The End of the Myth

The End of the Myth Plot Summary

Introduction

The year was 1893 when historian Frederick Jackson Turner delivered his landmark thesis declaring the American frontier officially closed. For over three centuries, the idea of an ever-expanding frontier had defined the American experience, shaping not just territorial growth but the very character of the nation. This mythological frontier—a place where democracy could flourish, where individuals could reinvent themselves, and where American exceptionalism was born—served as both a physical reality and a powerful symbol. As we journey through America's complex relationship with its boundaries, we discover how the frontier mythology transformed into border politics. This evolution reveals profound truths about American identity, democracy, and the persistent tensions between expansion and exclusion. The narrative traces how America's self-perception shifted from a nation defined by limitless possibilities to one increasingly preoccupied with walls, barriers, and restrictions. Whether you're interested in American history, immigration policy, or the deeper cultural currents that shape national identity, this exploration offers valuable insights into how mythologies can both inspire and constrain a nation's development.

Chapter 1: The Frontier Thesis: Turner's Vision of American Identity (1776-1893)

When Frederick Jackson Turner presented his landmark "Frontier Thesis" at the 1893 Chicago World's Fair, America was at a crossroads. The U.S. Census had recently declared the frontier officially closed—there was no longer a clear line dividing settled from unsettled territory. Turner's thesis, which would revolutionize American historical thinking, argued that the frontier experience had fundamentally shaped the American character and its democratic institutions. Turner challenged prevailing historical narratives that traced American virtues back to European, particularly Germanic, roots. Instead, he proposed that American democracy emerged from the frontier experience itself—from the process of settlers confronting wilderness and transforming it. "American democracy," he wrote, "came out of the American forest and it gained strength each time it touched a new frontier." This frontier, according to Turner, fostered individualism, self-reliance, and democratic values through the continual process of taming wild lands. The frontier in Turner's conception was elastic and multifaceted. It wasn't simply a geographical boundary but "a form of society," "a field of opportunity," and "a gate of escape from the bondage of the past." It represented different things to different people: for traders, miners, ranchers, and farmers, the frontier offered distinct possibilities and challenges. This complexity allowed Turner's thesis to explain numerous aspects of American development, from political institutions to national character. Turner's thesis conveniently downplayed the violence inherent in frontier expansion. While he acknowledged that each frontier was "won by a series of Indian wars," he muted this brutality in favor of emphasizing the transformative power of wilderness on settlers. Unlike contemporaries like Theodore Roosevelt, who celebrated frontier vigilantism and "rough justice," Turner presented a gentler, more sanitized version of westward expansion that focused on commerce, law, and civic development rather than conquest and bloodshed. This interpretation of American history proved enormously influential, shaping how generations of Americans understood their national character. By the 1920s, Turner's ideas had permeated academic discourse and popular culture alike. His thesis provided Americans with a unifying national narrative at a time when rapid industrialization and increasing immigration were transforming the country. The frontier became not just a historical process but a defining national myth that would be invoked repeatedly to explain American exceptionalism and justify further expansion beyond continental boundaries.

Chapter 2: Manifest Destiny: Continental Expansion and Its Costs (1803-1890)

The period between 1800 and 1850 witnessed America's dramatic territorial growth, driven by a powerful ideology later termed "Manifest Destiny." This concept, which crystallized in the 1840s, held that American expansion across the continent was not merely inevitable but divinely ordained. The young republic, barely established on the Atlantic seaboard, would extend its reach to the Pacific Ocean within just a few decades. Thomas Jefferson set this expansion in motion with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, doubling the nation's size in a single transaction. Jefferson, who had earlier worried about constitutional limits to federal power, found ways to justify this massive acquisition. He envisioned an "empire of liberty" stretching across the continent, populated by independent farmers—his ideal citizens. The Lewis and Clark expedition (1804-1806) that followed symbolized America's determination to explore and eventually claim these vast new territories. The mechanics of expansion combined government policy, private enterprise, and military force. Land speculation companies, often with political connections, acquired enormous tracts that were then subdivided and sold to settlers. The federal government facilitated this process through policies like the 1830 Indian Removal Act, which forcibly relocated eastern tribes to territories west of the Mississippi. Andrew Jackson, himself a frontier land speculator before becoming president, championed such policies as necessary for national progress. This expansion had devastating consequences for Native Americans. The Trail of Tears, which followed the Indian Removal Act, resulted in thousands of Cherokee, Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole deaths as they were marched westward. These removals weren't merely side effects of expansion but deliberate policies designed to clear valuable land for white settlement. As one government official put it, the goal was to "extinguish Indian title" to land—a euphemism for systematic dispossession. By the 1840s, American ambitions extended to Mexican territories in the Southwest. The annexation of Texas in 1845 and the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) resulted in the acquisition of California and much of the current American Southwest. The 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo added nearly half of Mexico's territory to the United States. Meanwhile, the Oregon Treaty with Britain in 1846 secured American claims to the Pacific Northwest. This continental expansion created a distinctly American political culture that emphasized mobility, opportunity, and what Turner would later call "the significance of the frontier." Yet it also established patterns of conquest and racial hierarchy that would shape American society for generations to come. The ideology of Manifest Destiny, with its assumption of Anglo-Saxon superiority, provided moral justification for displacing indigenous peoples and extending American institutions across the continent—setting precedents for later expansionist policies beyond continental boundaries.

Chapter 3: Beyond Borders: Imperial Frontiers and Global Ambitions (1898-1945)

As the physical frontier closed around 1890, America transformed its expansionist impulse into new forms. The Spanish-American War of 1898 marked this transition, as the United States acquired overseas territories including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. This shift from continental expansion to overseas imperialism represented what historian William Appleman Williams called "empire as a way of life"—the belief that American prosperity and security required constant expansion, whether territorial, economic, or ideological. Theodore Roosevelt, who had personally mythologized the frontier experience in his writings about the West, became a chief architect of this new imperialism. His "Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine asserted America's right to intervene throughout the Western Hemisphere. Meanwhile, Woodrow Wilson extended the frontier mythology into a mission of spreading democracy globally. Wilson's internationalism recast the frontier narrative: America would now carry its civilizing mission to the world, promoting free markets and democratic institutions. This period witnessed the consolidation of what historians call "the Pact of 1898"—a national reconciliation between North and South achieved partly through shared imperial ventures. Southern and Northern whites united in overseas expansion, often explicitly drawing parallels between subjugating colonial populations and maintaining racial hierarchies at home. The Spanish-American War helped heal Civil War divisions while reinforcing white supremacy, as Confederate and Union veterans marched together under the American flag. Economically, the frontier mythology adapted to industrial capitalism. Corporate leaders and political figures increasingly spoke of foreign markets as the new frontier—essential outlets for American surplus production. The "Open Door" policy in China exemplified this approach, demanding access to markets without formal colonization. This economic imperialism required military power to protect investments and ensure market access, creating what would later be called the American informal empire. The Great Depression temporarily challenged this expansionist model, as global trade collapsed and nations turned inward. Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal represented a partial retreat from imperial ambitions, focusing instead on domestic reconstruction. However, World War II revitalized America's global role. The conflict transformed the United States into the world's leading military and economic power, with interests spanning every continent. By 1945, America had established a network of bases around the world that would form the infrastructure for postwar global dominance. The end of World War II marked the beginning of what historian Henry Luce called "the American Century." The frontier mythology had successfully transformed from continental expansion to global hegemony. America now saw itself as the guardian of a new international order based on free trade, democratic values, and resistance to communism. This self-image would shape American foreign policy for decades to come, justifying interventions across the globe in the name of freedom and progress.

Chapter 4: Cold War Frontiers: Ideology and Intervention (1945-1989)

The end of World War II in 1945 marked America's emergence as a global superpower and the beginning of a new kind of frontier expansion—one defined by ideological competition rather than territorial acquisition. The Cold War pitted the United States against the Soviet Union in a struggle that would last nearly half a century and extend American influence to virtually every corner of the globe. This new frontier was conceptualized not as a geographical line but as a moral boundary between "freedom" and "tyranny." President Harry Truman established the framework for this ideological frontier with the Truman Doctrine in 1947, pledging American support to "free peoples" resisting communist expansion. The Marshall Plan followed, providing massive economic aid to rebuild Western Europe as a bulwark against Soviet influence. These initiatives reflected a new understanding of American security that required establishing and defending frontiers far from American shores. As one Life magazine editor put it in 1951, "America's frontier was now on the Elbe"—the river separating Western from Eastern Europe. This Cold War frontier mentality transformed American domestic politics and culture. The frontier myth of rugged individualism was deployed against the collectivist vision of communism. Americans were encouraged to see themselves as defenders of freedom in a global struggle that required constant vigilance. Films, literature, and political rhetoric celebrated American values as universal, while portraying Soviet communism as an existential threat. The frontier hero was reimagined as the intelligence agent, the nuclear scientist, or the astronaut pushing into the "final frontier" of space. The competition extended to the developing world, where both superpowers sought to win allies among newly independent nations. American policymakers viewed these regions through a frontier lens—as spaces to be claimed for the free world before they fell to communism. This perspective led to interventions across Latin America, Africa, and Asia, including covert operations to overthrow governments perceived as sympathetic to communism. The CIA-backed coups in Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), and Chile (1973) exemplified this approach. Vietnam became the most tragic expression of this Cold War frontier mentality. American involvement escalated from advisory roles in the 1950s to full-scale war by the mid-1960s, eventually deploying over half a million troops. Military operations were given names like "Sam Houston" and "Daniel Boone," while soldiers described hunting the Vietnamese "like Indians." As journalist Michael Herr observed, it was "as if Cowboys and Indians were the only game the American invaders knew." The war's failure forced a painful reassessment of America's global role and the limits of its power. By the 1970s, the costs of maintaining this ideological frontier had become increasingly apparent. The Vietnam War had killed over 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese. Economic challenges at home, including inflation and deindustrialization, raised questions about America's ability to sustain its global commitments. The frontier metaphor that had long justified expansion began to lose its persuasive power, even as Cold War competition continued into the 1980s.

Chapter 5: The Border Hardens: Immigration Politics and Enforcement (1965-2001)

The late twentieth century witnessed a profound shift in America's relationship with its physical borders, particularly the U.S.-Mexico boundary. What had long been a relatively permeable line became increasingly militarized and contested, reflecting deeper anxieties about national identity in a globalizing world. The border, rather than the frontier, emerged as the dominant spatial metaphor in American political discourse. This transformation accelerated under President Ronald Reagan, who campaigned on a vision of America without limits—"nothing is impossible," he frequently declared. Yet his administration also began the systematic hardening of the southern border. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 combined amnesty for undocumented residents already in the country with increased enforcement measures. This legislation established a pattern that would define subsequent border policies: promises of comprehensive reform coupled with ever-increasing security infrastructure. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), implemented in 1994 under President Bill Clinton, paradoxically accelerated both economic integration and border fortification. While goods and capital could move freely across borders, human movement became more restricted. Clinton initiated Operations Gatekeeper and Hold-the-Line, which dramatically increased border patrol presence in urban crossing areas. These operations forced migrants into more dangerous desert terrain, leading to thousands of deaths. As Clinton's INS Commissioner Doris Meissner acknowledged, "geography" became an "ally" in deterrence. The changing demographics of immigration also influenced border politics. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 had eliminated national origin quotas, leading to increased migration from Latin America and Asia. By the 1990s, these demographic shifts generated anxiety among some Americans about cultural change and national identity. Politicians increasingly framed immigration as a threat rather than an asset, with California's Proposition 187 in 1994 representing a watershed moment in anti-immigrant politics. Media coverage reinforced these anxieties, with television news frequently featuring dramatic footage of border crossings and apprehensions. Terms like "illegal alien" and "invasion" became commonplace in public discourse. Meanwhile, border communities experienced the direct impacts of militarization, including increased surveillance, checkpoint stops, and the disruption of cross-border social and economic ties that had existed for generations. Despite the rhetoric of crisis, unauthorized migration actually responded primarily to economic factors rather than enforcement levels. The robust economy of the 1990s drew migrants northward despite increased border security, while migration declined sharply during economic downturns regardless of enforcement measures. This disconnect between political discourse and migration realities would become even more pronounced following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which fundamentally transformed America's approach to its borders and national security.

Chapter 6: From Safety Valve to Security Threat: Post-9/11 Border Militarization

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, fundamentally transformed America's approach to its borders, both external and internal. What had been a gradual militarization of border enforcement accelerated dramatically as national security concerns merged with immigration policy. The "War on Terror" extended the frontier mythology into a new phase, with profound consequences for civil liberties and immigrant communities. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the newly created Department of Homeland Security absorbed immigration functions previously handled by the Justice Department. This organizational change reflected a conceptual shift: immigration was now primarily a security issue rather than a matter of labor policy or human rights. The Border Patrol's budget more than tripled between 2001 and 2011, while its workforce doubled to over 21,000 agents. New technologies developed for overseas battlefields—drones, thermal imaging, biometric identification—were deployed along the border, creating what journalist Todd Miller calls a "Border Patrol Industrial Complex." The Bush administration's response to 9/11 expanded the concept of the border itself. No longer just a physical line on a map, the border became a zone of exception where constitutional protections were weakened. Within 100 miles of any external boundary—an area encompassing nearly two-thirds of the U.S. population—Border Patrol agents gained extraordinary powers to stop, search, and detain individuals without warrants. Meanwhile, immigration enforcement increasingly reached into the interior, with workplace raids and deportations reaching unprecedented levels. Central American migration continued during this period, driven by economic devastation from natural disasters, gang violence, and the lingering effects of U.S.-backed civil wars. The Bush administration responded with Operation Streamline, which criminally prosecuted border crossers en masse through expedited proceedings where dozens of defendants were sentenced simultaneously. This criminalization of migration represented a significant departure from previous approaches that had treated unauthorized entry primarily as a civil violation. The post-9/11 era also saw the rise of what anthropologist Leo Chavez calls the "Latino threat narrative"—the portrayal of Latino immigrants, particularly Mexicans, as an existential danger to American identity and security. Conservative media figures promoted theories of "reconquista," claiming that Mexican immigration represented a stealth invasion aimed at reclaiming territories lost in the Mexican-American War. These narratives gained traction among segments of the population experiencing economic insecurity and demographic change. The Obama administration continued and in some ways intensified enforcement policies, deporting more immigrants than any previous administration while attempting unsuccessfully to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The administration's "smart enforcement" approach prioritized criminal deportations while offering temporary protection to some undocumented youth through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. This dual approach reflected the increasingly polarized politics of immigration, with both humanitarian and enforcement concerns shaping policy.

Chapter 7: The Wall Era: Nationalism and the Inversion of Frontier Mythology

Donald Trump's rise to political prominence marked the culmination of decades-long shifts in America's border politics and the effective inversion of the frontier mythology. His campaign announcement in 2015, centered on building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and characterizing Mexican immigrants as criminals, signaled a definitive break with the optimistic expansionism that had defined American identity for centuries. The wall became Trump's signature policy and most potent symbol—a physical manifestation of a nation turning inward after generations of outward expansion. Unlike the frontier, which represented possibility and growth, the wall embodied limitation and fear. Trump's rhetoric explicitly rejected the universalist aspects of American exceptionalism, replacing them with a zero-sum nationalism captured in his slogan "America First." This represented what historian Greg Grandin calls "the end of the myth"—the collapse of the belief that America could forever solve its internal contradictions through external expansion. Trump's border policies intensified enforcement practices developed under previous administrations. The "zero tolerance" policy that separated migrant children from their parents, the deployment of active-duty military to the border, and the Migrant Protection Protocols (requiring asylum seekers to remain in Mexico) all represented extensions of existing approaches rather than complete innovations. What distinguished the Trump era was the explicit celebration of cruelty as deterrence, with administration officials publicly defending family separation as a necessary warning to potential migrants. The wall also functioned as a powerful cultural symbol that resonated with many Americans experiencing economic insecurity and demographic anxiety. For Trump's supporters, the wall promised not just physical security but the preservation of a particular vision of American identity perceived to be under threat. Chants of "Build the wall!" at rallies expressed not only immigration policy preferences but deeper anxieties about social change and cultural transformation in a globalizing world. Resistance to Trump's border policies was equally passionate. "Abolish ICE" became a rallying cry for progressives who viewed immigration enforcement as fundamentally unjust. Sanctuary cities expanded their protections for undocumented residents, directly challenging federal enforcement efforts. At the border itself, humanitarian groups continued providing water and medical assistance to migrants crossing the desert, sometimes facing criminal charges for their efforts. The COVID-19 pandemic further transformed border politics, as the Trump administration used public health authorities to effectively end asylum processing at the southern border. Title 42 expulsions allowed for the immediate return of migrants without standard legal protections, a practice that continued into the Biden administration despite campaign promises to restore humanitarian protections. By the end of Trump's presidency, the wall—whether partially built or simply invoked—had replaced the frontier in America's political imagination. This shift represented not just a policy change but a profound transformation in how Americans understood their national identity and relationship to the wider world.

Summary

Throughout America's history, the mythology of the frontier has served as both a geographical reality and a powerful metaphor for the nation's self-understanding. From Jefferson's "empire of liberty" to Turner's frontier thesis, from Roosevelt's imperial adventures to Reagan's economic deregulation, the idea of perpetual expansion has provided a framework for managing internal tensions and projecting power abroad. This mythology suggested that America could forever escape the constraints that limited other nations—that there would always be new territories, markets, or ideological spaces to conquer. The transformation from frontier to wall represents a fundamental crisis in American identity. As external expansion reached its limits—ecologically, economically, and militarily—the nation turned inward, increasingly defining itself not by what it could incorporate but by what it could exclude. This shift reveals the exhaustion of a national mythology that promised unlimited growth as the solution to social problems. The challenge facing America now is whether it can develop new narratives and policies that acknowledge limits while preserving democratic values—whether it can find security not in walls but in more equitable social arrangements and sustainable relationships with both its own diverse population and the wider world.

About Author

Loading...

Greg Grandin

Greg Grandin is the author of Fordlandia, a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, the National Book Award, and the National Book Critics Circle Award. A Professor of History at New York University, Grandin has published a number of other award-winning books, including Empire's Workshop, The Last Colonial Massacre, and The Blood of Guatemala.Toni Morrison called Grandin's new work, The Empire of Necessity, "compelling, brilliant and necessary." Based on years of research on four continents, the book narrates the history of a slave-ship revolt that inspired Herman Melville's other masterpiece, Benito Cereno. Philip Gourevitch describes it as a "rare book in which the drama of the action and the drama of ideas are equally measured, a work of history and of literary reflection that is as urgent as it is timely."Grandin has served on the United Nations Truth Commission investigating the Guatemalan Civil War and has written for the Los Angeles Times, The Nation, The New Statesman, the Guardian, the London Review of Books, and The New York Times. He received his BA from Brooklyn College, CUNY, in 1992 and his PhD from Yale in 1999. He has been a guest on Democracy Now!, The Charlie Rose Show, and the Chris Hayes Show.

Read more