The phrase “Make America Great Again” has become synonymous with President Donald Trump’s political agenda, in which he has promised to return the United States to its post-war glory.
However, this proud memory and his actions toward it are inherently contradictory.
His recent rhetoric, executive orders, diplomatic discussions, and military measures all ignore the central factors that propelled the United States into global dominance in the 20th century.
So, what made America great, and how is Trump threatening to undo it?
How America Became “Great”
The attack on Pearl Harbor forced America to abandon its isolationist stance and fully embrace globalism. Dubbed the “arsenal of democracy,” the U.S. industry fueled the Allied war effort and kick-started an economic boom that would redefine the country’s future.
By the war’s end, the U.S. wasn’t just victorious — it was the world’s wealthiest superpower. Determined to cement its influence, the U.S. played a key role in founding international organizations like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations. Meanwhile, financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade opened markets for American capital, reinforcing U.S. dominance in global finance.
The postwar prosperity of the 1950s set the stage for decades of economic expansion, culminating in the “Reagan Boom” of the 1980s. In this period, both Republicans and Democrats rejected protectionism, favoring free trade and global market growth.
America’s position as the world’s sole superpower was solidified with the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991. No longer locked in Cold War competition, the U.S. expanded its reach through globalization, interventionism, and the promotion of democracy. The creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995 further secured America’s dominance, ushering in an era of unchallenged influence often referred to as the “unipolar moment.”
The Free Trade Advantage
For nearly a century, America’s economic dominance has been fueled by its commitment to free trade. By lowering trade barriers, the U.S. not only encouraged competition and specialization but also paved the way for lower consumer prices, greater efficiency in production, and an unprecedented era of economic expansion.
Agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement and China’s entry into the WTO in 2001 further integrated the U.S. into the global economy, strengthening key industries such as technology, agriculture, and manufacturing. This open-market approach allowed American firms to create a record-breaking amount of jobs during the Clinton administration and guaranteed the U.S. power on the world stage.
Yet, protectionist policies like tariffs are often pitched as a means to protect domestic industries, create manufacturing jobs, and give the U.S. leverage in trade negotiations. The reality, however, is far less beneficial to the average civilian. History has repeatedly shown that tariffs lead to inefficiency, higher costs, and retaliatory restrictions that spark economy-wrecking trade wars.
Even Ronald Reagan, often hailed as a champion of American industry by the right, warned against the dangers of protectionism. In a 1987 speech, he explained how tariffs initially appear patriotic but ultimately breed complacency among domestic industries, stifle innovation, and provoke foreign retaliation.
The result? Well, Reagan himself said it: “Because of the prices made artificially high by tariffs that subsidize inefficiency and poor management, people stop buying. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.”
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, intended to protect American industries, is a particularly striking case against protectionism, which backfired horrifically. Retaliatory tariffs from other nations choked U.S. exports, prolonged the Great Depression, and devastated American agriculture. Farm exports alone dropped by a third in just three years.
In an attempt to combat this damage, the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 was issued, giving the president the authority to slash tariffs by up to 50% without congressional approval. This shift toward freer trade revitalized the American economy, proving that competition, not protectionism, drives productivity and innovation. When businesses can access international supply chains, costs decrease, quality improves, and consumers benefit from lower prices and greater product variety.
Trump’s push for tariffs against Canada, Mexico, and China — the U.S.’s top trading partners — blatantly ignores these economic lessons. His approach undermines the very principles that propelled the U.S. to the economic greatness he claims to want to return to. Rather than safeguarding American jobs, these tariffs would raise costs for American manufacturers relying on imported materials while inviting reciprocatory measures that would cripple U.S. exports.
Curtain Call on the World Stage
The U.S. Agency for International Development is a government agency meant to provide humanitarian aid to countries facing poverty, the aftermath of natural disasters, and/or democratic reforms. While altruistic in nature, the agency was actually created by President John F. Kennedy as a form of political soft-power, aligning developing nations to America’s interests.
By providing economic, medical, and infrastructural support to vulnerable regions, the United States united many countries under a common belief in democracy, a crucial strategy in the global fight against Communism and Authoritarianism. Due to these policies and the USAID specifically, nations like Ukraine, Jordan, and Egypt became crucial allies for America throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.
Trump’s cuts to USAID and repeated attacks on foreign assistance as a concept fly in the face of the ideas that made America a global superpower.
By stabilizing fragile states and strengthening democratic governance, foreign assistance is crucial in preventing possible military conflicts. Furthermore, USAID has played a pivotal role in global health initiatives, such as combating the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, stopping the disease from becoming a global pandemic, as well as providing life-saving HIV/AIDs treatments, particularly through implementing Former President George Bush’s PEPFAR program which has long received overwhelming bipartisan support.
Now, per Trump’s 90-day freeze on foreign aid, commodities such as medicine and food sit in warehouses, unable to be handed out to those relying on them for survival. This isn’t just a waste of taxpayer money — it is paradoxical to America’s long-term interests toward influence and our enduring moral framework.
By effectively withdrawing the U.S. global presence, Trump has served up international power on a golden platter to our main rivals. This vacuum is an opportune chance for America’s geopolitical competition to swoop in and fill the economic and political space we left. China, for example, can now use its investment programs to expand its influence on potential ally countries, harming our international reach for decades to come.
History has shown that politically unstable nations can be incredibly dangerous when fueled by anti-American sentiments. Take the Iran hostage crisis of 1979 or even the 9/11 attacks, both of which were carried out by radicalized extremist groups believing they were helping their people take down the Western threat. Foreign aid is one of the most productive ways of fostering goodwill and strengthening diplomatic relations, which is vital in combating hostility toward the United States.
Trump is erasing one of the key tools the U.S. used to cement its dominance in the post-WWII world. America didn’t become “great” by retreating into isolationism but by shaping the new global order in its ideals and interests.
Breaking Ties, Losing Influence
Trump’s disdain for global cooperation also extends to international alliances like the United Nations, NATO, and WHO, all of which America was a founding member. After World War II, the United States spearheaded the creation of these institutions to solidify its dominance.
NATO ensured American military precedence by binding Europe to U.S. security guarantees, the UN provided a framework for diplomatic leadership, and organizations like WHO allowed the U.S. to shape global health policy in ways that directly benefited its people, especially during recent health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
By pulling out of the WHO and the United Nations Human Rights Council, undermining NATO, and dismissing the UN as not having “their act together,” Trump has displayed shortsighted nationalism, which has eroded decades of curated influence.
In his 2025 inaugural address, Trump claimed, “Our power will stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent, and totally unpredictable.” However, Trump more or less surrendered his ability to perpetuate America’s global agenda by fostering distrust in the organizations that’d allow him to do so most diplomatically. This, too, opens the door for the U.S.’s rivals, like China, to expand their sphere of influence drastically.
Trump’s Echoes of Lebensraum
“Only an adequately large space on this earth assures a nation of freedom of existence. Moreover, the necessary size of the territory to be settled cannot be judged exclusively on the basis of present requirements… another significance, that is, a military and political one, must be attributed to the area of a state. This lies in the general power-political strength of the state, which in turn to no small extent is determined by geo-military considerations.”
– Adolph Hitler, 1924
This quote refers to the idea that territorial expansion is valid for nations deserving of security and geopolitical dominance, in this case, applied to the Nazi concept of Lebensraum.
The allied nations of the First World War, led by Former President Woodrow Wilson, desired a world order that saw the end of wars of aggression. This desire was doubled down on following the Second World War when the Allies established protections against unjustifiable acts of military invasions.
Due to this stance against territorial expansion, the world’s borders have remained relatively stable. However, Donald Trump’s alignment with Russia against Ukraine’s path toward democracy is a dangerous leap away from this stability and an outright endorsement of territorial expansionism.
By echoing Kremlin propaganda, specifically against President Volodymyr Zelensky, suspending aid to Ukraine, and suggesting enormous concessions to Putin during ceasefire negotiations, Trump has signaled to the world that America no longer stands for national sovereignty or democratic self-determination. This shift has already possibly emboldened other expansionist groups, such as the M23 rebels in the Democratic Republic of Congo, whose invasion aligns with a broader trend of exploiting instability to gain land.
This is precisely the kind of global disorder Wilson and Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt sought to prevent. Wilson’s League of Nations and FDR’s leadership in World War II were both aimed at stopping authoritarian land grabs before they could escalate into full-scale conflict. Trump’s foreign policy, by contrast, encourages the grabbing of land.
His blasé attitude toward the importance of sovereignty extends beyond military aid and has bled into potential offensive action. In his proposal of “Trump Gaza,” Trump suggested transforming war-torn Palestine into U.S. real estate for American business interests, relocating native Palestinians into neighboring countries.
The mere proposition of territorial expansion into a ravaged region and the ethnic cleansing of their people to profit the industry that gave Trump and his father their wealth goes against America’s foundational beliefs. It also sends a chilling message: Borders, sovereignty, and democracy are inconveniences to those in power, not principles in which we should structure our government. This is a radical departure from the post-war America Trump supposedly admires.
Conclusion
The irony of Trump is that in the post-war era, he made an empire off calling it “great” and built it on the very internationalism he is so eager to dismantle. America’s catapult into global superpower status was achieved through foreign aid, strategic alliances, free trade, enthusiastic participation in international organizations, and the rigorous fight for democracy worldwide.
Trump’s foreign policy, though, has done more to push America’s status into a stark decline than it has done to restore its dominance. The path forward for America lies in recommitting to global cooperation and the principles that have shaped our strength for decades.
With that being said, Trump will not make America great by embracing the playbook of conquest — he will turn us into the enemy America became great in fighting.