More to answer for with American exceptionalism

In his commentary, “Truths of U.S. history teachable and possible,” March 13, Christopher P. Gibson admits to a bias for American exceptionalism. To his credit, he provides an open door in his curricula for students to form their own opinions should they run counter to the doctrinal version of American history and government.

If one has a critical view of American exceptionalism, the founders are a good place to start. Without going into their privileged positions as wealthy, landowning slaveholders — because this merest account is admitted even by the adoring and excused for the times they lived in — there’s more to answer for in the way they structured their democracy.

Gibson notes the founders were united in the belief that “... an educated, informed and engaged citizenry was essential for the republic to survive and prosper.” This aspiration is much quoted today for the hypocrisy it reveals.

The founders were frightened by the idea of democracy and took pains to ensure that ordinary people — far outnumbering the elites — were constrained to a passive role.

The Declaration of Independence was a single-use public relations document for domestic and foreign consumption. On its most democratic expression, does anyone take seriously the idea that we people have the right to alter or abolish our government when the majority disapprove of it?

Gibson notes our “painful chapters.” It’s a purifying page changer and, by the way, those chapters fill up a large book. The foreign agressions that didn’t work out become “mistakes” from a past that we’re always in the process of moving beyond because we’re the exceptional nation.