There is no compelling or acceptable explanation for the lower voting patterns in the U.S., other than perhaps an assumption by many nonvoters that their fellow citizens will vote in ways that produce sufficiently acceptable results, obviating the need to vote oneself. Of course, there are always some citizens who feel their vote will not make a difference—i.e., a Democratic voter in a heavily Republican state or a Republican voter in a heavily Democratic state.
But the seemingly low turnout should not be seen as evidence that Americans generally feel voting is an unimportant feature of the country’s values.
Equality. The Founding Fathers certainly recognized the hypocrisy of talking about the virtues of equality when the country had nearly a half million slaves with no prospect of their ever achieving equality. But those at the Constitutional Convention decided that the political exigencies of getting a constitution in place required allowing the southern states, at a minimum, to maintain slavery. And the idea that women should be guaranteed any rights at all was not even discussed. Protections for other disenfranchised groups or minorities were also not on the Founding Fathers’ agenda, the soaring language of the Declaration of Independence notwithstanding. While the U.S. still struggles with the concept of achieving equality for all citizens, and true equality is still not a near-term reality, there is a general view within the country today that equality of opportunity and rights, for all citizens, is an important part of what America is supposed to be all about. There will still be challenges to reaching this goal for all Americans (and I doubt we will really get there in my lifetime).
That said, recent decades in the U.S. have seen widespread efforts to facilitate opportunities for those segments of society not truly treated as equal in the past—including gays, individuals with physical and mental disabilities, religious and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and former felony convicts, among other groups. The goal of producing greater equality has not been without controversy, but generally there has been a view recently that the concept of equal rights and opportunities cannot be overlooked in the future if the words of the Declaration of Independence are to have real meaning.
Freedom of Speech. There are many freedoms that seem essential to Americans, but perhaps none is more fundamental than the freedom of speech. It is not a surprise, therefore, that it is included in the First Amendment to the Constitution. There have been long and heated struggles about what can in fact be said or published within the Constitution’s meaning. But the courts in this country have generally given a wide swath to the First Amendment and have typically prohibited only speech that might clearly endanger the country’s security, or the safety of individuals or the public.
It should be noted that an important element of this freedom is the right—if not obligation—of citizens to participate in their governmental process by questioning government and inquiring about its actions.
Freedom of Religion. Also in the First Amendment is the freedom of religion. Those early settlers who arrived from Europe were often seeking religious freedom, and the concern that a government might restrict or favor a certain type of religion has been a worry of Americans throughout our history. The country has endured religious discrimination throughout large parts of its history, and those issues still exist in some areas. But there is no doubt that under the laws in this country, and with the overwhelming support of the American people, the free exercise of one’s religion (or nonreligion) is an essential American gene, one repeatedly upheld by the courts.
The Rule of Law. There are few countries that place such a high value on the rule of law, as opposed to political whim or bias, as does the United States. Where else do federal officeholders swear an allegiance to a 230-year-old Constitution? Where else are the rulings of the highest court in the land widely accepted as the law, even when a decision is five-to-four? What accounts for this reverence for the law and the general obedience to it? There are no doubt many answers, but my view is that the courts—especially the federal courts—are seen as honest and populated by talented individuals, focused on fairness and obedience to the law.
While legislative leaders, in federal or state governments, are clearly not held in the same high regard, the American system of government places high value on the binding outcome of the legislative process. The absence of the rule of law in many other countries has solidified the view that, while the courts and legislatures in the U.S. are far from perfect in their decision-making, the stability brought about by an adherence to their decisions makes the rule of law an indispensable American gene.
This was evident in the Trump election challenge—the courts invariably held against the Trump advocates’ position, and that was almost universally accepted as the law of the land. Similarly, the law was followed in the way the Electoral College votes were counted. Congress’s decision in counting the election votes was accepted as the final and binding decision on the election’s outcome.
Separation of Powers. The drafters of the Constitution feared giving too much power to one person or to one part of the government that they were creating. So they developed the concept of separation of powers, or checks and balances. No branch would have too much power, and the power of one part of government could be checked by another part of government. The idea was a bit novel at the time. The original concept gave the most important powers—the power of the purse and the power to wage war—to the legislative branch. This branch, the Congress, may have been initially viewed as first among equals—it was, after all, described in Article One of the Constitution.
In time, the executive branch, led by the president, has developed far more power than anyone ever anticipated at the Constitutional Convention. That has been true of the judicial branch as well, with its power, first announced by the Supreme Court in 1803 in Marbury v. Madison, to declare laws unconstitutional. While the three branches may operate somewhat differently than initially conceived, the separation of powers concept has certainly taken hold, and the belief in a system where power is divided is clearly an important American gene.
Civilian Control of the Military; Peaceful Transfer of Power. The Constitution made the president commander in chief, establishing the concept that the military would be subject to civilian control. That choice reflected the concern about a powerful military ultimately controlling the government, as had frequently happened in Europe. With the military subject to civilian control, the prospect of a military coup was greatly diminished. As a result, there was an expectation of a peaceful transfer of power, unlikely to be disrupted by military interference. This concept has worked well over the centuries. There have been no military coups in the U.S., and power has been transferred peacefully after elections—a gene thought to be indispensable to the country’s stability and achievements.
This was quite evident in the aftermath of the 2020 election, when the U.S. military leadership made clear that it had no role to play in the election outcome—no martial law and no politicization of the military.
Capitalism and Entrepreneurship. The word capitalism does not appear in the Declaration of Independence or in the Constitution. But from the early days of the republic, the economic construct of capitalism took hold and became a gene in the growth and strength of the American economy. Socialism and communism never had a serious chance of dislodging capitalism in this country, though obviously that was not true around much of the rest of the world. There are many variants of capitalism, but in the U.S. there has been a strong reliance on an entrepreneurial-led capitalism. New companies are started by creative and enterprising individuals, grow into large companies fueling economic and employment growth, and are displaced over time by even newer ventures more attuned to changing technologies and needs. And while government regulates these companies in the public interest, it does not own or control them or attempt to do so.
It is evident that the considerable wealth created by these types of free-market capitalist activities may make some individuals very affluent, and at times may also pr
oduce undesirable levels of income inequality. But just as clearly, the businesses created by this system create jobs and grow the economy to the country’s overall benefit. Of course, other countries have a capitalist tradition, and an entrepreneurial bent. But no other country seems to have a gene favoring entrepreneurial activity—and capitalism—to the same degree as does the United States.
Immigration. To a greater extent than with any other country, the United States is widely seen as having been built by immigrants. In the nation’s early days, everyone and anyone was welcome, though those who came from abroad were primarily from western Europe. When immigrants began arriving from other parts of the world in the late nineteenth century, concerns arose about the reduced homogeneity of the population, and immigration constraints were imposed after World War I. That changed in the 1960s, and immigrants from around the world, particularly those with desired skills, were more regularly welcomed, and the country was again seen as one that recognized the value of immigration. While there was an interruption in that perspective from 2016 to 2020, and there remain real concerns about rampant illegal immigration at our southern border, today the country is generally again seen as having an immigration gene, welcoming those who enter legally (i.e., meet our immigration law requirements) and who work to improve the country with their skills, hard work, and knowledge.
Diversity. At the country’s inception, its population was largely western European colonists, Native Americans, and enslaved Africans. Those in control of the country favored Western Europeans for virtually all of society’s benefits, believing that they had the greatest intellectual capabilities and moral strengths. Over several centuries, though, as the U.S. population dramatically changed in composition—by 2045, the country will no longer be majority non-Hispanic white—diversity has increasingly come to be seen as a strength of the country. There is thus a push in all parts of American society to encourage and take advantage of the country’s increasing diversity. Stated differently, there is now a relatively new gene in America—the realization that diversity brings clear strengths that are desirable, and thus is to be encouraged and pursued if America is to remain a vibrant force in the world.
Culture. Every country has a distinctive culture—a set of beliefs, customs, practices, and aspirations that unite the country’s population and tend to provide a common purpose. The U.S. is no different, though American culture has perhaps evolved more over the years than the cultures of much older countries with less diverse population growth. In the country’s early years, its culture was seen by those in Europe as not being particularly refined, impressive, or attractive. That changed in the late 1800s, as the U.S. put the Civil War behind it, expanded, grew in wealth and population, and managed to create new ways of expressing its values and thoughts in the performing arts, the visual arts, literature, architecture, education, athletics, and philanthropy. What could be more distinctly American than jazz, Hollywood movies, Broadway musicals, abstract art, baseball, Thanksgiving dinners, and Fourth of July celebrations?
In so many cultural areas, the United States has become a global leader over the past hundred years or so, and the result is that its culture is increasingly viewed with envy in many parts of the world.
To be sure, there is not one American culture. America has the highest immigrant population of any country and thus has too diverse a population for there to be a single culture whose parts are shared by everyone. But if there is a shared element to America’s culture, it is increasingly the view that the country should allow individuals to pursue their talents and ambitions, largely unfettered by central control or government interference, with merit and skill prevailing to the greatest extent possible. That is America’s real culture gene.
The American Dream. In every country, there are stories of individuals who started life with modest resources or social status but somehow rose to positions of great influence, wealth, social standing, and leadership. In the United States, unlike in some other countries, this upward trajectory seems to be a central tenet of what is most encouraged and admired—using skill, talent, and hard work to rise to the top from the bottom. This phenomenon has been labeled the American Dream. Earlier it might have been called a Horatio Alger story, after the author who wrote numerous stories of young boys (and one girl) who overcame hardships to rise to the top of their area of activity.
This type of occurrence is still very much admired in the United States, and can well be said to be a key gene within the country. That said, it is increasingly recognized that the American Dream is not as readily attainable by those who face overwhelming discriminatory barriers (because of race, religion, gender, sexual preference, or ethnicity) or cultural roadblocks (due to language challenges or educational backgrounds). Ironically, this recognition has actually increased the praise for those who are able to succeed despite these odds.
Added together, these thirteen genes have produced a wide range of events in the course of this country’s history; they have enabled the American Experiment to blossom, far more than the founders even imagined possible. I recognize, though, that my views on what qualities make America so distinctive may not be held by other observers or other Americans. So I thought that I could perhaps get a better, fuller snapshot of what others think through a public opinion survey.
Toward that end, I asked the Harris Poll organization to do a representative survey of Americans about what they think makes America distinctive. The poll of 2,000 Americans was conducted shortly before the 2020 elections. The full results appear in Appendix II of this book.
Interestingly, the most distinctive quality was viewed as the freedom of speech, with 64 percent of the respondents citing that freedom. Only one other quality polled above 50 percent—the opportunity to vote in free and fair elections, cited by 51 percent. A large percentage of those surveyed cared so much about a number of the freedoms they cherish that they indicated a willingness to risk their lives to protect them, with freedom of speech again polling at the top. Younger Americans tended to value these distinctive qualities to a lesser extent than older Americans. And younger Americans tended to be less concerned that everyone view America as the “best” country.
As to what those surveyed would most like to see America change to improve the country, the support for any given action was not overwhelming—but the two actions most cited were ending systemic racism and providing accessible, affordable health care for everyone.
This concern about racism is also reflected in the survey respondents’ view that the country is still significantly affected by its having sanctioned slavery. And, while the Founding Fathers did sanction slavery, there is a widely held view that the founders’ ideas (or at least rhetoric) about equality and freedom may not be as valued by today’s leaders.
Despite the concerns, Americans greatly value living in the U.S., and by overwhelming numbers do not want to leave for another country. As to the future, despite the stresses of the pandemic, economic decline, and racial confrontations, a majority of Americans still feel the country’s best days are ahead of it, and still expect to achieve the American Dream—good signs overall.
* * *
In two previous books, The American Story and How to Lead, I tried to cover subjects relating to American history and leadership by editing and providing my perspective on interviews that I held, respectively, with well-known historians and then with leaders from many walks of life.
So I thought, perhaps tempting fate, that I would use the same approach in The American Experiment, a book about how a certain unique combination of qualities produced, over two centuries, a distinctive country—the United States of America. Here I have combined interviews I have conducted in recent years with both well-known historians and well-known leaders, each knowledgeable about, or the embodiment of, some of these singular American traits. As with the previous two books, the conversations have been edited for length and consistency, and updated as needed, in consultation with the interviewees.
&
nbsp; I have tried, through these interviews and some of my own perspectives, to show how various qualities possessed by Americans—essentially our genes—have produced a series of events, over the country’s history, which enabled the Constitutional Convention’s initial experiment in representative democracy to evolve into a country that, in the ensuing two-plus centuries, became—and remains—the world’s economic, political, military, scientific/technological, and entrepreneurial leader.
The genes that coalesced into the American Experiment at times worked well together, and at other times produced unfortunate outcomes. In my view, an understanding of America today really requires an understanding of the genes that produced the American Experiment. Such an understanding can better help Americans now and in the future make this experiment work better for all Americans, and thereby produce a country which actually achieves the goals that the Founding Fathers’ uplifting language set for the nation.
In short, this American Experiment, while imperfect and evolving, has produced a country generally pleasing to a large part of the American population. But this experiment is not so pleasing as to keep Americans from recognizing that, while this unique country is still the envy of many in the world, the United States has still failed to live up to all of its founding ideals. And the country’s shortcomings are increasingly apparent. This experiment is certainly better today than some might have thought would be the case at the country’s founding, but with much progress still to be made in many areas. And there is no guarantee, if Americans ignore or minimize the genes that produced the country’s strengths over the past two centuries, that continued global leadership of the United States is inevitable.
The American Experiment Page 2
