Comparative Exceptionalisms: An Analytical Framework

• In Event: Analytical Frames in International History and Politics

Abstract

Nations often cultivate narratives celebrating their exceptional status. Such exceptionalism, as we conceptualize and define it in this paper, does not tout merely the nation’s uniqueness, for all nations are exceptional in that sense or they could not maintain a distinctive sense of national identity. Rather, the exceptionalism in which we are interested centers on nations’ contingent claims to “superiority”—that the nation is greater on some critical dimension relative to some other (or perhaps to all others). This paper will present an analytical framework for studying national exceptionalism in comparative perspective.
We suggest that there are three critical dimensions along which exceptionalisms vary: 1) the identity of the inferior other, 2) the bases on which the claim to exceptionalism rests, and 3) the degree to which the exceptional model is thought to be replicable. First, the identity of the non-exceptional other may vary geographically (think if Israel labeling itself “the villa in the jungle”) or temporally (think of post-war Germany vs. war/pre-war Germany). Second, the bases on which exceptionalist narratives claim superiority can be quite varied in terms of their scope and their domain. The claim to superiority may rest on the nation’s political system, its morality, its technical-scientific achievement, its economic performance, its military prowess, or all of the above. Third, exceptionalist narratives may vary with respect to whether they claim to apply universally or to reflect a radical particularism. Some exceptionalisms envision a set of universal lessons, easily ported into other environments. The exceptionalist discourses underpinning liberal imperialism, from the French civilizing mission to the British white man’s burden, are exemplary in this regard. Updated Western liberal discourses of intervention nshare this imaginary, envisioning a replicable model defined by particular institutions and policies. Other exceptionalisms, however, seem to be rooted in unique, contingent histories. By some accounts, Chinese exceptionalism avers that China’s superiority is grounded not in institutions, policies, or practices, but rather in its history that has resulted in a distinctive, ineffable configuration that, by definition, cannot simply be reproduced elsewhere.
Our framework departs from the existing literature on exceptionalism in three ways. First, substantial portions of that literature conceptualize exceptionalism not as superiority but as uniqueness. In that sense, all nations are exceptional, as exceptionalism is not analytically distinguishable from national identity. By conceiving of exceptionalism as a claim to superiority, we allow for the possibility that not all nations at all times think of themselves as exceptional. Second, much literature explores exceptionalism as a claim that warrants empirical investigation. The findings either affirm or deny the nation’s uniqueness. But this literature thereby ignores the claim to exceptionalism as a political phenomenon. This paper presumes that regardless of its empirical veracity, the claim to exceptionalism itself has productive consequences. Third, the literature on exceptionalism often embodies and reproduces the very claim to exceptionalism. It places the country in question in cross-national comparative perspective only to affirm its uniqueness and to deny that it may profitably be compared to others. We insist, however, that making sense of exceptionalism, grasping its origins and revealing its consequences, requires rendering exceptionalism non-exceptional: studying exceptionalism in truly comparative perspective.
The aim of this paper is thus to define exceptionalism as an analytical category. At the heart of this project, then, lie the following questions: What is an exceptionalist narrative? When do political entities—whether nations or empires or some other political unit—develop such exceptionalist narratives? On what dimensions and bases do these claims to exceptionalism rest? Does it matter if external actors accept these claims to exceptionalism? This paper thus tries to find the nature and sources of exceptionalism, so as to, further down the line, be able to tease out its political effects—in the policies and politics that exceptionalist narratives legitimate and make possible in a range of countries.

Authors

• Hilde Eliassen Restad, Oslo New University College

• Ronald R. Krebs, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

• Ole-Jacob Sending, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI)