Do Troop Deployments Reduce American Crime Rate?

After the American Century

The president has launched a lawsuit, attacking a report issued by the Center for American Progress.  It argues the crime rate has not been much affected by placing thousands of troops on the streets of particular American cities, such as Los Angeles, Washington DC, Memphis and New Orleans.  These deployments have been expensive. The "Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports that sending National Guard and U.S. personnel to Los Angeles; Washington, D.C.; Memphis; Portland; and Chicago cost $496 million in 2025. It continues in 2026, and almost $1.1 billion has been expended to keep troops in Washington DC.  

Trump claims the report is defamatory, and demands $5 billion in compensation. This seems like an excessive amount. It does not look like he has a strong case. The lawsuit looks rather frivolous, as the report is based on the government's own statistics. 

There is something pathetic about Mr. Trump attacking anyone's factual accuracy, since he has made countless and rather amazing errors of fact himself. For example, He falsely claimed there was no inflation during his first term, when it was about 8% for the four years.

He falsely claimed that Europe had given $200 billion less support to Ukraine than the United States, but in fact Europeans had given more support than the US, and continue to do so.

He falsely claimed that before him, no administration had ever received any tariff payments from China, "Not even 10 cents." Just plain nonsense.

He falsely claimed that vandals had ruined his hasty repainting of the reflecting pool in Washington. But it was an incompetent job.

Falsely claimed that China was operating the Panama Canal. Nonsense.

He claimed, numerous times in recent months, that Iran was defeated and would soon sign a peace treaty. Any sign of this happening?

But enough; examples abound online, or in tomorrow's newspaper.

Here are some statistics drawn from the FBI and possible generalizations based on them.

(1) Pretty much every year, the number of murders peaks sharply in December.  Santa Claus is not the culprit, but perhaps these deaths are the result of enormous gaps between rosy holiday expectations and the conflicts and disappointments of home-coming.

(2) Violent crime varies enormously from state to state. Maine has the fewest homicides, and New England as a whole is the safest region; the South and the West are more violent. Overall, the blue states seem less crime prone than the red states who voted for Trump.

(3) The highest rate of violent crime is in Memphis; but the rate was low in Savannah. The South is not uniformly dangerous, but it seems to be the most murder prone region

(4) While the general trend of non-violent crime is down, shoplifting has increased dramatically since 2000 (13,682 cases) to 2025 (952,303 cases). One might argue that this change is related to the rise of a billionaire class while ordinary Americans are struggling. I wonder if shoplifting declined or incresed in cities where Trump stationed troops?

(5) Arson declined from 69,000  cases in 2000 to 27,000 cases in 2025. This is remarkable, since the Republicans fear that there are terrorists everywhere. Has the desire to burn things down migrated elsewhere, perhaps into ICE, or video games, or maybe to endless conflagrations in virtual reality?

(6) Car theft: from 1995 until 2007 more than 1 million cars were stolen almost every year. But in the fourteen years after 2010, the average was less than 800,000 hijackings. This was not a supply problem. The nations had more automobiles than ever. Is something else becoming more desirable, reducing the lust for cars, replaced perhaps by the mobile phone or a laptop as an object of criminal desire?

The overall trend seems to be declining crime, rolling gradually down despite shifts in party politics. The change is especially dramatic if one calculates the rate per 100,000 people rather than simply counting all the cases, because the US population has increased by 50 million since 2000.  But it is not a uniform decline, since we have dramatic increases in shoplifting but also decreases in violent crime. Perhaps troop deployments reduce crime in the streets? Maybe would-be arsonists and homicidal maniacs have turned to the indoor crime of shop-lifting? One thing is certain, crime statistics do not suggest that putting troops in the streets has a definite effect.

Game Changers: Technology and Sport - Book Review

After the American Century

In 2017 Rayvon Fouché published a valuable meditation on the roll of technologies in sport that remains useful today. On its cover we see a cyclist head bowed to show only the streamlined helmut, crouched and famed inside a bicycle wheel.  Fouché's subject is familiar to every sports far, whether it's improvements in racing bicycles, new composite bats in baseball, new kinds of shoes for runners, continual improvements in automotive equipment for racers, and much more. 

Jim Brewer, clearing 15 feet
using a metal pole in 1957

It is hard to think of a sport where new technologies have not affected the abilities needed to win. The pole used in the pole vault was once rigid. A century ago it was made of hardwood, and it was heavy. During the 1940s and 1950s some athletes adopted an aluminum or steel pole, but few records were made using them. The new world records were made with bamboo poles, which were a lighter alternative, but they could break or splinter. Using any of these earlier poles required great physical strength to lift the body over the top of the pole, as Jim Brewer does in the photograph above. 

When fiberglass or carbon fiber composites made possible springy, flexible poles c. 1960, the event changed. Suddenly it called for taller, agile competitors more than the bulkier and shorter vaulters using rigid poles, whose sheer strength pushed them over the bar. The fiberglass poles first bent and then launched the competitor over the bar, and the faster one ran, the more energy could be transferred to the pole when planted, bent, and sprung. The highest jump with a wooden pole was 4.25 meters, in 1925; with a bamboo pole 4.77 meters in 1942, and with a steel pole 4.81 meters in 1960. The flexible pole enabled a vault of 5 meters in 1963, 6 meters in 1985, and 6.31 meters (more than 20 feet) in 2026. Changing technologies transformed the event and facilitated huge advances.

Fouché cannot discuss every sport in 222 pages, and indeed leaves out the pole vault, but he examines many famous athletes, including the swimmer Michael Phelps, the runner Oscar Pistorius, and the cyclist Lance Armstrong. He looks at a wide range of sports equipment and enhancements, including many pages discussing designer drugs, whose use forced competitions to introduce drug testing.  Because there are so many technological aspects in sports, he argues, "leaps in performance are no longer looked at with awe and admiration but are examined critically." (221) The era when success was attributed entirely to the athlete, not to the equipment, coaches, nutritionists, and new techniques, is over. 

But Fouché is not telling a story of decline and loss. Rather, he argues that sport technology needs to be studied more thoroughly and better understood, so that regulations maintain a level playing field. Fouché argues for the value of instant replay, for example, which does not impinge on an athlete's performance. But he does recognize that using instant replay, notably in football, requires a trade off as the flow of play is interrupted. In short, this is not a book that yearns for an impossible return to the pastoral simplicity of a pre-technological era, but rather an argument for careful adoption and regulation of new technologies.

The sports fan will be happy to know that Fouché's arguments are illustrated by short case studies, including many famous controversies. Game Changer is clearly written and it still deserves a wide audience.

Rayvon Fouché, Game Changer: The Technoscientific Revolution in Sports.

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2017, 262 pages, including notes and index.

US Reputation Abroad Has Collapsed

After the American Century

The reputation of the US in the world has declined since Trump became president. PEW Research found, already in June 2025, that a majority of the population of key allies developed an unfavorable view of the US after 2024:

   nation    % negative 2025   % negative in 2024

    Sweden          79                           44                                         

    Australia        71                           60

    Netherlands   69                            48

    Mexico          69                            33

    Germany       66                            48

    Canada          64                            41

    Spain             64                            43

    France           59                            48

    Japan             44                            28

The opinion of the US worsened further in the year after that poll. PEW Research surveyed citizens of 36 countries in June 2026. Among the traditional allies of the United States there was a tidal wave of no confidence in Trump, topped by Turkey (92%), Sweden (89%), and Mexico (88%). More than 80% of EU citizens polled had no confidence in Trump. In the 36 nations as a whole 57% had an unfavorable view of the US, and 76% had "no confidence in Trump." In only five nations did more than half the population think Trump could be trusted: The Philippines, Israel, Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana. 

By comparison, at the end of eight years in the White House in 2016, 80% of French, German, and British citizens had confidence in President Obama as a partner. The United States also had a much better rating as a nation during the Biden presidency. In 2022, 83% of Swedes thought the United States was a reliable partner. In the second year of Trump's presidency that number had fallen to 31%. In Canada the decline was from 85% to 35%; in Germany from 83% to 39%. Trust that the US was a reliable partner fell to even lower levels in Italy (34%), Spain (31%), and France (27%).  

This is a catastrophic decline. Trump has achieved what once looked impossible: an international ranking for the US that is worse than Russia under Putin.

Foreign affairs: how much has changed since the early months of the Trump presidency?

After the American Century

This post is a reflection on how much has changed since the early months of the Trump presidency, when he dramatically ceased to support Ukraine and told its president that "he did not hold any cards." Trump foreign policy is a vast, chaotic arena, and here I will only focus on the war in Ukraine and to a lesser extend the war in Iran.

In April, 2025 President Trump provided an example of his "art of the deal." He posed to be a peace-maker between Russia and Ukraine, when in fact he was collaborating with the Russian leader Vlad Putin. 

The deal seemed to be that United States would get mineral resources from Ukraine, in exchange for support given in the past (under President Biden), AND the United States would also get investment opportunities in Russia in exchange for support given during the "peace negotiations."

In this "deal," Russia would have been rewarded with territory, and the economic sanctions against it would have been lifted. Its bombing of hospitals, schools, and other war crimes, and its kidnapping of thousands of Ukrainian children would not have been punished.  It also appears likely that Russia would not object should Trump seize Canada and/or Greenland.

In this "deal," Ukraine would have gotten nothing. The war had caused billions of dollars of damage, plus thousands of dead and wounded. If the deal had gone through, Ukraine would have been crippled, shrunken, bankrupt, and denied membership in both NATO or the EU. President Trump said that this was only fair because Ukraine supposedly started the war by forcing Russia to invade. (Trump repeated this Putin-inspired nonsense.)

Europe was given a lesson. It could no longer count upon the United States. When the United Nations was founded, the Americans signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It promised to uphold the right to national self-determination, and the rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and due process of law. Instead, President Trump actively worked against these rights, both at home and abroad.

Indeed, without US support, the era of international law may be coming to a close, marking the end of the American Century. When entering World War I, Woodrow Wilson wanted to make the world safe for democracy. But the US Senate embraced isolationism instead, and it refused to ratify American membership in the League of Nations. 

Trump is the political descendant of those senators. His policy of "America First," in April, 2025 seemd to mean: Russia second, Britain third, Europe fourth, Canada fifth, Mexico sixth, and far down the list (because it won't sell Greenland) Denmark, while near the bottom of the list is Ukraine. This ranking could also be seen in the Trump-imposed tariffs. There were no tariffs for Russia, low tariffs on Britain, higher tariffs on Europe, higher still for Canada, etc. 

In April, 2025, it seemed that Trump's policies would result in a number of transformations  (in each case followed by comments on actual events after that April.)

1. Europe rearms; Germany reasserts itself as a military power.  This is in fact what is happening. European military investment has increased. Finland and Sweden have joined NATO, creating a much more robust defensive position in northern Europe. Germany has increased its annual military budget to $114 billion, which is expected to increase to $188 billion in 2029.  Examples of other increases: 

    France, 2% of GDP              $71 billion 

    Poland to 4.8% of GDP        $55 billion 

    Italy 2.8% of GDP                $48 billion 

    Spain, 2.4% of GDP             $39.5 billion 

    Netherlands 2.5% of GDP    $28.9 billion

    Norway to 3.5% of GDP      $19 billion.

    Denmark, 3.5% of GDP       $15 billion

2. Europeans and Canadians weaken support the American dollar, travel less to the US, and move some of their trade elsewhere. In 2026 support for the dollar remains, though it has lost value under Trump. European and Canadian travel to the US has fallen off. Canada still has a trade surplus with the US, and it has successfully shifted its trade elsewhere, too. Between 2016 and 2025, EU-Canada bilateral trade increased by 80%, to €130 billion. In May 2026 Canada had an overall trade surplus, including a 74% increase in exports to China ($3.99 billion Canadian) and an 86% increase in exports to the Netherlands (to $1.45 million Canadian). Its exports to Germany also had increased 25%.

3. A wave of Ukrainian refugees floods into Europe. This has not happened, because Ukraine has done much better in the war than Trump expected, despite the decline in US support. The Russian army has been unable to grind forward in a war of attrition, because Ukranian drone warfare has proven extremely effective. In the first years of the war, Russian lost 2 or 3 men for each Ukrainian casualty, a 3:1 ratio. But drones have increased deaths of offensive movement on the battlefield. That ratio is now 8:1, making offensive campaigns terribly grim for Russians.

4. China avoids Trump's tariffs by exporting through shell companies.  In fact, China stood up to Trump's tariffs by curtailing exports of rare earths that are essential for IT. Trump then caved in. At the same time,  China successfully expanded exports to other nations. Moreover, China has increased its production of patents, surpassing the US. It now challenges American production of automobiles, advanced computer technologies, and especially alternative energy, where China is the clear leader. 

5. The United States, its moral leadership in tatters and its military support uncertain, withdraws from NATO. This remains a possibility, for trust in NATO has declined. The US-Israeli war against Iran has created additional tensions, as NATO  has no duty to defend non-member Israel. Moreover, and probably the main point, NATO is explicitly a defensive alliance. Had Iran attacked Turkey, for example, then NATO would have a duty to join in the conflict. But if Turkey were to attack Iran, NATO would not have a duty to become aggressive. That is hypothetical. In the case of the actual war, the Americans kept the attack on Iran secret and therefore Europeans were unpreared to join in, even if they had wanted to. Trump only began demanding their help when attacks failed to force Iran to the bargaining table. In short, Trump did not consult with his European allies, made overly optimistic plans, and demanded participation to help a non-NATO country in its aggression. Moreover, he insulted his allies with lies and about their participation in the previous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

6. Russia rebuilds its armed forces and plans further attacks, in order to realize its ambition  to recreate the geographical boundaries of the Soviet Union before it fell apart. This remains a possibility, in part because the US military has proven unable to subdue Iran and appears to be running out of missiles in that war. Some analysts argue that the US position in the Persian Gulf is weaker now than before the war began. Its relations with NATO allies remain tense. The main check on Russia now is Ukraine itself. The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated in July 2026 that 450,000 Russians had died in the war, with 1.4 million casualties in all. Russia recruits 27,000 each month, but it loses c. 30,000-34,000 on the battlefield. As the Center concluded: "Dense minefields, layered fortifications, heavy shelling, and the saturation of drones across a zone more than 20 kilometers wide around the front line make it extremely dangerous to mass the personnel and armor to generate a large breakthrough."  In fact, the area Russia controlled shrank by 400 square kilometers in April and May. This war has become a stalemate on the ground.

Conclusion. Trump's attempt to end the Ukrainian war by siding with Russia proved to be a massive mis-judgement. The war with Iran has likewise been a costly misadventure. Already in March, CNN estimated that the war was costing $890 million every day. While the Pentagon has resisted full disclosure, and provided a vague estimate of $37.5 billion, Fortune magazine estimated on June 24 that the real cost was closer to $200 billion. That was 8 weeks ago, and the meter is still running. The military cost willsurely be higher than $300 billion, while consumers continue to face higher prices for oil, gas, fertilizer, and transportation.

Trump could have forced Russian to the bargaining table by giving Ukraine far less money than he has wasted in Iran. Instead, he has alienated his allies, produced two stalemates, and convinced the world that the Trump administration is unreliable and overconfident. 

Denial of Science: Republicans expunge climate change from Handbook for Judges

After the American Century

Once again, President Trump and the Republican Party have tried to take climate change off the agenda. As the New York Times reported today, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine have bowed to pressure and deleted an entire chapter of their handbook prepared for judges. The purpose of that book is to provide an overview of scientific issues that may have a bearing on legal cases. In Trumpland, however, climate science is unclear and cannot be trusted, and only deluded Democrats think it is reliable.  But erasing scientific evidence is not an argument, it is censorship.

At the very moment when climate change disappeared from judicial advice, CBS News reports that the month of July, 2026 was the hottest ever recorded for the contiguous United States. As a direct result, wild fires in North America have become more common. By 2020 the smoke from these fires increased the death rate by 24,000 every year. That is five times as many as die in swimming accidents (4500) and eleven times more than die in residential fires (2200). Since 2020, the intensity and the frequency of these fires has increased. But don't tell a judge that global warming is clearly linked to the rising death toll.   

The Trump Administration has also attacked museum exhibits, cancelled academic grants after they had won approval through peer review, and begun to remove and rewrite historical information available at national parks. Under Trump, the truth is supposed to be whatever the president claims it is. However, the wild fires devastating Europe and North America do not disappear just because the White House tells a lie about global warming. Nor does rain magically increase. In Europe, the water in the Rhine River is so low that navigation is difficult and may soon become impossible. In the American West, the Colorado River has so little water flow that its reservoirs are at their lowest level in ninety years. The snow pack this year was so small that the Colorado dams cannot be replenished.

If the Trump assault on science continues without check, then a name change will soon be needed. The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine should drop the facade of objectivity, and instead be named, "The National Academies that Legitimate Political Convenience and Wishful Thinking."

The End of the American Century?

After the American Century

On July 4, 2026, the United States is deep in a mess of its own making, and 2026 will be remembered as the moment when allies began to fall away, American scientific prowess began to falter, the international order that the US helped to construct weakened, and the US retreated into the Western Hemisphere where it alienated its neighbors and was torn apart by internal differences.  The American Century has come to a close as the country celebrated 250 years on the world stage. 

Just one third of the voters approve of the president, and 60% disapprove of him. The newspapers reported yesterday that Trump has enriched himself by more than $2 billion since taking office. Congress has ceased to be a check upon the president, and refuses to investigate evidence of corruption, insider trading, and other misuse of his office. 

Congress has continually failed in its obligation to ensure that the funds it allocates are actually spent  for the purposes intended. 

The Department of Defense routinely slaughters people in small boats on the high seas, because it suspects them of transporting drugs. Those killed are often unknown, and it seems certain some of them were innocent. Killing people based on mere suspicion is against international law, but the killings continue with little outcry and with no end in sight.

Masked government employees have killed a number of American citizens, notably two in Minneapolis. Far from investigating these deaths, the Trump administration has vilified the victims and resisted judicial action.

The Supreme Court has lost the confidence of the American people, less than half of whom now consider it to be non-partisan. A generation ago the courts were the most respected branch of government, with an approval rating as high as 80%. But in 2025 the Court's rating sank below 50%, and some polls put it as low as 42% in 2026. 

In short, the majority of US citizens do not respect or trust any of the three branches of government. 

Happy Birthday? Not really. The United States has lost its moral compass. The Founding Fathers knew that virtue among the legislators and leaders was essential for democracy to succeed.  As James Madison put it: "The aim of every political Constitution, is or ought to be first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

And meanwhile, the country is not paying its way. The national debt that is now over 100% of the annual gross national product. (See chart below.) The federal government does not collect enough taxes to pay its expenses. In 2025 the federal government spent $7.01 trillion and collected $5.23 trillion in revenue, resulting in a deficit of $1.78 trillion. The interest payments for that year were $396 billion. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that annual interest payments on this debt will rise to $628 billion in 2028. The long term danger is that the dollar might cease to be the world's de facto currency. 

--------

Size of national debt as a percentage of GNP

Country        2026

Switzerland       14%      

Norway             15      

Denmark           20      

Sweden             34        

Australia           37        

Germany           44      

Poland               45     

Mexico              45    

New Zealand     51       

Canada              52       

India                  54        

Brazil                83     

China                 --        

France               94       

UK                   101      

United States  103      

Italy                 133      

Japan               201     

Kaleidoscopic America: A Metaphorical Illusion

After the American Century

I am pleased to offer readers a free essay based on my new book, 

The Great Energy Transition: America from 1876 to 1929  

This piece makes sense on its own, but it is only a fragment of the larger argument. 

The download is 

https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/american-progress-was-an-optical-illusion/

---

What does American history look like if we focus less on elections and short-term issues and instead focus on energy systems during what the French annals school called the longue durée? Instead of many short eras between 1876 and 1929, one sees a massive energy transition. Every job, business, house, and public space underwent a transformation so radical that Americans could not grasp the larger pattern. The concepts of "technology" and an "energy transition" had yet to emerge. Observers struggled in a sematic void, attributing new experiences to "kaleidoscopic change" and "the machine." The Great Energy Transition explains this transformation, the failure to grasp it, and the still persisting consequences.

paperback, 334 pages, MIT Press, 2026

"A magisterial analysis of technological and social whirwinds that still sway everyday life, this is the rare book that takes on major issues and does so well. This is a truly milestone book."

 – John Stilgoe, Harvard University

"With this book, the reader is in the hands of a master historian. Nye reminds us that energy transitions are a long game, and the kaleidoscopic era·1876 to 1929–echoes today."

 – Julie A. Cohn, Rice University

Amazon

Penguin Random House

Barnes and Noble

MIT Press bookstore

A Plea for Justice: Should Trump Stand Trial for Murder?

After the American Century

Beginning on September 2, 2025, Donald Trump has ordered the execution of civilians on the high seas, without identifying them, charging them with a crime, attempting to capture them alive, or providing them an opportunity to surrender. These people were executed without due process or even evidence. The American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization, notes that, "The U.S. government claims the men killed were 'narco-terrorists' and members of Tren de Aragua but has provided no evidence. Interviews with victims’ families indicate that some of those killed had no ties to the drug trade."

These crimes must not be forgotten or ignored. The International Criminal Court could determine whether Trump and his Secretary of War are guilty of the murder of more than 120 people in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean. It appears that, without a declaration of war, members of the United States military violated international law with these attacks, which continued long after the probable illegality of these murders was widely discussed. There are also reports that in some cases the military has disguised an attacking plane as a civilian aircraft. If true, this constitutes the crime of perfidy, and that also violates international law.

The attacks have not ceased in 2026, and this has become a systematic military program of the murder of civilians. The Court could uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, notably Article 3, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person,” and Article 6, “Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.” Bombing small boats on the high seas and slaughtering everyone on board does appear to be an intentional violation of these articles. A thorough investigation is urgently needed. 

I do not imagine that either of these men will appear in person to stand trial for murder. But if a warrant were issued for their arrest, it would send a clear signal that other nations deplore these murders and wish to live in a world governed by international law. It would repudiate these murderous acts, and would also will encourage American lawyers and courts to hold these men to account for these and any other criminal acts they may commit.

For more information, see 

The Guardian  

& 

Amnesty International

&

A story on National Public Radio

Did the U.S. commit a war crime in the Caribbean?

The Great Energy Transition from 1876 to 1929

After the American Century

In March of 2026 I will publish The Great Energy Transition, America from 1876 to 1929, my 13th book with The MIT Press. This new book is far more than a summary of my previous studies. It examines how new forms of energy transformed every aspect of American life in a span of 50 years after 1876 – and how these changes seeded our current polarization. 

The Great Energy Transition has already been endorsed by several reviewers, including Professor John Stilgoe of Harvard University, one of the finest scholars working on the history of the American landscape, and Julie Cohn at Rice University, an expert on energy history. 

"A magisterial analysis of technological and social whirwinds that still sway everyday life, this is the rare book that takes on major issues and does so well. This is a truly milestone book."

 – John Stilgoe, Harvard University

"With this book, the reader is in the hands of a master historian. Nye reminds us that energy transitions are a long game, and the kaleidoscopic era·1876 to 1929–echoes today."

 – Julie A. Cohn, Rice University

334 pages, 35 illustrations
Publication date, end of March 2026

For more information, here is the link to MIT Press

at https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262052122/the-great-energy-transition/

You can also order it from any bookstore, including:

Penguin Random HouseAmazon

Barnes and NobleBookshop.org