Show Notes
Beneath the chaos of Donald Trump’s second term foreign policy—the bluster, bravado, back-handers and backdowns—is there something else going on? Has the United States reached a turning point in its relationship to the rest of the world? The era in which the United States constructed multilateral alliances to defend western Europe and advance a global free trade agenda appears to be over. Listen to the people around Trump and you will hear them talking in quite different ways – contempt for Western Europe, admiration for the audacity of Putin in reasserting Russia’s regional sphere of influence. It is as if the United States has decided to retrench geopolitically – controlling Greenland, fantasising about annexing Canada, realising total domination of the northern part of the western hemisphere with all its mineral wealth and, with climate change, new strategically vital sea-lanes? But if this is a new American foreign policy, is it one that has more than an echo of the pre-Second World War past? After all, it was a commonplace of nineteenth-century US politicians to make fiery speeches threatening to annexe Canada, and they actually did annexe half of Mexico and threaten much more. So, are there ways in which pre-1941 ideas about the US’s role in the world are relevant to understanding the US’s current geopolitical choices? And what does that tell us about the future? Adam Smith speaks to Daniel Drezner, Distinguished Professor of International Politics and Academic Dean at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University., prolific writer and author, among many other books and article, of The Toddler in Chief: What Donald Trump teaches us about the modern presidency and to Jay Sexton, President of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations, Rich and Nancy Kinder Chair of Constitutional Democracy at the University of Missouri, also a prolific writer, among his influential books is The Monroe Doctrine: Empire and Nation in Nineteenth Century America The Last Best Hope? is a podcast of the Rothermere American Institute at the University of Oxford. For details of our programming go to rai.ox.ac.uk Producer: Emily Williams. Presenter: Adam Smith Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
More from The Last Best Hope?
Since the Civil War the president's party has lost ground in Congress in every single midterm election bar four. What's going on? Are voters punishing the administration they put into office just two short years earlier? Is it an attempt to balance power in Washington? Or is it just that the president's party's supporters don't turn out? To explore this issue, Adam is joined by Ursula Hackett, the Churchill Associate Professor of US Politics at the RAI. Adam and Ursula discuss some of the most dramatic midterm elections of the past -- from the 1874 repudiation of President Grant to Obama's 2010 "shellacking" to try to work out what explains a remarkably consistent phenomenon-- the President's party losing.
What is an American political party? Unlike in parliamentary systems, they're not private organisations but quasi-public bodies, with no membership dues and with their candidate selection regulated by public law. And how do we explain the paradox that in an era of intense 'partisan' division, the parties themselves -- as organisations -- are by some measures weaker than ever before? Adam is joined by Sam Rosenfeld Associate Professor of Political Science at Colgate University, the author of The Polarizers: Postwar Architects of Our Partisan Era, and, with Daniel Schlozman, The Hollow Parties: The Many Pasts and Disordered Present of American Party Politics.
As the United States gears up to mid-term elections, which may once again shift the political trajectory of the country, the Last Best Hope? returns for a brand-new season on the 8th of October.
In the bicentennial summer of 1976, the United States staged what was, by some measures, the largest single celebration in the country’s history. Tall ships in New York harbor. Fireworks over the Mall. Specially-minted bicentennial quarters. A made-for-TV reconciliation after Vietnam and Watergate, after the assassinations and the riots and the burnings of the long sixties. The country told itself, for a few weeks at least, that it was still the country it remembered being.
Is there anything more distinctively American than its sports culture? In a previous episode of this podcast, we discussed the tragic decline and partial revival of American cricket. As the 2026 World Cup kicks off in the US Adam asks why a sport that took over the world has been so marginal for so long in America – and wonders if that’s finally changing. In the nineteenth and early twentieth century, a form of football that had begun in English public schools became a global phenomenon, played almost everywhere except in the United States. There, a strange alternative form of football was played instead, one in which men in helmets stand around for long periods, interrupted by occasional violent bursts of energy. This is a story about culture, gender politics, race, class and migration – and, as with the story of cricket’s demise -- about nationhood. Guests on this episode: Frank Guridy, Dr. Kenneth and Kareitha Forde Professor of African American and African Diaspora Studies and Professor of History at Columbia. His most recent book is The Stadium: An American History of Politics, Protest, and Play (Basic Books, 2024) which tells the story of the American stadium as an institution that has played a central role in American civic and political life and in the struggles for social justice over the last 150 years. And by Uta Balbier, Professor of US History at Oxford, a transnational historian of the modern United States with a particular interest in sport history.