A City Upon a Hill: The Spirit of American Exceptionalism

The rise of the USA from independence in 1776 and the original 13 colonies to the most powerful country in the world is remarkable. It was the expression "American exceptionalism" that was first coined by a French diplomat at the end of the 19th century. However, what he wouldn't have known was from that point to first 1945 to then to 1991 the USA would be the worlds most powerful country in modern times with no peer competitor.

American exceptionalism however is a slogan in recent years that has been embraced by the broadcasters and punditry class from the conservative movement who lay great emphasis on the role of capitalism. However the Democrats don't like to say it because of the issues over slavery and racial discrimination that is part of the USA's past. President Obama was asked about this from a journalist and replied that many countries regard themselves as exceptional. This reply is a clear example of how uncomfortable the Democrats are with it and only opened him up to the charge from conservative critics that he doesn't think that the phrase was worthy for the United States at any time. It's probably not a good idea to pump your own tires, it's more appropriate to leave that to the admirers to sing the praises. What it really means is simply an observation that from 13 states on the eastern seaboard in 1783, the USA has emerged as the most powerful country in the world a position that it's held for decades and reached ascendancy at the end of the cold war.

By the end of the 19thC there was a remarkable 45 states in the Union. The USA was becoming stronger just as the European powers were becoming weaker distracted by overseas wars and then eventually conflicts between each other in the first part of the 20thC. The USA came out of WW2 wealthy and powerful and were able to embark on the reconstruction efforts of Europe and Japan.

The USA was in the driver's seat as the only global challenger being former ally the Soviet Union. The USA was the force behind global economic growth which the USSR could not match, it was only political ideology and military power that the Soviet Union could challenge the USA.

Despite continued racial tensions, the Vietnam war protests, and the counterculture movements during the late 1960's, after initially being left behind in the space race the USA passed the USSR bye with six successful landings on the moon between 1969-1972.

Even after the loss of the war in Vietnam and economic malaise at the end of the 1970's, by the mid 1980's the economy was roaring and it was "Morning in America". By the late 1980's it seemed that the USA was on course to win the cold war as the USSR embarked on Glasnost and Perestroika and tensions between both countries eased up. So what went wrong? Where did it all get unraveled?

In the USA in the 1960's 1970's and 1980's there had always been an undercurrent of radicalism in the Universities and colleges of the USA. Indeed, in in some local municipalities there were new ideas about social and economic organization being floated about in certain quarters. By the 1990's under President Bill Clinton his administration cozied up to wall street and the large banks who wanted a continuation of the Reagan administrations overhauling of the banking system which included increased deregulation and a more relaxed approach to immigration. The Democrats encouraged the radicalization of human reaorse departments throughout corporate America and enforced it in government run departments at a local and national level.

The "education industrial complex" proliferated in the US to such an extent that qualifications and degrees were now required, or at a least a prerequisite for even applying for a position that never required one before. There is a general belief by academia that qualifications are an indication of intelligence. What's overlooked is creativity, thinking from a different perspective, being competent and wise, academia certainly can't stake a claim for being a monopoly on that. The choice of taking an academic route or deciding to by-pass further education is being taken away from the individual who are often forced to embark on a route they are unsuited to, or are unwilling to do and consequently they are finding that previous opportunities are now out of their reach. Another off shoot to this is now that education even at community colleges is leaving students with massive student loans that takes years to pay off. That's not to mention that universities and colleges are cash cows for the administrators and many top faculty members that leave students in many cases with worthless degrees as well as being chased by debt collectors.

It's not all the left that created the problems that stalled the American dream. In the mid 1990's the Republican party fell back to it's default position of deregulation, tax cut's, free trade and dealing with the federal governments ballooning budget defect. They wanted to scale back the role of the state and make cuts to the "entitlements" which includes social security, Medicare, Medicare and welfare benefits, which at first glance isn't an inspiring manifesto. The first fault lines in the political system was actually in 1992 when third party upstart Ross Perot won 18% of the popular vote in the presidential election. Athough in 1996 this dropped to 9% it still helped incumbent Bill Clinton win reelection (still below 50% of the vote) against the decent but hapless Republican challenger Bob Dole, whose main talking point in his campaign was character.

In 2000 George W Bush and his administration embarked on a platform of more tax cuts, more financial deregulation, free trade, and tax breaks for corporations that went overseas and an overhaul of the bankruptcy laws. The United States business and banking sectors was taking full advantage of globalism.

After the 9/11 attacks the USA declared a "war on terror" which gave the defense industry a massive financial windfall and Americas military empire was off to the races.

Also in 2001, China was invited into the WTO and what followed was that China becoming the fastest growing economy over the next 20 years. Policy makers in Washington bet that opening up China to global markets would eventually lead them to become a liberal democracy with a political party system and free elections. This hasn't worked out and Hong Kong was the first to fall as the 1984 agreement of "one country two systems" was abandoned by China and have now set their sights on Taiwan. But even if it had, they also assumed that the nationalistic aspirations of China wouldn't take hold, and they would ease into the world created by the USA. This also hasn't sufficed either, not only has China become a major regional competitor, but has global ambitions too and wants to do things their way. China's influence on the major U. S. political parties hindered Americas response to their rise through the financing of Americas security think tanks which they knew would favor a bias towards Beijing. Business interests and financiers promoted the conceit of globalization and in essence, the U. S. willingly and enthusiastically taught, trained, and even equipped China as they indefatigably sought economic gain from cooperation with Beijing. This has to be the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the United States .

However, by 2008 it was things on the home front where things were about to become unglued with the biggest bank collapse since the 1930's. This led to years of falling house prices and foreclosures due to people owing more than the property was worth. This was all compounded by a 2004 change to the bankruptcy laws that previously allowed people to declare themselves bankrupt but in most circumstances keep thier homes afterwards. The new rules did away with this, so there was no incentive for people to financially restructure a loan but it made more sense to just walk away. The banks which had lobbied for the 2004 change never took that into consideration. (note: that the Democrats under Obama and then Biden never reversed this 2004 legislation). This had global financial repercussions which affected all the worlds major economies. Neo Conservative and internationalist Robert Kagan's 2011 book "The World That America made" seemed ill timed, hollow and laughable as many of the major banks had to be bailed out by the government money.

With the exception of Pat Buchannan a traditional conservative who left the party in the late 1990's the Republicans weren't interested in confronting the ideology of "political correctness" that has taken hold of the USA. Republicans like Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney and the establishment in general were oblivious or unconcerned. Romney himself who in 2020 went on a BLM march during the George Floyd demonstrations is the epitome of the problem. A well healed country club Republican who adopted the neo conservative internationalist view was a member of a church that at one time banned blacks from becoming members. Was this atonement? A dig at incumbent President Donald Trump who he disliked, or was it more wanting to get on board a new fad or fashion. BLM's membership would be hostile to the type of economic system that Romney supported and benefited from, therefore it takes some kind of brass neck for him take part in such a march. This type of virtual signaling and cynicism has become endemic to the modern political class in the developed world.

Diversity, equity and inclusion which has spread not only t USA but has gone beyond its shores and spread throughout the anglosphere. DEI is a pathway to the end of western liberalism by the enlightenment in late 19thC Europe, headed by the likes of Scottish economist Adam Smith and English philosopher John Lock.