Exemplary Überpower

by David VIckrey
Published: Last Updated on 0 comment 7 views

joffe_1

  Is there anyone better qualified to write about the vicissitudes of the the Germany-America transatlantic relationship than Josef Joffe?  Educated at Swarthmore and Harvard, Joffe spends most of his time in Washington DC while he also edits and publishes the influential Hamburg weekly Die Zeit.  Now Joffe has come out with a new book about the US: Überpower: The Imperial Temptation of America.  The basic thrust of the book is that the United States is today not just a great power, it is something entirely new in history – an Überpower that is stronger that all of its adversaries put together, with a defense budget greater than the combined spending of the rest of the world. Joffe scoffs at the notion that China could threaten US spremacy in the coming decades, Russia is just a shadow of its former power, and the EU is a farce as military force.

And so as the Überpower the United States will always be forced to confront every issue in the world from Darfur to Pyongyang – and in the process become the object of hate and resentment.  Joffe is especially strong when he examines the almost irrational anti-Americanism that is rampant in Europe. Joffe is scathing as he psychoanalyzes the anti-Americanism of his countrymen:

" The second theme is that America is socially retrograde. It is the land of "predatory capitalism" (Raubtierkapitalismus) in the words of the former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt, a country that denies critical social services, like welfare and health insurance, to those who need it most. Coming from behind in the German electoral campaign of 2002, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder resorted (successfully, in the end) to carefully coded anti-Americanism. In a campaign speech in Hanover, he damned America’s ways by praising the superiority of the "German way" (deutscher Weg). "The days are now truly over when America and others were to serve as an example to us. The plundering of little people in the United States, who must now worry about their old-age pensions, while top managers carry home millions and billions after a company bankruptcy, that is not the German way we want for ourselves." Nonetheless, Schrööder’s "Agenda 2010" provided for precisely the kind of welfare cuts mandated by Bill Clinton’s 1996 "workfare" legislation, which would cause seven million people—one-half of all German recipients—to leave the welfare rolls and start working. Apart from the fact that U.S. executives do not make "billions", the point of this tale is the functionality of anti-Americanism in the German domestic political contest. The chancellor denounced the United States while emulating it, setting up the country as a convenient scapegoat (and smokescreen) for the harsh policies he himself enacted. Freud would clap hands over such a vivid instance of projection."  – Josef Joffe Überpower

Joffe doesn’t have any answers to this anti-Americanism: it is simpy the price the nation has to pay for being an Überpower.  Whatever America does in the world, it will be feared, resented, and hated – it’s lonely at the top.  That is our fate, according to Joffe.

But not everyone agrees with Joffe that being hated as an Überpower is our necessary fate.  I want to recommend a new journal – Democracy: A Journal of Ideas – that contains a lot of terrific free content available online (with free registration). The first issue contains an interesting essay by Michael Signer: A City on the Hill.  Signer rejects the failed neoconservatism of the right, as well as the Realpolitik of some of the more moderate Republicans and Democrats.  Instead, he advocates a new foreign policy direction based on Exemplarism.  Here he agrees with Joffe’s analysis of the primacy of the United States as a dominant force:

"In recent years, liberals have underestimated the importance of U.S. primacy, realists have ignored the power of moral idealism, and neoconservatives have scoffed at the necessity of prestige. Exemplarism would chart a course through these shoals, placing the United States in a community, but as its leader. It is a foreign policy for a time when meeting so many of the threats the United States faces requires not only international cooperation, but the cooperation of individuals around the world. And we’ve seen this approach work before–elements of exemplarism can be found in Franklin Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms, Harry S Truman’s Marshall Plan, John F. Kennedy’s Peace Corps, and Bill Clinton’s Kosovo intervention. The idea of exemplarism is uniquely American–and recognizes America’s singular status–while providing a vision of how a superpower can lead a multipolar world of interdependent nations."

In a way, America’s postwar policy towards Germany could serve as a paradigm for American Exemplarism – since it involved the three pillars of the exemplarist doctrine: morality, power, and prestige:

"That Germany today is a modern liberal democracy can be attributed largely to the careful stewardship of the postwar occupation and de-Nazification program. As a result, during the Cold War West Germans sought to be more liberal and democratic, more like the United States, rather than either a communist or authoritarian country. Germany was part and parcel of the Marshall Plan, which invested billions in rebuilding societies that ultimately would share (if not surpass) most American values; that is exemplarism par excellence.

As Truman once told Henry Kissinger, in response to a question about what he wanted to be remembered for, "We completely defeated our enemies and made them surrender. And then we helped them to recover, to become democratic, and to rejoin the community of nations. Only America could have done that." The United States used its moment of triumph not to shame or annihilate its vanquished enemies, but to rebuild them, to show the world the moral quality of its leadership and the rightness of its military might. America’s postwar behavior quickly redounded in its favor–had we treated Japan as a conquered colony, it is unlikely that we would have received such support from the United Nations during the Korean War. Had we followed Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau’s advice and exacted retribution on Germany by returning it to a pre-industrial pastoral life, we almost certainly would not have been able to build as strong a Western European alliance as we did. "

Would Exemplarism as a foreign policy doctrine overcome the world’s animosity towards the US?  Not completely, for there will always be an element of Nietzschean Ressentiment towards the Überpower.  But a global leadership based on Idealism – instead of military strength – could (re)capture the world’s imagination.

You may also like

0 comment

Über-nonsense anyway July 7, 2006 - 8:42 am

Will this self-delusion ever stop? There never was any “De-Nazification” apart from filling out a questionaire. 95% of the “Nazi” officials simply continued to work on their new posts and were never harassed.
The Nazis were defeated by Russia who gave more than 20 million lives for it. The western allies made a photogenic landing in France and fought a non-battle “of the Bulge” in which the Nazis simply ran out of supplies. Even the Chinese insurrection against the Japanese occupiers was more decisive than the entire American campaign in the Pacific, which ended with the honorless nuking of two whole cities to test a new weapons technology.
The Marshall plan amounted to something like 5% of the entire German post-war budget and was no more than a drop of water on the fire. Practically all of this money went directly back into the pockets of American companies. Germany is still transferring an equal amount ANNUALY into the neue Länder.
Even considering the Morgenthau plan – the current plan for Iraq – there is no better indication of the descent into Neo-fascism.

Reply
David July 7, 2006 - 8:58 am

I don’t agree with your analysis of the Marshall Fund. True, initially the funds were used to replenish depleted foreign currency and were used to purchase staples from the US, but from 1949 on the funds were used in Germany to rebuild German industry.
See “Postwar” by Tony Judt for the best discussion.

Reply
Über über über July 7, 2006 - 9:55 am

sure, financial aid for the poor poor Krupp and Rheinstahl.
Did you ever ask yourself why the D-Day landing troops had to run against a few hilltop bunkers? Because the airforce that had been laying German cities to ruins was not able to take out a few bunkered machineguns? Neither could the naval artillery of the greatest fleet ever put together? So much for heroism.
Great moments for propaganda. And ohh the Marshall plan. There you have the basic element for being a “leader” : Be generous towards your followers. There is no alternative. It hasn’t changed for millenia.

Reply
anglofritz; July 7, 2006 - 3:02 pm

Überpower

Y: Just look at [American] TV. X: And we [Europeans] don’t have reality TV, soaps, and afternoon talk shows that deal with sexual perversions? Y: These are all American imports, which they are inflicting on us. X: Who Wants To…

Reply
John July 19, 2006 - 3:30 am

What a bunch of crap…
1) Yes, it’s certainly true that the Soviets broke the back of the Wehrmacht. Whether they actually lost 20 million to the war is highly debatable given the difficulty of separating war deaths from those purged by Stalin.
However, calling the Normandy landing a sham is idiotic in the extreme. It’s possible the Red Army could have won the whole thing by itself, but it would have taken much longer and cost many more lives.
Oh, by the way, ever heard of a thing called “lend-lease”? The Russians sure have.
2) I suggest you go look at a few pictures of the Normandy coast on June 6 1944. You’ll quickly see why the allied air forces couldn’t “take out a few bunkered machineguns”.
Even if the weather had been good, destroying bunkered positions with the air-to-ground weapons available at the time was difficult.
2) The Chinese insurrection more effective than the US campaign in the Pacific? Are you a crack smoker? The US destroyed much of Japan’s naval capability, took over the islands Japan was using as air bases, and bombed the Japanese home islands heavily.
However you feel about the Atomic bombs, it’s undeniable that their use saved thousands of American soldiers that would have been lost invading Japan. I’m sorry if you think Truman was wrong for electing to prioritize American lives.

Reply

Leave a Reply to David Cancel Reply

Website Designed and Developed by Nabil Ahmad

Made with Love ❤️

©2004-2025 Dialog International. All Right Reserved.