The End of American Exceptionalism

Video Statistics and Information

Video
Captions Word Cloud
Reddit Comments

The concept of American Exceptionalism dates back to the colonial times and is rooted in religious fruitcakery. It's vapid jingoism and has never been more than that. It will be a great day when such garbage is piled into the dustbin of bad ideas.

It's lazy wishy thinking from true believers who used their religion as an excuse to do whatever they want. Of course god told them to do what they were going to do anyway. Of course god likes the guy speaking for him best.

👍︎︎ 8 👤︎︎ u/AnthraxEvangelist 📅︎︎ Sep 19 2019 🗫︎ replies

I'm an ex-pat from America, and have been living among international people for 20 years, and most of them would agree with that discussion

👍︎︎ 3 👤︎︎ u/YOUREABOT 📅︎︎ Sep 19 2019 🗫︎ replies
Captions
I'm here today with Professor Jeffrey Sachs from Colombia University to talk about his new book. A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism. Thanks for joining us, Jeff. - Great to be with you. - The American Foreign Policy, we can feel the tremors every day of what's happening in China, concerns about Europe, problems with Russia. Why did you wade into this water? As an economist, why is this important? - We are at a crossroads. In 1941, Henry Luz declared the American century. In 1992, when the Soviet Union collapsed, we were the colossus, the New Rome, the sole superpower of the world. And I'm arguing it was a lot of illusion. The idea that there is one power that bestrides the world, especially one country with 4.4% of the world's population presuming to lead the world, to be the superpower is very naive and very dangerous in my view. In central terms, it is this word exceptionalism which has been repeated throughout American history that we are the exceptional country. That at this point I think makes us a danger to ourselves. We have ended up so vastly overextended. Military bases in more than 70 countries around the world, more than 700 bases around the world. Wars that are dragging on endlessly from Afghanistan. The violence throughout the Middle East. Libya, all our drone and covert operations in Africa, The Middle East, and elsewhere. We are a danger to ourselves now by taking this idea of exceptionalism in such an anachronistic way when it no longer applies. - Those bills for those wars that you just described don't stop because the fighting has ceased. As Linda Bilmes has written a foreign INET research report, the tale in terms of healthcare for the troops who have come home and everything else, these are colossal expenses that we've undertaken. - I think we don't really feel except by such wonderful studies how much this imperial state has weighed on American society in the budget, of course, in the unbelievable medical costs that continue through the VA system. In the amount of crisis that we're constantly bearing in places that we should not be involved. In Syria, which was another one of the debacles, that one where Obama played a very heavy role. So my critique is not only about Trump, it's about American foreign policy and the establishment American foreign policy that has gone on for decades. It's become more and more unreal and out of kilter because the share of the world economy, or global finance, or technology that America dominates, let's say, has diminished over time. We once were the economic colossus at the end of World War II. We were the ones standing that had not been attacked on home territory except for one day, Pearl Harbor, and we were a military, technological, financial powerhouse, of course. But over time, other countries, other regions that have developed, of course China is the most remarkable case of economic development that the world's ever seen. 1.4 billion people coming out of poverty in a 40-year period. And the reality of where we are today in the United States and where we term ourselves as still the indispensable country, or Trump's foreign policy doctrine which says American primacy in every region of the world. The military doctrine, not only under Trump, but now for a long time that we should be able to fight two major regional wars successfully. Where does this imperial global thinking come from? Now Trump, on the surface, said, well, we should pull back and he was even called isolationist in some ways, but actually, as confused as it is, so I can't get into his head exactly, but as confused as the Trump administration is, we're continuing still on the basic idea that America must dominate, that we are the exceptional country. And, again, as confused as the Trump administration is, and the president, I won't even go there, in his understanding, but this new trade war with China is a part of this story. China's rising technologically. China is reaching cutting edge in absolutely key technologies, whether it's 5G, and broadband artificial intelligence, the whole digital revolution. Phenomenal capacities. I say good and fine because that means that these technologies are more available around the world to raise living standards and improve our lives. But from an American security point of view in the exceptionalist mode, oh we have to stop that. The way that Trump is trying to stop that is to scramble everything about the international systems, start new trade wars and somehow try to bring China to heel. Ridiculous, impossible, self-destructive, wrong-headed, and missing all the important things of our time. Can we get our heads around the environmental crisis, can we work together with China to address absolutely global concerns on health and environment, on migration, on a lot of the turmoil in the world? No, we're so determined to keep this primacy that we're gonna do a lot of damage unless we rethink this. - As you talk about this exceptionalism, it's kind of like a hubris, where we can do no harm, is a mindless mindset, where we can often do a lot of harm outside the country, but within the country. We're not exactly prioritizing our spending, or, how do I say, how we use our tax revenue for education, health, retirement, and other things when we're maintaining these bases in 70 countries. So it feels not like we're doing something that's benefiting that 4.5% of the population referred to earlier, to the detriment of everybody else. It may be benefiting a very small percentage of our population to the detriment of many others and the dynamic evolution of health and education in this country. - I think if you step back, and especially if, you take a not American mindset, but look at America. The most notable thing for me is, as a society, we seem completely incapable right now of solving even one problem. We're just not solving anything. We have falling life expectancy in the United States. Unbelievable, we have, of course, the opioid epidemic. We have a healthcare system that is twice the cost of any other healthcare system in the world. We're at perpetual war in the Middle East. We have the highest income inequality in American history right now. We have crumbling parts of our infrastructure. We know it's been falling apart for a long time. But administration after administration recently, we haven't been able to build one mile of fast rail. We're patching at best, but not designing anything for the 21st century. And you step back and you say, that is really a peculiar political system. Put aside all the debates about what kind of system, The U.S. Congress, or Parliamentary system. Just ask a question, can a society address real problems and move to solve them? And I would say America has been unable to do that for probably about 30 years now. Where we identified the problem and nothing happens. Trump said, okay, I'm a builder, I'm gonna build infrastructure. That was the last we ever heard of it. It's not going to happen on this man's watch, be sure of it. But I have to say also with the President Obama, he gave a lot of speeches about infrastructure, too. He didn't get one mile of fast rail built in the United States. He made a stimulus in 2009, 2010 during the financial crisis a decade ago, but it was a blip. Spend more, spend less, end of story. Where was the structural change? Where were the long-term solutions? We don't have that and yet, we're the number one country, we run the world, we're now dictating through the international financial system. Sanctions on this one, sanctions on that one, you can't use the dollar, we'll punish you if you go to the international criminal court and so on. As if we're running the show globally. And okay, for a moment, when a bully talks like that, people in other countries stand back, but, it's more like the cartoon character that ran off the cliff, doesn't realize it, thinks everything's fine, and then shoo. And that is really what this book is saying. We need a conceptual rethink of where we are in a world where the American century, for basically the reasons of the spread of knowledge, technology, capacity around the world means we're not running the show. Where the spread of problems around the world, means hey, we'd better cooperate. And we really need to rethink what are our priorities. We remain with the institutional priorities of this quasi imperial state of ours, which overthrows governments or puts sanctions or dictates others what to do, but it's not gonna work this way. - I had a group of European economists come visit me earlier this year, and they said the model that we were supposed to follow to have vitality and growth was an American model. Deregulate, privatize, and allow those who own the business to reallocate everything so it's more efficiently used. And that Europeans have been accused of having sclerotic economies. When they came to me, they said they thought the American model was over. Because with the pervasiveness of adjustment and disruption from globalization and particularly from automation. The American political system was getting bogged down and our president was a symptom of that. And if you don't facilitate transitions where people don't protect their jobs, but they're protected as people, their children's schooling, their health, their pension, their retraining, then the political system's gonna break down and America will be left behind the countries that can manage these transfers. So it's not purely like Robin Hood, or the rich taking care of the poor out of charity. This is the dynamism of America that's at stake in the contest between these two models of how to manage a dynamic economy. - One of the most ridiculous things that we're all subjected to in the US is the endless stream of Wall Street Journal editorials warning us, don't become like Europe. Especially not like Scandinavia. And they love to run anti-Sweden stories and so on. If you have the chance, I would say to anybody watching, go to Stockholm or Oslo or Copenhagen. Take a look around and look at that horrible crisis of these countries and the fact is, these are amazing places actually. Unlike our infrastructure, the escalators and elevators work, the roads are quite beautiful, the airports are gleaming, the idea of the environmentally-friendly design is confirmed. They're not falling apart, they're kinda gorgeous and they enjoy, and every worker enjoys five or six weeks summer paid vacation as a matter of every worker's right. So the starting point when you had that visiting delegation, these are people living very, very comfortably. They're living in societies that actually are working functionally as integrated societies. Of course they have the stresses. They have the arguments about migration, about refugees, that's for sure. But these are places that are working, functioning, investing, and they're living in the 21st century, actually. Because they know the future technologies and they're aiming for those, and they're making changes. And what always impressed me about those countries is they're really market oriented. They're not socialist in the idea of state ownership and so forth, but exactly what you said, they take care of people sensibly. Everyone gets healthcare, everyone gets quality education, paid leave time, vacation time, and so forth. So that as technologies improve, even in the face of all this global competition, quality of life keeps getting better and on a very broad base. Now they're arguing, well, we want it for us, we don't wanna take in more migrants or refugees, so forth. That debate is understandable, but the quality of life is exceptionally good pretty much across the board, actually. In the US we are still a dynamic society because we're still capable of putting new technologies in place, and it's fair to say America invented the internet, it invented the new world of apps, it did a lot of things. But we do not look after each other at all anymore. The Republican party, by the way, though I'm not especially partisan, but the Republican party is on one idea and one idea only. And that is close down government, whether it's regulation, environmentalism, or basic support for basic needs of people. Cut taxes, and by the way, now they cut taxes no matter that we're at a nearly trillion dollar a year deficit, and now they want another round of tax cuts. Okay, we can head to fiscal bankruptcy as fast as they want but how blind. So that ideology, no we don't have a society. No, we have us the winners and be dammed the losers, is not gonna work. And then Trump comes along and says yeah you're losing because of those guys, the Mexican rapists, and the terrorists, the Chinese cheaters, and all the rest, and then of course is just another round of misdirection and excuse, maybe deliberate, maybe ignorant, but we lost the vocabulary of the society that hangs together. And if we don't have that, we are not going to hang together. - To my mind, I look at the work that you've always done, but particularly in a book like this stepping forward, you are an excellent example to my young scholars. You're taking on subjects that are important, you're taking on subjects with rigorous economics. You yourself have done a lot of work in Africa and other places, so that your sensitivity to the challenges of our time is always one of your formidable talents. So I just wanna thank you for being so vigilant and providing a good example to our young scholars, and I look forward to having everyone read this book. - Well, thank you very much. - Thanks for joining us. - Let me praise INET and you in return for keeping us fresh and focused on the future and really economics should be a problem-solving profession. And it should be, I'd like to think of Aristotelian economics, Aristotle is my favorite philosopher, that it should be a science for the common good. And I hope that we continue in that tradition. - It's nice to see you practice what you preach. - Well, thank you so much. - Thanks.
Info
Channel: New Economic Thinking
Views: 309,161
Rating: 4.8186512 out of 5
Keywords: NET6, Jeff Sachs, Earth Institute, Columbia University, American Dream, matthew Kulvicki, rob johnson, INET, institute for new economic thinking, american exceptionalism, jeffrey sachs, earth institute columbia university, jeffrey sachs interview, #AmericanExceptionalism, #AntiPropaganda, united states, american exceptionalism explained, institute for new economic thinking youtube
Id: kZU0IXO7AQw
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 18min 46sec (1126 seconds)
Published: Wed Oct 03 2018
Related Videos
Note
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.