Not the kind of discussion you’ll find in the corporate media bubble, or even in superficial critiques of recent events, however interesting, like The Dark Side. Of course, Massachusetts started it all:
The inspirational phrase “city on a hill” was coined by John Winthrop in 1630, borrowing from the Gospels, and outlining the glorious future of a new nation “ordained by God.” One year earlier his Massachusetts Bay Colony created its Great Seal. It depicted an Indian with a scroll coming out of his mouth. On that scroll are the words “Come over and help us.” The British colonists were thus pictured as benevolent humanists, responding to the pleas of the miserable natives to be rescued from their bitter pagan fate. …
The Great Seal was an early proclamation of “humanitarian intervention,” to use the currently fashionable phrase. As has commonly been the case since, the “humanitarian intervention” led to a catastrophe for the alleged beneficiaries. The first Secretary of War, General Henry Knox, described “the utter extirpation of all the Indians in most populous parts of the Union” by means “more destructive to the Indian natives than the conduct of the conquerors of Mexico and Peru.”
He continues:
The reigning doctrine of the country is sometimes called “American exceptionalism.” It is nothing of the sort. It is probably close to a universal habit among imperial powers. France was hailing its “civilizing mission” in its colonies, while the French Minister of War called for “exterminating the indigenous population” of Algeria. Britain’s nobility was a “novelty in the world,” John Stuart Mill declared, while urging that this angelic power delay no longer in completing its liberation of India.
Read the full piece here on TomDispatch.com. (Hat tip, History News Network).
tedf says
Isn’t it a mistake to conflate the idea of American Exceptionalism with imperialism or colonialism? To me, at least, American Exceptionalism simply means that because of our origins–Puritanism, immigrants of many nationalities, cheap land, lack of a hereditary nobility, etc.–our society and institutions have developed differently from those of other developed countries. Read de Tocqueville on this idea. In my mind, there’s no necessary connection between this idea and our colonial adventures in the last century, or what I’m sure Chomsky would consider our colonial adventures today.
<
p>TedF
kbusch says
American Exceptionalism is sometimes also used to mean that the doctrine that everything America does is ipso facto good or at least good-intentioned. In that context, it’s often a polemical term liberals use to critique conservatives.
<
p>I was reflecting on a few recent examples.
<
p>In yesterday’s speech, Vice President Cheney dismissed the notion that Gitmo is a recruiting tool for terrorists because, if you think that, you’re blaming us for terrorism and that cannot be true. An odd use of U.S. innocence.
<
p>The other two examples are from the Republican National Committee. They’re running an ad (again!) against Nancy Pelosi. They suggest that she shouldn’t be criticizing the patriotic CIA.
<
p>A recent tweet from the RNC expressed disappointment with Obama for saying the Constitution was imperfect. Obama possibly meant Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3, you know, the part about slaves being three fifths of a person.
mr-lynne says
… the slavery issue that they were taking out of context (color me surprised). Mediamatters:
mr-lynne says
… Medamatters link here.
christopher says
A lot more charitible than William Lloyd Garrison’s “covenant with death and agreement with hell”. Just saying.
christopher says
Even the framers knew it wasn’t perfect. Many said so outright, and the very existence of Article V, providing for a method of amendment, implies it.