The Political Parties and “American Exceptionalism”
Scott Hinrichs at Reach Upward has written an interesting post based largely on a recent Michael Barone column. He contends that one reason, the main reason, the Democratic Party has so much trouble in Utah is because nationally it seems to have rejected the idea that the United States of America is different from the rest of the nations of the world…different in a good way.
The idea of American exceptionalism is one I have always subscribed too. I really do believe that our history and founding reflect a nation and government substantially better than any other in the world’s history. Read the whole post…it is hard to disagree with his assertion about national Democrats and their rejection of American exceptionalism. Joining the world court and accepting Kyoto are two easy examples of policies many Democrats (including the senatorial candidate I support) have argued for. I believe each be disastrous for our nation’s economy and sovereignty.
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I see how one could argue that the ICC and Kyoto Protocol are products of other nations and are trying to be forced on the US. However, one reason I am a Democrat is because of American exceptionalism, and because I believe the Republicans have abandoned that; or at least they believe the only way to do that is through military strength. I am a Democrat because I believe the US can lead international institutions, which was the original intent of the UN, NATO, etc. I am angry at Republicans in office because they ignore, at our peril, involvement in these organizations and distances ourselves from our neighbors. Republican exceptionalism believes that we have to separate ourselves, exile ourselves from the world in order to become “free” or “pure.” I feel we MUST be involved with our international neighbors if we are to help them. If we had taken the opportunity to lead discussions regarding international law and global climate change, maybe we could complain about it. Instead, Republicans have abdicated the responsibility to peacefully lead the world; they have embraced the policies of bullying others into short-term compliance with our wishes, but producing long-term problems.
Comment by brett — August 15, 2006 @ 10:38 am
You lost me at “the US can lead international institutions…”
The U.S. cannot lead the United Nations because that body is composed in a way that dictatorial regimes can easily stymie any liberal policy agendas in any of the committees and councils that make up that body. The U.S. is a voice in the U.N. but not its leader.
NATO was meant to be a mutual defense pact…not a worldwide policy making council. Our leadership there is becoming more and more dangerous to us as NATO takes on more and more members who can’t/won’t pull their own weight in the treaty organization.
I agree with you that Democrats are going to be better at dealing with our international neighbors than Bush has been. I think that could be a great benefit to us as time goes by but it is also risky. The Kyoto protocol and most of the other ideas relating to “solving” the global warming problem would cripple our nation’s economy. That American Exceptionalism I talked about subscribing to before doesn’t let me support garbage like that. While I really like Ashdown and really really want him to beat Hatch I can’t get over the fact that his ideas in these areas really stink.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — August 15, 2006 @ 8:43 pm
Unfortunately, you will rarely find a candidate with whom you can agree 100%. We don’t live in utopia. You have to make a choice among what is available. You can vote for the imperfect candidate as long as he/she is not too imperfect by your standards, and she/he does not violate the principles you consider sacrosanct.
Comment by Reach Upward — August 22, 2006 @ 7:55 am