Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World

I have found Mead's book very valuable for explaining American foreign policy to Japanese graduate and undergraduate students. The great advantage of the book is that it rises above the battles over particular policy decisions and gives an aerial view of the various historical and social forces that go into the formation of American foreign policy. The chapters on Jacksonianism and Wilsonianism are especially useful in explaining American reactions to September 11th and conflicting American attitudes about America's role in the world. These chapters are so good that they are worth the laborious process of working through the English text with Japanese students. Mead writes well with an absence of jargon and an impressive array of interesting observations. I hope that a Japanese translation is in the works.

I really, REALLY liked this book. It made me feel optimistic about the future - that our instincts as Americans (diverse as they are) will serve us well.We tend to think that Americans are not very good at foreign policy, at least in the manner of Metternich and Talleyrand, and that our traditions lie in staying snug behind our oceans. Special Providence makes the case that, in fact, have been quite successful in international relations and that we have been heartily engaged with the world since independence. "We don't just draw lucky cards, we play the game well."A consistent thrust in our history has been developing markets, a focus that has set us apart from European style power politics. "Frederick the Great thought about how to snatch Silesia from Austria; Alexander Hamilton thought about how to integrate the infant American economy into the British world system on the best possible terms." This Hamiltonian school has continued from Commodore Perry to NAFTA.Americans have had a missionary impulse as well, whether for the gospel or democracy. Indeed, the 19th Century missionaries had a positive effect with schools, hospitals, and egalitarianism. Woodrow Wilson personified this tendency. "The European powers sneered at Wilson, but today every one of them conducts foreign policy along Wilsonian lines."The "Jacksonian" tradition represents our cowboy impulses, our history of being slow to anger, but when aroused, carrying a terrible, swift sword to the enemy. "Jeffersonians" argue that the best way to lead the world is by example, and stay within our own borders.Each of these four schools has its strengths and has taken the lead at different times in our history. The debates between them have robust and coalitions among them shift. The culmination of this process of checks and balances is a foreign policy that reflects the underlying national interest reasonably well.In contrast to a couple other reviewers, I found the book to be well written. In fact, to me, every page was a treat. I liked the labeling of our divergent tendencies into "Hamiltonian," "Jeffersonian," etc., rather than sterile terms like "realist" and "libertarian," since it roots the schools in history. The work provides many good insights on domestic U.S. history along the way.Foreigners should read this book to understand the shifting tendencies in America that shape our behavior. Americans should read it to better understand our relationship with the world.

Walter Mead's Special Providence belies the historical myth of American foreign policy. Mead challenges the idea that American foreign policy was non-existent or amateurish before World War II. Mead argues and capably supports that the United States has a unique and rich tradition in its dealings in International Relations. Mead asserts that this policy is a product of our American democracy; a form of government that many argue is inferior when dealing in foreign affairs. However as a product of American society, a number of voices and ideals have tempered a policy that has done exceptionally well, judging by our rise to power and status today. "American foreign policy rests on a balance of contrasting, competing voices and values - it is a symphony - or tries to be, rather than a solo," asserts Mead. Escaping the typical and lacking descriptions of realist versus idealist, Mead illuminates four active voices within America. Each voice is complicated enough that any elaboration I give here will be lacking. However, the names of the schools should give you the idea. The Hamiltonians, Jacksonians, Jeffersonians, and Wilsonians make up the America's collection of competing schools of thought. Mead concedes that the names are not historically accurate. But he makes a strong case, leading the reader to re-evaluate American foreign policy history - providing historical antidotes of each school in action. Mead treats each school with respect and supplies a convincing intellectual argument for each. Special Providence is a delight to read. This paradigm of the four schools provides deeper insight and understanding of American politics in the international arena, and even to a lesser extent on the domestic side. Meads insights are lightly glazed with wit. I found myself laughing out loud numerous times. I recommend this book to anyone with the slighted predilection for international relations or American history.

I bought this book after I read the review of the Economist in its November 17, 2001 issue. It ends with the following words: "...a highly intelligent analysis of America's foreign policy, which is full of common sense and learning, and is clear and readable to boot". I certainly agree. Insights upon insights, erudition and absolute familiarity with US history. Political science written with accuracy approaching (inasmuch as that is possible) the exact sciences. Example: in the chapter discussing the US school which emphasizes the maintenance of the democratic system (referred to as the "Jacksonian" by the author): "We shall find ourselves mixed in with corrupt and unworthy allies; today we help the Afghan mujahideen by arming and training them against the Soviet Union, and tomorrow they turn those weapons against us and become a thorn in our flesh throughout the Middle East." This was written before September 11, 2001!Ever since I read it I wonder why it's not getting anything but 5-star reviews. In view of the fact that it did get a few excellent reviews I shall merely say that I join them. We are all blessed with hindsight. Mead did his homework so well that he was able to present us with more than a few foresights. This book is political science and history at their best.

Just wow. Mead contends that American foreign policy has been the most successful foreign policy in history and this book is an exploration of what Americans need to do to continue that success into the 21st century.Mead begins by exploring the history of American foreign policy from the founding of the republic to the present. He successfully dispels the myth that the United States spent the 19th century in some kind of virtuous isolation and places many of the political and economic events in a foreign policy context.Just as Mead dispels the myth of virtuous isolation, he seeks a new myth to explain the success of American foreign policy. A myth, he explains, is a way of condensing complex topics into a set of notions which everyone can easily discuss in a reasonably informed manner. His myth is based on our particular strengths as a democracy, the notion that competing schools fight for control over our foreign policy. The result, he claims, is that every portion of our society is represented in our approach to the world.The next chapters describe each of the schools in turn. Mead ends the text with a cautionary but hopeful note about where America needs to go to maintain its success.On top of all this substantive discussion, the book is a compelling read. I cannot recommend it highly enough.