The shift in public opinion about America's proper place in the world is perhaps best exemplified by Henry Luce, publisher of Time Magazine during WWII, who in 1941 exhorted President Franklin Roosevelt and policymakers to pursue the "first great American Century." Internationalists such as Luce believed that the US should use its economic and military might to promote democracy and act as the world's Good Samaritan.
The first American Century petered out in the 1970s as US growth slowed and the Soviet Union reached military parity, but it was temporarily resurrected by the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Currently, the great American international project seems to have hit another bump in the road with new economic difficulties, mixed success (at best) in two wars of choice, and serious questions about whether the US can afford prolonged military dominance.
Richard N. Haass, for one, is more optimistic. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations argues that, despite recent troubles, it's time the US pursue the second American Century. American military might is still unmatched while our economy remains strong (if not necessarily as strong as we'd like). While we first have to get our ducks in a row at home, Haass believes we can once again serve as a beacon to the world by establishing a global order of cooperation that promotes international law and solves transnational problems such as global warming.
Read his piece and share your thoughts for participation credit. Do you agree with his assessment that it's possible? Whether or not it's possible, is this something the US should pursue?
