American Exceptionalism Reflected in a City Upon a Hill Essay Example

in the world.

This is not necessarily tantamount to the United States being superior in any way, even though this is still debated. Joyce Appleby gives reasons for American exceptionalism being more than just different by saying “Exceptional does not mean different. All nations are different; and almost all national sentiments exploit those differences”[3]. She claims that America is not only different, but also unique in every aspect, and that exceptionalism comes with a set of moral values and responsibilities for the well being of other nations.

One could argue that the responsibility aspect became part of American exceptionalism late, because, as John B. Judis argues “In their first hundred years as a nation, Americans were preoccupied with their own continent… foreign policy was principally concerned with removing Mexicans and Indians from lands that American settlers coveted”[4]. A different opinion than Joyce Appleby’s is given by Seymour Martin Lipset, who refers to the term as “the ways in which the United States varies from the rest of the world. 5] On this basis, American exceptionalism originates with the American Revolution, where America becomes one of the latest independent countries in modern history, and as a result develops an unrivalled American ideology, founded on individual freedom, liberty for all, and a laissez-faire economy. The United States varies from the rest of the world in many ways. A historian, John A. Kouwenhoven argues, that America has a long list of things that makes America American; “The Manhattan skyline, The gridiron town plan, The Skyscraper, The Model-T Ford, etc…”[6] but is this part of American exceptionalism?

Not necessarily. One of the most profound aspects would

be the country’s history of slavery and the racial issues it has suffered from ever since, even though America was founded on the notion of equality and considers liberty for all an essential value. The United States still has the highest criminal rate in any category and clearly stands out among comparable nations in difference between rich and poor and people living in poverty, especially children[7]. But even though these aspects are distinctive, and clearly make America different, one cannot count these as terms of American exceptionalism.

American exceptionalism is exactly as the term states, an “ism”, just as socialism, liberalism and conservatism all are “isms”. On that notion one could consider American exceptionalism to be a distinctive system, or a theory, rather than a set of variations to set it apart from the rest of the world. Richard Hofstadter noted on this “It has been our fate as a nation not to have ideologies, but to be one”[8]. A City upon a Hill originally used as a metaphor in one of Jesus’s sermons, has become a famous line in the discussion of American exceptionalism when written in a sermon by John Winthrop in 1630.

Recently it has been a popular slogan for most Republicans running for Congress, and was used especially by the former President of the United States, Ronald Reagan. American Presidents have throughout the history enacted foreign policies based on the idea of a city upon a hill. Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) had an agenda with implementing democracy outside the United States after World War I, and recently George W. Bush (2000-2008) was on a mission for national security and war

on terror with interventions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

One could classify these as preventive wars, in which American values of liberty and democracy were implemented as part of the operation and would serve as justification to the declining popularity, in the national and international community. Michael Signer, an attorney and Professor in Public and International Affairs characterize exceptionalism as “deeply and uniquely American, stemming from our essential national character–our generosity, our hopefulness, our ambition, and our sense of possibility”[9].

He is concerned with the direction of American exceptionalism in foreign policy and argues, “Today… we see a messianic strain of exceptionalism powerfully realized in the presidency of George W. Bush. His constant, post–September 11 injunction that the United States should democratize the world at gunpoint posits an America not only above, but apart from, the world. His exceptionalism frames the United States as an exception to the world, rather than as an exceptional–meaning excellent–nation within it”[10].

One could make a case for Michael Signer’s arguments due to the continuing wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and the rising uproar for democracy in Middle Eastern countries. Victor Davis Hanson, Author, and Military Historian, disagrees and finds it possible that the outcome of an ongoing war cannot be determined at the present moment. Victor Davis Hanson claims, “It would be folly to think, however, that one can sit by and wait for history to deliver a smiling verdict.

Shifting judgments about the causes, conduct, and consequences of America conflicts are indeed the norm in American history… But for the cycle to play out, there must be a persistence of spirit and a

willingness to see a war through to the end, as well as a bedrock confidence in both the capabilities of America's armed forces and the righteousness of the American cause”[11]. Hanson finds American intervention essential, and believes that implementing democratic values and ending suppression in one country will influence the surrounding countries in the same direction.

Hanson notes, “This is not to suggest that the Iraq war was fought in order to pressure Libya and Iran into desisting from their quest for WMD. But had we not gone into Iraq, it is alt too easy to envision a scenario in which Libya and Iran would now be proceeding to process weapons-grade uranium and we would still be as unsure about Iraq itself as we and the international community had been throughout the 1990's. ”[12]. Both Hanson and Signer make valid points, but it would be reasonable to conclude that both have political motives.

Michael Signer is a former strategist for Democrats running for Congress and has since 2008 worked for the State Department Transition Team during the Obama Presidency. Victor Davis Hanson is a neoconservative, who voted for George W. Bush both in 2000 and 2004 due to the Democrats morally irresponsible foreign policy[13]. On this basis, it is plausible that a political agenda has been overshadowing the objectivity of both articles, and therefore no definite conclusion is possible, given the topic’s complexity.

A city upon a hill should be the shining example for the rest of the world and therefore the very definition of American exceptionalism. But in a historical perspective, John Winthrop himself did not embrace one of the main

principles in American exceptionalism: religious freedom. Dennis R. Hoover argues, “It is ironic that the “city on a hill” has become the go-to metaphor for exceptionalism, because Winthrop himself was concerned with spiritually purifying a state church (the Church of England), not with instilling religious freedom in a new country”. 14] In fact, John Winthrop renounces many American values, besides his religious beliefs. One of the essential values of the American spirit is the democracy.

The United States has been eager to implement democracy in countries around the world through the history. America has shifted between passivity and activity in foreign policy often with different political agendas at home. After the end of World War II and to fall of the Berlin all, the United States was anxious of the rising popularity of communism, and especially the military operations in Vietnam and Korea, with the purpose of minimizing communist influence, became symbols of American exceptionalism reflected in a “City upon a Hill”. John Winthrop, however, did not embrace the idea of democracy. In a letter from Winthrop, he states “democracy is, amongst civil nations, accounted the meanest and worst of all forms of government. [To allow it would be] a manifest breach of the 5th Commandment”[15].

One could find this statement and the use of Winthrop’s famous citation as a slogan for a country build on democracy contradictory, but one must consider the mindset of Puritans and John Winthrop at this time in history, “The Puritans did not need to come to America to discover the principle of rights. The colonists were “Anglo Americans”… who sought to give new meaning to values they

brought with them from England. England was the “mother country” – the colonists’ political principles, commercial relations and educational practices all were closely tied to Great Britain”[16].

Based on this, it is clear that even though John Winthrop and The Puritans sought to reform the Church of England, they were still attached to the values of England and thereby also its form of government; Monarchy. One of the most prominent founding fathers and author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, rejected the ideas of John Winthrop and The Puritans. On their faith, he noted, “His religion was demonism. If ever man worshiped a false God, he did. The being described in his five points is ... demon of malignant spirit. It would be more pardonable to believe in no God at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin”[17]. Thomas Jefferson, A freethinking man (and lifetime slave owner) who sought to break ties with England, did not embrace The Puritans beliefs. One could find it peculiar that these two men, John Winthrop and Thomas Jefferson, with such disparate views on life, religion and democracy, still find themselves in company with one another when discussing American exceptionalism today.

Historian from Harvard University, Mark Peterson also discusses this subject and he argues that American exceptionalism reflected in John Winthrop’s famous citation could be misunderstood. He argues that “We shall be as a city upon a hill”, is a phrase that describes the exposed position of the colonists. “Mistakes and internal conflict would be noted by the outside world, and The City upon a Hill is not about a guaranteed exceptional future

prophecy of success and a glowing example for the rest of the world”. 18]

In addition to this, Mark A. Signorelli, a poet and essayist, agrees with Mark Peterson, and in critique of Republicans excessive and incorrect use of the term, notes, “But this is not at all what John Winthrop meant… What he wrote was as follows: “Consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill; the eyes of all people are upon us, so that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and byword through the world. Winthrop intended the preeminence of a city on a hill to signify not the inherent superiority of the Plymouth settlement, but its notoriety. His point was that the whole world would be aware of the outcome of the Pilgrim’s expedition, so that a failure to establish a just community in the new world would inevitably become known throughout the old world, and become an occasion for the Puritan’s enemies to deride their faith”[19]. American exceptionalism can be perceived in many ways.

It can be seen as a nation’s search for identity, and a common ideal. A truly exceptional ideology spawned by the American Revolution embraced in liberty, equality and justice for all. A nation with a mission to spread ideals of liberty and democracy to the world, but it can also be seen as a simple set of differences, defining a nation from others, based on political and social status. Wars and military interventions have been justified by

advocates of American exceptionalism and scrutinized by its adversaries.

Historians debate the true meaning of John Winthrop’s famous line, and some believe that analyzing and reading between the lines is the best way for a true understanding. Whatever the answer is, the debate is ongoing, but one cannot deny the contradictions in a nation founded on liberty and equality, having such a devastating history of slavery and racial segregation, and it is hard not to find the famous phrase by John Winthrop, that embodies American exceptionalism, a bit ironic, if it has indeed been misunderstood for centuries.