Reply To The Response Requirement 1: Respond To A Specific P

Reply The Response Requirement1 Respond To A Specific Prompt In Detai

Respond to a specific prompt in detail and with sustained interest over the discussion. Apply concepts and ideas from lecture and/or readings to something currently in the news. Your participation will be assessed using the following criteria:

• Activity (25%): How much do you participate in our online discussions? Are you “lurking” or actively conversing? Do you wait until the last minute or work consistently throughout the discussion period? Are you taking the initiative to post and to work with one another?
• Quality (50%): How strong are your contributions to the online discussions? Do they deepen your group’s general understanding of the course materials and ideas contained therein? Are your contributions based on the ideas contained in the readings and do they strengthen our deliberations OR are they merely expressions of unsupported opinion—“data-free” analysis?
• Interest (25%): Are you bringing some new and relevant information into the discussion that deepen the general understanding of your group? For example, are you discussing an interesting journal or newspaper article that pertains to the topic for the week? Are you applying concepts and ideas from lecture and/or readings to a current case or a particular class?

Paper For Above instruction

The assignment requires an exploration of the building blocks of American exceptionalism and how they have influenced both historical and contemporary foreign policy. The core of American exceptionalism lies in the nation's foundational beliefs, reinforced by geographic advantages, military strength, and cultural narratives of independence and moral superiority. Historically, these elements have driven expansionist policies and a sense of destined leadership, often articulated through national rhetoric emphasizing America’s unique role in the world.

American exceptionalism has roots in the early colonial period, where Protestant ideals and the notion of a “New Jerusalem” fostered a sense of divine purpose. Winthrop’s “A Model of Christian Charity” encapsulates this, suggesting the settlers’ mission was to exemplify moral excellence, which would serve as a beacon for others. Over time, this moral mission became intertwined with expansionism, embodying the belief that America’s destiny was to spread the principles of liberty and democracy. Kennedy and Reagan’s retasking of the nation’s role—as a “beacon of hope”—reinforces the perceivable mission of America as a moral leader, regardless of the evolving geopolitical landscape.

Military power has historically been a key building block, with the U.S. leveraging geographic isolation and military dominance to maintain a posture of selective engagement, often justified through doctrines of defense and national interest. President Washington’s Farewell Address exemplifies early calls for avoiding entanglements in European conflicts, promoting a form of strategic isolation. However, subsequent military interventions, such as the War of 1812, the Spanish-American War, and subsequent Cold War confrontations, illustrate a persistent tension between ideals of isolation and expansionism. These military endeavors are underpinned by a belief that U.S. strength confers the authority to shape the global order, reinforcing notions of American exceptionalism.

In recent decades, this exceptionalist perspective has been challenged by changes in global power dynamics and internal vulnerabilities, such as economic deficits and political polarization. Despite these challenges, the narrative of American uniqueness continues to influence foreign policy, manifesting in unilateral actions or commitments driven by moral justifications. The belief that America has a special role, often called the “last best hope of mankind,” shapes policy choices and national identity, maintaining a legacy rooted in historical narratives of moral superiority and destiny.

Conceptually, American exceptionalism is intertwined with expansionism—believing in the nation’s right and responsibility to extend its influence—and with an at times detached form of isolationism, selectively engaging when deemed necessary. This complex relationship is also informed by core cultural narratives, such as Manifest Destiny and the Protestant Errand in the Wilderness, which serve as foundational myths sustaining these policies across centuries. Understanding these interrelated themes enriches an analysis of contemporary foreign policy decisions and debates over America’s role in the world.

In conclusion, American exceptionalism’s building blocks—its beliefs in moral superiority, divine purpose, military strength, and geographic advantages—continue to significantly shape foreign policy. Recognizing these elements helps to comprehend why the U.S. has historically engaged in expansion or intervention and why it persists in asserting a unique global leadership role, despite evolving global challenges. This analysis underscores the importance of critically examining these historical and cultural foundations to better understand current American foreign policy strategies and debates.

References

• Beinart, P. (2010). The Beautiful Lie of American Omnipotence. National Journal.
• Campbell, D. (1998). Writing Security: United States foreign policy and the politics of identity. Manchester University Press.
• Mead, W. R. (2002). The American Foreign Policy Legacy. Foreign Affairs, 81(1), 1-13.
• Rehm, D. (2012). Legacy of The War of 1812. The Diane Rehm Show.
• Washington, G. (1796). Farewell Address.
• Winthrop, J. (1630). A Model of Christian Charity.
• BBC News. (2012). Quiz on the War of 1812.
• Pew Research Center. (2010). Global Attitudes & Trends.
• Bercovich, J. (2012). The Typology of America’s Mission. American Quarterly.
• History.com Editors. (2020). The War of 1812.