January 27, 2011--American Exceptionalism

For some time Republicans have been beating up on Barack Obama because he doesn't openly declare that he believes in American Exceptionalism.

To sign on to this belief is the latest litmus test to demonstrate one's patriotism, and the GOP sees Obama's seeming reluctance to do this as more evidence that he in not a real American.

Even those who (reluctantly) agree that he is an American citizen and not an African take him to task about this. (See, for example, Majority Leader Eric Cantor's hemming and hawing about his citizenship last Sunday on Meet the Press.) And these attacks on the president's patriotism continued the other night after his State of the Union Address.

He did talk extensively about America's specialness but did not use the E-word. Instead he spoke about how America has the most innovative people, the best colleges and universities, and an abiding entrepreneurial spirit; however, he also warned that in a world that changes as rapidly and radically as ours, these assets are fragile. And thus, the people and the government together will have to work hard and make sacrifices to preserve our standing in the world.

But then he pointed out that our education system is slipping behind many Asian and European countries and they are as well investing more than we in infrastructure. He also mentioned that Korean homes have better Internet access than we, and of course reminded us that China is surpassing us in many realms from high-speed rail to newer airports. (See linked New York Times for more about this.)

This latter list, which was supposed to inspire and challenge us--he called it our "Sputnik moment"--only got him into trouble with hyper-conservatives. Yes, they agree, China and others are advancing, but, his critics say, they are still well behind us; and what's more, unlike the USA, there is nothing exceptional about them. In fact, they are progressing largely through cheating, stealth, and taking advantage of their captive peoples. What they are thus looking for from the president is less talk about the accomplishments of our "enemies" and more about our specialness.

So what is it with this American Exceptionalism?

As with everything else, it has a history. It is an opinion, actually, closer to a belief, that the United States is qualitatively different from other nations. In this view, America's Exceptionalism stems from the nature of our Revolution and from our becoming "the first new nation" of the modern era. Exceptionalism sees us as developing a uniquely American ideology, based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and a laissez-faire economy. This characterization of America can be traced to Alexis de Tocqueville, the first writer, in 1835, in Democracy In America, to describe the United States as "exceptional."

At that time, he had good cause to perceive us that way. We had indeed completed a successful revolution, we had overthrown a monarchy, we resisted mandating a government-established religion, and in the New World had created a version of democracy (which of course excluded women and slaves). Also, after the successful conclusion of the War of 1812, he saw the emergence of a remarkable economy based on agriculture, manufacturing, and hard work. Also, through his travels he became aware of the natural abundance of this still new country. From the fertility of the land to the minerals below its surface. His vision also saw us as soon dominating the western world.

We were indeed "exceptional."

A contemporary de Tocqueville, however, would discern a very different American landscape. One similar to that described on Tuesday by Barack Obama. A mix of remarkable national qualities and achievements but also one threatened by the rise of other countries and their very real achievements.

To strengthen his case Obama could have cited one of my old college professors, Daniel Bell, who died earlier this week. In 1973 he was among the first to notice that the West was rapidly, in a book with this title, becoming a post-industrial society. He saw Western capitalism depending more and more on mass consumerism, acquisitiveness, and widespread indebtedness. Sound familiar? And that this cultural and economic shift was undermining the old Protestant ethic of thrift and national modesty that had indeed made us . . . exceptional.

But none of this would have mattered. Citing a public intellectual such as Bell, of course, would have made matters worse. Obama's opponents are not persuaded by history or facts. They are guided more by ideology and beliefs. Like an enduring, quasi-religious belief in American Exceptionalism.

What they want from him is evidence of behavior similar to their own. Rather than dig in and do the hard work and make the sacrifices necessary to right our ship of state they want him to join them in chanting, "We're Number One! We're Number One!"

This will not get the job done. We didn't get to be Number One by claiming that it was and is our divine destiny to be and remain so. We had to bring it into being. We will see soon if any of that spirit endures. If we are still in fact anything resembling exceptional.