American Exceptionalism 2024

 Joseph Nye Jr. at Project Syndicate:

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, three broad camps are visible in America’s debate over how the United States should relate to the rest of the world: the liberal internationalists who have dominated since World War II; the retrenchers who want to pull back from some alliances and institutions; and the America Firsters who take a narrow, sometimes isolationist, view of America’s role in the world.

Americans have long seen their country as morally exceptional. Stanley Hoffmann, a French-American intellectual, said that while every country considers itself unique, France and the US stand out in believing that their values are universal. France, however, was limited by the balance of power in Europe, and thus could not pursue its universalist ambitions fully. Only the US had the power to do that.

The point is not that Americans are morally superior; it is that many Americans want to believe that their country is a force for good in the world. Realists have long complained that this moralism in American foreign policy interferes with a clear analysis of power. Yet the fact is that America’s liberal political culture made a huge difference to the liberal international order that has existed since WWII. Today’s world would look very different if Hitler had emerged victorious or if Stalin’s Soviet Union had prevailed in the Cold War.

American exceptionalism has three main sources. Since 1945, the dominant one has been the legacy of the Enlightenment, specifically the liberal ideas espoused by America’s founders.

...

A second strand of American exceptionalism stems from the country’s Puritan religious roots. Those who fled Britain to worship God more purely in the new world saw themselves as a chosen people. Their project was less crusading in nature than anxious and contained, like the current “retrencher” approach of fashioning America as a city on a hill to attract others....

The third source of American exceptionalism underlies the others: America’s sheer size and location has always conferred a geopolitical advantage. Already in the nineteenth century, De Tocqueville noted America’s special geographical situation.

Zelensky and American Exceptionalism

 Volodymyr Zelensky at WSJ:

A decade ago the current boss of Russia wrote that “America is not exceptional.” What he did later shows what he really meant. Many tyrants in human history have claimed global influence, but none of them could inspire the rest of the world to strive for the best in human nature. That’s why today’s Russian tyrants, like all tyrants, are fundamentally weak and their regime will crumble over time. When any tyrant hates America and denies its exceptional role in the struggle for freedom, he recognizes his own inevitable defeat. To Russian tyranny I say the world needs more, not less, American exceptionalism.

In 2013, Trump sided with Putin:

And it really makes him look like a great leader, frankly. And when he criticizes the president [Obama]  for using the term "American exceptionalism," if you're in Russia, you don't want to hear that America is exceptional. And if you're in many other countries, whether it's Germany or other places, you don't want to hear about American exceptionalism because you think you're exceptional. So I can see that being very insulting to the world.

And that's basically what Putin was saying is that, you know, you use a term like "American exceptionalism," and frankly, the way our country is being treated right now by Russia and Syria and lots of other places and with all the mistakes we've made over the years, like Iraq and so many others, it's sort of a hard term to use.

 But other nations and other countries don't want hear about American exceptionalism. They're insulted by it. And that's what Putin was saying.

Did God Grant America a Special Place?

From PRRI:

Compared to 2013, significantly fewer Americans today believe that God has granted America a special role in human history. In 2013, nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) agreed with this statement, compared to only 29% who disagreed. Today, belief in this statement has dropped a massive 20 percentage points, to 44%, with a majority of Americans (53%) now disagreeing that God has granted America a special role in human history.

Republicans (68%) are twice as likely as Democrats (33%) to agree that God has granted America a special role in human history. Independents (40%) are slightly less likely to think this way than all Americans are. Notably, belief in this statement has dropped across all partisan groups since 2013, including 25 percentage points among Democrats (from 58% to 33%), 23 percentage points among independents (from 63% to 40%), and nine percentage points among Republicans (from 77% to 68%).

Among all religious groups, white evangelical Protestants (75%) are the most likely to agree that God has granted America a special role in human history, a significant decline from 84% in 2013. Two-thirds of Black Protestants (67%) and 55% of other Christians also agree with this idea, as do half of Hispanic Catholics (50%). Less than half of white mainline (non-evangelical) Protestants (46%) and white Catholics (46%) agree, substantial decreases from 75% and 60%, respectively, in 2013, while even fewer members of non-Christian religions (29%) and religiously unaffiliated Americans (18%) think this way. Unaffiliated Americans also declined significantly, from 40% in 2013.[3]

A Force for Good?

From the Public Religion Research Institute:

About three in four Americans (74%) agree that America has always been a force for good in the world, including 19% who completely agree with this idea and a majority (55%) who mostly agree. One in four (24%) disagree, including 17% who mostly disagree and 7% who completely disagree. In 2013, slightly more Americans (79%) believed their country has always been a force for good in the world.

Republicans (92%) are more likely than independents (72%) and Democrats (67%) to agree with the idea that America has always been a force for good in the world. While there have not been significant changes among Republicans (90%) and independents (77%) since 2013, Democrats have become seven percentage points less likely to agree (67% today vs. 74% in 2013). Notably, nearly all Republicans who trust Fox News (94%) and far-right media outlets (96%) as their main sources of information agree with this idea.[1]

Overwhelming majorities of white Christian groups agree with this idea, including nearly nine in ten white evangelical Protestants (88%), white mainline (non-evangelical) Protestants (88%), and white Catholics (85%). Two-thirds or more of Hispanic Catholics (73%), other Christians (71%), Black Protestants (69%), and members of non-Christian religions (66%) also agree that America has always been a force for good in the world.[2] Religiously unaffiliated Americans (58%) are the least likely to hold this belief.

Attitudes on Patriotism and American Exceptionalism

Daniel A. Cox at the Survey Center on American Life:

Despite a lackluster federal response to the COVID-19 outbreak and a violent assault on the US Capitol, Americans remain firm in their belief that American culture and the American way of life are superior to others. More than half (53 percent) of Americans say that the world would be much better off if more countries adopted American values and the American way of life. Approximately four in 10 (42 percent) disagree with this statement.

There is even greater agreement among the public that the US has always been a force for good in the world. Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of Americans agree, while about one in four (24 percent) reject the idea that the US has been consistently virtuous in its actions abroad.

Fewer Americans believe the US has a special relationship with God. Nearly half (45 percent) the public believe that God has granted the country a special role in human history. Roughly half (49 percent) of Americans disagree.

There are massive generational differences in views about American exceptionalism. Young adults are far more likely to challenge notions that the US serves as a moral beacon. Less than half (46 percent) of young adults (age 18 to 29) believe the world would be better off if more countries adopted American values and lifestyle. In contrast, seven in 10 (70 percent) seniors (age 65 or older) agree with this statement. Young adults are also far less inclined to believe the US continues to be a force for good in the world.

Overall, most Americans feel proud about their national identity. More than six in 10 say they are extremely proud (34 percent) or very proud (28 percent) to be an American. But this sentiment masks considerable cleavages among the public along the lines of race, political affiliation, and generation.

There are sizable generational divisions in feelings of pride about being American. Older Americans express much more pride in their nationality than do younger Americans. In fact, seniors are more than twice as likely to say they are extremely proud to be American than are young adults (55 percent vs. 23 percent).

No religious group expresses greater pride in their national identity than white evangelical Protestants. More than three-quarters of white evangelical Protestants say they are very or extremely proud to be an American; half (50 percent) say they are extremely proud. More than four in 10 white Catholics (46 percent) and white mainline Protestants (43 percent) also report being extremely proud about their national identity. Considerably fewer Hispanic Catholics (29 percent), black Protestants (27 percent), members of non-Christian religious traditions (26 percent), and religiously unaffiliated Americans (20 percent) report they are extremely proud to be American.

Polarization and COVID in Comparative Perspective

Many posts  have discussed partisan polarization and its relationship to various social characteristics.

Michael Dimock and Richard Wike at Pew note that other countries have political fissures.

But the 2020 pandemic has revealed how pervasive the divide in American politics is relative to other nations. Over the summer, 76% of Republicans (including independents who lean to the party) felt the U.S. had done a good job dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, compared with just 29% of those who do not identify with the Republican Party. This 47 percentage point gap was the largest gap found between those who support the governing party and those who do not across 14 nations surveyed. Moreover, 77% of Americans said the country was now more divided than before the outbreak, as compared with a median of 47% in the 13 other nations surveyed.

Much of this American exceptionalism preceded the coronavirus: In a Pew Research Center study conducted before the pandemic, Americans were more ideologically divided than any of the 19 other publics surveyed when asked how much trust they have in scientists and whether scientists make decisions solely based on facts. These fissures have pervaded nearly every aspect of the public and policy response to the crisis over the course of the year. Democrats and Republicans differ over mask wearing, contact tracing, how well public health officials are dealing with the crisis, whether to get a vaccine once one is available, and whether life will remain changed in a major way after the pandemic. For Biden supporters, the coronavirus outbreak was a central issue in the election – in an October poll, 82% said it was very important to their vote. Among Trump supporters, it was easily the least significant among six issues tested on the survey: Just 24% said it was very important.

Why is America cleaved in this way? Once again, looking across other nations gives us some indication. The polarizing pressures of partisan media, social media, and even deeply rooted cultural, historical and regional divides are hardly unique to America. By comparison, America’s relatively rigid, two-party electoral system stands apart by collapsing a wide range of legitimate social and political debates into a singular battle line that can make our differences appear even larger than they may actually be. And when the balance of support for these political parties is close enough for either to gain near-term electoral advantage – as it has in the U.S. for more than a quarter century – the competition becomes cutthroat and politics begins to feel zero-sum, where one side’s gain is inherently the other’s loss. Finding common cause – even to fight a common enemy in the public health and economic threat posed by the coronavirus – has eluded us.

Patriotism and Pandemic

At WP, William Booth interviews Lancet editor Richard Horton:

Q: In your book, you write, “The story of covid-19 in the United States is one of the strangest paradoxes of the whole pandemic. No other country in the world has the concentration of scientific skill, technical knowledge and productive capacity possessed by the U.S. It is the world’s scientific superpower bar none. And yet this colossus of science utterly failed to bring its expertise successfully to bear on the policy and politics of the nation’s response.”

A: That’s true.

Q: What happened?

A: This is hard. I love America. But it can be very parochial. I think the fact that America sees itself as the greatest country in the world means that it sees itself as impregnable. That view informs not just a response to a pandemic, but attitudes to climate change and other threats.

I don’t think many American public health scientists and government advisers read those papers we published. If they did, I don’t think that they took them seriously. I think there was a very serious miscalculation of the risk by American public health scientists.

I know Tony Fauci well, and his entire career has been forged on the fight against AIDS. He’s a brilliant scientist. He is a brave man. But something went wrong here. I wish I could give you a clear answer as to why, but I can’t. I really can’t explain it.

"Truly American"

At the Public Religion Research Institute, Maxine Najle and Robert P. Jones report on survey data:

When asked how important certain characteristics or beliefs are to being “truly American,” Americans overwhelmingly agree that a few characteristics are fundamental to being American, but are more divided on others. The vast majority of Americans agree that believing in individual freedoms, such as freedom of speech (91%), respecting American political institutions and laws (90%), accepting people of diverse racial and religious backgrounds (86%), and being able to speak English (83%) are somewhat or very important to being American.

Americans are more divided on other characteristics. A majority (56%) of Americans agree that believing that capitalism is the best economic system is somewhat or very important for being truly American, while 38% say this is not too important or not at all important. A slim majority (52%) of Americans agree that believing in God is somewhat or very important for being American. However, only 39% say that being a Christian is somewhat or very important for being truly American, while a majority (56%) say it is not too important or not at all important.

Half (50%) of Americans say that being born in America is somewhat or very important for being truly American, while 46% say this is not too important or not at all important. However, Americans decisively reject the notion that Western heritage is fundamental to a truly American identity: only 17% say that being of Western heritage is somewhat or very important for being American, while most (78%) agree that this is not very important or not at all important.

Generation Z: Yea on Liberalism, Nay on American Exceptionalism

Kim Parker, Nikki Graf And Ruth Igielnik at Pew:

No longer the new kids on the block, Millennials have moved firmly into their 20s and 30s, and a new generation is coming into focus. Generation Z – diverse and on track to be the most well-educated generation yet – is moving toward adulthood with a liberal set of attitudes and an openness to emerging social trends...while majorities in Gen Z and the Millennial generation say government should do more to solve problems, rather than that government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, Gen Xers and Boomers are more evenly divided on this issue. For their part, most Silents would like to see a less activist government.

And the younger generations are less likely to think that America is better than other countries:

Definitions

• Generation Z (born 1997-2005)
• Millennials (born 1981-96)
• Generation X (born 1965-80)
• Baby Boomers (born 1946-64) 
• Silent Generation (born 1928-45)

American Politics for International Students 2018

Ways in which America is different 


I. RELIGION

There are other rich countries.  There are other religious countries. The US is rich and religious.



"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." -- George Washington, 1796  Farewell Address

Similarly, see percentage who think that belief in God is necessary for morality:




Being "truly American:

• Belief in Evolution

II. PATRIOTISM

"Nothing is more annoying ... than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that he is absolutely refused."  -- Tocqueville, Democracy in America

• Pride in Nationality
• "The Greatest"
• BUT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT AND UNIQUE DIMENSION TO US PATRIOTISM:

More than six in ten (62%) Americans believe that God has granted America a special role in human history, while roughly one-third (33%) disagree. Views have not shifted significantly in recent years. In 2012, an identical number of Americans (62%) agreed that the U.S. was granted a special role in human history. There are sharp differences on this question by political ideology and religious affiliation.

Conservatives are nearly twice as likely as liberals to agree that God has granted the U.S. a special role in human history—80% of conservatives and only 45% of liberals agree with this statement. Half (50%) of liberals reject the notion that the country has a divinely sanctioned role in human history.

White evangelical Protestants are unique among religious Americans in their affirmation of American exceptionalism. More than eight in ten (83%) white evangelical Protestants agree that God has granted the country a special role in human history. Seven in ten non-white Protestants (73%) and Catholics (70%) and a majority (56%) of white mainline Protestants also believe in a divinely chosen role for the U.S. In contrast, a majority (53%) of religiously unaffiliated Americans disagree that God granted the U.S. a special role, compared to fewer than four in ten (39%) who agree.

...

More than eight in ten (83%) Americans say that it is important to publicly show support for the U.S. by doing things such as displaying the American flag; only 14% of the public disagree. Across political and religious spectrums, Americans embrace the importance of public demonstrations of patriotism.

THE 45TH PRESIDENT IS QUITE ODD, SINCE HE BELIEVES IN NEITHER AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM NOR THE CENTRAL PRINCIPLE OF THE DECLARATION.



III. INDIVIDUALISM AND THE WELFARE STATE

• An international values gap

The self-made man:  Alexander Hamilton as immigrant and American hero.



IV.  INSTITUTIONS AND ELECTIONS

Ranking Presidents

The Separation of Powers

Congress and Bicameralism:




Federalism:  about 89,000 governments and about 513,000 elected officials

Federalism and ballot complexity

Voter turnout

Partisan Polarization

Parties and Campaigns:



"Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters." --Frederick Douglass

Free Speech:  the Unusual First Amendment

Support for Free Expression

“We’ve seen this movie before, just never in English.”

Gideon Rose at Foreign Affairs:

Centralization of power in the executive, politicization of the judiciary, attacks on independent media, the use of public office for private gain—the signs of democratic regression are well known. The only surprising thing is where they’ve turned up. As a Latin American friend put it ruefully, “We’ve seen this movie before, just never in English.”

The United States has turned out to be less exceptional than many thought. Clearly, it can happen here; the question now is whether it will. To find an answer, the articles in this issue’s lead package zoom out, putting the country’s current troubles into historical and international perspective.

Some say that global democracy is experiencing its worst setback since the 1930s and that it will continue to retreat unless rich countries find ways to reduce inequality and manage the information revolution. Those are the optimists. Pessimists fear the game is already over, that democratic dominance has ended for good.

Public Opinion on American Greatness

Pew reports:

A majority of the public (85%) says either that the United States “stands above all other countries in the world” (29%) or that it is “one of the greatest countries, along with some others” (56%). Only 14% of Americans say there are “other countries better than the U.S.” These views have changed little in recent years.

As in the past, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say the U.S. “stands above” all other nations, according to the survey, conducted June 8-18. About four-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (41%) say the U.S. stands above other countries, compared with 19% of Democrats and Democratic leaners. This is nearly identical to the partisan gap on this question in the fall of 2015.

Nationalism and Patriotism

Daniel Krauthammer at The Weekly Standard:

The distinction between nationalism and patriotism is often overlooked. Unlike the United States, most countries were nations long before they became states. And nationalism has traditionally been an ideology that advocates the aggrandizement of particular national groups​—​not whole countries inclusive of minority ethnicities and nationalities. The word nationalism was first used in this sense in 1772 by the philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder, and it came to be embraced as an animating ideology by Germans in their response to the ideals and invasions of the French Revolutionary era. They rejected the liberal ideas of political citizenship and universal rights and instead embraced a unifying vision of a German volk rooted in ethnicity, language, blood, and mythology. German nationalism predated the creation of the German state by a century.

Patriotism, on the other hand, is a concept whose etymology and history is closely linked with ancient Greek and Roman ideas of membership in a political community. It is a term for devotion and commitment not to the ethnic group into which one is born, but to a political state of which one is a citizen. It does not exclude minorities within that state, nor does it extend to members of a common national group outside that state. An ethnic German living in Poland as a Polish citizen in 1939, for instance, could have fought against the Nazi invasion as a Polish patriot, but not as a Polish nationalist. Likewise, the defense of a political republic can be patriotic even if it undermines nationalist goals. The Wehrmacht officers who broke their oath and tried to kill Hitler in 1944, for example, are regarded as German patriots, not nationalists.

Survey: American Identity

A recent poll  by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research:

• Sixty-five percent of Americans say diversity makes the United States stronger, up from 56 percent in an AP-NORC poll taken last June. Only 11 percent say it makes the country weaker, and 23 percent think it has no effect.
• Along with a positive view of diversity, Americans see immigration in a largely positive light, although they are less welcoming to refugees.
• Nearly 6 in 10 say the United States should be a country with an essential American culture and values that immigrants take on when they arrive, but just as many say that most recent immigrants retain their own customs, rather than assimilate.
• Americans say legal immigration provides more advantages than disadvantages, and two-thirds think the benefits outweigh any risks. The public is closely split on whether the possible harm from welcoming refugees outweighs potential advantages.
• Six in 10 Americans say legal immigration boosts the reputation of the United States as a land of opportunity and benefits companies with technical expertise.
• A third of the public agrees that the United States stands above all other countries in the world, while 56 percent of the public say the United States is one of the greatest countries in the world along with some others. Just 11 percent think there are other countries that are better.
• Nearly 8 in 10 Americans are proud of the country’s armed forces, while less than 3 in 10 have pride in how groups in society are treated and in the Social Security system.
• More than three-quarters consider a fair judicial system and rule of law, Constitutional freedoms and liberties, and the ability to achieve the American dream as central tenets of the country’s identity. Half say the mixing of cultures is important, and fewer think the country’s identity is tied to Christian values and European traditions. However, 7 in 10 consider the use of English to be important.
• More than half of Americans say political polarization is extremely or very threatening to the United States. Nearly as many consider political leaders, economic inequality, and illegal immigration as important threats to the American way of life. Four in 10 say influence from foreign governments jeopardizes the country, but only 15 percent say that about legal immigration.

...

Most Americans fear the United States is losing its national identity, with 7 in 10 saying so compared to just 3 in 10 who say the country’s identity is secure. Young people are particularly likely to say the country is losing its identity (77 percent) compared to those age 60 and older (66 percent). This is one issue where Democrats, independents, and Republicans are in agreement: about 7 in 10 of each of these groups says the country is losing its identity.

Trump -- Like Putin -- Derides American Exceptionalism

David Corn reports at Mother Jones:

In late April 2015, a month before Trump officially announced his candidacy, he spoke at an event called "Celebrating the American Dream" that was hosted in Houston by the Texas Patriots PAC, a local tea party outfit. The mogul sat in an oversized leather chair and fielded questions from Jim "Mattress Mack" McIngvale, a prominent local businessman. About an hour into the program, McIngvale posed Trump this query: "Define American exceptionalism. Does American exceptionalism still exist? And what do we do to grow American exceptionalism?"

Trump didn't hesitate to shoot down the premise of the question, saying he didn't "like the term." He questioned whether the United States was "more exceptional" and "more outstanding" than other nations. He also said that those who refer to American exceptionalism were "insulting the world" and offending people in other countries, such as Russia, China, Germany, and Japan. It is "not a nice term," he said, maintaining it was wrong to equate patriotism with a belief in American exceptionalism. He derided politicians who use the phrase.

Explaining his negative reaction to this idea long cherished and promoted by Republicans and Democrats, Trump said, "perhaps that's because I don't have a very big ego, and I don't need terms like that." Audience members laughed in response. Trump added, "I want to take everything back from the world that we've given them. We've given them so much." He suggested that were he to become president, he would make the United States exceptional.

Trump agrees with Putin, who wrote  in The New York Times:

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made onAmerican exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

Descriptive American Exceptionalism

Peter Schuck writes at National Affairs:

These general descriptive terms — decentralized, diverse, competitive, and contentious — actually describe what makes America unique on a whole host of fronts. Stepping back from the particulars, and from the descriptive analyses offered up by experts in specific segments of American life, one is struck by the way in which what makes America exceptional seems, again and again, to be its resistance to being homogenized and regulated by government.

Not only in his work on Understanding America but also in his vast body of work spanning half a century, James Q. Wilson frequently emphasized the significance of this diversity and libertarian streak. He drew subtle distinctions and analyzed the causes of exceptional outcomes while cautioning against over-generalizing from them. His brand of social science stayed close to the ground — to the facts, to the people's attitudes and behaviors, to complicated motives and patterns — rather than trafficking in simple explanations and easy abstractions. This distinctly Wilsonian approach to exceptionalism is especially valuable today. It demands that we carefully consider the many distinctive — and in some cases unique — features of American life, while urging us to be skeptical about their applicability to other societies. The empirical evidence summarized here and presented extensively in Understanding America shows that, however one defines "exceptional," the term unquestionably applies to us in a purely descriptive sense.

Normatively, the picture is surely mixed. Some of our country's exceptional features — like its political stability, decentralization, competitiveness, successful integration of immigrants, vibrant media, and remarkably robust non-profit sector supported by unparalleled private philanthropy — are praiseworthy. Others, like our growing economic inequality, violence, child poverty, adversarial legal culture, and demoralized public bureaucracy are deplorable. Fortunately, much of this is remediable, as James Q. Wilson would have reminded us. But, I think he would have added, some of it probably is not.

American Exceptionalism on the Fourth of July

At AEI, Gary J. Scmitt writes of Independence Day and American exceptionalism:

Here, for the first time in history, was a government whose legitimacy explicitly rested on the claims of human nature and not on common blood, soil, language, religion, or ancient tradition.

This is the true root of American exceptionalism and why it is more apt that we celebrate Independence Day on July 4th rather than July 2nd. It is the creed, the principles, of the Declaration that define the United States—not our successful break from British rule.

President Obama was surely right when he said that other nations, such as the Greeks, no doubt “believe in Greek exceptionalism” just as Americans believe in American exceptionalism. But this is to confuse and conflate “exceptionalism” with day-to-day “nationalism” and to overlook just how revolutionary and transformative the American experiment in liberal self-government was, and has been.

Up to that moment, republican rule was an exception, and an exception that occasionally but rarely dotted the landscape of political rule through the centuries. Today, through the growth of American power to support those universal principles—and, lest we forget, through our own bloody test of a civil war to ensure their survival—the world truly has been transformed.

At The New York Times, Allen C. Guelzo writes that Lincoln revered the Declaration but looked down on Jefferson's personal conduct and economic policies.

History is neither a political fable in which all the brothers are valiant and all the sisters virtuous, nor is it a tabloid exposé, full of crimes and follies, signifying nothing but victimization. There is, I admit, a caustic delight in unveiling the frailties of our Jeffersons (and our Lincolns). But the delight turns malevolent when it serves only to strip the American past of anything remarkable or exceptional, or when it demeans or discourages civic engagement and confidence.

Patriotism without criticism has no head; criticism without patriotism has no heart. Lincoln was capable of understanding both the greatness and the limits of Thomas Jefferson and the founders and still come out at the end embracing the American experiment for “giving liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but hope to the world for all future time.” And so should we.

American Exceptionalism: The Data

George Gao writes at Pew:

The differences between America and other nations have long been a subject of fascination and study for social scientists, dating back to Alexis de Tocqueville, the early 19th century French political thinker who described the United States as “exceptional.”

Nearly 200 years later, Americans’ emphasis on individualism and work ethic stands out in surveys of people around the world. When Pew Research Center surveyed people in 44 countries last spring, 57% of Americans disagreed with the statement “Success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside our control,” a higher percentage than most other nations and far above the global median of 38%.

True to the stereotype, surveys showed that Americans are more likely to believe that hard work pays off. When asked, on a scale of 0 to 10, about how important working hard is to getting ahead in life, 73% of Americans said it is was a “10” or “very important,” compared with a global median of 50% among the 44 nations.

...
In general, people in richer nations are less likely than those in poorer nations to say religion plays a very important role in their lives. But Americans are more likely than their counterparts in economically advanced nations to deem religion very important. More than half (54%) of Americans said religion was very important in their lives, much higher than the share of people in Canada (24%), Australia (21%) and Germany (21%), the next three wealthiest economies we surveyed from 2011 through 2013.
...
Americans are also more upbeat than people in other wealthy nations when asked how their day is going. While we ask this question to help respondents get more comfortable with the interviewer, it provides a glimpse into people’s moods and reveals a slightly negative correlation between those saying the day is a good one and per capita gross domestic product. About four-in-ten Americans (41%) described their day as a “particularly good day,” a much higher share than those in Germany (21%), the UK (27%) and Japan (8%).

The Politics of AP History

Liana Heitin writes at Education Week:

Concerns about an overhaul to the Advanced Placement U.S. History curriculum framework have been spreading through a growing number of states over the last few months, with critics saying it emphasizes negative aspects of the nation's history and downplays "American exceptionalism."

Policymakers in Colorado, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Texas have pushed back on the new framework, which .outlines the concepts and skills students need for a college-level history course. The Republican National Committee also condemned the guidelines last summer, calling them "radically revisionist."

In response, the College Board, the nonprofit New York City-based organization that administers the Advanced Placement program, says that the framework was written by history educators and historians, and that AP teachers widely support it. The group also emphasizes that it's only a framework—not a detailed curriculum—and that teachers should populate the course with more specific content.

...
Some of the earliest criticism of the new framework can be traced to retired AP U.S. History teacher Larry S. Krieger, who published several articles last spring attacking the guidelines. A piece he co-wrote last March for the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank in Chicago, states that the framework "inculcates a consistently negative view of the nation's past." Mr. Krieger points to the framework's treatment of Manifest Destiny as evidence of that negative slant: "Instead of a belief that America has a mission to spread democracy and new technologies across the continent," he writes, "the framework teaches the nation 'was built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority.' " (Mr. Krieger declined to be interviewed for this article.)

In August 2014, the Republican National Committee adopted a resolution stating that the framework "deliberately distorts and/or edits out important historical events" and recommending that Congress withhold federal funding to the College Board pending a rewrite. The AP and International Baccalaureate programs receive about $28 million in federal funding combined.

Mr. Coleman, the College Board president, responded by releasing a full-length practice exam in AP U.S. History to the public, which the group had never done.
"We hope that the release of this exam will address the principled confusion that the new framework produced," he wrote in a letter. "The concerns are based on a significant misunderstanding."

Religion and American Exceptionalism

William Galston writes at The Wall Street Journal:

In this year-end holiday season, it is timely to reflect on American exceptionalism. Although this phrase is much abused in partisan polemics, it should not be discarded. The United States does continue to differ from most other developed democratic countries. And the heart of that difference is religion. The durability of American religious belief refutes the once-canonical thesis that modernization and secularization necessarily go hand in hand.

He points to a recent Pew poll on beliefs in elements of the Christmas story: 

Although Republicans are more likely to espouse these beliefs than are Democrats and Independents, each group endorses them by a two-thirds majority or more. As expected, conservatives are more likely to espouse them than are moderates and liberals. But here again, majorities of each group endorse each belief. Among liberals, 54% profess a belief in the virgin birth.

...
These public beliefs have constitutional consequences. When it comes to church and state, many Americans are soft rather than strict separationists. When asked whether religious symbols like Christian nativity scenes should be permitted on government property, 44% said yes, whether or not the symbols of other religions are present. An additional 28% said that Christian symbols would be acceptable only if accompanied by symbols of other faiths. Only 20% took the position that no religious symbols should be allowed.

Democrats should pay careful attention to these findings. In reaction to the excesses of the religious right in recent decades, many secularists and strict separationists took refuge in the Democratic Party. Their voices are important. But if the party takes its bearings only from their concerns, it risks serious misjudgment.