Saturday, September 23, 2023

The Myth of Exceptionalism: A Study in Divergent Perspectives

The Great American Myth: Exceptionalism, Bootstraps, and the Facts of History

Abstract: This article interrogates the notions of American exceptionalism and bootstrapping, often touted as self-evident truths. Drawing on historical examples and evidence, it argues these ideas overlook the role of government programs, collective action, and external factors in enabling opportunity and prosperity. The “bootstrap” narrative is a flawed simplification of complex forces in America’s development.

“American exceptionalism”—the notion that the United States embodies unique ideals of freedom and democracy, establishing it as an “exception” among nations—has long pervaded public discourse. This high self-regard often intertwines with veneration for the “bootstraps” ethos: the idea that individuals can transcend their circumstances through hard work alone. But do these lofty concepts accurately reflect history? Let us subject them to scrutiny.

The legend of bootstraps calls to mind a rugged pioneer, pulling himself up by sheer determination. It is an alluring fable—it suggests success depends solely on individual grit. But this mythos overlooks key external factors enabling such mobility. The postwar economic boom offers a prime example. The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, better known as the GI Bill, provided government-funded support to veterans for education, unemployment benefits, and home loans. This substantial investment fueled exceptional growth, facilitating the rise of a prosperous middle class.

Consider the numbers: Over 2 million veterans used GI Bill education benefits to attend colleges and vocational schools. The Veterans Administration backed nearly 5 million home loans between 1944 and 1952, opening home ownership to many. Clearly, this economic transformation did not emerge from bootstraps alone! By overlooking this decisive government role, proponents of the myth do history a disservice.

We must also examine the contributions of collective action, such as that undertaken by labor unions. The typical 1940s workweek spanned six grueling days of 10-12 hours or more. Union collective bargaining was instrumental in achieving the 40-hour work week that endures as standard today. Likewise, child labor laws, workplace safety standards, and minimum wage protections resulted from reform efforts, not mere individual industry.

Perhaps the most dubious claim of exceptionalists is that the United States embodies freedom and democratic ideals beyond all other nations. But measured against facts, this notion withers. America was founded on slavery, the most abhorrent violation of human dignity and autonomy. This original sin casts doubt on claims of inherent enlightenment. It took a bloody civil war and a century of struggle to partly redeem this birth defect—and its legacy still haunts us.

We might also ask: exceptional for whom? The doctrine of Manifest Destiny justified displacing Native peoples under the guise of spreading freedom. Yet American Indians were afforded neither freedom nor justice. And American women did not achieve the right to vote until 1920, lagging behind many countries. Clearly, the vaunted freedom and equality of myth do not align with large portions of U.S. history.

I do not aim to completely debunk American achievement; constructive criticism should not shade into cynicism. The United States has realized authentic accomplishments amid its imperfections. But honesty compels us to confront realities which unsettle national mythologies. Only by doing so can we continue striving toward the ideals invoked by American exceptionalism. Therein lies the rub: those ideals are worthy, but attaining them usually demands more than individual bootstraps. It necessitates government playing a proactive role to expand opportunity.

The GI Bill and New Deal policies fostered upward mobility by including marginalized groups in education, home ownership, and employment. Infrastructure projects connected commerce. Banking regulations stabilized markets. Environmental and consumer protections enhanced quality of life. Government research funding drove innovation, from medical advances to the internet.

Perhaps the starkest examples are Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security—programs which provide healthcare and financial security for the elderly and disadvantaged. These policies represent government functioning as an instrument of collective advancement. They belie the notion that progress relies on atomized individuals.

None of this detracts from rugged self-reliance as an American virtue. But it was generally not frontier loners who tamed the wilderness, but communities of purposeful citizens. So too with creating an enfranchised middle class and broadly shared prosperity. If hordes of GIs had been left to their own devices after WWII, college education and suburban homes would have remained distant dreams reserved for elites.

It is time to abandon Potemkin mythologies that flatten history’s complexity. A clear-eyed view reveals government policies as central drivers of growth, along with labor advocacy and civic organizing. Shared progress relies on social contract, not just individual drive. Let us shape policies worthy of our national promise, expanding opportunities to all. Our exceptionalism should be measured by enabling everyone to transcend the circumstances of their birth through development of human capabilities. False notions of history distract us from this task.

In examining the prevailing narratives, I hope I have demonstrated the importance of factual rigor in evaluating our self-conceptions as a nation. The uncritical stance lends itself to comforting fables which short-change the truth. America cannot fulfill its potential if bound by airbrushed mythologies. Maturity compels acknowledging difficult realities in our past and present. But this mature self-awareness contains the seeds of progress. In casting off illusions, we open eyes to opportunities for advancement.

Abstract concepts like freedom and justice only acquire force when made real through politics, institutions and struggle. Government funded education, unions fought for fair wages, civil rights leaders organized marches. The American story is one of tumultuous change, not divine ordination. We continually redefine ourselves.

The blunt facts of history instruct us that no solitary individuals can claim credit for this progress. It required collective efforts making the most of circumstances created by public policy or economic context. Government assistance gave multitudes of returning GIs a leg up into the middle class. Labor advocates confronted powerful interests to demand fairer treatment for workers. Civil rights visionaries rallied followers to extend the franchise. We are the beneficiaries of those who worked in common purpose for a better society.

The bootstraps narrative, though beguiling, does not capture this complexity. It offers comfort by suggesting success is limited only by one's personal determination. But progress relies on employing enlightened structures and policies to open doors of opportunity. A balanced, evidence-based understanding of history makes this clear. We must move beyond myth and critically engage with how social, political and economic forces shaped past and present. Only then can we truly take responsibility for forging the more perfect union that lasting exceptionalism demands.


The GI Bill, also known as the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, provided benefits to nearly eight million returning World War IIhe bill provided tuition assistance, low-interest home loans, and a year of unemployment compensation. The bill expired in 1956.

The Post-9/11 GI Bill has benefited one million veterans, service members, and family members since its inception in August 2009. The program continues to pay tuition for hundreds of thousands of service members and veterans each year

The Myth of Exceptionalism: A Study in Divergent Perspectives


Christopher Hitchens and Dennis Prager offer profoundly different takes on the notion of American exceptionalism. Their clashing views encapsulate the divide between secular rationalism and faith-based traditionalism.

Hitchens, with his signature wit and erudition, punctures the myth of unique American enlightenment. He highlights the hypocrisies and flaws in its history, from slavery to imperialism against Native Americans. For Hitchens, true exceptionalism requires acknowledging this troubled past honestly rather than indulging in self-glorifying illusions.

Prager epitomizes the exceptionalist traditionalism steeped in Judeo-Christian value. He considers America uniquely blessed by God and argues its prosperity relies on devoutness. His moralistic style aims to uphold institutions and mores he views as under siege by secular forces. 

Both men celebrate reason, but differ fundamentally on its nature. For Hitchens, rationality means scientific rigor and empirical evidence. Prager ties reason to faith, revelation and traditional authority. A yawning epistemological gulf divides them.

Hitchens excoriates exceptionalism as arrogant mythmaking that papers over injustice and suffering. He rejects the idea that America has a divine mandate or inherent superiority. Our ideals only acquire meaning through constant struggle to realize them, not self-congratulation.

Prager sees American history as a moral journey with occasional detours. He considers the overcoming of slavery and extension of rights as fulfillments of the godly vision of the Founders. For him, exceptionalism is America's natural state - when it strays, it must return to providential values.  

In the exceptionalists' rendition, the self-made frontiersman is the quintessential American. But Hitchens points out pioneers succeeded through communal effort, not solo grit. Government assistance like the GI Bill laid foundations for postwar prosperity, not just bootstrapping.

Prager's account minimizes flaws while accentuating triumphs of will over circumstance. Hitchens takes a forensic scalpel to self-serving myths. A thoughtful examination shows history's complexity defies either pole. The search for balance requires wrestling honestly with perspectives from Hitchens' skepticism to Prager's idealism to find durable truth.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you!