AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM IN
U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
by
Xu Dongwei
A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate School and College of English
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Master of Arts
Under the Supervision of Associate Professor Lin Ling
Shanghai International Studies University
May 2010
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt gratitude to all who have
greatly contributed to or have helped with the development of this thesis in their special
ways during the year that it has been in preparation.
My deepest gratitude goes to my respected supervisor, associate Professor Lin Ling,
whose insightful suggestions aroused my interest in the present topic and led to the
preparation of this thesis. In the following days she has carefully guided me through every
stage of the project. Without her scholarly criticism and patience it will be impossible to
accomplish this thesis.
My profound gratitude should also be extended to Professor Wang Enming, whose
enlightening lectures are of great benefit to my writing. I am grateful for his great care in
reading the draft and the precious advice he has given.
I find myself deeply indebted to my friends at SISU. Their company and friendship
enriched my campus life and reduced the formidableness of the task.
Special thanks go to my parents, sisters and brother. Throughout the hard years of
study their love and support have been unfailing sources of inspiration.
i
Abstract
The thesis discusses the belief of American exceptionalism as a national creed in the
United States and its influence on the formation and implementation of American foreign
policy.
As one of the enduring American political ideologies, American exceptionalism constitutes
an integral component of American political culture. Traditionally the term American
exceptionalism denotes the perception that the United States differs significantly and
qualitatively from other nations; the nation is not only unique but “exemplar” or “superior”
among nations.
The belief of American exceptionalism, the way Americans hold about themselves and the
rest of the world constitutes one of the underlying philosophies for the making and
implementation of US foreign policy. Two main strands of American exceptionalism
sentiments have influenced American foreign policy.
One is the exemplar strand as reflected in the vision of “city upon a hill” and
“isolationism.” Followers of this strand insist more detached, introspective foreign policies
serving foreign trade and domestic development; they have mostly advocated that the
United States remain somewhat aloof from the world’s troubles and Americans should
strive to perfect their own society as much as possible, concentrating on building a model
society for others to copy rather than forcing the benefits of American life on others. The
other is the missionary strand derived from the idea of “manifest destiny”. Followers of the
missionary strand of American exceptionalism believe that it is the divine mission of the
U.S. to advance freedom and democracy to every corner of the world. In the process of its
overseas expansion and interference, the U.S. would not seek dominion over other peoples
in its self-interest, but to help them become free and democratic.
The concept of American exceptionalism, however, has been an issue of controversy as the
exceptional nature of the United States has been brought into question from time to time.
While the academic disputes and debates persist, American exceptionalism permeates
throughout the history of US foreign relations and still prevails in framing US foreign
policy.
Key words: American exceptionalism, foreign policy, political ideology
ii
摘
要
作为美国民族信念之一的“美国例外论”是指在美国人看来，上帝选择了这个民
族，将其安置在北美新大陆上，并赋予其特殊使命，她是全世界瞩目和仰望的“山巅
之城”，是其他国家应该效仿的自由与民主的榜样。这样一种对本民族的自我认知无
疑对其处理对外关系、制定外交政策有着潜在的影响，本文即着意论述这一植根于美
国文化的民族信念对美国对外政策所产生的深远影响。
传统上，两股“美国例外”的潜流对美国外交政策的影响最为显著：榜样论和使
命论。榜样论认为美利坚民族是上帝选定的特殊民族，美国应该致力于构建世界自由
民主的样本，做好世界的榜样，而不是过多干涉国际事务，其具体体现即早期的孤立
主义外交政策。使命论认为美国担负着上帝赋予的传播自由民主的价值观念和将民主
制度推广到世界各个角落的神圣使命，体现在外交上即美国在 19 世纪的扩张以及二
战后致力于构建美国主导的国际社会和谋求世界霸权。
虽然“美国例外论”一直备受争议，对美国是否“例外”学术界也争执不下，本
文则通过考察不同时期的美国外交政策得出结论，无论当政者奉行孤立主义还是对外
扩张，自由主义还是保守主义，“美国例外论”自始至终存在于美国的对外关系实践
中，并对其对外政策产生着持续而潜在的影响，成为一股不可忽视的思想潜流。
关键词：美国例外论，外交政策，政治意识形态
iii
Table of Contents
Introduction..........................................................................................................................1
Chapter One American Exceptionalism as a National Creed..........................................6
1.1 The Origins of American Exceptionalism.................................................................7
1.2 Main Assumptions .................................................................................................. 11
1.3 American Exceptionalism and American Political Culture ....................................12
Chapter Two Manifestations of American Exceptionalism in US Foreign Policy .......21
2.1 Two Strands of American Exceptionalism..............................................................21
2.2 Manifestations.........................................................................................................22
2.3. Implications ...........................................................................................................29
Chapter Three American Exceptionalism: Myth or Reality？......................................33
3.1 The Myth of American Exceptionalism..................................................................33
3.2 Vietnam: The End of American Exceptionalism?...................................................35
3.3 An Enduring Creed .................................................................................................36
Conclusion ..........................................................................................................................40
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................43
iv
Introduction
As the sole super power in current world, challenged if not undermined, the United States,
with its military might, economic vitality, cultural influence, along with its willingness to
provide global public goods to the world, asserted undeniable tremendous influence on
global political system and world development. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the
American war on terror, the nation has drawn more attention and more criticism both at
home and abroad out of the many controversies of its foreign policy. To gain a better
understanding of these controversies of American foreign policy, one must probe deeper
into the belief system as shaping factors. As an integral part of the American belief system,
American exceptionalism deserves more academic attention. This thesis aims to examine
the development of American exceptionalism in the history of American foreign relations
and the making and implementation of US foreign policy.
The forming of the American nation itself was based on the popular belief that the United
States is an exceptional society which is significantly and qualitatively different from other
nations and has a special role to play in the world. This difference has been defined as
American exceptionalism(AE) and has attracted constant discussion and concern since the
beginning of the republic. At the core of all the discussion over “American exceptionalism”
lies the question: how different is the US and in what way is it different? Among scholars
who gave comprehensive surveys over the concept, Alexis de Tocqueville and Seymour
Martin Lipset provided the best answers.
As a way of self-perception, American Exceptionalism was first discussed by Alexis de
Tocqueville in his classic work Democracy in America, in which he recorded what he saw
and what he reckoned upon the working of the democratic system in the young republic
during his travel in 1831. Through his empirical observation, he noticed that US was
unique and different from the old world in many ways, i.e., it has a federal system, lacking
a feudal past, being more socially egalitarian, more meritocratic, more individualistic,
more rights-oriented, and more religious, etc.. That exceptionalism was concretely
elaborated in his analysis of why the republican representative democracy succeeded in US,
1
which was also the primary focus of the work. “All the causes which contribute to the
maintenance of the democratic republic in the US are reducible to three heads: I. The
peculiar and accidental situation in which Providence has placed the Americans. II. The
laws. III. The manners and customs of the people.” (Democracy in America, Chapter XVII,
Vol. I) To paraphrase, the three explanations are that: I, Geographically Americans came to
occupy a vast, largely empty, and isolated continent; II, Americans have benefited from a
legal system that involves federalism and an independent judiciary; and III, Americans
have embraced certain “habits of the heart” that were profoundly shaped by their religious
tradition. Of these, Tocqueville argued that American customs were more important than
laws, and laws more important than geography.
In the tradition of Tocqueville’s perceptive study of American society, Seymour Martin
Lipset, an influential social scientist, makes a comprehensive analysis of AE on a range of
social, economic and political issues based on extensive polling data. In American
Exceptionalism, Lipset relies heavily on cross-national comparisons to prove that the
United States is an “outlier” compared with a supposed European/East Asian norm. He
stresses the importance of U.S. political culture in the form of “the American
creed”—defined as “liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and laissez-faire”—to
explain the differences between the US and other industrial democracies. According to
Lipset, the five core pillars of the American creed account for its exceptional status. He
points out that the key to understanding social, economic and political trends throughout
American history is to consider them in the context of this five-dimensional prism.1 In this
sense, the ideal of the American creed is the distinguishing feature that makes the US
unique. The degree to which the national character is influenced by the beliefs and values
ingrained by this creed is what Lipset identifies as “American exceptioanlism.” He views
American exceptionalism as a “double-edged sword” since there are many negative as well
as positive traits in American society that are exception compared with other nations.
There have been persistent debates among scholars over whether the US is indeed
exceptional or superior. The end of American exceptionalism has long been anticipated or
proclaimed. As early as 1949, for example, Harold Laski wrote in The American
Democracy that “no one now takes seriously the legend of a special American destiny.” Yet
2
like one of its more enduring fellow beliefs, American liberalism, the concept of American
exceptionalism has proven a great survivor. No sooner proclaimed dead and buried in one
place, it reappears, alive and kicking, in the next: apparently prepared, as the twentieth
century came to an end, to continue its odyssey across the nation’s material and imaginary
landscapes well into the twenty-first century. In 1975, following the fall of Saigon, Daniel
Bell declared “the end of American Exceptionalism.” He argued that the “American
Century … foundered on the shoals of Vietnam.” Bell concluded: “Today, the belief in
American exceptionalism has vanished with the end of empire, the weakening of power,
the loss of faith in the nation’s future.” The chastening experience of Vietnam had made
Americans realize that “we are a nation like all other nations.”2 He reopened the debate in
1989 by arguing that American exceptionalism was still a strong belief in the US. Bell
suggested that American exceptionalism continued to prevail in several social and political
fields and thus further academic research deserved.3
There was a renewal of interest in American exceptionalism among scholars in late
twentieth century. In 1991, Byron Shafer edited Is America Different? A New Look at
American Exceptionalism following a Nuffield College conference on the fate of American
exceptionalism. The conference had attracted social scientists from a range of disciplines to
argue about the dimensions of the notion on the realms of government, economics, religion,
education, and public policy from different approaches. In 1994, David K. Adams and
Cornelis A. van Minnen co-edited Reflections on American Exceptionalism, a collection of
selected papers of the inaugural European Historians of the United States conference held in
1993 in Middleburg, the Netherlands. With these papers, the editors desired “to provide
internal cohesion around the theme of democratic republicanism as expressed domestically,
reflected externally and articulated in particular foreign policy exercise.”4 In 1996, Seymour
Martin Lipset published American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword in an attempt “to
explain contemporary America, including the nature and strength of American political parities,
by reference to its organizing principles and founding political institutions,” which are
exceptional, qualitatively different from those of other Western nations and double-edged in
his eyes.5 Two years later, Deborah Madsen provided a historical and cultural review of
American exceptionalism in his American Exceptionalism. The book “traces the contribution
3
of exceptionalism to the evolution of the United States of America as an ideological and
geographical entity.” 6 Significant essays on the topic could also be found on journals,
including Joyce Appleby’s 1992 presidential address before the Organization of American
Historians and Michael Kammen’s 1993 American Quarterly reassessment of the debate
concerning the scholarly enquiry of the past two decades. There have been numerous other
meetings, articles and reviews informing and complementing these prominent conferences and
publications.7
Many scholars and authors turn to study the underlying influence of American
exceptionalism and its relations with the nation’s foreign policy. Joseph Lepgold and
Timothy McKeown have found little empirical evidence for claims that American foreign
policy behaves exceptionally. They observe that American leaders make “unusual internal
justifications” for their actions abroad, using “idiosyncratic symbols and metaphors…
based on national self-image and values,” provided by the belief in American
exceptionalism.8 Michael Hunt attempts to identify an “American foreign-policy ideology
inspired by the cultural approach.” Hunt argues that the capstone idea that has underscored
U.S. foreign policy from its beginning is that of American greatness, an idea that reveals
Americans as a special people with a unique destiny.9 This self-image of uniqueness,
together with a secular fundamentalism and a strident moralism, are among the core
traditions that, according to Roger Whitecomb, constitute the collective set of values that
energize and form a national style of foreign policy.10 He contends that the US was
uniquely qualified to lead the forces of freedom in the world. H. W. Brands agrees that: “if
a single theme pervades the history of American thinking about the world, it is that the US
has a peculiar obligation to better the lot of humanity.” 11 He argues that persistent
missionary thought could be called a manifestation of American exceptionalism. Other
authors addressed the impact of American exceptionalism on US foreign policy on specific
periods. John Fousek has explored the cultural roots of the Cold War and argues that US
policy and the broad consensus that supported it were enveloped within a framework of
American greatness. He argues that the American Cold War was underpinned by a
discourse of American globalism that combined traditional nationalist ideologies of
American chosenness, mission, and destiny with the emerging notion that the entire world
4
was now the proper sphere of concern for US foreign policy.12
The influence of the belief in American exceptionalism on US public policy and the end of
the Cold War has also been analysed. Siohhan McEcoy-Levy has found that during this
period of consensus-and-paradigm-shattering transition, President Bush and Bill Clinton
both utilized the common institution of traditional exceptionalist rhetoric to overcome the
cognitive dissonance among American elites and the public concerning the appropriate
post-Cold War role for the US.13
According to Trever B. McCrisken, the author of American Exceptionalism and the Legacy
of Vietnam, more important than the debate over whether American exceptionalism is a
truth is the fact that Americans generally believe in the myth or rhetoric of American
exceptionalism and act on those beliefs. Focusing on the legacy of the Vietnam War for the
exceptionalism and the course of US foreign policy, McCrisken argues that exceptionalist
beliefs have framed the discussion of foreign policy making by providing underlying
assumptions and terms of reference for policy debate and conduct.
The thesis aims to enrich the existing literature on American exceptionalism with a
comprehensive study of the credo itself and its impact and expression in US foreign policy.
It has three specific purposes: (1) to outline development of American exceptionalism
belief; (2) to analyze how the belief of American exceptionalism permeates the formulation
and implementation of US foreign policy; (3) to study perspectives on whether American
exceptionalism is a myth or a reality pertaining to US foreign policy.
Notes
1
Seymour Martin Lipset, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword, ch. 1.
D. Bell, “The End of American Exceptionalism”, The Public Interest (No. 41, Fall 1975), pp. 193-224.
3
Daniel Bell, “American exceptionalism” revisited: the role of civil society. Public Interest, Spring 1989, Issue 95,
pp.38-56.
4
David K. Adams & Cornelis A. van Minnen ed., Reflections on American Exceptionnlism, p. 7.
5
Lipset, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword, p. 13.
6
Deborah Madsen, American Exceptionalism, p. 1.
7
Dale Carter ed., Marks of Distinction: American Exceptionalism Revisited, pp.11-12.
8
Ibid.
9
Michael Hunt, Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy, ch. 1-2.
10
Roger S. Whitcomb, The American Approach to Foreign Affairs : An Uncertain Tradition, ch. 1-2.
11
H. W. Brands, What Americans Owes the World: the Struggle For the Soul of Foreign Policy, see Preface for
quotations.
12
John Fousek, To Lead the Free World: American Nationalism and the Culture Roots of the Cold War, pp.2-7.
13
Siohhan McEcoy-Levy, American Exceptionalism and U.S. Foreign Policy, pp. 64-65, 143.
2
5
Chapter One American Exceptionalism as a National Creed
As a nation well known for its ethnic and cultural diversity, the United States is often
dubbed as “melting pot” or “salad bowl.” The heterogeneity of the society had come to
exist ever since the land was first settled. Immigrants form various cultural backgrounds
make up the nation that gives them a label as Americans. Being an American means
sharing a commitment to a set of values and ideals. In other words, it is an ideological
commitment, not a matter of birth. Writing about the relationship of ethnicity and
American identity, historian Philip Gleason put it this way:
To be or to become an American, a person did not have to be any particular national, linguistic,
religious, or ethnic background. All he had to do was to commit himself to the political ideology
centered on the abstract ideals of liberty, equality, and republicanism. Thus the universalist
ideological character of American nationality meant that it was open to anyone who willed to
become an American.1
Since Americans do not have a common past, it is imperative to share a national credo that
suggest them a common future and help them build a national identity. In Seymour Martin
Lipset’s analysis, the US is a country organized around an ideology which includes a set of
dogmas. As G. K. Chesterton put it, “America is the only nation in the world that is
founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in
the Declaration of Independence. …”2
Generations of analysts have articulated abundantly and debated extensively over the
concept of American exceptionalism and its status in the nation’s belief sytem. Deboralh L.
Madsen argues that American exceptionalism “permeates every period of American history
and is the single most powerful agent in a series of arguments that have been fought down
the centuries concerning the identity of America and Americans.”3 Similarly, Trevor B.
McCrisken views the belief in American exceptionalism as a central part of the American
belief system and it “forms a core element of American national identity and American
nationalism.”4 To paraphrase, American exceptionalism has served as a national credo that
functions to glue Americans of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds.
6
This part will examine the roots and development of this national credo and try to explore
the meaning of the concept through lens of American politics.
1.1 The Origins of American Exceptionalism
Puritan Heritage
Though the term “exceptional” was first used by Alexis de Tocqueville to describe the
people and the nation as a peculiar entity, the idea of American exceptionalism could
be traced back to the Puritan settlers of colonial period. As Deborah Madsen observes,
Puritans were the first American exceptionalists; they “were charged with a special
spiritual and political destiny: to create in the New World a church and a society that
would provide the model for all the nations of Europe as they struggled to reform
themselves (a redeemer nation).”
5
In John Winthrop’s most famous sermon “A Modell of Christian Charity”, given in
1630 to the Winthrop fleet passengers during or just before their voyage to the New
World, he charged the colonists with these words: “....we must consider that we shall
be as a City upon a Hill, (and that) the eyes of all people are upon us.”
6
Unlike the
separatists(such as the Pilgrims) who traveled to make a permanent and lasting colony
in the New World, Winthrop and the other Puritans who traveled to Massachusetts
were non-separatists seeking a temporary refuge form the difficulties and persecution
they had endured in Europe.7 Rather than trying to flee the corruptions of a wicked
world, the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay remained nominally a part of the Anglican
Church in hopes that it could be purified from within. As their leader, Winthrop holds
deeply the conviction that the only way forward for the church in England is to await
the construction of a model church, a completely reformed church in New England. In
his journey Winthrop repeats the original motivation for migration: “to advance the
kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to enjoy the liberties of the gospel in purity with
peace.”8 They hoped to establish in New England a pure church and that would offer a
model for the Old World. This, they believed, would redeem and reform their English
society on both continents, and turn things around for the better. This model-building
7
tenet could be regarded as the earliest source of the exemplary strand of American
exceptionalism that Americans should concentrate on their experiment at home, strive
to perfect their own society and to build a model society for others to copy.
For many Puritans, America was their promised land—a New Israel. Despairing of reform
in England, Morgan said the settlers brought with them
to New England, and particularly to Massachusetts, the sense of a special mission that had formerly
attached to England. England’s covenant with God had been jeopardized, if not forfeited, by the
failure of her monarchs to press forward in the reforms so happily begun. Massachusetts, however,
had taken up the cause and made its own covenant with God. In the eyes of its founders
Massachusetts was at once a new Israel and a new England. 9
Not unusually, several generations of colonists viewed themselves distinguished from
those in the old world as God’s chosen people with exceptional destiny. Countering Robert
Cushman’s view that New England is fundamentally unlike Canaan, the non-Separating
Congregationalists of Boston argued that their colony was typical of Canaan and had been
given to them by God, as promised in scripture, for the purpose of constructing a purified
church. In 1630, John Cotton, viewed as the prime architect of New England
exceptionalism by Madsen, had preached “God’s Promise to His Plantations”, at
Southampton, Before the Winthrop fleet. He quotes II Samuel 7:10, “Moreover I will
appoint a place for my people Israel, and I will plant them, that they may dwell in a place
of their own, and move no more” in order to point out the uniqueness of the Bay colony.
God provides a place for all nations, Cotton explains, but to His chosen people He gives
the land by promise: “others take the land by his providence, but God’s people take the
land by promise: and therefore the land of Canaan is called a land of promise. Which they
discern, first, by discerning themselves to be in Christ, in whom all the promises are yea,
and amen.”10 Not only the eyes of the world were upon the colonists as they struggled to
fulfill their destiny. Much more importantly, God was ever-watchful of His people’s
successes and failures, which He could reward or punish. This interpretation sought sings
of God’s favor or signs of His anger as His people failed to keep to the high purpose of
their errand. By virtue of their exceptional destiny, the God’s chosen people are subject to
particular suffering, and this provided a powerful explanation for the many kinds of
afflictions that befell the colony: famine, disease, Indian attacks, and so on11, all could be
8
explained as the signs of God’s displeasure as He sought to keep His people to the path of
righteousness. Seen within the logic of jeremiad, witchcraft was another sign that the New
England errand was under serious threats. From the exceptionalist line of reasoning, Cotton
Mather (the grandson of John Cotton) viewed that the exceptional destiny of New England
had been under siege by the Devil, operating through his agents, to destroy God’s chosen
people and their promised land. Echoed in his “The Application of Redemption” (1640),
Thomas Hooker points out that the children of Israel would face many afflictions and
humiliations, which are designed by God as part of His purpose for them, in the wildness
before they could come into the promised land of prosperity and plenty.
However, God’s chosen people of New England can take some comfort from the
knowledge that the trials they are sent to endure signify God’s continuing commitment to
their exceptional destiny. This is the theme of Michael Wigglesworth’s poem, the classic
jeremiad “God’s Controversy with New England.” God uses nature’s drought as a
secondary cause to punish the exsiccation of the spirit among the offspring of New
England’s patriarchs, whose children were either unable (or unwilling) to accept the
Half-Way Covenant (1662) governing church admission. More than that, God’s
Controversy encapsulates the Federal Covenant between God and Saints, whose
chastisement, paradoxically, is a sign of God’s loving kindness for the whole colony.
American Revolution and the Creation of the Nation
American Revolutionary War is often cited as another milestone in the historical
development of American exceptionalism. The intellectuals of the Revolution for the first
time expressed the belief that America was not just an extension of Europe but a new land,
a country of nearly unlimited potential and opportunity. Although few common Americans
would have agreed with them at the time, they laid the intellectual foundations for the
Revolutionary concept of American exceptionalism. The loudest voice of this tone was
probably uttered by Thomas Paine in his Common Sense:
I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished under her former connection with
Great Britain, the same connection is necessary towards her future happiness, and will always have
the same effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may as well assert
9