What does Trump mean when he refers to the “manifest fate of America”? – a public radio in South Carolina

You probably haven’t heard the term “manifesto fate” in the high school history class. This is the case until the introductory address of President Trump last month when he used it to call on America to “plant the stars and stripes of the planet Mars.”

The 19th -century term describes faith in American exclusivity and divine right to expand into lands in North America, where the indigenous population and Mexicans lived. “It is fascinating to see that the term is coming back because the whole concept of expanding the country, of course, is at the heart of American experience,” says Michael O’Hlanon, a senior associate at the Bruckings institution.

When Trump discusses the United States gaining Greenland, turning Canada into the “51st country”, it threatens to “return” the Panama Channel and recently proposed it was a clear part of us goals from Teddy Roosevelt’s days.

Trump, says O’hanlon, “has a long historical tradition to upgrade.”

What is the origin of the term “manifesto fate”?

James K. Polk won the presidency in 1845 On the explicit expansionist platform: acquire California and other lands in the southwest, annex the then independent Republic of Texas and arrange a dispute with the UK to control Oregon. (Another promise of a regiment, by the way: Reducing Tariffs for Imports).

National Archives / Getty Images / Hulton Archive

/ /

Hulton archive

The term fate was created by journalist John O’Sullivan in the same year in essay Praisey the annexation of Texas and looking forward to California – then part of Mexico – like the next one.

More generally, the term is a form of American exclusivity, which means the inevitable occupation from east to west of the North American continent, often expressed in Messianic terms.

Although the term was created in the 19th century, it returns to the first European settlers who believe that their aspiration is divinely inspired, according to Smithsonian American Museum of Arts.

“The manifest fate was intended as this view that America was destined to control the whole territory … We must have all this land because we were exceptional,” said Susan D. Page, the first US ambassador to South Sudan, who is Now a professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Michigan.

Does the term describe Trump’s diplomacy brand?

Partly. “There are some superficial parallels,” says Will Freeman, an associate of Latin America research at the Foreign Relations Council. “It seems that Trump and those around him are quite serious to do this time from territorial expansion in the United States.”

But when Trump talks about Canada, Greenland and Panama, he also fits into the source code of Manifest Destiny – The Monroe doctrineThe first time supported by President James Monroe in 1823 as a warning to European forces against intervention in the cases of the Western Hemisphere. Like Stuart Patrick, a senior associate at Carnegie Fund for International Peace notesPolk referred to Monroe’s doctrine as a justification first for the annexation of Texas – so as not to become an “ally or dependence of some alien nation by a powerful than [the United States]”According to Polk-and later for war with Mexico (1846-1848). In 1867, President Andrew Johnson quoted him as a justification for the purchase of Alaska.

“The Monroe doctrine is historically the way of the United States to connect with its own sphere … Although it changes over time over time,” says Freeman.

At the end of the 19th century, the doctrine in Monroe acquired more stable, Patrick notes. “Of course, it is supposed that the whole Western hemisphere is an American reserve,” he writes.

Another historical parallel can be attracted by the aggressive use of Trump’s tariffs and threats and arrival in 1853 of a fleet of US warships in the bay in Tokyo. The ships had to harass Japan to open its ports for the US trade. Tactics became known as “weapons diplomacy” and it will be changed by President Theodor Roosevelt in his “A big stick” The maxim of persuasion, combined with the threat of force to achieve goals on the international stage.

Hulton Archive / Getty Images / Hulton Archive

/ /

Hulton archive

“It seems that Trump is rediscovering the” big stick diplomacy “in America for the 21st century, just without the” talk quietly, “says Freeman.

But this way, he says, Trump “will face restrictions.”

“The United States has no unsurpassed power in the hemisphere, which began to win on Teddy Roosevelt’s days,” says Freeman. “There is now China to compete with in the bigger part of South America the economic burden of China is crucial.

“His” big wand “will be the most effective, irony of fate, in the countries of which he needs the lowest -those north of Panama, which in their bigger part are tightly integrated into the orbit of the United States” , he says.

It is also worth noting that Trump has also long been supporting the isolationist rhetoric, urging the United States to eliminate world conflicts and blame US military allies for not paying their fair share.

What would it mean if Trump followed?

If Trump is following in expansionist rhetoric, US would essentially become an international pair, “says O’Hlanon of Broocks.

“If we use military force to seize the Panama Channel or Greenland … that would be [put] The US in the same category … like Vladimir Putin, “he says.

But after making the comments, their retreating can also be difficult, says Freeman. When Trump says it will hit 25% rates for Colombia but then settles for a Renewal of deportation flightsFor example, “It’s kind of like the boy crying a wolf,” says Freeman. “So I think maybe what he is able to come out of each of them, what he is able to extract from any of these threats will probably decrease as leaders realize, ‘Well, he In fact, he doesn’t mean what he says, he says, – but you know, he is also quite unpredictable.

Being unpredictable can be his own long -term problem, according to Page, the former ambassador. As an example, she cited the North America Free Trade Agreement (S)Nafta) and his successor, the United States Agreement Mexico-Canada (USMCA) negotiated and signed during Trump’s first term.

“How can you threaten your two tariff partners when you have a trade agreement with them?” She wonders. If Trump can do so, “it means that the next administration may oppose any previous policies and agreements.”

Copyright 2025 NPR