Donald Trump has frequently been labelled an idiosyncratic aberration and has equally been accused of breaking with American foreign policy tradition. However, by applying the foreign policy...Show moreDonald Trump has frequently been labelled an idiosyncratic aberration and has equally been accused of breaking with American foreign policy tradition. However, by applying the foreign policy traditions uncovered by Mead (Wilsonianism, Hamiltonianism, Jeffersonianism and Jacksonianism), scholars began arguing that Trump was perfectly traditional because he adhered to one or more of these historic traditions. Simultaneously, scholars argued that Trump rejected the myth of American exceptionalism that informs said traditions. This begs the question of how one can be traditional, yet also reject their foundational myth. Scholars had failed to consider these two facets in tandem, and had only focussed on Trump’s campaign and early presidency therefore failing to provide a prudent analysis of Trump’s entire foreign policy. This thesis aimed to rectified both by asking the following question: how has Trump’s re-interpretation of American exceptionalism influenced the utilisation of the dominant traditions in American foreign policy in his foreign policy discourse? Through the use of a critical geopolitical analysis, it was uncovered that Trump redefined American exceptionalism to an conditional state of objective greatness that only he could achieve and maintain, rather than an inherent trait. This allowed him to argue that his predecessors had made America unexceptional, stirring feelings of betrayal that he could then mobilise for his own political gain. This demagogic ‘exceptional me 2.0’ strategy shaped his application of all the four traditions wherein he blames Wilsonianism for American decline and aims to rally disappointed Hamiltonians, Jeffersonians and Jacksonians against them in order to effectuate a great reset of American foreign policy and domestic politics.Show less
