The national security policy of the United States has been long debated on whether it was more motivated by realism or liberalism tendencies in preceding times. There are various theories that contribute to the internal and external characteristics of the US and how they have implemented their policy throughout history; realism and liberalism being the main two. On the realist side, there are arguments that the US has implemented both offensive and defensive realism tendencies in the past. Realists argue that the US did what it did throughout history out of the interest of it's own survival with regional power being the main focus. Advocates for offensive realism claim that the US in the past was inclined to take as much as they can and maximize their power so that no other state could overpower them, ensuring a regional and world hegemony. Defensive realists claim that the US only did what they had to do to remain stable and secure. As for the liberalist theory, their arguments focus more on good and bad states instead of more powerful and less powerful. Advocates of this theory focus on institutions, ideas, economic interdependence and the spread of democracy and liberty in the interest of the United States' security. Advocates for liberalism have an argument, and while the US has exhibited liberalist tendencies, the US has implemented offensive realism tactics more than any other tactic throughout history. .
To support my claim, lets take a look at the general history of the US and how it became the hegemony it is today, beginning with the inception of the US and the revolutionary war. Americans aimed for autonomy from the British and they achieved it – we know that. This is when the conquest for power began: the rest of the world heard about what this new country can do and America knew it as well, and began its expansion into a world power. We quickly raised a standing army and began our own continental expansion by recognizing the strategic importance it could achieve.
