American Exceptionalism (split)

#101
#101
therealUT said:
According to Wikipedia, which is not the most authoritative source, this is the earliest record of the concept of "American Exceptionalism":



This is not what I refer to when I say "American Exceptionalism". I mean it in the sense that it has been interpreted as "the American system is inherently superior to all others and, therefore, all actions conducted by the American government, in accordance with the system, are superior and good acts". I believe that it is in this sense that Americans embraced Manifest Destiny, the displacement of the American Indians, and the multiple wars of ideology and "nobility" in which America has been entangled. It is a notion not just that capitalism is good, but that any other economic system must be defeated; it is a notion that not only is freedom good; but that every other system of government must be defeated. AE results in the sense of duty to police the Earth and "correct the faults". I am absolutely opposed to such a duty.
Click to expand...

Fine if you interpret that way but I don't believe that is the intended interpretation. In particular I don't see it as a justifying explanation for actions nor a call to destroy other systems.
 
#102
#102
volinbham said:
Fine if you interpret that way but I don't believe that is the intended interpretation. In particular I don't see it as a justifying explanation for actions nor a call to destroy other systems.
Click to expand...

In reading Michael Prell, I have no doubt that is the way he intends it.

December 20, 2010
Sarah Palin: Fishing for American Exceptionalism

By Michael Prell
Watching "Sarah Palin's Alaska" is like stepping back in time -- not to a time when Americans lived off the land and the sea, but to a time when our desire to be #1 was celebrated and not scorned.

A recent episode of "SP's Alaska" was about Sarah Palin's oldest son Track trying to prove to his father Todd that he was worthy of taking over the #1 fishing site in Bristol Bay. As Sarah Palin said, "Todd has the #1 site in this area...so Track has to work very, very hard and prove to Todd that he deserves to fish the #1 site."

Let us pause for a moment to take that in. A young man working hard to prove that he is worthy of being #1.

There was a time in America when young people were taught that being #1 was a good thing, and that anyone could grow up to be president, which is the #1 position of power in the world. Now America is led by a president who bows down to the world and apologizes for America's power, while criticizing powerful and successful Americans at home, scorning them as "fat cats," and saying that "at a certain point, you've made enough money."

American Thinker- Print Article
Click to expand...

He is the author of Underdogma; the discussion of that book's relation to the Tea Party started this tangent.
 
#105
#105
I took a political science course last year. I felt that my professor was very qualified. We disagreed a lot (and it was a funny dynamic because I was 28 and he was like 30), but he was very well informed. The textbook and the professor both taught exceptionalism as if it were based on American superiority. Our unique founding was part of the discussion, but many exceptionalists explain it away by saying we were divinely chosen by God to be a great nation, which gives the founding a "superior" edge rather than a "unique excellence", IMO.

It seems we have 2 different definitions for the term. That's fine. I disagree with the usage of "liberal" since it has been bastardized. I try to take it back. I don't fault people who try to take back AE.
 
#107
#107
America is better than just about anywhere else. The problem is that most of our elected officials are trying to correct that.

On the one hand, our greatness came from our self-reliance and our refusal to accept that we anyone is better than us. Our pride and sense of self-worth have historically been more based on our accomplishments and work than on our ancestors or traditions. Many are trying to change all that.

On the other hand, our greatness came from our lack of traditions and our willingness to innovate. We accepted all comers, with strange, new ideas. We took the best of those ideas and words and made them our own. We discarded worthless ideas and took the new ones that our newcomers brought. Our newcomers discarded old ideas and old attitudes that were not as good and bought into ours. This synthesis of what was good and the willingness to not cling to what was bad gave us an advantage. We now have those who want to keep new ideas out. Also, we have more and more coming here who insist on holding on to old ideas. Either way, we are reduced to being the sum of our parts, where before we were more than that.
 
#108
#108
RespectTradition said:
America is better than just about anywhere else. The problem is that most of our elected officials are trying to correct that.

On the one hand, our greatness came from our self-reliance and our refusal to accept that we anyone is better than us. Our pride and sense of self-worth have historically been more based on our accomplishments and work than on our ancestors or traditions. Many are trying to change all that.

On the other hand, our greatness came from our lack of traditions and our willingness to innovate. We accepted all comers, with strange, new ideas. We took the best of those ideas and words and made them our own. We discarded worthless ideas and took the new ones that our newcomers brought. Our newcomers discarded old ideas and old attitudes that were not as good and bought into ours. This synthesis of what was good and the willingness to not cling to what was bad gave us an advantage. We now have those who want to keep new ideas out. Also, we have more and more coming here who insist on holding on to old ideas. Either way, we are reduced to being the sum of our parts, where before we were more than that.
Click to expand...

This is a romanticized view and a view that could have only been expressed, before, by a white male.
 
#109
#109
nbakerld said:
I took a political science course last year. I felt that my professor was very qualified. We disagreed a lot (and it was a funny dynamic because I was 28 and he was like 30), but he was very well informed. The textbook and the professor both taught exceptionalism as if it were based on American superiority. Our unique founding was part of the discussion, but many exceptionalists explain it away by saying we were divinely chosen by God to be a great nation, which gives the founding a "superior" edge rather than a "unique excellence", IMO.

It seems we have 2 different definitions for the term. That's fine. I disagree with the usage of "liberal" since it has been bastardized. I try to take it back. I don't fault people who try to take back AE.
Click to expand...

That is why I use the word progressive instead. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were liberals, in the true sense, and to see it applied to statists and socialists sickens me.
 
#111
#111
I want to hear the damned details. Some other girl came out and said she felt uncomfortable but didn't file a complaint. But she didn't say what the heck he did. Why not?
 
#112
#112
therealUT said:
In reading Michael Prell, I have no doubt that is the way he intends it.



He is the author of Underdogma; the discussion of that book's relation to the Tea Party started this tangent.
Click to expand...

From the passage it sounds like individualism and achievement. I don't see anything about destroying other systems or that the goal to be #1 justifies any number of wrong actions (ends justifying means).

Personally, I don't the AE is about being #1 unless that is the goal of the individual. Again it's the system and ethos that says you are free to go for being #1 if you like or you are free to be a bum (just don't expect others will be forced to support it). There's nothing wrong though with seeking to be the best.

I know nothing of Prell so I won't pretend to know what he means.
 
Last edited:
#113
#113
RespectTradition said:
That is why I use the word progressive instead. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were liberals, in the true sense, and to see it applied to statists and socialists sickens me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I tried to label myself as a "classical liberal" but people don't get that. They think I mean FDR or something.
 
#115
#115
I hate to beat the dead horse but AE isn't about American just being better than everyone else. It has plenty of warts.
 
#116
#116
Randomly I was just now watching Reason videos from the past week, and this video with Daniel Hannan came up talking about the "good kind" of exceptionalism. Sorry you gotta deal with Huckabee to hear Hannan and Schiff.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CRs9J1_MfE&feature=channel_video_title[/youtube]
 
#117
#117
volinbham said:
I know nothing of Prell so I won't pretend to know what he means.
Click to expand...

He used to be a speechwriter for Netanyahu; he is an advocate for US Military support and assistance in getting rid of the Palestinian problem. He is definitely a projectionist, in terms of military and foreign policy.
 
#118
#118
therealUT said:
This is a romanticized view and a view that could have only been expressed, before, by a white male.
Click to expand...

Hardly. We were never perfect, but our system allowed us to grow in ways other systems didn't. To compare the way things were accurately, you must compare us to contemporary countries. With that in mind, there is no need to apply modern criticisms about race or gender. Just because we have improved in our attitudes towards those things, does not mean that we have not lost ground in other ways.
 
#120
#120
Spun this thread off the Herman Cain thread. This deserves its own thread.
 
#124
#124
RespectTradition said:
Hardly. We were never perfect, but our system allowed us to grow in ways other systems didn't. To compare the way things were accurately, you must compare us to contemporary countries. With that in mind, there is no need to apply modern criticisms about race or gender. Just because we have improved in our attitudes towards those things, does not mean that we have not lost ground in other ways.
Click to expand...

I will grant that in a way relative to the rest of the world, America was in better standing prior to about 1970 than America is today; however, I will not grant that America was a better place, absolutely, prior to 1970 than it is today.
 
#125
#125
volinbham said:
only the ideals on which this thread were founded are
Click to expand...

I think the ideals that America was founded on are great; I hope that my argument implies anything against this. I just think that we have not come close to actualizing that potential (a potential which needs not to be seen as a comparison to any other nation-state) and may have permanently corrupted such potential.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top