Summary Of The Unique American Prism

Howard Zinn defines American exceptionalism as the belief “...that the United States alone has the right, whether it be divine sanction or moral obligation, to bring civilization, or democracy, or liberty to the rest of the world, by violence if necessary.” The American exceptionalist ideology has domestic implications found in political rhetoric and within the founding of the United States. External implications of exceptionalism are evident in American foreign policy and militaristic interventions such as Vietnam and Iraq. A new definition of has arisen, highlighting the negative implications of exceptionalism, “Roast beef and apple pie explained exceptionalism but now we are back to moldy rye bread and water.”

Charles Murray’s American Exceptionalism invokes ideas I had not considered before. The way he describes America in its early life is unrecognizable to me. Murray discusses the geographic setting, American ideology, the traits of the American people, and the operation of the American political system. Now, centuries later than the time he described, it is like America had gone on a rapidly fast down torrent. I agree with Murray’s ideas of the exceptional traits America exuded, however, the traits I observe now, and as Murray talks about later on in the book, have taken on a different meaning. It is almost as if the once amazing concepts have been reduced to nearly half their worth. I am in no way stating America is no longer exceptional, but

The discrimination of the United States against undesirable ideologies is, in essence, the very action that was feared about other countries. Author Regin Schmidt wrote about how the FBI set up political surveillance systems in foreign nations to prevent this kind of power the government had over the people from being exported to the U.S. Unbenounced to the public, however, the real threat was not in any foreign nation, but in the domestic government. Schmidt also went on to explain how President Truman attempted to make substantial revisions to foreign policy when enacting the Truman Doctrine. This belief of America being a promiseland is shown today when the United States continually forces itself into wars in an attempt to press its

In John Winthrop’s essay “City Upon a Hill”, Winthrop expresses his distinct views on the aims of the Puritans coming to New England. During the early 17th century in Europe, some groups separated from the Church of England. These groups were known as the Pilgrims, who founded Plymouth Colony in 1620. This religion had a direct impact on religious ideas and culture in America. John Winthrop acquired a royal charter from King Charles I and created the Massachusetts Bay Colony. “City Upon a Hill” was written on the ship during the first mass Puritan migration to New England. This document provided the followers with a plan regarding their goals upon arriving in America. Winthrop firmly believes that the people who are willing to be fully

America felt the need to move towards the idea of foreign policy from 1895 to 1920; their success was a combination of idealism and self-interest. Both were influential in the decision to venture outside of U.S borders. America expanded due to idealistic view such as: The White Man’s Burden, Religious motivation, a social contract with the Western Hemisphere and the Spanish American War. However, self interest offered more of a substantial force with America’s desire for a stronger Navy, foreign market, power, pride, and the influences of the Roosevelt Corollary. When both ideas are combined they create one of the most influential and globally shaping decisions of our world.

John Winthrop, a Puritan leader, was an example of this. When the Puritans landed in Massachusetts, he wrote a speech known as A Model of Christian Charity that gave instructions to the people on how they needed to act, proclaiming that they must be “A city on a hill [, for] the eyes of all people are upon us.” Historically, Puritans were known for their religious beliefs, shown in the forms of upholding the law of God, living in tight knit communities, and putting the conditions of others before their own. This speech was written to encourage the colonists to express those qualities in great measures, and to not do what was considered to be wrong. Contrarily, the leadership in Virginia was not invested in the good of the people. The Governor, Sir William Berkeley, did not trust, nor was he satisfied with, the residents of the colony. After a Dutch attack in 1673, he appealed to the King to send English reinforcements, since there were not enough trustworthy men to defend the borders. He believed that as soon as they saw the enemy gain on them, they would defect. This shows that although Berkeley sought to keep the colony safe, he did it out of lack of trust and scorn of those below him, differing from John Winthrop’s standards of equality and solid community. Berkeley sought to increase his prosperity, as well as that of his friends, by establishing unfair taxes in Virginia. The people were upset,

Throughout the development of one of the greatest countries in the world, the he United States had created a world empire between 1890 and 1945. In such a short amount of time, the country as a whole as able to produce a homogenization of life where the measurement of national and international power and the level of control of economic, military, political, media, institutions, education, sport, music, etc. came together to form a new kind of American cutlure. However, during this time, it was all about the projection of the “American-self” and demonstrating characteristics and qualities that distinguished the U.S. (us) and the foreign outsider (them).

How other countries view America’s position in the world varies not only based on America’s actions within the international arena, or foreign policy, but also how Americans view the actions of their leaders and policy makers. For both internal and external views, America’s “standing” revolves around two primary elements – how well the US government does what it says it is going to do and how well it stands up to threats against it. While these are not the only elements considered, America’s credibility and pride are viewed as key to how well it will respond to interactions both within and outside its borders. A country’s world view, or standing, can vary over time and be impacted by a number of things such as where a country is located,

For imperialists it was the possibility to experiment with democracy in other countries, and to spread their way of life. Litke (2012) seems to view early American imperialists as people who wanted to be different, and to introduce these differences to newly discovered cultures. Winthrop does not seem to want this, or be focused on this. His goals seems to be focused more inward in the colonies, rather than around the globe. Although Litke (2012) considers Winthrop to be distinctly anti-imperialist. It is clear that many others do consider Winthrop to be exactly that. For Litke (2012) there is a clear divide between Winthrop’s American exceptionalism and imperialism. This is mainly due to the fact that Winthrop was focused on life in the colonies, and the people within them (Noll 2012). This is certainly an excellent example of American exceptionalism, but does not seem to fall within the realms of imperialism. However Winthrop’s American exceptionalist attitude has since been interpreted by some politicians as being imperialist, and therefore is used as an argument for imperialism. Litke (2012) considers this misuse of Winthrop’s sermon to be an insult to Winthrop and detrimental to American

I believe that McClay and Zinn provide a persuasive argument elaborating their notion of the validity of America’s “unique” mission. However, I am inclined to agree with Professor McClay in his assertion in the mythical nature of American exceptionalism that has promoted social cohesiveness and propelled America as the “beacon of liberty and democracy” (McKenna & Feingold 2011, 14). The existence of present-day America developed after a period of empirical practices that allowed us to incorporate the positive qualities of democracy and make note of the negative aspects of wrongfully enforcing democratic ideals internationally (McKenna & Feingold 2011). Since our inception, the “invisible hand” of “divine providence” has directed America to propagate freedom and democracy to all peoples of the world (McKenna & Feingold 2011, 2-3). The majority of American Presidents

America’s foreign policy affects each and every person in the world in terms of prices, taxes, supply of gasoline, and the lives of our soldiers also depends on how we associate with US. This country can bring hope to the lives of the poorest people in the world. It is because of their persona that they are able to respect the lives of others who are not even their own. Most American citizens believe in embracing their values, justice, fairness, democracy, a helping hand when there is need and hard work. Their values are applied from their households, to

In truth, its history dates back as far as the sixteenth century, following the first great expansion of European capitalism, which resulted in slave trade, colonialism and neo-colonialism (Ezema, 2009). Throughout history, world powers have continually sought to perpetuate their way of life: from the philosophy and mythology of the Greeks, the political ideologies and linguistics of the Romans, and the art and architecture of the Italian Renaissance (Daghrir, 2013). Thus, it comes as no surprise that the aftermath of the post-war era, which saw the collapse of Soviet communism and the emergence of the United States as the sole hegemon, saw the aggressive spread of American ideals, values, and beliefs. Indeed, just as American goods flooded world markets in the post-World War II era; American culture now penetrates every continent through the aggressive development of mass communications, trade expansion and information technology.

He begins more abstractly and then applies these principles to America. Specifically he says that power leads to a sense of superiority and is confused with virtue. Fulbright defines the “arrogance of power” as the “psychological need that nations seem to have in order to prove that they are bigger, better or stronger than other nations”. Clearly, these statements provide the premise of the book. As such, it explains Americas actions in all the situations exemplified in the book. After Fulbright analyzes patriotism in America, specifically when relating to the citizen, universities and the senate. For example, he describes the political climate at the time as opposed to descent and criticism. Despite this, he mentions the anti-war movement and describes both it being conducted and accepted as a sign of maturity and patriotism. That is to say, criticism is vital to democracy and consensus is a threat to freedom. Similarly, he describes how senate is in decline because of its unquestioning acceptance of the president’s request for war and as a result the decline in its Importance in the area of international relations and war. On account of this, Fulbright denounces the diminished importance of debate and dissent in the senate. In part two of the book, Fulbright analyzes revolutions and America’s perspective on them. According to Fulbright, America is an un-revolutionary society with

“America was conducting business as usual, but others were joining the game.” (Zakaria, 221). All this time we thought we were on top, we were actually slowly becoming less and less of leader and more a bystander as the rest of the world is slowly rising around us. Zakaria shows in that quote that as America has been continuing business like always, and because of this we have failed to realize our standing with the world around us. In the book The Post-American World, Zakaria shows us the challenges that America faces today. I believe the United States is most affected by our ignorance, competition, and worldly participation.

Many strategies have been devised by empires over centuries, these strategies and decisions have helped shape the world as it is in its present state. The author explains how strategic decisions made in the past were the wrong decisions in his opinion, as John Perkins had seen first hand the devastation that could be caused by the American government in its pursuit for a “global empire”.