Examples Of American Rationalism
In 1630, John Winthrop famously pleaded with the puritans to consider “that we shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eyes of all people upon us” (John Winthrop, 1630). This was the birthplace of an idea for a nation that would develop, and be observed by many as creating its own ideology. It provoked the creation of attitudes and morals in the resulting United States, which would become known as ‘American Exceptionalism’, a nation viewing itself as above and more superior than any other nation. Exceptionalists see Winthrop’s words as a narrative about the US being founded as some sort of ‘Promised Land’: a new type of republic encompassing ‘a popular form of government to empower individuals and enable them to improve their lives’ (Tomes, p.30,
…show more content…
2014).
What do we mean by a ‘Beacon’ then? For the purpose of this essay, it means ‘America the example’, a superior nation in everything they do and in their founding idealism. It is the idea of being exceptional and the ideology of an ‘American Dream’ creating the perfect existence; therefore making it a beacon to the free world for others to follow.
Ideology might be seen as the major driving force behind the United States as an idea and as a result, may explain its self-perceived role as the leader of the free world in more recent times.
This ideological formula based on liberalism, individualism and egalitarianism manifested itself in the ideal of ‘the American Dream’. The idea behind America, its ‘Dream’ and perceived ‘Exceptionalism’ will help reinforce what we mean by ‘Beacon’. In addition to ideology and moral superiority, has the United States been a beacon in the past? Looking at ideology and political makeup, foreign policy and military prowess, economic power and the nature of its society. Is the United States still a beacon today given the same factors? Or does it behave like a normal country motivated by normal interests now? Finally is the US more than just the sum of its parts? Is the idea more than the …show more content…
nation?
America is unique in that it was ‘derived from a revolutionary event, giving it a raison d’etre ideologically as opposed to a common history’ (Shafer, p.6, 1991).
America has no experience with European feudalism and is instead focused on hardship and strife in creating a new nation. ‘The situation of the Americans is therefore entirely exceptional, and it is to be believed that no other democratic people will ever be placed in it’ (de Tocqueville, p.420, 2000). The US, ‘unlike most other nations, defines itself not on the facts of blood, religion, language, geography or shared history, but on a set of ideals expressed in the declaration of independence and consolidated in the constitution’ making it unique in its formation (Cullen, 2004). These ideals harbour liberalism, individualism, and egalitarianism as their blueprint in a secular society. The idea of American exceptionalism is essentially what makes it a theoretical beacon to the free world. It is the exceptional example, set for the rest to follow. This idea of an exceptional America is perhaps less proudly or arrogantly presented in front of the rest of the free world of late. “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism” (Obama, Strasbourg, 2009). Here we might infer that the US’s approach to exceptionalism is changing. Obama clearly makes the US appear not to be above and beyond fellow nations in the ‘Free
World’.
‘The American dream is, and has been for decades if not centuries, a central ideology of Americans’ and centres around the principle that individuals have ‘a reasonable chance to achieve success as they define it – material or otherwise – through their own effort and to obtain virtue and fulfilment through that success’ (Hochschild, p.xvii, 1995). As an ideology, it is quite brilliant. It is a descendant of classical liberal philosophy, and in the idealist nature of the dream it holds the founding ideological principles to light. It is a concept that, for better or worse, has proven to be amazingly elastic and durable for hundreds of years across race, class and other demographic boundaries (Cullen, 2004). The ideals within the dream, and of American exceptionalism, set the foundations for the moral and superior ‘shining city upon a hill’ (Reagan, Farewell Address, 1989) that presidents have consistently referred to in their rhetoric. This idea of the ideal nation’s existence is what is meant by ‘beacon’. Today though, the American dream is not a dream shared by all, certain categories have always shared it less than others. In this respect the ideology faces the severe challenge of race (Hochschild, p.xviii 1995). There is now a big enough black middle class in America for to warrant a review of the ‘American Dream’, and to what extent it fulfils its promise of equal, and unalienable opportunity for all. Due to America’s history of slavery, some are forced to ‘come to terms with a dream that was not originally theirs’ (Hochschild, p.15, 1995).
In what ways then has the US been a beacon to the free world in the past? Foreign policy and military might, are the mediums by which the US interacts with the rest of the world. If it were to be a beacon, then its attitudes and ideals concerning foreign policy ought to reflect its exemplary status. Additionally, economically and socially, the US has shown that it can lead the world in terms of economic performance, unalienable rights and equality. The US’s commitment to its ideology was arguably what carried it through the Cold War and into Fukuyama’s unipolar world (Fukuyama, 1992), making ideology another medium through which to set an example – as an ideological beacon over the last 100 years. America originally adopted isolationist policies, designed to avoid permanent alliances with other nations and hold firm the founding principle of ‘laissez faire’ flexibility in developing trade and commerce links with any other nation. George Washington referred to it as an aversion to ‘entangling alliances’ that put a limit to the ‘new nations’ flexibility (Tomes, p.37, 2014). This approach could have been seen as exemplar to the free world. Furthermore Thomas Jefferson thought that the ‘US should set an example at home but not attempt to impose an American model of government on others’ (Payne, p.38, 1985).
However by the end of the 19th Century, foreign policy had shifted to expanding the American governance model and expanding the global system of trade, securing access to foreign markets for American goods (Tomes, p.38, 2014). Exceptionalist attitudes evolved in the 20th century, focusing on a more interventionist and arguably realist view of America’s role in global affairs. Its aim seemed to be to spread its exemplary liberal and democratic values. Richard Olney, the secretary of state in 1900 said, “the mission of his country” was to seize “any fitting opportunity to further the progress of civilization”(Ninkovich, p.24, 1999). Such rhetoric indicates ideas held by the US as that time, and suggests a ‘world leader’ attitude, which was to carry on evolving throughout the rest of the century.
This superiority and international snobbery was evident after WWII. The US managed to steer clear of becoming a member of the League of Nations. Not only did it not see itself at the same level, but this also introduces an idea that the US, whilst acting as an example to the rest of the world, consistently refuses to hold itself accountable to the same strict ideals that it seeks to impose on other nations. During the Cold War, the US abandoned its exemplary aversion to constraining alliances as it created alliances and partnerships with other nations opposed to communism. Whilst in its early history, the US attempted to act as an exemplary ‘beacon’ of isolationism, it is during the cold war years that its status as a ‘Beacon’ to the free world was most realistic and practical (through economic and military dependence). The alliances and partnerships with other ideologically similar nations is an obvious example.
Having saved Europe twice, the US sought to create economic and political institutions in its exemplary image that secured a new ‘open-door’ model. With this model, liberty, democracy and progressivism along with the core economic principle of free markets and minor government intervention, could flourish, fast racking the American economy to global superiority (Tomes, p.39, 2014). In the 1980’s hundreds of thousands of new businesses along with 14 million new jobs were created. Far and away the best performance of the advanced countries (Kilborn, p.5, 1988), success made possible by the market freedom, individual land ownership, classical liberal ideology (Lipset, p.15, 1996).Furthermore, socially, there is evidence that the US was leading the free world. The European nations have become more ‘Americanised’. The post-feudal elements that existed in many European countries have declined enormously. This was accelerated by leadership from Thatcher and other neo-liberals. She represented the trend towards social modernization attempting to adopt individualism to mitigate class conflict and reconciling it with egalitarianism to the extent of equality of opportunity (Shafer, p.39, 1991). So economically and socially, we see dominance and an aspiration from Europe towards the American ideals.
Is the US still a Beacon to the Free world today? Or does it behave more like a normal country with normal interests? Politically and ideologically, America struggles to hold itself to the same high standards that it seeks to impose upon the rest of the world. Recently in the conflict in Syria the US has demanded that Syria obey international laws that the US itself ignores. (Docksey, 2013). Obama claims that President Assad ‘crossed a red line’ by using chemical weapons. Little attention is drawn to the American arsenal of chemical weapons, some of which were used in 2004 in Iraq, and that it has passed a law preventing the UN inspection of its weapons (Docksey, 2013). Politically it is hard to assert that the US is still an ideological beacon or example to the free world.
Obama proudly stated, regarding Americas exceptionalism, “The United States remains the largest economy in the world. We have unmatched military capability. And I think we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic processes, in our belief of free speech and equality. That, though imperfect, are exceptional” (Obama, 2009). Militarily speaking the US dominates the free world, even the whole world for that matter. It outspends the next 15 countries combined. Its defense spending doubled since 2008, when its percentage of global output shrunk, along with its economy, from 32% to 23%. With around 5% of the global population it spends just over 50% of the world’s total military spending (businessinsider.com, 2014). Here we see that for perhaps the opposite moral and idealist reasons, the US currently imposes itself as a beacon for the free world militarily. Realists might argue that it is impossible to ignore their military presence, and that the free world either be forced to compete with it or form an alliance with it in the form of NATO. Either way, the US is the dominant actor in global military power. It is the largest contributor to NATO (Morgan, 2011), the dominant military alliance of the free world, further evidence that it behaves at a level that the free world should aspire to. It appears that they are so keen to make themselves free from other countries that they end up preventing the same level of freedom for other countries that is afforded to them.
American society is not ideal for the poor, with exceptionally low levels of welfare and medical care along with very unequal distribution of wealth making America one of the most unequal societies. Currently the top 0.1% of Americans are worth as much as the bottom 90% (Monaghan, 2014).It also seems fairly unexceptional that a nation which prides itself on liberty has proportionally more of its population behind bars that any other country in the free world. Their love of guns and the ‘right to bear arms’ meant that in 2010 the total firearm death toll stood at a staggering 31’672 people (Docksey, 2013) – hardly a society worthy of the title of ‘beacon to the free world’. Yet it would appear the US is still desirable enough to attract mass attempted immigration despite the grossly unequal society.
Interestingly, throughout the post war period, as US policy shifted from isolationist to expansionist (ideologically) and more interventional foreign policy, propaganda has played a role in justifying and maintaining the exceptionalist perception of the actions of the US. More specifically this been a result of the global dominance of Hollywood in the world of film. It has certainly been a medium through which the American ideal of it as a benevolent world actor has been espoused (Alford, 2010). The view of America being an example to the world has consistently featured in the work coming out of Hollywood. ‘Action films present the US in glowing terms and suggests that the hostile external world can only be brought to heel through the imposition of great force’ – the US (Alford p.104, 2010). ‘Political dramas champion liberal ideas’ (Alford, p.149, 2010). This propaganda has presented and still does present the US as an example and therefore a beacon to the free world through ‘self-congratulatory endorsements of the benevolence of US power’ (Alford, p.39, 2010). As Bertolt Brecht put it, “Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it”. This is applicable in the case of the US and Hollywood. The US has used it as a means of shaping its ideology, almost reinforcing the legitimacy of its actions through the art of this propaganda.
The US was born out of exceptional circumstances and as De Tocqueville said it is unlikely that it will happen again. They had the ability to determine their own founding ideology, and successfully molded their chosen ideals into the ‘American Dream’, an ideology in itself according to many. As a result exceptionalism has led to the US acting as if it were above and beyond all other nations. When the US shifted from an inward looking nation to and outward looking on,e and it decided concern itself with spreading its values overseas, we observe a change in their state as an exemplar nation. The change is between leading by example by setting the perfect example for others to follow, to forcing the issue and intervening to ensure that its ideology and moral superiority is adopted by the rest of the free world. Today, the US is less of an example to the rest of the free world than it once was. They currently expect other nations to live up to standards that they find it hard to achieve themselves, thus not acting as an example to the same extent. This said the US id still the most powerful nation in the free world and it eclipses its nearest competitors economically, in terms of ideology and militarily. Therefore there is a significant extent to which it is still the beacon to the free world.
2014).
What do we mean by a ‘Beacon’ then? For the purpose of this essay, it means ‘America the example’, a superior nation in everything they do and in their founding idealism. It is the idea of being exceptional and the ideology of an ‘American Dream’ creating the perfect existence; therefore making it a beacon to the free world for others to follow.
Ideology might be seen as the major driving force behind the United States as an idea and as a result, may explain its self-perceived role as the leader of the free world in more recent times.
This ideological formula based on liberalism, individualism and egalitarianism manifested itself in the ideal of ‘the American Dream’. The idea behind America, its ‘Dream’ and perceived ‘Exceptionalism’ will help reinforce what we mean by ‘Beacon’. In addition to ideology and moral superiority, has the United States been a beacon in the past? Looking at ideology and political makeup, foreign policy and military prowess, economic power and the nature of its society. Is the United States still a beacon today given the same factors? Or does it behave like a normal country motivated by normal interests now? Finally is the US more than just the sum of its parts? Is the idea more than the …show more content…
nation?
America is unique in that it was ‘derived from a revolutionary event, giving it a raison d’etre ideologically as opposed to a common history’ (Shafer, p.6, 1991).
America has no experience with European feudalism and is instead focused on hardship and strife in creating a new nation. ‘The situation of the Americans is therefore entirely exceptional, and it is to be believed that no other democratic people will ever be placed in it’ (de Tocqueville, p.420, 2000). The US, ‘unlike most other nations, defines itself not on the facts of blood, religion, language, geography or shared history, but on a set of ideals expressed in the declaration of independence and consolidated in the constitution’ making it unique in its formation (Cullen, 2004). These ideals harbour liberalism, individualism, and egalitarianism as their blueprint in a secular society. The idea of American exceptionalism is essentially what makes it a theoretical beacon to the free world. It is the exceptional example, set for the rest to follow. This idea of an exceptional America is perhaps less proudly or arrogantly presented in front of the rest of the free world of late. “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism” (Obama, Strasbourg, 2009). Here we might infer that the US’s approach to exceptionalism is changing. Obama clearly makes the US appear not to be above and beyond fellow nations in the ‘Free
World’.
‘The American dream is, and has been for decades if not centuries, a central ideology of Americans’ and centres around the principle that individuals have ‘a reasonable chance to achieve success as they define it – material or otherwise – through their own effort and to obtain virtue and fulfilment through that success’ (Hochschild, p.xvii, 1995). As an ideology, it is quite brilliant. It is a descendant of classical liberal philosophy, and in the idealist nature of the dream it holds the founding ideological principles to light. It is a concept that, for better or worse, has proven to be amazingly elastic and durable for hundreds of years across race, class and other demographic boundaries (Cullen, 2004). The ideals within the dream, and of American exceptionalism, set the foundations for the moral and superior ‘shining city upon a hill’ (Reagan, Farewell Address, 1989) that presidents have consistently referred to in their rhetoric. This idea of the ideal nation’s existence is what is meant by ‘beacon’. Today though, the American dream is not a dream shared by all, certain categories have always shared it less than others. In this respect the ideology faces the severe challenge of race (Hochschild, p.xviii 1995). There is now a big enough black middle class in America for to warrant a review of the ‘American Dream’, and to what extent it fulfils its promise of equal, and unalienable opportunity for all. Due to America’s history of slavery, some are forced to ‘come to terms with a dream that was not originally theirs’ (Hochschild, p.15, 1995).
In what ways then has the US been a beacon to the free world in the past? Foreign policy and military might, are the mediums by which the US interacts with the rest of the world. If it were to be a beacon, then its attitudes and ideals concerning foreign policy ought to reflect its exemplary status. Additionally, economically and socially, the US has shown that it can lead the world in terms of economic performance, unalienable rights and equality. The US’s commitment to its ideology was arguably what carried it through the Cold War and into Fukuyama’s unipolar world (Fukuyama, 1992), making ideology another medium through which to set an example – as an ideological beacon over the last 100 years. America originally adopted isolationist policies, designed to avoid permanent alliances with other nations and hold firm the founding principle of ‘laissez faire’ flexibility in developing trade and commerce links with any other nation. George Washington referred to it as an aversion to ‘entangling alliances’ that put a limit to the ‘new nations’ flexibility (Tomes, p.37, 2014). This approach could have been seen as exemplar to the free world. Furthermore Thomas Jefferson thought that the ‘US should set an example at home but not attempt to impose an American model of government on others’ (Payne, p.38, 1985).
However by the end of the 19th Century, foreign policy had shifted to expanding the American governance model and expanding the global system of trade, securing access to foreign markets for American goods (Tomes, p.38, 2014). Exceptionalist attitudes evolved in the 20th century, focusing on a more interventionist and arguably realist view of America’s role in global affairs. Its aim seemed to be to spread its exemplary liberal and democratic values. Richard Olney, the secretary of state in 1900 said, “the mission of his country” was to seize “any fitting opportunity to further the progress of civilization”(Ninkovich, p.24, 1999). Such rhetoric indicates ideas held by the US as that time, and suggests a ‘world leader’ attitude, which was to carry on evolving throughout the rest of the century.
This superiority and international snobbery was evident after WWII. The US managed to steer clear of becoming a member of the League of Nations. Not only did it not see itself at the same level, but this also introduces an idea that the US, whilst acting as an example to the rest of the world, consistently refuses to hold itself accountable to the same strict ideals that it seeks to impose on other nations. During the Cold War, the US abandoned its exemplary aversion to constraining alliances as it created alliances and partnerships with other nations opposed to communism. Whilst in its early history, the US attempted to act as an exemplary ‘beacon’ of isolationism, it is during the cold war years that its status as a ‘Beacon’ to the free world was most realistic and practical (through economic and military dependence). The alliances and partnerships with other ideologically similar nations is an obvious example.
Having saved Europe twice, the US sought to create economic and political institutions in its exemplary image that secured a new ‘open-door’ model. With this model, liberty, democracy and progressivism along with the core economic principle of free markets and minor government intervention, could flourish, fast racking the American economy to global superiority (Tomes, p.39, 2014). In the 1980’s hundreds of thousands of new businesses along with 14 million new jobs were created. Far and away the best performance of the advanced countries (Kilborn, p.5, 1988), success made possible by the market freedom, individual land ownership, classical liberal ideology (Lipset, p.15, 1996).Furthermore, socially, there is evidence that the US was leading the free world. The European nations have become more ‘Americanised’. The post-feudal elements that existed in many European countries have declined enormously. This was accelerated by leadership from Thatcher and other neo-liberals. She represented the trend towards social modernization attempting to adopt individualism to mitigate class conflict and reconciling it with egalitarianism to the extent of equality of opportunity (Shafer, p.39, 1991). So economically and socially, we see dominance and an aspiration from Europe towards the American ideals.
Is the US still a Beacon to the Free world today? Or does it behave more like a normal country with normal interests? Politically and ideologically, America struggles to hold itself to the same high standards that it seeks to impose upon the rest of the world. Recently in the conflict in Syria the US has demanded that Syria obey international laws that the US itself ignores. (Docksey, 2013). Obama claims that President Assad ‘crossed a red line’ by using chemical weapons. Little attention is drawn to the American arsenal of chemical weapons, some of which were used in 2004 in Iraq, and that it has passed a law preventing the UN inspection of its weapons (Docksey, 2013). Politically it is hard to assert that the US is still an ideological beacon or example to the free world.
Obama proudly stated, regarding Americas exceptionalism, “The United States remains the largest economy in the world. We have unmatched military capability. And I think we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic processes, in our belief of free speech and equality. That, though imperfect, are exceptional” (Obama, 2009). Militarily speaking the US dominates the free world, even the whole world for that matter. It outspends the next 15 countries combined. Its defense spending doubled since 2008, when its percentage of global output shrunk, along with its economy, from 32% to 23%. With around 5% of the global population it spends just over 50% of the world’s total military spending (businessinsider.com, 2014). Here we see that for perhaps the opposite moral and idealist reasons, the US currently imposes itself as a beacon for the free world militarily. Realists might argue that it is impossible to ignore their military presence, and that the free world either be forced to compete with it or form an alliance with it in the form of NATO. Either way, the US is the dominant actor in global military power. It is the largest contributor to NATO (Morgan, 2011), the dominant military alliance of the free world, further evidence that it behaves at a level that the free world should aspire to. It appears that they are so keen to make themselves free from other countries that they end up preventing the same level of freedom for other countries that is afforded to them.
American society is not ideal for the poor, with exceptionally low levels of welfare and medical care along with very unequal distribution of wealth making America one of the most unequal societies. Currently the top 0.1% of Americans are worth as much as the bottom 90% (Monaghan, 2014).It also seems fairly unexceptional that a nation which prides itself on liberty has proportionally more of its population behind bars that any other country in the free world. Their love of guns and the ‘right to bear arms’ meant that in 2010 the total firearm death toll stood at a staggering 31’672 people (Docksey, 2013) – hardly a society worthy of the title of ‘beacon to the free world’. Yet it would appear the US is still desirable enough to attract mass attempted immigration despite the grossly unequal society.
Interestingly, throughout the post war period, as US policy shifted from isolationist to expansionist (ideologically) and more interventional foreign policy, propaganda has played a role in justifying and maintaining the exceptionalist perception of the actions of the US. More specifically this been a result of the global dominance of Hollywood in the world of film. It has certainly been a medium through which the American ideal of it as a benevolent world actor has been espoused (Alford, 2010). The view of America being an example to the world has consistently featured in the work coming out of Hollywood. ‘Action films present the US in glowing terms and suggests that the hostile external world can only be brought to heel through the imposition of great force’ – the US (Alford p.104, 2010). ‘Political dramas champion liberal ideas’ (Alford, p.149, 2010). This propaganda has presented and still does present the US as an example and therefore a beacon to the free world through ‘self-congratulatory endorsements of the benevolence of US power’ (Alford, p.39, 2010). As Bertolt Brecht put it, “Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it”. This is applicable in the case of the US and Hollywood. The US has used it as a means of shaping its ideology, almost reinforcing the legitimacy of its actions through the art of this propaganda.
The US was born out of exceptional circumstances and as De Tocqueville said it is unlikely that it will happen again. They had the ability to determine their own founding ideology, and successfully molded their chosen ideals into the ‘American Dream’, an ideology in itself according to many. As a result exceptionalism has led to the US acting as if it were above and beyond all other nations. When the US shifted from an inward looking nation to and outward looking on,e and it decided concern itself with spreading its values overseas, we observe a change in their state as an exemplar nation. The change is between leading by example by setting the perfect example for others to follow, to forcing the issue and intervening to ensure that its ideology and moral superiority is adopted by the rest of the free world. Today, the US is less of an example to the rest of the free world than it once was. They currently expect other nations to live up to standards that they find it hard to achieve themselves, thus not acting as an example to the same extent. This said the US id still the most powerful nation in the free world and it eclipses its nearest competitors economically, in terms of ideology and militarily. Therefore there is a significant extent to which it is still the beacon to the free world.