Oct 17, 2021


Russian president Vladimir Putin, New York Times, operated, has awakened a lot of emotion, as he challenged the idea of ​​US exceptionalism. While many are surprised by such an affront to US values ​​and ideals, it could be a brief look at some historical data points over the evolutionary path of US exceptionalism that culminated with the defeat of the Soviet Union in the field of battle in the field of battle of the human terrain. As most, the roots of US exceptionalism are in three figures, Jonathon Winthrop, Thomas Jefferson and Alexis de Tocqueville. However, it was not until President Kennedy invoked the concept that he became the ideological tool for victory in the cold war. In 1630, WinThrop gave us the first words that sat the foundation for US exceptionalism: "Because we must consider that we will be like a city on a hill. The eyes of all people are about us." [1] From Tocqueville provided a quite different description of why America is exceptional: "The position of Americans is, therefore, quite exceptional, and you can believe that no democratic people will be placed. In a similar aspect ... Let us, then, to see all democratic nations under the example of Americans. " [2] Thomas Jefferson vacilated among the concept of America as an exemplary and as a crossed. Clearly, the words of him describing the inalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence support the notion of the United States that is a city on the hill as the exemplary for all to emulate. According to Walter Russell Mead, the Jeffersonian foreign policy can be described as a form of "flexible pacifism" and isolationism. [3] However, Jefferson also felt that for America to flourish, democracy and free market economies must be extended all over the world, which, of course, influences the form of Crusader of US exceptionalism. The final views of Jefferson can be summarized from their letter on foreign affairs with this extract: "Trust with the destinies of this lonely republic of the world, the only monument of human rights, and the only deposit of the Sacred Fire of Freedom and The self-chamber. Therefore, therefore, it is to be illuminated in other regions of the Earth, if other regions of the Earth will become susceptible to its benign influence. " [4] Despite this last "benign influence" of sight and the roots of what Joseph Nye later with a coin of "soft power", Jefferson established America for the continuous conflict between specimens and crusaders. In his seminal work, the empire of freedom, Robert Tucker and David Hendrickson succinctly summarized Jefferson's conflicting positions that last today. Note that US foreign policy had two broad views: "... to advance to freedom only when remaining separate from the world. Only by avoiding huge economic and constitutional threats produced by the entanglement and foreign wars would make the United States itself as an example or asylum for the oppressed peoples in everywhere ". "... Free political and economic institutions would flourish in America only if they would take roots elsewhere, an idea that has had a bit of much of the impulse of crunch in this century." [5] (Referring to the twentieth century) These two ideas really illustrate the copy and the exceptionalist of Crusader. After Tocqueville, little focused on the exceptionalism until the twentieth century. Putin is not the first to challenge US exceptionalism. Stalin himself used the term to criticize the American Communist Party for thinking that he did not enter online with Marxist history due to its geographical location and access to resources, its industrial capacity throughout the description of Tocqueville about 80 years before. [6] Maybe he predict what would become the US conflict. UU., USSR, realized that even US communists could not divorce the unique US experience. However, it was President Kennedy who reinfigor√≥ and cemented the concept in the US presidential lexicon that continues to this day in 1961 in 1961 in an address to the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, called America a "City Shining on a hill" . [7] Since then, every US president has regardless of the political party, used various forms of this metaphor and invoked American exceptionalism. Why Kennedy did this? While political scientists and historians can challenge me because I have no hard data to prove this, I offer the following hypothesis. Kennedy inherited the vast most effective strategy in American history, the policy of containment of Soviet communism. Diplomatic instruments, economic, and especially military instruments of national power were strongly represented, but what Kennedy needed was an information component that not only would unite and motivate Americans, but would also serve as an example to the free world. What better way to compensate for the communist ideology to describe an American ideology that would be the shining example. While US and Soviet forces never met directly on the field of battle during the Cold War; On the battlefield of the human field and in the war of ideas, ideals Americans dominated communism. Democracy and free market economies spread throughout the world and American soft power was one of the main influences. Putin's KGB could not counter this and now sees an opportunity to try to get some satisfaction and maybe even a form of revenge for their failures to the United States to discredit the New York Times. Of course, many people criticize American exceptionalism. It is the subject of fierce debate among Americans. They can be divided into three camps. We talked about the first two. The Crusaders are proponents aggressive export of American principles and following the proverbial concept of "making the world safe for democracy" because they believe it will improve the chances of global stability and economic prosperity obviously in the interests of the United States . Examples are advocates soft power. They believe that the American example should be sufficient for others to adopt and the ideals need not be pushed aggressively. The third category is still not discussed. These are the "apologists" for American exceptionalism. These are people who believe that the concept of American exceptionalism is arrogant and leads to poor strategic decisions, entangling the US. UU. In adventures abroad and leads to conflicts and damage to America. Although critics of American exceptionalism will deny this, they are more eyes with Putin than any US president since Kennedy, either President Reagan or President Obama. However, it is true, the United States has made mistakes in foreign policy. He can not be denied that and there are too many faults to list here. But there have been many successes, again, in particular the victory in the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Again, political scientists challenge this hypothesis, but I feel if our failures can be attributed to the specimens and Crusader camps are getting out of balance. When the balance has shifted too close to the side of the cross ledger and foreign policy is too aggressive, the United States has made mistakes and perhaps intervened in the affairs of others when it should not. When the next copy is too dominant and suppresses the side of the cross, perhaps a conflict has occurred where it might have been prevented. But when the balance is right, America is strong and is able to exert international leadership that helps maintain peace and stability. There are two things to finish. First, Putin and apologists have the right to criticize America and belief in their own exceptionalism. However, if we have returned to De Tocqueville and read carefully the description of him what he is really saying it is that America had

No comments:

Post a Comment