Is the US really exceptional in terms of its willingness to take universal human rights seriously? According to the rhetoric of American political leaders, the United States has a unique and lasting commitment to human rights principles and to a liberal world order centered on rule of law and human dignity. But when push comes to shove—most recently in Libya and Syria--the United States failed to stop atrocities and dithered as disorder spread in both places. This book takes on the myths surrounding US foreign policy and the future of world order. Weighing impulses toward parochial nationalism against the ideal of cosmopolitan internationalism, the authors posit that what may be emerging is a new brand of American globalism, or a foreign policy that gives primacy to national self-interest but does so with considerable interest in and genuine attention to universal human rights and a willingness to suffer and pay for those outside its borders—at least on occasion. The occasions of exception—such as Libya and Syria—provide case studies for critical analysis and allow the authors to look to emerging dominant powers, especially China, for indicators of new challenges to the commitment to universal human rights and humanitarian affairs in the context of the ongoing clash between liberalism and realism. The book is guided by four central questions: 1) What is the relationship between cosmopolitan international standards and narrow national self-interest in US policy on human rights and humanitarian affairs? 2) What is the role of American public opinion and does it play any significant role in shaping US policy in this dialectical clash? 3) Beyond public opinion, what other factors account for the shifting interplay of liberal and realist inclinations in Washington policy making? 4) In the 21st century and as global power shifts, what are the current views and policies of other countries when it comes to the application of human rights and humanitarian affairs?

American Exceptionalism Revisited provides a broad overview of the various features that signify American politics. These include the upholding of an exceptional political stability, involving a particular balance between legislative, executive and judicial powers, and the permanence of a unique party system. Furthermore, special traits in the electoral realm?e.g., voter turnout, the inflow of money, and the application of primaries?are targets of analysis. Through comparisons with conditions applying abroad, particularly in Europe and Latin America, Axel Hadenius reveals a number of new insights on American political life, both today and over time

When looking at the US from a European perspective a sort of paradox immediately emerges. On the one hand, the ‘American way of life’ has been penetrating in depth our everyday life and, even more, our Western culture through the music, the movies, the literature and all possible consumerist habits. But, on the other hand, all recurrent statements have been emphasizing the ‘American exceptionalism’ of political institutions, that is, how different and distant the North American institutions are from the European ones with regards to the government leadership, the relationships between existing powers, the connections with the citizens and even the very notion of democracy. This book will not analyze the reasons of such exceptionalism. It addresses a more salient and up to date question: how much exceptionalism is today still present if we compare US democratic institutions to the European ones? In other words, has there been a convergence or are the differences still very strong and accentuated? And if there has been convergence, in what directions? Or if resilient divergences, on what aspects? Moreover, how to explain the convergence, if there has been one?

Since colonial times, Americans have viewed themselves as distinct from the inhabitants of other lands. Today, many still do: relishing a sense of their uniqueness more than ever, upholding the superiority of their democratic ideals and the vitality of their economic system. In an era of globalization and postmodernity, meanwhile, scholarly discussion of American Exceptionalism among historians, sociologists, political scientists and literary and cultural critics has continued to pursue new directions. This issue of The Dolphin assesses the state of Exceptionalist debate at the close of what Henry Luce dubbed Aethe American CenturyAe. Some of the essays revisit well-established expressions of Exceptionalism in American cultural history, while others draw on recent work in newer academic fields, including feminist and African-American studies, to develop or revise Exceptionalist discourses. Still others examine the concept in little-studied contexts, connecting it with such phenomena as judicial activism, regionalism and the Information Age. Embracing critical and sympathetic viewpoints alike, Marks of Distinction combines new scholarship from both sides of the Atlantic for an up-to-date survey of Exceptionalism, one of the most long-standing concerns of American Studies, from its origins to the present.

Is America unique? One of our major political analysts explores the deeply held but often unarticulated beliefs that shape the American creed. "(A) magisterial attempt to distill a lifetime of learning about America into a persuasive brief . . . (by) the dean of American political sociologists".--Carlin Romano, "Boston Globe".

Draws on societies' unique histories, distinctive paths of institutional development and contrasting cultures to explain why they adopt different policies for common problems. It compares the United States with Sweden on tax policy, Canada on financing medical care, France on abortion policy, and Japan on immigration.