Adrian Sowandi; 112980229

“U.S. foreign policy since 1940 has not been nationalistic in its essential nature but has
instead shown itself at least as concerned with the rights and well-being of others around the
world as it has been focused on the economic, social, and political circumstances of
American citizens.” Comment pro or con, or somewhere in between, based on U.S. history
as presented in the lectures.

The United States of America had always been a great nation or, in my view, a

pioneer to the world. Many Asian countries had viewed the United States as the strongest

nation in the world and thus will always be influential to the world. The United States foreign

policy has evolved over time; when we look before WWII, it revolves around isolationism,

which means that the U.S. tries to hinder dealing with European affairs. During this time,

U.S. foreign policy has a more nationalistic approach. The United States seeks to reduce

conflict with the Europeans that can be proven by the late entrance of the United States to

WWI and WWII. After WWII, the Allies won the war, and therefore receive great power

from it. This power changed U.S. foreign policy. When the League of Nation was found

(after WWI), the transition from isolationism to internationalism starts. Then the United

Nations was formed and thus requires a significant power to rule.

When we look at this event, the United States has not been concerned with other

nation welfare until NATO was formed in October 1948. Even after the U.N. was created, the

U.S. had not taken immediate leadership. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington “foreign

policy” had pressured America to hold back from any European affairs. However, after

NATO was formed, we can see that the U.S. had taken an active role in foreign policy.

Truman Doctrine, which was inspired by Secretary of State Henry Wallace ideas known as

“containment policy,” had laid the first step for U.S. foreign policy. Truman Doctrine states

that “it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting

attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.” This means that the U.S.

will be involved in foreign affairs that resist Communism. After that, Richard Nixon and
Ronald Reagan would implement the same doctrine and known as Nixon Doctrine and

Reagan Doctrine.

The United States history shows that expansionism and isolationism period had been

nationalistic and occurs during the 1940s. As quoted by Frederick Jason Turner,” “Since the

days when the fleet of Columbus sailed into the waters of the New World, America has been

another name for opportunity, and the people of the United States have taken their tone from

the incessant expansion which has not only been open but has even been forced upon them.”

During the 1940s, the U.S. had been aggressively nationalistic in acquiring new lands that are

touching with their borders. Oklahoma Land Rush, which was driven by natural resources

such as silver and gold and the Dawes Act, which takes the land from the Indians, are

historical examples of the U.S. foreign policy during expansionism. Woodrow Wilson’s

presidential policy started the isolationism. Wilson’s realistic approach and decision-making

based on national security start isolationism. Taft’s dollar diplomacy is the historical example

of the U.S. isolationism foreign policy.

The United States history also shows that after WWII, the U.S. had dealt with

numerous international affairs. The creation of NATO, which basically unites 12 countries in

the response of the Cold War, marks the official ends of isolationism to internationalism.

Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, and U.S. memberships in NATO are the first few events

during the early periods of internationalism. However, as the U.S. grew more vigorous in

power due to the Soviet Union collapsed, the U.S. had been more and more involved with

international affairs, especially in dealing with Communism. Korean War, Vietnam War, and

CIA intervention with Guatemala President assassination are a few examples of U.S. reaction

toward Communism.
 Some policies had been more important than national affairs, and some are less

important. LBJ’s “Great Society” policy had been considered a failure not because Medicare

and Medicaid fails, but because the spending on the Vietnam War had created underspending

on necessary reforms that cause the “Urban Decay” in the mid-1960s. However, during JFK

presidency, he has reformed a firm nationalistic foreign policy during Fidel Castro and Cuba

missile crisis, which was the result of the Bay of Pigs (which is a weak foreign policy). At

last, there are several U.S. involvement of foreign affairs, which are as important as national

affairs, during Nixon years, “Vietnamization,” Soviet Union ‘détente’, and Egypt-Israel peace

talks, are examples of foreign affairs, while Family Assistance Plan is also of equal

importance.

To conclude, before WWII, the U.S. had been very nationalistic with its foreign

policy, while after WWII, the U.S. has taken a more active role in being involved in

international affairs. There are times when the nation had put foreign affairs more important

than its national matter, but there are times when it did not. There are positive and negative

effects on foreign policies implemented, but after all, America had been the pioneer of the

modern world through its foreign policy.

“U.S. history since 1940 is a record of failed attempts to confront racism and related forms of
the ‘otherization’ of many individuals within the nation’s own borders.” Comment pro or con,
or somewhere in between, based on U.S. history as presented in the lectures.
Racism is always the ‘hot’ topic when we read the news each morning. The most

recent issue is the death of George Floyd, which unfortunately relates to the United States.

Thus, the question rings again, “Does the U.S. government fails to confront racism?”

Racism originated decades and thus had rooted in U.S. society. Slavery had occurred

during the early years of the U.S. Unfortunately, it was based on skin color, the whites

compared with the “color.” Eventually, slavery had been demolished after a long civil war of

the U.S. which ends during the Lincoln presidency. Unfortunately, Woodrow Wilson depicts

the mental of the whites in his statement, ”The white men were roused by a mere instinct of

self-preservation … until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan a

veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country.” The early 1940s racism

events started with the enormous amount of poor immigrants, and few came from China. This

event results in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 in which it bans Chinese immigrants from

entering the U.S. for 10-years, and it will be extended for another ten years in the form of the

Geary Act. This act had started the “instinct of self-preservation” on U.S. citizens. Ten years

later, Homer Plessy, a partially black person, violates the “separate” cars on Louisiana. This

event was marked as the constitutional basis for racial segregation, which is known as the

Plessy v. Ferguson.

Racial segregation diminished after WWII means successful attempts to confront “de

jure” racism. During WWII, racial segregation distress the U.S. war necessities. At first,

soldiers were trained on different camps base on their race. However, FDR was forced by a

threat on Washington to forbid segregation on training camps. This is the first successful

attempt of racial desegregation. After WWII, racial segregations slowly disperse from U.S.
society. The civil rights movements start with the NAACP effort to obtain the anti-lynching

and Truman civil rights recognition in 1948-1949. Truman’s announcement of the

desegregation of U.S. army and federal sectors marks significant events on the Civil Rights

movement; but, the actual factor was that the blacks confrontation on eliminating racism.

Thurgood Marshall NAACP legal team, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Martin

Luther King Jr. “I have a dream” speech, Rosa Parks case, sit-ins, freedom riders, and James

Meredith’s application to the University of Mississippi are turning points of racial

desegregation. All these events started to abolish the U.S. racial segregation. It achieved its

highest peak when Barack Obama became the 44th President of the U.S. which ultimately

ends “de jure” racial segregation.

The U.S. fails to confront “de facto” racism from the 19th century onward. Victory on

racial desegregation doesn’t necessarily reform U.S. morale. There are several factors that

don’t eliminate racism entirely; first civil right victories provides a foundation for conflict.

Second, the whites felt that they have racial power, which was passed by their fathers. Third,

there are also militant “black power” movement, which demands freedom through force. This

can be shown by riot initialize by white (after Senator Byrd “massive resistance” speech) and

black (after Martin Luther King assassination on 1968). Also, these factors reach its highest

peak when Donald Trump was elected President of the 45th President of the U.S. which

proves that there still exists an identity crisis and “de facto” racial segregation still exists.

To conclude, the U.S. had successfully confronted “de jure” racism, but “de facto”

racism had still been U.S. failures from the 1940s onward. As other non-white races are

rapidly growing in the U.S., “de facto” racism must be U.S. citizens’ priority. This can be

ended by eliminating the “instinct of self-preservation” among U.S. citizens and redefine

what it meant to be American once again.