American Greed Analysis

One of the bold claims that Huntington makes in his book that I would like to unpack involves the gap between the American Creed and American Institutions. The premise of his claim is that the essence of American Creed is flawed by humans. Human beings are naturally fallen and therefore, the IvI gap will never be able to fully close. I think Huntington’s argument involving the gap between institutions and ideals never closing is accurate, however, how this takes place, I lean in another direction. Personally, I think the discrepancy really lies in the nature of the American Creed and its principles that abide within it. For example, on a broader spectrum, the American Creed is seemingly a group of large, general principles that don’t necessarily …show more content…
Governments are always existing with some sort of hierarchical power, as Huntington insists. The nature of bureaucratic government is a counter to the American Creed. As Huntington states, “The Government can never, however, reflect those principles perfectly (American Creed), and is therefore illegitimate to the extent to which people take seriously the principles of the American Creed.” One thing that really strikes me and leaves an imprint in my head is when we enter these times of “Creedal Passion”, the citizens of society usually implement a coping mechanism of some sort like moralism to try and bring the two sides of the gap closer together. If this is the case, and the sides become closer, how much do they actually fluctuate? Does it actually get dangerously close to the gap becoming closed, or do we just think we are doing something helpful and the government plays it off but is still being secretive in reality? Either way, I think that coping mechanisms are really just worthless. If you think about it, these times of Creedal Passion are points in history where the government realizes that their corruption or strength might be a little to publicized or well known. So naturally, they pull back a little or make it a bit more secretive. Only enough for the citizens to just conclude that the institutions are becoming …show more content…
However, I feel like there are points in his arguments that he puts his blinders on and doesn’t get the full story or leaves some things out. Even at the times we are the “most American”, we could still be extremely separated. I don’t think the IvI gap can be closed officially, and therefore, I find it a bit worthless for us Americans to try to close it. The gap is there because one side is wanting a more individual dominant arena while the other, a more central power governing. As I do notice, however, that the times where citizens try and revert the government back to a more Creedal like system, things are generally better in the United States. But that is not what the government is in place for. It isn’t in place to be an individualistic body that just does things every once in a while, but generally remains incapable of doing something against the individual. The government is created to be that strong, central power that sometimes has to do certain things. Generally, the job we ask our government to do is essentially unwinnable for them. They have to be that forceful power that is able to get things done and protect us, but at the same time, they also must make sure they aren’t infringing on the individual’s rights. So when we ask the government to become more “Creedal”, it is not a small task to demand because they have to abandon certain principles that make