Essay: The Bubble of American Supremacy

Overview
George Soros frames "The Bubble of American Supremacy" as an argument that the post–Cold War era produced a dangerous overconfidence in American power. He compares prevailing attitudes in Washington to a speculative bubble: a self-reinforcing belief in unlimited U.S. ability to shape world affairs, protected from inconvenient facts by ideology and institutional practices. That insulation from reality, Soros contends, has encouraged unilateral action and risky interventions that undermine long-term U.S. interests and global stability.

Main critique
Soros identifies a cluster of intellectual and political tendencies that feed the bubble: a belief in American exceptionalism, an eagerness to act preemptively, and a disdain for international restraints. He argues these tendencies manifest in policy through secrecy, marginalization of opposing views, and the sidelining of international institutions. Rather than producing secure, democratic outcomes, this approach sows resentment, strengthens adversaries, and erodes the legitimacy of U.S. leadership.

Evidence and examples
Soros points to recent interventions and policy choices as demonstrations of the bubble's logic and consequences. He highlights how military force used without broad international support can create humanitarian costs, strategic setbacks, and political backlash that fuel extremism and instability. The emphasis is less on cataloging events than on showing a pattern: repeated reliance on force and unilateralism breeds outcomes that contradict the stated goals of spreading democracy and securing peace.

Institutional failings
A central element of the essay is the critique of domestic and international institutional failures that allow the bubble to persist. Soros argues that weak checks and balances, curtailed public debate, and a compliant expert community enable hubris in policy-making. Internationally, he faults the marginalization of multilateral organizations and international law, which both diminishes the capacity to manage global problems collectively and delegitimizes U.S. actions in the eyes of other nations.

Consequences and warnings
Soros warns that clinging to the bubble invites long-term decline rather than sustained dominance. He suggests the combination of overreach and growing global resentment can provoke strategic setbacks, economic costs, and political isolation. The danger is not simply moral or reputational; it is that tactical victories can turn into strategic defeats when they generate instability, empowerment of hostile actors, and a fracturing of cooperative frameworks needed to confront transnational threats.

Policy prescriptions
The corrective Soros proposes is restraint coupled with renewed commitment to multilateralism. He calls for greater reliance on diplomacy, increased cooperation with allies, and respect for international institutions as mechanisms to legitimize and sustain policies. He urges transparency, open debate at home, and a willingness to accept limits on the use of force. By acknowledging mistakes and engaging partners, the United States can deflate the bubble before its inevitable burst does damage beyond repair.

Conclusion
Soros frames the challenge as both moral and pragmatic: reclaiming credibility requires abandoning the illusion of omnipotence and rebuilding the institutions and habits of cooperation that anchor stable international order. The essay closes with the pragmatic admonition that a humbled but constructive America will be more effective at promoting its values and securing its interests than a triumphant yet isolated superpower.