You are attempting to argue that non-Americans mischaracterize American political culture or American political institutions, as part of your argument pushing back at people trying to situate America in political context. You weighed into this debate by for some reason questioning my nationality. When I jumped through your hoop, you said that you notice non-Americans just don't get America. The entire line of argument is offensive and nativist and you haven't even identified what it is that non-Americans, writ large, are apparently getting wrong about America. Having your loyalty or your right to participate in a discussion questioned because of where you born is just awful.
The truth is that among developed countries America is one of those that most suffers from political myopia and exceptionalism. Some of this comes from pre-independent political culture in the colonies, some from the framers, some from westward expansion, some from America's post-20th century military and economic power, and some understandably because of American institutional exceptionalism. This is a pathological problem in political discussions, where what people see as possible or desirable are coming mostly from gut checks and reactions to whatever they heard happened yesterday rather than a reasoned analysis of what people have tried and what we've learned from it. Mandatory minimums, gun culture, partisan control of elections and redistricting, OECD-worst access to healthcare, and unlimited money in politics are some of the many policies the Democratic party is against but about which public debates are derailed due to unwillingness to look abroad or through history for answers. It's hilarious and ironic that American institutional design and federalism gave birth to what Brandeis characterized as "laboratories of democracy" between the states, implying that what's great about America is a willingness to learn from successes and failures, when precisely the opposite happens so often.
