Where do you see versions of the frontier myth operating today (politics, culture, technology, borders, etc.)? Give one contemporary example and briefly explain the connection.
End of the Frontier Question 3
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
One clear example of a contemporary vision of the frontier myth is the tech industry’s push toward space colonization. In the NYT article, Grandin writes that Trump promised to “pursue our Manifest Destiny into the stars — even to Mars,” and adds that “Trump supporters, especially in tech, see Greenland as valuable not for its minerals or strategic position but as a spiritual solution to our current malaise, a way of restoring a sense of purpose to a country adrift.” This idea fits perfectly into Turner’s Frontier Thesis: America needs an endless and open frontier to escape its problems. Turner wrote that the frontier promised a “perennial rebirth” – an idea that when combined with the notion of space colonization, suggests that America can get rid of its problems just by running away from them. Problems, including climate change, social injustice, immigration, and inequality, are all left untouched, while money and time are being dumped into this outward escape. As Grandin warns, “the challenges this country confronts will not be solved by fleeing to an imagined frontier.” Thus, space colonization does not fix or even start to deal with America’s problems; instead, it holds onto the frontier myth, preventing America from dealing with its real problems.
I see the frontier myth at work today in how Silicon Valley talks about AI. They talk about it as if it were this endless new frontier that would fix everything, create endless growth, and basically start the American dream over again, but this time for real. It fits perfectly with what Grandin says: when the physical frontier closes, the myth just moves somewhere else. Right now, it’s moved into technology, where the promise is that if we just keep pushing forward into this new digital wilderness, prosperity will follow and social problems will take care of themselves. People who are actually getting hurt by it, like workers who lose their jobs to automation, artists who have their work stolen by training data, and entire industries that are destroyed, are basically invisible in that conversation. This is exactly how the frontier myth has always worked, hiding the violence and inequality behind all the hope. No one wants to stop and think about any of that because stopping feels like losing, and the myth says the best thing to do is keep going.
One contemporary version of the frontier myth I see clearly is the rhetoric around AI. The language sounds exactly like the frontier language we have already looked at. They are “pioneers,” “the next frontier,” talk of an AI “race” or “gold rush,” and the constant description of AI as a limitless new space where wealth, productivity, and even human potential can expand without bound. Sam Altman and others describe AI as the technology that will solve all of our problems, regardless of the new ones they create. This sounds exactly like Turner.
It maps cleanly onto Grandin’s argument that once the physical frontier closed, its imagery got transferred to other arenas to keep the promise of endless growth alive. AI is just the latest terrain. And like the Greenland fantasy Grandin describes, it’s appealing because it offers an escape from a moment defined by stalled wages, climate catastrophe, and political deadlock. Rather than confront those problems directly, the pitch is that a new tech breakthrough will solve them.
One place the frontier myth shows up today is in how people talk about economic growth and capitalism, especially the idea that there’s always some “next opportunity” that will fix things. In the intro, Grandin explains how the frontier became this bigger metaphor for endless expansion, not just land but also markets and wealth. It’s this mindset that fuels how we still treat the economy like it can just keep growing forever, and that growth will somehow solve inequality or political division. For example, when politicians or companies push things like new industries or global trade as the solution to economic problems, it kind of reflects that same frontier logic. Instead of dealing directly with issues, the focus is on expanding the system and hoping the benefits will spread. I think this shows how the frontier myth is still shaping the way we think, because it keeps us looking for solutions in expansion rather than actually confronting the root problems.
I feel like I see versions of the frontier myth operating today in regards to the expansion into space but as well as deep sea in regards to the physical expansion but how that physical expansion leads to dominance. Physical expansion in the frontier myth was never really just about the land itself — it was always about what controlling that land meant. In regards to deep sea and space expansion, the nation or company that establishes a mining operation on the ocean floor or a permanent presence on the Moon isn’t just expanding—it’s setting the rules, controlling resource flows, and shaping access for everyone who follows; that’s why the U.S., China, and others are moving so urgently, because being first creates lasting and important leverage. In space specifically, this shows up in the race to establish lunar bases and satellite infrastructure, and whoever builds them first can define the standards of communication and property claims beyond Earth.