NationStates Jolt Archive

This seems to include most US Conservatives. Explain. Why is the US above the rest of us? Why do ordinary moral standards, legal standards and empirical evidence not apply in America's case?

Why is it America's job to teach the rest of the world right and wrong, but God forbid that we try to tell America what's best (see, reaction to prohibition on executing minors).

Because we have so many nukes...

Because we have so many nukes...
True enough. Might is right etc.

True enough. Might is right etc.

But look East to China, the Dragon is rising!

But look East to China, the Dragon is rising!
The Eagle is... setting?

This seems to include most US Conservatives. Explain. Why is the US above the rest of us? Why do ordinary moral standards, legal standards and empirical evidence not apply in America's case?

Why is it America's job to teach the rest of the world right and wrong, but God forbid that we try to tell America what's best (see, reaction to prohibition on executing minors).

Because we say we are fighting terrorism, the holiest of all holy wars.

Surely you mean "Shitting", right?

Surely you mean "Shitting", right?
Who, me?
"While the Dragon rises, the Eagle defecates."
Sounds good, even with the politically correct spin.

The term has never meant that the U.S. government can do anything it wishes, moral or immoral, because it is better or special. The term is meant to describe our basic political/economic environment.. historically, things were possible in the U.S. that were impossible elsewhere..

American exceptionalism has never been a term used to denote moral infallibility..

The term has never meant that the U.S. government can do anything it wishes, moral or immoral, because it is better or special. The term is meant to describe our basic political/economic environment.. historically, things were possible in the U.S. that were impossible elsewhere..

American exceptionalism has never been a term used to denote moral infallibility..
It's been used by many people to denote just that, and it (or its predecessors, like manifest destiny) has been for decades. Not by all, of course, but by a significant number of all political stripes. The people who are most likely to use the term in that manner are the ones who invoke God with their politics--it's used along with the notion that the US is a particularly christian nation, when its actions certainly belie that.

It's been used by many people to denote just that, and it (or its predecessors, like manifest destiny) has been for decades. Not by all, of course, but by a significant number of all political stripes. The people who are most likely to use the term in that manner are the ones who invoke God with their politics--it's used along with the notion that the US is a particularly christian nation, when its actions certainly belie that.

The premise has constistently been that our fundamental character as a nation permits greater political freedom/prosperity/growth etc. than elsewhere.. I think the Cold War use of the term has muddied its definition due to its use by some in the "exporting democracy" camp, during Vietnam, but the term goes back to de Tocqueville. I don't think its more recent use as an afterthought in justifying war or religious persecution should change the definition, that's all.

Because it feels good to them.
*shrugs*

It ain't logical, of course.
But what the F does logic have to do with reality?

The American exception, (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12888599/site/newsweek/) or does this not apply to the term "American exceptionalism"?

Its a matter of the US is on top of things, and since we are, the government feels (wrongly) that they are mighty, unquestionable and untouchable.

Its a matter of the US is on top of things, and since we are, the government feels (wrongly) that they are mighty, unquestionable and untouchable.


I think they are indeed mighty, you know?

The premise has constistently been that our fundamental character as a nation permits greater political freedom/prosperity/growth etc. than elsewhere.. I think the Cold War use of the term has muddied its definition due to its use by some in the "exporting democracy" camp, during Vietnam, but the term goes back to de Tocqueville. I don't think its more recent use as an afterthought in justifying war or religious persecution should change the definition, that's all.
I agree with you that it shouldn't change the definition, but unfortunately, individuals don't often get to make that call because larger groups often appropriate terms for themselves and morph the definitions for their own causes.

The American exception, (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12888599/site/newsweek/) or does this not apply to the term "American exceptionalism"?

It does. Basically, the "exception" is the x-factor that no one can put their finger on, at least definitively. The idea that there's something in our national character or psychology that separates us from the rest (in this case, slower population decline versus Europe) is suggested in the article.

The theory in this case basically amounts to a scavenger hunt for statistics that might explain the difference. :p

Why is it America's job to teach the rest of the world right and wrong, but God forbid that we try to tell America what's best (see, reaction to prohibition on executing minors).

To address the question, two pages in.. We don't execute minors, but until recently could execute individuals who committed capital offenses as minors.. If you're referring to the recent Supreme Court abolition of that practice, the negative reaction was to certain justices' use of foreign law in their rationale for abolishing the practice. I don't think many Europeans would would be pleased if their Courts struck down laws on the basis of "well, they don't allow that kind of thing in America" just like a lot of people here don't like it when our courts try and enforce foreign standards.

It's just a matter of Nationalism for the most part. But as Ben Parker said "With great power comes great responsibility." As a Superpower on the world stage the US has the responsibility to insure peace. To do sucha thing by itself would be impossible. The US is the leader for the world since the disinagration of the Soviet Empire. Most Europeans however, from what I have seen, think the US is just being a bully. In any case, with the industrial might behind the US, the United States will put a boot in whoever's ass if they spill american blood especailly on our own soil. I would give China kudos for reaching their Industrial Age but uh I am not because it took them long enough to get there.

If you're referring to the recent Supreme Court abolition of that practice, the negative reaction was to certain justices' use of foreign law in their rationale for abolishing the practice. I don't think many Europeans would would be pleased if their Courts struck down laws on the basis of "well, they don't allow that kind of thing in America" just like a lot of people here don't like it when our courts try and enforce foreign standards.
Considering that America is the main interventionist in the middle East, and that Western Europe has, to a degree, been modelled on America after WWII, I don't agree with this argument.

But look East to China, the Dragon is rising!
Not for long.

This seems to include most US Conservatives. Explain. Why is the US above the rest of us? Why do ordinary moral standards, legal standards and empirical evidence not apply in America's case?

Why is it America's job to teach the rest of the world right and wrong, but God forbid that we try to tell America what's best (see, reaction to prohibition on executing minors).

The general view is that America is exceptional because unlike other nations, which ground their statehood in the existence of a common people or coercive force, America grounds its existence in the internal dignity of its citizens and the consent it allows them. America, then, is based on a common ideal rather than a common people or strength of military. While others have since copied this method of government, ours is still the first, best, and highest manifestations of states deriving their just power from the consent of the governed.

It is America's job, then, to tell the rest of the world right and wrong because we have an understanding of right and other people deserve to be shown the same sense of dignity that ours does.

tbh if america really was acting for the good of the world then we would be straight into zimbabwe, now there is a place which actually does need a regime change and there would be almost no insurgents. ( especially if you handed out the aid which is needed there )

america needs a gd kick up the arse to sort itself out
i guess we will have to wait for china to sort out the mess in africa

It is America's job, then, to tell the rest of the world right and wrong because we have an understanding of right and other people deserve to be shown the same sense of dignity that ours does.

i disagree on almost all levels to this statement. ( cant be arsed to give reasons i have a levels to revise for)