How have American writers critiqued the idea of American exceptionalism?

Caitlyn Fong

H Block

In 1630, John Winthrop encouraged the New England Puritans to embrace the concept that they are chosen by God. Over the years, this idea has become known as American Exceptionalism. Although several valid arguments have been made for American exceptionalism, many American writers have critiqued it, including two contemporary ones. Sarah Vowell, a New York Times’ bestselling author, and Scott Shane, a writer for the New York Times, analyze this concept in different manners. Vowell uses tone to convey her feelings on American exceptionalism while Shane bases his evaluation on modern-day issues.

In her book The Wordy Shipmates, Vowell writes with a sarcastic and snarky tone. She indirectly criticizes American exceptionalism when she writes, “From New England’s Puritans we inherited the idea that America is blessed and ordained by God above all nations, but lost the fear of wrath and retribution,” (Vowell). She blames the United States’ arrogance on John Winthrop’s idea that the Puritans were chosen by God or, in other words, American exceptionalism. Vowell argues that America’s hubris has become excessive because Americans are not reluctant to act. They feel that they cannot be punished since they are superior, so they do whatever they want. She also mocks Winthrop by saying, “As I write this, the United States of America is still a city on a hill; and it’s still shining - because we never turn off the lights in our torture prisons. That’s how we carry out the sleep deprivation,” (Vowell). Her critique is that striving to be the center of attention causes Americans to overwork themselves, which may look good on the outside, but is internally detrimental. Vowell describes the United States as a country who tortures their people just to appear outstanding to the rest of the world. Through her snide tone, Sarah Vowell condemns American exceptionalism in her writing.
One of Scott Shane’s articles, titled The Opiate of Exceptionalism, studies the idea of American exceptionalism in relation to the 2012 presidential election. He argues that American exceptionalism harms the United States rather than helps it. Even though “[American exceptionalism] may inspire some people and politicians to perform heroically, … during a presidential campaign, it can be deeply dysfunctional, ensuring that many major issues are barely discussed,” (Shane). Presidential candidates want to win over voters, so they do not talk about anything that could question the United States’ dominance. The country’s serious problems are not deliberated, which keeps them from getting fixed. Likewise, Shane states that “[b]oth parties would rather avert their eyes from such difficult challenges - because we, the people, would rather avert our eyes,” (Shane). By ignoring how low their country ranks worldwide in many categories, Americans will soon become inferior to other countries without realizing it. No one is acknowledging that solutions are needed, so while the world is advancing, America will be stuck where they are right now, still thinking they are ahead. Scott Shane uses current events to analyze and critique American exceptionalism.
Two contemporary American writers, Sarah Vowell and Scott Shane, have critiqued American exceptionalism. Vowell reveals her scrutiny through her mocking tone of John Winthrop’s ideas, as Shane expresses his opinion by applying it to present-day events and issues. American exceptionalism has existed since 1630 and still continues to affect the United States today.