Owning worldwide principles: The case of American exceptionalism

Abstract

This article addresses the observation that, among 13 national legislatures compared, the proportion of floor debates containing a reference to the international community is lowest in the USA. Does the spirit of American exceptionalism make politicians particularly wary of being accused of cultural treason, so that they avoid references to exogenous models and international treaties or recommendations? Our analysis shows that, rather than alluding to the authority of the international community and to the principles it upholds, speakers refer to the self-image of the nation as a yardstick by which to assess whether a proposal aligns with esteemed values such as equality, freedom and democracy. In that way, rather than appealing to globally shared principles, the speakers claim ownership of them, constructing the USA as the self-evident origin of worldwide models. A comparison of the usage of the national self-image between the 13 countries studied here shows that it is most frequently used in the US Congress. Therefore, owning universal principles makes understandable the low frequency of international references in the US Congress.

The Spread and Domestication of the Term “Austerity:” Evidence from the Portuguese and Spanish Parliaments

“…We coded the different parliamentary discussions into eleven policy areas to ensure the inclusion of all the different issues: civic policy; consumption; cultural policy; crime; education; environment; fiscal; foreign and security policy; health; science and technology policy; and social policy. This categorization has been established and used in our research project and in subsequent publications (Alasuutari , ; Alasuutari and Vähä‐Savo ; Rautalin, Alasuutari, and Vento ; Tiaynen‐Qadir, Qadir, and Alasuutari ).…”

National Self-Image as a Justification in Policy Debates: An International Comparison

“…A prime example would be the United States. In the US parliament the actual "Founding Fathers" and the Constitution are typically infused to create an idealistic and quasihistorical account of the founding of the nation and the principles guiding it, which all following decision-makers should adhere to (Alasuutari and Vähä-Savo 2018).…”

“…Politicians may avoid international references if, for instance, the public sentiment regards them as "cultural treason" (Meyer et al 1997: 163), or if the common conviction is that "we" are a truly unique or leading country that cannot take lessons from others. Such an instinctual sentiment seems to be particularly strong in the US political culture (Alasuutari and Vähä-Savo 2018), which means that even when politicians introduce exogenous ideas, they avoid advertising their sources or influences. Yet the United States is not the only country in which citizens stress their country's uniqueness; it appears that there is variation in how commonly a nation's "true character" is evoked in domestic politics.…”