Overview of The End of the American Empire
This episode of NPR’s Code Switch argues that the United States has always functioned as an empire — even if Americans rarely use that word. Through a conversation with historian Daniel Immerwahr, the hosts explore how U.S. colonial history, overseas territories, and a worldwide military footprint complicate the familiar story of America as a nation built only from states and ideals of freedom. The episode also considers whether Donald Trump is strengthening or hastening the decline of U.S. global power.
Main Argument: The U.S. Is an Empire, Just a Hiding One
The episode’s core thesis is that American empire is real, but culturally erased.
- Americans often think of empire as something European powers did, not the United States.
- Yet the U.S. has controlled territories, colonies, and military holdings across the world for more than a century.
- Immerwahr argues that the country is an empire in the technical sense: a political system with different rules for different places and people.
A major theme is how the U.S. tells itself a different origin story:
- The U.S. was founded as a rebellion against empire.
- Its name — “United States of America” — was meant to signal a union of states, not colonies.
- That self-image helped the country distance itself from the word “colony,” even while it continued colonial rule.
Historical Blind Spots and Hidden Colonialism
The conversation highlights how U.S. history is usually taught as if the continental states are the whole nation.
Examples discussed
- Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Guam, the Philippines, Wake Island: all were or are part of the American imperial system.
- At the start of World War II, the U.S. had more colonial subjects overseas than Black Americans in the U.S.
- Pearl Harbor is often treated as the lone symbol of that attack, but Japan also attacked other U.S. territories in the Pacific the same day.
The episode emphasizes that these places are not side notes — they are central to understanding the U.S. as a global power.
How U.S. Empire Works in Practice
A big portion of the discussion focuses on the U.S. military base network around the world.
- The U.S. is estimated to have around 750 military bases globally.
- These bases are treated as normal inside the U.S., but would be seen as outrageous if another country had them on American soil.
- Bases create both strategic power and local tensions:
- They bring money and jobs, but also inequality.
- They create service economies around them, including sex work and entertainment.
- They often come with legal and political friction, especially when local courts cannot fully control U.S. service members.
The episode also notes how bases can fuel anti-American politics:
- Osama bin Laden’s opposition to U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia is cited as an example.
- Iran’s anti-imperial stance is tied in part to being surrounded by U.S. power and bases.
Trump, Hegemony, and the Possible Decline of Empire
The episode’s more provocative claim is that Trump is not preserving American empire so much as breaking it.
Immerwahr’s argument
- Past presidents often acted like chess players, considering the long-term implications of military action.
- Trump, by contrast, is described as less strategic and more willing to act impulsively, even if it damages U.S. power structures.
- This doesn’t mean he is anti-imperial in any moral sense — just that he may be cannibalizing the empire rather than managing it.
Key examples
- Military escalation with Iran
- Pressure and threats toward Venezuela and Cuba
- A broader rejection of the U.S. role as global policeman
- Tariffs and trade nationalism that reflect a more inward, transactional worldview
The episode frames Trump as a right-wing critic of hegemony:
- He does not oppose empire because it is unjust.
- He opposes it because he thinks it does not pay enough for the United States.
What Could Come Next?
The closing question is what the world looks like if U.S. hegemony continues to weaken.
Possible outcomes
- Pessimistic view: chaos, instability, or a vacuum filled by China or Russia.
- More hopeful view: a world order managed by multiple medium-sized countries working multilaterally.
The episode doesn’t pretend to know the answer, but it suggests that the decline of American empire may force a new global arrangement — one that could be more democratic, or more dangerous.
Key Takeaways
- The United States has a long colonial history that is often left out of mainstream American identity.
- Calling the U.S. a mere “nation-state” hides the reality of territories, possessions, and overseas power.
- Military bases are a core tool of American empire, not just ordinary defense infrastructure.
- Trump may be accelerating the weakening of U.S. hegemony by acting without the usual imperial guardrails.
- The end of American empire could mean either a more multipolar world or a more unstable one.
Notable Insight
An empire is, at minimum, a polity with different rules for different places.
That idea captures the episode’s central claim: the U.S. has spent generations insisting it is not an empire, while operating like one all the same.