| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Debate about the goals of American foreign policy at the end of the twentieth century, especially that thread differentiating "conservative" from "neoconservative" perspectives, might profit by revisiting the debate over American expansion at the end of the nineteenth century. "I am an imperialist," Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan once remarked, "simply because I am not isolationist." This paper explores the connection between Mahan's defense of imperialism-often couched in terms of national interest and balance of power- and the norms of American power in world politics. The will-to-power behind American expansion and involvement, a formidable pillar in Mahan's realism, coexisted (often uneasily) with the affirmation of national purpose, a less formidable but still important part of Mahan's idealism. Mahan's strong conservative inclinations in politics were matched by a willingness to employ the tools of realism-particularly traditional diplomatic methods-as a way to uphold historic national goals and moral vision in American foreign policy. Far from seeing an irremediable conflict between the counsels of realism and limited moral gains in foreign policy, Mahan understood that governments are not immune from certain overall constraints. Seldom if ever could American actions abroad be defended by arguing solely for the maintenance or increase of national power.
|