‘History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes’ – Mark Twain.

With Donald Trump’s news of tariff implementations on over 57 countries across the globe, as well as threats of annexation of Greenland and the pullout of NATO, some could say just another day in American politics. However, with these trends playing out, it does seem that the present day is taking a similar route of repetition to that of historical events in America a century ago.

Many now fear a looming trade war between the United States and the rest of the world, with fresh trade tariffs being issued against imported products from countries of every continent, including more obscure places including the Falkland Islands and the island nation of Nauru in the South Pacific. This is of course not the first time in which the American government has implemented such measures in the cause of protectionism of domestic production. Rather, the U.S. have historically used these same measures in order to promote and protect their domestic production. After the presidential victory of Warren G. Harding in May 1921, Harding was quick to enact trade tariffs such as the Fordney-McCumber Tariff, a highly protectionist tariff act that raised import taxes on foreign goods with the sole purpose of protecting domestic American industry and agriculture from competition abroad. This tariff led to retaliatory measures from other countries. Another such tariff act implemented was the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930, which raised import duties on over 20,000 goods, again intended to protect American business and agriculture. This second act further sparked retaliatory tariffs and shrinkage of global trade. 

It was not only trade tariffs during this time period of American history which observed protectionist measures being used by the United States which are so similar to events of today. Instead, the obsession of American protectionism encompassed not only economics but also immigration and entry into the country. The 1917 Immigration Act barred entry to citizens of countries of the ‘Asiatic Barred Zone’, which included modern day India, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Southeast Asia and the Asian-Pacific islands. This attitude of the time seems to be mirrored in contemporary American politics, with Trump’s administration considering complete travel bans on citizens from 11 countries, a part of a ‘red list’, which includes Russia, Afghanistan and Iran, the same counties which were included in the immigration act over 100 years ago. 

Protectionist attitudes and measures implemented by the Americans, both now and a hundred years ago, were pushed to also include views on international military and diplomatic collaboration and involvement, or rather the withdrawal of it in Europe and across the globe. The U.S. was profoundly reluctant to join both world wars until their hand was inevitably forced to do so. This is reflective, with the pentagon considering a proposal which would withdraw as many as 10,000 American troops from Eastern Europe. Furthermore, in an address at the Munich Security Conference in 2024, Kamala Harris highlighted the isolationist views currently at the forefront of American society, ‘These are questions the American people must also ask ourselves: Whether it is in America’s interest to continue to engage with the world or to turn inward’.

The governments of the past believed in leaving European matters for the Europeans. George Washington’s farewell address in 1796 embodied this, simply saying ‘steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world’.

This seems to be inherent in the present day, with Trump’s threats of walking away from NATO, whether serious or superficial is not clear, but it nonetheless sends a clear message that if anything, the Americans are in a period of increased isolationist sentiment parallel to that of the twentieth century.