easy i would say two hours and they say look let's not pick this fight now let's wait and see what happens lagarde you know by herself although she is chicago wall street let's say she's an american player go on basically she's not a european player she's an atlanticist but with an american but by herself is not she's absolutely impotent like so this was in the corner of the york times saying let's be patient which is completely. redundant when you think about it so the chinese are picking this fight in the long run and with the help of the brics so if there is some modification of the international financial system it has to be engineered by the four largest brics as asia times course and it has escobar that does occur now that statement right here on r.t. for morning.

download the official publication. i pod touch from the i.q. some still. see life on the good. ol t.'s mind the old comes and says feeds now in the palm of your. column.

today violence is once again fled up the phone these are the images. from the streets of canada. keep. following welcome to crossfire crime purell about just how exceptional american exceptionalism goes to the very foundation of how most americans see their country's history and place in the world is there any truth to this world view or is it just a myth. to continue. to

discuss the meaning of american exceptionalism i'm joined by david merkel in copenhagen he is a former deputy assistant secretary of state in the administration of george w. bush in oxford we go to god to hard thing from oxford university and author of the myth of american exceptionalism and in new york we cross to peter shock he is a professor at yale law school and coeditor of understanding america the anatomy of an exceptional nation and another member of our cross talk team yelena hunger all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want since you wrote a book on it either go to godfrey first in oxford you are all quite open out there it's a myth why is that a myth well first of all a myth does not mean that everything about it is untrue it is an idea or a story which is partially true or none of the things i say and times in the book is that it's not

a good thing to believe things which are not wholly true now that basically two parts to my thesis one is that historically. people in the united states exaggerate how different. sides are exceptional to history and that in fact the history of the united states and many many important ways has been part of large and movements. larger ideas the protestant reformation the enlightenment all kinds of political and legal ideas which came from europe but also such great historical movements as the competition between the british and french and in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries industrialisation the industrial revolution all of these things said present the united states somehow created only american events and ideas such as massachusetts. or frederick jackson turns the frontier seems to me to be distorting history that's the one idea

the second idea which is probably more controversial is the idea that somehow since the end of the cold war american exceptionalism become more nationalistic more aggressive and more of a problem for the rest of the world if i go to you peter i mean a lot of people see american exceptionalism as a problem from americans also i mean how do you reflect about what godfrey just said because he did a sickly deflates it or it diminishes they did is that america is just an extension of the european experience in many different ways though you could say they go republican ideas came to the fore there but in any other ways are americans exaggerating who they are and what they are. well i don't know you know it's very much a matter of degree no sensible person would imagine that the american culture began in seven hundred seventy six and didn't have important roots in europe of course it did. the question really is whether the united states has developed a culture and

a political system an economic system that is sufficiently different from european countries in particular in some other countries as well. that we could think of it . as very distinctive characteristics of a of a society and i think that's undoubtedly true there are a number of respects in which we differ very decidedly from from europe to use the most obvious comparison first is that we are a very. as societies go we are very. attractive to immigrants and we generally receive immigrants in a very in a very dynamic way and in very large numbers and that has shaped almost everything else about our society ok we're saving really demographically we're very different than europe we have a growing population part of that is because of immigration but

a part of it's also because americans tend to be much more optimistic than europeans are and believe in the future in ways that europeans don't thirdly there's a very strong as a religious kind of character and says we just kind of exaggerate to is that i mean that how do you know how optimistic europeans meticulously think. well we have service we have survey evidence we have survey evidence that suggests that people's attitudes toward the future towards their ability to control their destinies are very different in europe and the united states and to sions tend to reflect that now again these are matters of degree i'm not suggesting that everybody said. this characteristic that the society in general tends to be much more future oriented and watch more confident about what will happen in the future and here in europe did you do your research before the great recession because i see a lot of depression among europeans and americans if i go to you david you know i'm

going to pick on you here i mean a lot of people say american foreign policy and it doesn't matter if it's a democrat or republican if it's bush or it's obama it's exceptionalism and it's a very negative i mean exceptionalism that that even goes as far as what people say is imperialism americans think they're better than everyone else and they know the future better than everyone else and they know what's better for everyone else i mean that that's in and it was mentioned by godfrey earlier that a lot of people say this exceptionalism really got magnified out even out of control but after the end of the cold war because of the only being the only superpower in the world. well i think that i think the united states has been a positive force for mankind i think that the world with the united states in a leadership role is a world that's moving in the direction of greater prosperity and greater freedom for people now that does not mean that the united states hasn't made mistakes mistakes and it does not mean that the united states should should go it alone but

clearly there are countries that exhibit leadership there are countries that exhibit a desire to join consensus and there are countries and leaders who seem to want to frustrate consensus so i think that that u.s. foreign policy while not perfect has really been a very positive force and has been quite distinct from other you know leadership leading leading countries in the twentieth century ok the first century you know what i mean peter a lot of people would say is that you know the united states will join in organisations that it's. its purpose is. protocol is one of them not joining the international criminal court i mean this is a exceptionalism in a negative way in the eyes of many people in the world where the united states if it can't control the game it will play yeah i say that's true the united states does calculate its national self interest in deciding what to do and what not to do

i think every state does that and it's probably it's probably a universal characteristic of political systems and in terms of kioto in the international criminal court you have to assess each of those positions on their merits there are very strong reasons why the united states resisted the kyoto protocol and there are strong reasons why the u.s. has declined to join the criminal court one could disagree with those that you know that's a legitimate argument but there were guided by in writing self-interest i think is . it is and do what it will ok but i mean this is what this is what's so interesting it is already a game of go ahead go ahead jump in i started a fight you can continue it go ahead are you going to god for going to see that this is what so this is i i agree with what peter said this is what's so interesting is that when the united states gets behind something or or builds consensus who are a common good that common good is also in our national interests so when we oppose

something out of national interest reasons it kind of makes people think that all we're about is our national interest i think that what's different is that is that there is a a mix of idealism in reality all the take on our foreign policy that in many ways but not exclusively in many ways is uniquely american and has as set us up in a perfect situation since since world war one to really build consensus around greater freedom and greater prosperity ok and that means invading countries without a u.n. resolution also i godfrey go ahead ahead go. well i'm i'm not in the business of saying that the united states has not done many positive things i think the united states for example. in the defeat of nazi germany and we can all be very good i'll give you a very good example i was on a radio discussion as it happens a while ago when i made the point that while the united states played

a very important part in defeating nazi germany to the british empire which most americans value violently disapproved of and so to the soviet union which even more americans disagreed with the american academic told him just simply thought i was talking nonsense it was a completely new idea that the the great britain or the the soviet union played any role in fighting nazi germany that's what i mean by except i think you should tax the united states for every stupid thing that an academic says that we say well stupid things i mean i think it's ok. i think i have very good morning very has there been a very good point because they have long and how policy is formed i mean roger brings up an excellent point here i mean the number how many people actually know the role in the united states the role of the soviet union in the second world war and if they did though they would understand how russia is feels about its

neighborhood in nato expansion it would explain a lot of things russia's act behavior would seem so much more irrational if americans actually knew history that's very important i'm sorry dave if you were going to judge and they're just on the do you think. american know as much about history as possible all right i don't think that's i think and i mean a controversial. but let me just say one thing about american foreign policy which is that it is it is infused with david said with a kind of idealism and more hourly which certainly isn't. alone it's that is to say that it's self-interest is it's dominant but it does define self-interest in moralistic ways and that can lead to great tragedies and mistakes as well was great . and triumphs ok david you were before we go to the break ok another example all right i think go ahead and i want to david go ahead real quick question are you going to read yeah i'm talking about woodrow wilson in nine hundred eighteen one

thousand nine hundred roubles and could not open his mouth without saying that the united states alone had no selfish interests in the world. in theory it should be ok because the united states had the greatest interest of all which is that of an emerging from the war as the richest and most powerful nation in the world all right gentlemen i'm going to jump in here after a short break we'll continue our discussion on american exceptionalism stay with our.

some. players. took a look or. mrs tree still keeps it sequence of announced time to me feel that the soviet files on the a. wealthy british style. is not the type of. market finance come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy

with this month's cause or there are no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars a report on r g. the emissions free credit take should free in-store charges free coming from and free. three stooges free. the old free blank cancelling video for your media projects and free media don carty dot com. play. chicken soup. welcome back you know a little remind you we're talking about american exceptionalism today.

but before let's see what russians think about the u.s. americanism that is an all ideology morning revolution being over the u.s. exceptionalism implies that country is qualitatively different from other nations but is this concept why both today with the u.s. dominance on the decline and other countries on the rise as well should americans were think exceptionalism the russian public opinion research center citizens attitude towards the united states the center of the respondents said they had positive feelings and another twenty seven feel negative and that's a minute the question remains whether any country should think of itself as exceptional. ok david i'd like to go to you but and i'd like everyone keep a thought in mind this david because david said he when he got

a three pointer i think was mandolin albright said the united states stands taller so we can see farther that is a very arrogant statement and is not taken very well around the world so go ahead david. firstly if someone from her diminutive says. i'd like to i'd like to go to to godfrey's point about woodrow wilson the united states it was a result of world war two one that the united states came out as a pretty predominant power but it was not wilson campaigned about keeping neutral there was a huge debate united states we weren't prepared and it was a tragic result of the ravages of world war one on europe and the united states did come out as a more dominant power relative to the destruction of europe after world war one but look what happened after world war one look what happened after world war two the united states' role in rebuilding other countries other former enemies was specific and peter i think i think obviously we should all learn more about history but i

would say that the policymakers in the united states who thought about the importance of protecting the sovereignty of russia's neighbors who thought about the importance of nato enlargement knew well the massive contribution of the citizens of the soviet union during world war two and knew well of the ravages that stalin brought on russia's neighbors afterwards and i think that those two things made the importance of what president bush and clinton and george w. bush talked about as far as a importance of a europe whole free and it peace and the exciting thing the third point the exciting thing about about the united states not having as far of a distance between its leadership in other countries is all these other countries are rising up to have a stronger voice and to take a greater responsibility because i do think united states is exceptional it has a big role to play in the united states and with that comes a great responsibility ok godfrey i mean i guess i'd like to jump in here i'm going

. to enable you in addition. ok in addition to the examples of world war one and world war two in the post. recoveries facilitated by the united states you also have nato was mentioned and the e.u. is also a project that benefited a lot i think from from american policy and then finally there's the world trading regime which is a very important institution for knitting together disparate. societies and economies and the u.s. played a leading role in all of those except obviously for the e.u. which. played a facilitator of it certainly did certainly did won't. so that's one thing the second thing is that the fact that a statement is arrogant. that it causes negative reactions around the world does not mean that it's false. and said in a different way unless. you know assertive or aggressive way but it doesn't mean

that is force. the third thing to say let me jump in here a bit. if i can just say something about woodrow wilson i mean would your wilson said in a speech in philadelphia that there is such a thing as being too proud to fight it was not too proud to tak mexico twice and in fact he did get involved in the one but he what he did do was to suggest that the rest of the world must adopt ideas in detail even when they were a country to the interests of other people that is according to those ideas that they were what were those ideas they were personal freedom they were they were well you know yes i mean here we go you know we have to invade countries to make them free oh my goodness you know i'm really you know the people of iraq you know they don't all agree with that statement i wouldn't trust the public opinion poll coming from their afghanistan as well ok so i mean i don't see how can we still say these

kind of you know a statement like that is because of the end of the cold war and the arrogance of exceptionalism i david have american. foreign policy is blinded by this exceptionalism and gives grass to many people around the world to this day i mean here we are you know it's still nothing's off the table it's go to war against iran i mean it's constant thunder you know go to war go to war it's all because we're such an exceptional people that we know the truth of the world it's ridiculous it's dishonest and i know that's not true. and i was telling his neighbors when he was it was. well here i thought there was i think but not my hope position is that i think it's important not to believe things and not wholly true it is not the case that woodrow wilson offered to bring personal freedom to the world there were two principles two principles if you ideological principles and the fourteen ones one was purely an ancient issue. of american self interest which was so-called freedom

of the seas which was a way of undermining specifically british advantages and the other that was open covenants. which i think most people now are entirely in favor of but it was not about bringing personal freedom to the people so that would all to an extent i am sure i got very few can find a university there in oxford i would suggest that you dig up the fourteen points i would suggest that you try and look at all the woodrow wilson's neighbors and i got a part of it well i'm going to hear what i think is important i've got the forty was a rebel book about so don't put me down in that area where i think it really was it's not what doesn't work for her year old baby suggest how dare you suggest i would go by the fourteen points without having read them because he's it's american exceptionalism and smart peter in new york go ahead. i think it's not very useful to get hung up on speeches that were made by a president

a hundred years ago the question is the long the long arc of history and in the long arc of history america has been a very. very important force for good in the world with lots of mistakes along the way lots of tragedies that we have helped to create but. on balance i think it's impossible to make the case that we have not been a very important force for progressive ideals all right let's change gears here you've got of course i'm not saying anything of the kind if you read my book because i read the fourteen points if you read my book you'll find i got out of my way again and again and again to list the name many ways in which the united states had a positive effect i'm just saying that many things are believed by americans we could not be true all right gentlemen let's kind of change years if you want to make one more point in foreign policy i'd like to look internally go ahead david that's the

test what i think what i think we could we could agree upon is there has been there has been points where the united states has built great consensus and move things forward by by example and i think what is the frustration is that there is coming across the idea of too much lecturing of saying the way a country another country should behave without people seeing the united states behave in such such a way i think that's what godfrey's getting to so there's definitely a examples of where the united states has made mistakes mistakes and where the national interest was probably contrary to to a particular country's interest but i think as paul in new york new york said i think the united states has been a force for positive force in mankind and i think that we can do a lot to enhance our own image as living by that example. and trying to build greater consensus or countries that are contrary to that consensus stand out

a little bit more than when i could have any consensus on this program here gentlemen i can change gears a little bit here. exceptionalism yes united states is exceptional because of its prison inmate population is quite exceptional death penalty not too many how countries in the world have that exceptionally bad health care maybe that will change social inequality public education none of these things are particularly proud beacons in american society right now he compared to other countries i go to peter on the out there i mean all the things that we used to be so proud of in the united states there are a lot of them are lagging and biking very badly. i would agree with that. and i would say as as we say in our book that excessive exceptionalism has consigned to the core and there are some very bad ways in which we are exceptional as well as many good ways so i would not contest that at all what i would say is

that the united states is unusually. it's usually strong in its self-criticism. for all the arrogance it may be perceived the broad the united states the mescal is a very very self-critical people and so the the the process sees the political process is perennially these ills are very very robust ok godfrey when you tell me i tell you that i just wanted to mention a very interesting book by a young american historian called peter baldwin in which an enormous strength enormous dieter shows that in many many parameters the united states now achieved lies not of the top or the bottom but somewhere in the middle between developing countries and that's if you like a concrete way of suggesting my thesis which is not that everything's that you know it's good god no but it is the united states is a country like others in many ways stronger than many many ways a better place for people to live in than some but it is not exceptional. to give

you the last word david i would say in some respects it is exceptional particularly with regard to its religious characteristics its attitudes toward immigration its suspicion of centralized power those are those are unusual it's not unique features in the western in the western political tradition as institutionalized today i'm afraid and as a german here david we've run out of time thank you for a very interesting discussion many thanks to my guests to be in copenhagen new york in oxford and thanks to our viewers for watching us here r.t. see you next time and remember crosstalk.

a charmer in here broadcasting live from washington d.c. coming up today on the big picture.