he deemed to be the heresy of americanism in the encyclical Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae,[9] was probably refering to American exceptionalism in the ecclesiastical domain, when it is specifically applied to the teachings of Christianity and the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.[10] At the end of the 19th century, there was definitely a tendency among the Roman Catholic clergy in the United States to view American society as inherently different from other Christian nations and societies, and to argue that the entire understanding of Church doctrine had to be redrawn in order to meet the requirements of what is known as the American experience, which supposedly included greater individualism, civil rights, the inheritance of the American revolution, Anglo-Saxon cultural traditions, Anglo-American analytical philosophy, economic liberalism, political reformism and egalitarianism, and Church-State separation.
Preemptive declinism
New York Times critic Nicolai Ouroussoff calls America "an empire enthralled with its own power and unaware that it is fading." Former Clinton administration official Charles Kupchan concludes that "American primacy is already past its peak." According to Joseph Nye, who served under Presidents Carter and Clinton, America's "soft power -- its ability to attract others by the legitimacy of U.S. policies and the values that underlie them -- is in decline."
Peggy Noonan, speechwriter for the most optimistic of presidents, Ronald Reagan, asserts that "in some deep fundamental way things have broken down and can't be fixed." Ivan Eland of the Independent Institute warns that America's military "overextension could hasten the decline of the United States as a superpower."
Matthew Parris of the London Sunday Times reports that the United States is "overstretched," romantically recalling the Kennedy presidency, when "America had the best arguments" and could use moral suasion rather than force to have its way in the world. From his vantage point in Shanghai, the International Herald Tribune's Howard French worries about "the declining moral influence of the United States" over an emergent China.[11]
In 2004, Pat Buchanan lamented "the decline and fall of the greatest industrial republic the world had ever seen." In 2005, The Guardian's Polly Toynbee concluded that Hurricane Katrina exposed "a hollow superpower". In 2007, Pierre Hassner of the Paris-based National Foundation for Political Science declared, "It will not be the New American Century."[12] In 1988, Flora Lewis sighed that "Talk of U.S. decline is real in the sense that the U.S. can no longer pull all the levers of command or pay all the bills." Even in trying to deflect the declinists, James Schlesinger conceded in 1988 that the U.S. was "no longer economically the preponderant power... no longer militarily the dominant power... no longer can achieve more or less whatever it desires." "The signs of decline are evident to those who care to see them," declared Peter Passell in 1990, noting that the U.S. had lost its competitive edge and was losing its battle with the Japanese juggernaut. "Europeans and Asians," wrote Anthony Lewis in 1990, "are already finding confirmation of their suspicion that the United States is in decline." Citing America's dependence on foreign sources for energy and "crucial weaknesses" in the military, Tom Wicker concluded "that maintaining superpower status is becoming more difficult -- nearly impossible -- for the United States."[11]
References
- ^ http://www.gilderlehrman.org/wp/?p=307
- ^ Reichard, Gary W.; Ted Dickson. America on the World Stage, University of Illinois Press, 2008, back cover. ISBN 0252075528
- ^ a b Sellevold, Martin (2003). "A Look At American Exceptionalism". Australian Rationalist (65): 46–48. ISSN 1036-8191. Retrieved on 2009-02-22.
- ^ http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/24/opinion/edcohen.php?pass=true
- ^ http://web.pdx.edu/~kinsella/ps448/koh.html
- ^ http://clivecrook.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/03/book_review_the_myth_of_americ.php
- ^ http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0704.hirsh.html
- ^ http://www.lclark.edu/~tepo/Publishing/Voekel-YoungST.pdf
- ^ http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7630&CFID=11811177&CFTOKEN=51286733
- ^ http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p22.htm
- ^ a b http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/declinism.html
- ^ http://www.american.com/archive/2007/august-0807/the-decline-and-fall-of-declinism
| This page uses content from Wikipedia. The original article was at American exceptionalism. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. The text of this Wikinfo article is available under the GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. |
