For a long time, the U.S. sold itself (to itself and the world) as leading by attraction: institutions, openness, innovation, rule-of-law, cultural gravity. The story was “we don’t need an enemy to know who we are.” When rhetoric pivots toward needing an external rival to unify people, it can feel… smaller.
A few frames that might help untangle what you’re noticing:
1. Political strategy vs national identity
What you’re reacting to is less “America” and more a political playbook. Figures like Donald Trump use adversarial framing because it works emotionally. An external rival simplifies complex domestic problems into a single narrative: pressure → blame → mobilize. That doesn’t mean the country’s core values disappeared, but it does mean they’re being overridden in messaging.
2. The enemy is often a mirror
When China is framed as an existential threat “to everything,” it’s usually less about China itself and more about unresolved U.S. anxieties:
-
economic dislocation
-
technological competition
-
loss of manufacturing prestige
-
internal inequality
An “enemy” becomes a way to avoid admitting: we’re struggling to adapt.
3. Strong cultures don’t need constant villains
Historically, societies that are confident in their institutions don’t rely heavily on enemy-centric identity. When they start doing so, it’s often a signal of internal fragmentation, not external weakness. That’s why your reaction feels like “much lower” — it is a downgrade in tone and self-belief.
4. This isn’t uniquely American — but it hits harder because of the myth
Many great powers do this. The difference is that the U.S. long claimed moral leadership without needing permanent antagonists. Watching that shift can feel like watching a grown adult suddenly act insecure. It clashes with the story you were taught.
5. The U.S. is not one voice
One important grounding point:
Trump-era rhetoric ≠ American society ≠ long-term U.S. trajectory.
Universities, tech ecosystems, courts, civil society, state governments, and even parts of the federal system still operate on fundamentally different logic than “we need an enemy.”
No comments:
Post a Comment