All Republics ultimately fall. Does that mean all presidents and congresses are pointless?

Otto is correct that societies all have their founding myths (George Washington and the cherry tree, etc.) Exceptionalism has its advantages if you building a country out of wilderness and so forth. It can become dangerous to the continued health of the country as we’ve seen over the last period of time. And militarism has certainly risen to the fore the last 25 years.

Of course, mythology and make believe are hardly the exclusive province of the Right, as the Left’s deification of MLK, Kennedy, FDR, etc. or normalization of homosexuality shows well.

No thanks? You’re welcome.

signed,
The Whiners

There is only one American public. A politics based on reminding them of their national sins may satisfy our spiritual, intellectual pride, but I ask you, is it best for them? Is it better that we play Cato while the Republic falls? For better or worse we operate in an electoral system. Reagan was wise enough to realize that before you can lead you must first attract.

And I’m sure none of these men think Americans are uniquely anything, good or ill; indeed, I rather think that’s the point of everything they’ve written. Americans have a different culture than other peoples and a different disposition, but they’re not unique among peoples.

So it seems you rather agree with them after all, you’d rather just not discuss the failings, just the good parts. Not terribly enlightening that.

And Thomas, I think the line between “guiding” and “chiding” is a rather fuzzy one, if we agree that neither involve shaking pom-poms for the U.S.

mnbr, I have been having this discussion with Dr. Deneen on the TAC bog regarding optimism and the American character. I agree with you that a tendency toward chauvinism is universal among humanity, except perhaps in decadent ones like our own. This is why I, like you, I defend American optimism, not because it is always wise, but because it is characteristically American. It is certainly preferable to its opposite, pessimism.

There is much to be said in favor of circumspection and common sense and an appreciation of our fallen nature in crafting a political philosophy. Certainly The Founders held this view. My point is that given this tendency toward optimism Conservatives would succeed more by guiding than chiding. We have to operate within the culture in which we live.

I also think we need to differentiate between elements of American culture and political life that have been introduced in the 20th Century, and traditional characteristics. Recent transplants are easier to uproot.

Or — and this seems to be true emotional chord that is struck — they (like many on the left) seem to find the American people a rather uniquely depraved and contemptible lot. I just don’t buy it. American history is not uniquely sinful. On balance the good outweighs the bad. I rejoice that Lincoln crushed slavery and that FDR did the same to Hitler and Tojo. These were blessings for all of mankind. (I haven’t followed AmCon or Larison very closely till now, but I have an impression they might not go along with me on this…) And, personally, I have found average Americans — and I stress the comparison of averages, rather than the common mistake of comparing the American average versus foreign elites — to be the most tolerant, decent and generally civilized people among whom I have lived. So there! I like ‘em!

Unfortunately, it may be that men simply aren’t capable of such a fine balance. It may rather be that we will have to content ourselves with lessening the degree to which our optimistic character gives way to chauvinism and exceptionalism.

The spirit of Conservatism is one of restraint and thoughtfulness, but as a movement it cannot prosper if it flies in the face of the culture. I would argue that optimism is generally a positive trait. We Conservatives must work to guide expressions of this optimism in positive channels if we are to make headway.