Last night I decided to forgo an hour’s sleep to watch a Davos 2012 conversation entitled ‘The Future of American Power in the 21st Century’.
The session was deftly chaired by the Dean of the National University of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, and the panel consisted of two senior Democrat representatives and two senior Republicans.
The discussion is a fascinating watch in that it so accurately, in my opinion, reflects the American national character type: confident and bold and unwaveringly clear on the assumed preeminent US role in leading and shaping the world of tomorrow.
It would be easy to describe, or dismiss even, the various views proffered by the US representatives in familiar terms of arrogance and hubris and cultural imperialism, and maybe even straight denial that the times they are-a-changin’.
It does appear to be genuinely unthinkable to the American leadership that the United States of America could be anything but the biggest, most powerful and most technologically advanced nation across all the usual league table measures such as the size of the economy and the strength and scale of the military.
For all of this the commentators owned, also without apology, America’s faults and very real contemporary challenges. They did this with what I would describe as typical American candour. On reflection it is reasonably remarkable that the status and trajectory of a single nation should command this level of attention when nations gather to discuss the global issues of the day. It is equally remarkable in turn that representatives of that country should so openly discuss the good, bad and ugly of their national existence in such candid terms in front of an international audience.
To this southern hemisphere observer’s considerable surprise the members from both parties articulated a remarkably similar view of America’s challenges. These included especially a need to “reform the nation’s balance sheet” through a flattening of the country’s taxation regime, the more equitable redistribution of income and the need to overcome the current political gridlock produced by the country’s intense and polarising partisan politics. Such glimpses of bi-partisan cohesion around issues as fundamental as these is both rare and welcomed.
In the spirit of the candour displayed during this session I must admit to moments of personal discomfort when the American speakers were talking in archetypically self-assured terms of how the United States intended to continue to drive the global agenda. This notwithstanding, I have considerable – albeit qualified – respect for the contribution made by the inheritors of the unfolding American experiment to the advancement of human progress. And having recently watched the series ‘God in America’ there is no doubting the sincerity of America’s belief that this global leadership role is the country’s manifest destiny.
While it is easy to criticise – and Homer Simpson, no less, has noted that “it is fun too!” – to my mind the ‘warts and all’ candour of this conversation confirms that “American exceptionalism” is indeed very real.
Image As Voice 