# The insidious lie of American Exceptionalism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 17, 2011, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487 "2011-12-17T01:35:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/61 "2011-12-20T00:57:58Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > I am a moderate Exceptionalist. America from the start had the qualities of constitutional governance which practically every other country at that time lacked. Our franchise was far more generous than that of Britain the only other constitutional country at the time. In the 224 years since the Constitution there has been only one rebellion and no coups, and revolutions. That is not special. You are basically taking the few instances where America has been the best or first at something, weighted them accordingly, and used that as the basis for your comparison. It would be like if China said they were the best because they invented fireworks. What makes the Constitution so special? The Magna Carta was even more exceptional, I think. Or Hammurabi’s Code. Or the first time a monkey ate something from a fire and thought it tastes better than the raw crap they’ve been eating before ---
**Author:** ![Candyman74](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/62 "2011-12-20T01:54:12Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > That is not special. You are basically taking the few instances where America has been the best or first at something, weighted them accordingly, and used that as the basis for your comparison. It would be like if China said they were the best because they invented fireworks. > > What makes the Constitution so special? The Magna Carta was even more exceptional, I think. Or Hammurabi’s Code. Or the first time a monkey ate something from a fire and thought it tastes better than the raw crap they’ve been eating before Two reasons, IMHO. 1. Only superpower for a short time. China’s coming up, and the USSR just fell. This period is a very short one, but it lasted longer than a single person’s memory . So there’s an illusion it’s how things are. It’ll be a 60-year blip in history. It’s really a tiny amount of time. 2. This happened just as we reached global media and the intrawebz. So for the first time in the world, it’s a globally repeated status quo on a minute to minute basis. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/63 "2011-12-20T02:54:45Z")
I always thought the real key to “American Exceptionalism” was stumbling on to an entire continent of staggeringly vast natural resources, without anyone occupying it able to defend it. What the gold of Mexico and Peru were to Spain (launching it to European pre-eminence for a time) the forests, fields, mines, and furs of North America were to the young U.S. It isn’t anything in the American people, so much as the huge bounty that they obtained. (That said, we were incredibly lucky in having George Washington as our founding spirit. Imagine if Hamilton or Adams had been the big wheel at the time!) (re natural rights, hogwash. No such thing. Nor “inalienable” rights, as people suffering under totalitarian rule can aver. The best we can do is put together various lists of consensual ideals, things that large numbers of people agree with, and then generalize these as “universals.” They aren’t, but they do seem to be a pretty good basis for civilized governments.) ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/64 "2011-12-20T08:32:33Z")
According to the document, the rights are **not** _inalienable_ anyway. They are _unalienable._ I don’t know that it makes too much difference in the Twenty-First Century, but it might have in the Eighteenth. Anyone know? ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/65 "2011-12-20T10:28:15Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > “You have to be very careful about quotations you find on the internet.” > > - Abraham Lincoln Love it , am stealing it. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/66 "2011-12-20T12:50:39Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > And, no I don’t believe the fundamentalist line that atheists cannot be moral. It’s just that they are standing on flimsier ground when they argue what is moral: > > Atheist: Killing people is immoral. > Person: So says you, I think there is nothing wrong with it. Who is right, me or you? Since there is no higher power, we are both free to believe what we want. > > compared with: > > Believer: Killing people is immoral. > Person: So says you, I think it is fine. > Believer: No God says it’s immoral. You say it isn’t. The Creator of the universe wins, you lose. Nonsense. The “god” concept adds nothing whatsoever to the argument: Believer Brand A: Killing people is immoral. God says so. Believer Brand B: Killing infidels is moral. God says so. “God” appears on both sides of the moral equation, and cancels out. QED. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/67 "2011-12-20T13:20:30Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Any country that doesn’t have the death penalty, does allow gay marriage and isn’t currently occupying a foreign nation is superior to the US. So move to Mexico. > [@Lobohan](#): > > If America had the Logan’s Run hand crystals, I’d fight to overturn the rule or try to leave. Why? Society has decided that you don’t have a right to live past whatever age. How dare you become a criminal! Or is there some inherent “right” that goes beyond what is written down by societies legislators? > [@Trinopus](#): > > I always thought the real key to “American Exceptionalism” was stumbling on to an entire continent of staggeringly vast natural resources, without anyone occupying it able to defend it. What the gold of Mexico and Peru were to Spain (launching it to European pre-eminence for a time) the forests, fields, mines, and furs of North America were to the young U.S. It isn’t anything in the American people, so much as the huge bounty that they obtained. That…and the whole Democracy thing. The US didn’t “stumble on all that land”. The European powers of the day - English, French, Dutch, Portuguse, Spainish - did. What was “in the American people” was the desire to break away from the land-owning aristocracy / imperialist structure of Europe at the time. > [@Candyman74](#): > > A magic man in the sky dating back 14 billion years said Americans had a divine right to pack a six-shooter? Nonsense. Americans have that right because they agreed amongst themselves that it would be a right. Owning a firearm is a right determined by society’s laws. The right to defend yourself is a “natural right”. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/68 "2011-12-20T14:11:38Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Owning a firearm is a right determined by society’s laws. The right to defend yourself is a “natural right”. …and yet only one is in the US constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/69 "2011-12-20T16:28:25Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Why? Society has decided that you don’t have a right to live past whatever age. How dare you become a criminal! People break laws when they are motivated to. Wanting to live is a desire written into me by billions of years of adaptation. Mammals who try to live longer, tend to live longer. Is there a natural right to food, since I want that too? Is there a natural right to sex, because I crave that? The very notion is nonsense. > [@](#): > > Owning a firearm is a right determined by society’s laws. The right to defend yourself is a “natural right”. No, the desire to defend oneself is incorporated into humanity by virtue of that fact that we want to live longer. Simply asserting nonsense doesn’t make it true. In what way would the universe be different if there weren’t a natural right to self-defense? Would people not want to defend themselves? Would deer stand there blinking while lions closed in? You are asserting something that has no effect on the universe and demanding it exists. Why? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/70 "2011-12-20T17:30:45Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > We are clearly much wealthier and more powerful than all other countries. Is that a result of some sort of inherent exceptionalism in the way we do things or is it merely some quirk of history? A good deal of that is population though, we have about 7-10x more people than most other wealthy nations, which means a bigger GDP and a bigger talent pool to draw upon. I wouldn’t qualify that as exceptionalism. If you want national exceptionalism, nations like Israel are pretty good bets (IMO). They built a first world economy out of nothing, are surrounded by hostile neighbors but still not only survived but have a better human rights record than their neighbors, have an incredibly high per capita % of scientists, engineers and physicians, etc. Nations like Taiwan could probably count too. They developed rapidly and became liberal, free nations despite authoritarian, hostile, larger neighbors wanting to keep them down. The US just has a bigger population. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/71 "2011-12-20T18:24:07Z")
[QUOTE=Wesley Clark] The US just has a bigger population. [/QUOTE] You make that sound like it’s no big deal, but the reality is that having a larger population makes it tougher to act in a cohesive and coherent way. As does having a continental sized nation. It’s easier to make stuff work when you have a more homogenous and smaller population, as it is when you have a smaller country. See, that’s one of the things that MAKES us exceptional. When China and India (both with larger populations) are able to get the majority of their populations up to the standards of living that the US has…well, THEN you can come back and say that the US is no longer exceptional. Or when Russia does it (since they have more area under control than the US), then the same. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/72 "2011-12-20T18:50:06Z")
Do India and China get to kill off their aboriginal populations too? Because that makes things much easier, I hear. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/73 "2011-12-20T19:51:12Z")
Only if they want to take another feather from our exceptional-ism cap. 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/74 "2011-12-20T20:14:24Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > If you want national exceptionalism, nations like Israel are pretty good bets (IMO). They built a first world economy out of nothing, are surrounded by hostile neighbors but still not only survived but have a better human rights record than their neighbors, They had a little help from the USA. Because that’s what exceptional countries do. We help people. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/75 "2011-12-20T20:16:56Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > The US just has a bigger population. Yeah, I forgot all 300 million of us just materialized out of thin air. Or maybe it’s because for the past 200+ years people from all over the world have been pounding down the door to come hear because it’s so awesome. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/76 "2011-12-20T20:45:11Z")
“Exceptional” is no longer PC. We prefer “differently abled.” ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/77 "2011-12-21T00:09:02Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > You make that sound like it’s no big deal, but the reality is that having a larger population makes it tougher to act in a cohesive and coherent way. As does having a continental sized nation. It’s easier to make stuff work when you have a more homogenous and smaller population, as it is when you have a smaller country. > > See, that’s one of the things that MAKES us exceptional. When China and India (both with larger populations) are able to get the majority of their populations up to the standards of living that the US has…well, THEN you can come back and say that the US is no longer exceptional. Or when Russia does it (since they have more area under control than the US), then the same. > > -XT A lot of nations are divided by class, race, religion, political belief, etc but still function. I don’t see how that makes us exceptional. We had a civil war over our differences, plus our racial and class differences play a core role in our divisions in national politics. Canada and Australia have continential sized nations too. They do fine. But the fact that we are bigger means our talent pool is bigger. We have more cities and companies that talented people can work for. This also creates incentives for foreigners to come here (because there are more options in a nation of 300 million with dozens of tech saavy metro areas and hundreds of good universities than in a smaller nation with a couple of tech saavy metro areas and a few dozen good universities). A nation of 300 million has more jobs, more universities, more cities and more opportunities. That attracts the best in the world, which makes the nation even better. But I don’t think that makes a nation exceptional. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/78 "2011-12-21T01:18:41Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Any country that doesn’t have the death penalty, does allow gay marriage and isn’t currently occupying a foreign nation is superior to the US. > [@msmith537](#): > > So move to Mexico. I do believe that **MrDibble** already lives in a country that meets his criteria for being superior to the US. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/79 "2011-12-21T05:14:30Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Believer: Killing people is immoral. > Person: So says you, I think it is fine. > Believer: No God says it’s immoral. You say it isn’t. The Creator of the universe wins, you lose. The right not to be killed is kind of a no-brainer. But where is there a comprehensive list of rights handed down by God? At what point did this “endowment” take place. How do we account for differences on what should or should not be considered an inalienable right? Should Gays have the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I think the Newtster should take a second look at the line from the DoI he’s exploiting. The God he’s sticking up for is the that’s believed in by faith. The Declaration only acknowledges divine activity insofar as it is “self evident”. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487/80 "2011-12-21T05:25:15Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > You know the Nazis as a society decided that certain groups should die an untimely death. You know who _else_ concluded that their country was exempt from international norms? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-insidious-lie-of-american-exceptionalism/606487.md?page=5)