AFP NOTES 1/23

LECTURE 2: The Main Themes of AFP
The source of American Exceptionalism

Identity (in order following list)
race
religion
distance
internal balancing
the frontier

North America c.1750
-three major powers
-to the north- FRENCH CATHOLIC
-to the south- SPANISH CATHOLIC
-stuck in between- WASPy brits

religion played a role
-the protestant puritanism/calvinism contrasted starkly with catholicism surrounding it
-americans believed themselves the chosen instrument of God
-woo american exceptionalism

North America c.1783, territory had changed
-to the north- british empire
-to the south- spanish empire
-stuck in the middle once again, AMERICAN COLONISTS
because of this, americans denied legitimacy to the two european powers, because they weren't indigenous
-said that america had a legitimate sphere of influence over the north american continent
-culminated in 1823 with the Monroe Doctrine- European powers can have NO SAY in any territory they don't already control in the western hemisphere

Note that america is only exceptional in relation with other white nations (non-white nations were never respected anyways)
americans treated indians not as a foreign power, but as an internal group revolting and to be put down

Distance played a huge role in maintaining american independence
-many people tried to emulate the american experience
-France, Latin America
france FAILED
why?
-America had a lot of experience already with self government, because even while it was under royal subjugation it had a great deal of autonomy
-france had no experience at all with this, being ruled by an absolute monarch
-legitimacy of opposition
-after an election, there is a peaceful transfer of power
-this legitimacy broke down in the 1850s, with civil war, but since 1865 this hasn't happened
-france has no experience with this at all
-space and time (distance)
-America had the space and time to deal with revolutionary issues at its own pace
-america even had time to go through two different governments before getting it right
-the cycle in europe was monarchy/oppression, brief burst of liberalism, back to monarchy/oppression
-this just didn't happen in america
-the space/time separation led to the idea of 'america invulnerable'
-wars are something we do to other people, not something other people do to us
-american soil was not touched in any real way from 1815-2001

Internal balancing-
-example of a failure- roman republic
-started out as a republic, but the infrastructure just failed and it led to the empire
-two ideas for dealing with this
-stay small, keep republican tradition, but you're small enough to be picked off
-expand, but lose republican tradition
-hamilton and madison argued that this model didn't apply
-the philadelphian system was a 'confederate republic'- and as such a republican ideal could be maintained
-governing bodies were small enough (states) to be effective republics, but all linked by a federal republic

frederick jackson turner wrote the significance of the frontier (1893)
-argument is that the existence of free land (or a frontier) is the stabilizing force on the american state
-america expanded away from europe and towards autonomy
-independence leads to democracy in america. woot.
reasons for revolution?
-'no taxation without representation'
-somersett's case- 1772
-royal proclamation of 1763
-at the end of the 7 years' war
-indian chief pontiac was owning frontier settlements, makes them very expensive to defend
-the proclamation imposed this geographic line on the Appalachians, no settling past it
-this kept the colonies very centered on the eastern seaboard, near british industry
-uh oh, the frontier closed in 1890, no more real land on the american mainland
-america looks somewhere else... 1898- spanish-american war
-american foreign policy extremely frontier-oriented

America as Realist Power
one of the main expectation of realism- powers will balance against eachother to maintain stability
external balancing
americans were EXTREMELY prejudiced against alliances-
-GW argued against even temporary alliances, only under extraordinary circumstances
around 1800, balancing really plays no role at all
-US doesnt balance- (french/UK wars)
1846-8 - mexico doesnt balance against US
-why?
-only power that mexico could have used to balance the US was the UK
-UK policy post 1815 was one of appeasement
balancing occurs to meet the POSSIBILITY of a threat
-US has the mindset that this possibility doesnt exist
US was essentially at detente with the UK, the only power capable of doing damage to the US
monroe doctrine codifies this
-europe no longer has influence over western hemisphere
-essentially, US becomes monarch over west. hem.
acts as a great power
-louisiana purchase 1803
-mexican-american war 1846-48
these sorts of territorial gains would nto be possible in europe, other powers would have balanced against it

post civil war- 1865-1900
-us population more than doubles
-becomes a major industrial power
-coal production up 800%, steel up 523%, railroad track mileage up 567%
-by 1885, US passes UK in total manufacturing output
-1890- surpasses UK in total energy production
-ends up being as powerful as much of europe combined

US embarks on traditional domination of western hemisphere
-embodied on the roosevelt corollary of 1904
-US becomes 'international police power' of the hemisphere, protecting it against europe
-this is UNILATERAL power, in keeping with american traditions
-key manifestation of this is Roosevelt's takeover of the panama isthmus, specifically in order to build the canal
-pure US self-interest
-US still does this, Grenada and Panama in the 1980s
1898 onwards- america does the same on an international scale
-1899-1902- America gets an actual colony- the Philippines from spain
-since then, US has done this again and again, vietnam, iraq, etc.
this relates to the jeffersonian ideal that the revolution is 'not for ourselves, but for the entire human race'
America as Liberal Power
Heir of the Enlightenment

Foreign Policy Options
Example vs Force