The Roads to Trump, Monroe, and understanding the doctrine

episode

Belle of the Ranch 10 min 2 speakers 5 chapters transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the main topic discussed in this episode?

Beau 0:01

Well, howdy there, Internet people. It's Belle again. And welcome to the Roads with Belle. Today is December 11th, 2025. And we're going down the roads to Trump, Monroe, and understanding the link. Recently, the Trump administration released a 33-page document that purported to be a national security strategy. But it really reads like a justification after the fact of what Trump wants to do because of his feelings. In it, it says the U.S. will assert and enforce a Trump corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. I described it as a twisted version of the Monroe Doctrine when I covered it. That's led to a lot of questions about the Monroe Doctrine as a whole.

What is the link between Trump and the Monroe Doctrine?

Beau 0:52

Lots of people asking about whether it was good or bad. It depends on what century you're in. The other thing is that it gets referred to in the past tense, primarily because it's one of the oldest American foreign policy doctrines. But the truth is, the Monroe Doctrine never really went away. It evolved. It expanded. It reversed.

What does the Trump administration's national security strategy entail?

Beau 1:20

And for nearly 200 years, it's been one of the most powerful justifications the United States has ever used to project power beyond its borders, especially down south. And what's interesting is that it didn't start as a threat. It started as a warning. In 1823, the United States was young. Fragile, really. It was still figuring out whether it could survive as a nation or fracture into something else. Most of Latin America had just broken free from European colonial empires. Spain was weakened. Portugal was strained. And the great monarchies of Europe were looking across the Atlantic, wondering if they could reclaim what they'd lost. President James Monroe went before Congress and said in the simplest of terms, the Western Hemisphere is no longer open for European colonization.

Beau 2:22

Any attempt by European powers to expand their control in the Americas would be seen as a hostile act against the United States. At the time, it wasn't bluster. It was a gamble, an almost delusional one. The U.S. didn't really have the military power to enforce that warning by itself. Not even close. What made it work was the British Navy, which also didn't want rival European empires gaining ground in the Americas. The United States declared the rule. Britain made it real. Originally, the Monroe Doctrine wasn't about domination. It was about distance, about keeping old world empires out of the new world. I think most people watching this would agree that's an objectively good thing, but it's foreign policy.

Beau 3:19

It's not about good and evil. It's about power. And here's the thing about power. Once you claim a sphere of influence, every generation finds a way to stretch what that claim means. By the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Monroe Doctrine was no longer just about stopping European colonization. It became a justification for US intervention anywhere south of our borders. Then came the Roosevelt Corollary in 1904. Theodore Roosevelt added a new layer. The United States wouldn't just keep Europe out. It would also reserve the right to intervene in Latin American nations if it believed instability threatened U.S. interests. That's the moment the doctrine truly flipped from a shield into a lever of power. From that point on, the U.S.

Beau 4:21

treated much of the Western Hemisphere not as independent equals, but as a managed neighborhood. The U.S. was the obnoxious HOA, but with a lot more infantry. This is where the history gets uncomfortable. The Monroe Doctrine and its offshoots were used to justify U.S.

How has the Monroe Doctrine evolved over time?

Beau 4:43

military occupations all over down there. It was used to rationalize the overthrow of governments, seen as unfriendly to U.S. economic or political interests. It shaped Cold War interventions. And honestly, it created much of the instability we see down there today. In a bizarre twist, the people cheering on a revitalized Monroe Doctrine constantly complain about the migration that occurs because of the destabilization caused by it. Each time the U.S. stuck its nose into something, the official reasoning sounded different. It was communism, instability, national security, whatever.