Most U.S. Foreign Policy books cover the same terrain. They describe U.S. foreign policy actors (i.e., the President, Congress, media, interest groups, bureaucracies) and issues (economic policy, human rights, etc.). Foreign policy debates may be organized in an ad hoc fashion, geographically (what should U.S. foreign policy be toward Russia, China, Europe or the Middle East?), or chronologically (a diplomatic history approach). None of these approaches address the overarching challenge across foreign policy issue areas: how do U.S. foreign policy and U.S. foreign policy institutions adapt to the changes brought about by globalization? The oldest institutions of the U.S. government are foreign policy institutions: the Departments of State, Treasury, and War (today renamed Defense). Foreign policy was a central reason for the American Revolution, for changing institutions and creating the United States of America. Yet institutions born in 1776 or even 1946 struggle to meet 21st-century challenges.

There is a disconnect between scholars and practitioners in thinking about the changes brought about by globalization; practitioners view these as more pressing and challenging than scholars, who are skeptical about whether they represent "real" or significant change. But, to take just one example, there is something new afoot in the privatization of U.S. foreign policy when non-state actors issue money (bitcoin). Our current foreign policy theories don't offer much guidance to policy makers charged with coming up with policy for virtual currencies. Maryann Cusimano Love discusses the history of change within U.S. foreign policy and its institutions, and provides antecedents to the current trends we are seeing.