American Exceptionalism Revisited

US Political Development in Comparative Perspective

A. Hadenius

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781137520692
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: European Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

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

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In this opening chapter, I give an account of the way this work came about—how I found the approach that first inspired me being less fruitful and instead chose another angle to the basic question, which has to do with the special features that signify American political life.

THE LIPSET ARGUMENT

This work was originally inspired by the renowned sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, who published a book in the 1990s entitled American Exceptionalism. He had dealt with this theme in earlier writings, and here he summarized his arguments. Lipset was mainly focused on political culture, which has to do with attitudes and values held by the general public. In their political views, he found, Americans deviate—sometimes quite considerably—from the usual pattern in the Western world. The difference is particularly pronounced vis-à-vis Europeans, his main reference group.

In the main, Lipset reported, Americans are more inclined to hold individualistic views. They are more critical of government intervention, in the societal as well as in the private sphere. In their social and political outlook, Americans distinguish themselves by an egalitarian and antielitist stance. They are also more religious and morally oriented. More than half the US population regularly goes to church (or to a corresponding spiritual gathering). Overall, associational life is more developed than in any comparable country. Besides their religious activities, Americans are engaged in a broad spectrum of voluntary organizations. It may be a matter of charity work, sports activities, political action, cultural endeavors, or many other things. Americans further distinguish themselves by their strong sense of patriotism, which manifests itself in a great pride over their country and its institutions. Nowhere else is the constitution of a country held in such high (almost sacred) esteem as in the United States. Americans are also very optimistic, comparatively speaking, and strongly inclined to believe that you can improve your conditions of life by your own efforts. In interviews, a strong majority typically concur with the statement that in America it is possible, through hard work, to improve your standing and fulfill your dreams.

As a consequence of the individualism that dominates American political culture, Lipset argued, the public sector in the United States has been given another role than elsewhere. The comprehensive welfare state found in many countries, particularly in Western Europe, has no counterpart in the United States. Social protection in America takes the form of private insurance to a far greater extent, and charity associations play a more important role. Hence, taxes are lower than in most West European countries, and the public sector is smaller. In line with this, the educational sector has by tradition been given top priority among public undertakings, Lipset pointed out. Education is seen as the prime means of individual improvement and of social mobility. No country allocates more resources to schools and to institutions of higher education and research. An unusually large share of the population has undergone some form of college and postgraduate education. Another side of the coin, Lipset noted, is the fact that crime rates are considerably higher in the United States. This holds for all types of crime, and especially for acts of violence. Few other countries have such a large share of their citizens locked up in jail. Sentencing is also relatively harsh, both in terms of time and in terms of degree. (Lipset 1997).

Lipset’s account of the special attitudes prevailing in the United States has been verified by later investigations into these matters (Kopstein and Steinmo 2008; Cleggett and Shafter 2010). But at the same time, objections have been made to his sweeping statements about American exceptionalism. Among others, social historian Peter Baldwin has remarked that regarding criminality there are differences within Europe (between north and south, east and west) that are as striking as that between the United States and parts of Europe. And the same holds for the extent of public involvement in the social field. In many policy areas having to do with social care and living conditions, it has become mostly a matter of nuance when conditions on the two sides of the Atlantic are contrasted (Baldwin 2009).¹

To a great extent I concur with this objection, especially as the situation in the United States has changed substantially since the time (up to the mid-1990s) that Lipset referred to. The public sector, which then was relatively small—and that according to Lipset’s explanatory theory would remain at that level—has grown significantly. As a result, the United States has in many ways become more similar to other economically developed countries of the world. As we shall see in the inquiry that follows, the United States now has a public sector with the same prime orientation: The emphasis nowadays is strongly on the social side. Observers have often called attention to the fact that the United States—unlike practically all other countries in the Western world—lacked a system of comprehensive health insurance (Fabbrini 2007: 103f). But the situation has changed. In 2010, Congress decided to introduce a federal health program that includes the lion’s share of citizens who were previously uninsured. The new program started operating in 2014.

As for social and economic circumstances more generally, the UN Human Development Index is commonly referred to when conditions in different countries are compared. This index combines measures of four different factors: life expectancy, literacy, education, and standard of living. The United States belongs—along with many other Western countries—to the group that is labeled “very high.” It comes out number 13 in a recent ranking, with an index value close behind that of Norway, Australia, Sweden, and France and just before that of New Zealand, Great Britain, and Germany. Another attribute that is often observed is the distribution of income. Here a ratio can be calculated, showing how much high-income people earn, compared with their low-income counterparts. Comparing conditions for the 10 percent of the population at the top with those for the 10 percent at the bottom, we find that the United States gets a score of 16; in other words, people in the highest bracket get 16 times more than those in the lowest bracket. For West European countries the corresponding figure is 9 on average (with Portugal and Britain highest, scoring 15 and 14, respectively). Other reference countries are Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, which like the United States have a British colonial background. These countries have a mean of 11 (with Australia highest, at 14). However, the difference in income distribution is greater by far among the neighboring countries of Latin America. Here the average score is 37 (UNDP: Human Development Report 2009 and 2011).

Hence, with regard to living conditions more generally, which are tapped by the Human Development Index, the United States cannot be seen as an outlier. In this respect it has much in common with the countries of Western Europe (and some of their far-flung offspring). This affinity is also manifested in great similarities in terms of lifestyle. The close ties are illustrated, moreover, by the high degree of commercial interaction. The member states of the European Union are by far the biggest US trading partner, accounting for almost half the country’s global exports (Forbes, August 8, 2013). Yet with regard to income distribution, the United States deviates from the main West European tendency. Seen in a broader perspective, however, it is a matter of a moderate deviation. In its distributional profile, the United States undoubtedly has more in common with West European countries (and with other former British colonies) than with its neighbors to the south of the Rio Grande.²

ARGUMENT OF THIS BOOK

Given the objections that can be raised, the Lipset thesis—presuming a divergent American societal and policy model, grounded in a particular popular ethos—can hardly be deemed conclusive. Yet even as I object to his major proposal, I am inclined to support—and to emphasize even more in several respects—Lipset’s view in another field. I refer to his analysis of the characteristics that distinguish the American mode of government. This is also the field that will be the center of attention in this book. Lipset demonstrates that the political institutions and types of organizations that have developed in the United States are special in many ways. He points in particular to the way that parties operate and elections are conducted. But his reports on these matters are generally rather brief and superficial. The focus of his analysis lies elsewhere.

After Lipset, not much has been written about the particular traits that mark American political life.³ The exception is a book by Raymond Smith from 2007, with the illuminating title American Anomaly. Smith is mainly interested in various aspects of the separation of powers in America, and he makes several interesting comparative observations in that realm—particularly when contrasting the American system to the parliamentary model applied in Europe. But his account of the distinctive features of the American system is rather limited and in want overall of a historical perspective. Hence, he offers no analysis of how the special American institutions have emerged and developed.

My ambition in this book is to clarify the special features that have come to distinguish American political life. In this realm, I would maintain, the differences vis-à-vis the rest of the world are not marginal. In its form of government, the United States from the beginning was a country very much apart; and in many respects it remains so even today. Nevertheless—it should be noted as well—the picture is mixed. In certain respects, the differences have clearly diminished over time. In some areas, moreover, conditions in the United States are often presumed to be more deviant than they actually are.

More particularly, the following features of the United States system will be the object of analysis:

•  The American constitution of 1789 stood out as a remarkable creation. Yet it has, with some amendments, been maintained up to this day. Since its beginnings, moreover, the country has experienced an unbroken tradition of civil, and increasingly democratic, rule. Accordingly, the United States is marked by a unique political stability.

•  For a long time, the responsibilities of the central government in the United States were very limited. But then its action profile grew considerably. The federal structure in the country has not been much affected by this development, however.

•  From the beginning, the United States has applied a special system whereby powers are divided between the legislature and the executive at the federal level. The relative weight of the organs in question has shifted over time. But the balance of powers has not disappeared; if anything, it has become more pronounced with time.

•  Almost from the founding of the Republic, judicial institutions have had the authority to monitor and to reject political decisions. For many years this phenomenon was peculiar to the United States; in due course of time, however, a system of judicial oversight has come to be instituted in other countries also.

•  The American two-party system—with Democrats and Republicans as the prime competitors—has lasted for over 150 years. This is unique. At the same time, a particular American organizational structure has developed. Furthermore, a distinct increase in the programmatic coherence of the parties has taken place in recent decades—giving rise to strong polarization. This has resulted at times in a conspicuous lack of decision-making capacity.

•  Elements of direct-democratic modes of decision making have been introduced. Among these, the primary elections—which is truly an American institutional innovation—have had a heavy political impact. During recent decades this electoral feature has been applied (in different forms) in several parts of the world.

•  In the electoral realm, it is generally held that the United States stands out in terms of low turnout, a big incumbency advantage, and a significant effect of the great involvement of money. In certain respects, however, these perceptions need to be modified.

In the chapters that follow, I shall elucidate these factors more closely and situate them in comparative perspective. The approach will be thematic, focused on one aspect at a time. The period of study will stretch from the emergence of the Republic up to the present. Hence, a time span of more than two hundred years will be covered. My analysis of the early years will be mainly of a broad and sweeping character. Here my aim is just to illuminate the general trends of development. The picture will be more detailed when we come to recent times, especially the last few decades.

In my comparative analysis, the objects under scrutiny will vary somewhat according to the particular question at issue. In many cases, I will contrast the situation in the United States with that in Europe and Latin America. The selection of Europe (mainly Western Europe) is natural for the simple reason that, as I briefly illustrated above, this region displays many similarities with the United States in social and economic terms and has had far-reaching historical connections with it besides. The focus on Latin America is relevant mainly because most of the countries in that region apply an institutional system that was originally designed with the United States as a model. However, in some fields I make a different and often more restricted selection. One of these relates to federalism. In this realm, for one thing, the number of cases is limited (there are not so many federal states in the world). For another, I want to focus on cases where—as in the United States—this institutional arrangement has been maintained, and become rooted under democratic conditions, over a long period of time. I also make a special selection of comparative cases when issues relating to the function in different ways of the US electoral system is under study; here I concentrate on countries that apply a similar majoritarian electoral code.

Having said this, it is time to get started. We relocate ourselves, therefore, to the early phase, when the United States of America came into existence.

CHAPTER 2

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A SPECIAL NEWCOMER AMONG STATES

In this chapter, I give a brief overview of the process by which the United States came into being. I show that a special type of state was formed, with roots stretching back both to Europe and to the modes of governance developed in colonial times. Along the way, some basic traits of the new state are clarified.

A NEW KIND OF REPUBLIC

The United States of today is certainly an exceptional political formation in many ways. And such were actually the conditions already from the start. The new state that was established was for its time a strange institutional creature. In the late eighteenth century, in a world dominated by royal rule, the rebelling Americans created a republic. The ne...