<p>American Political Development (APD) scholars have long sought to escape notions of American exceptionalism—the view that the United States is qualitatively distinct in ways that limit the usefulness of comparative analysis. This article presents a comparative framework that reframes the issue of exceptionalism by distinguishing between two analytic logics: divergence and lack of convergence. The exercise consists of examining the U.S. divergence from cases with shared starting points in Latin America and assessing convergence—or its absence—with European cases that began from markedly different initial conditions. Viewed from these two lenses, the U.S. fits neither pattern of development neatly. It followed a different trajectory shaped by contingent historical choices and specific structural characteristics. However, treating the U.S. as a comparative case study proves analytically productive: it sharpens counterfactual reasoning, permits the transfer of comparative lessons, and revises interpretations of core theories of political development, including debates over institutional sequencing.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

American Exceptionalism in Comparative Perspective

  • Julieta Casas

摘要

American Political Development (APD) scholars have long sought to escape notions of American exceptionalism—the view that the United States is qualitatively distinct in ways that limit the usefulness of comparative analysis. This article presents a comparative framework that reframes the issue of exceptionalism by distinguishing between two analytic logics: divergence and lack of convergence. The exercise consists of examining the U.S. divergence from cases with shared starting points in Latin America and assessing convergence—or its absence—with European cases that began from markedly different initial conditions. Viewed from these two lenses, the U.S. fits neither pattern of development neatly. It followed a different trajectory shaped by contingent historical choices and specific structural characteristics. However, treating the U.S. as a comparative case study proves analytically productive: it sharpens counterfactual reasoning, permits the transfer of comparative lessons, and revises interpretations of core theories of political development, including debates over institutional sequencing.