A new isolationism ?

[Camino LS6]

Been thinking that perhaps a new sort of isolationism might be a good thing for us right now.

Not the old " let's ignore the rest of the world and use protectionism in our dealings with other countries" way. Just a strictly non-interventionist, and locally focused sort of way.

The idea of what else defines this idea is still floating around in my head and not fully formed yet. But I see some logical reasons for it.

Thoughts?

[Blake Noble]

I agree.

We should scale back military presence in other countries and quit trying to act like a global police force. While it is nice to help out other countries when they are in a time of need, it is not required of us to have our presence installed unwarranted. Not every nation's problems are our own.

[Camino LS6]

It seems to me that the way to spread freedom is to practise it.

Not to invade other nations in order to bring "freedom's blessings" to the unwashed masses.

It would certainly help the effort if we didn't imprison more of our own people than any other nation.

Perhaps we should try leading by example for a change.

[PurdueGuy]

I agree - we need to find a responsible exit to some of the situations we're in now (iraq), then cut back on our overseas military dealings and get our own home in order a little better.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Nuke the Bastards, oops, I mean peace in our time!

[ZL-1]

IMHO isolacionism hurts the US (and the World) as much as blind military intervention abroad. Those are the two extremes that US foreign policy should avoid.

[FAPTurbo]

An isolationist stance will mean that Russia, and China will be able to be even more aggressive globally, especially in areas like Africa. It will not bode well for anyone in those areas who believes in freedom, liberty, and human rights.

[IfICouldWouldYou?]

Personally, I love the idea of offshoring our manufacturing base and jobs to China, then having to compete with them on the world stage for dwindling resources. I think that is the definition of irony.

[loki]

don't worry, if we don't correct our course of interventionism, that decision will be made for us (economic collapse). the only thing scary about that happening is the idea of a NA union stripping away our national identity following a collapse.

[Sixty8panther]

Funny you say that Camino... about three weeks ago a few of my co-workers at UPS

jumped down my throat when I suggested that what our nation needs right now is a

dose of isolationism and nationalism.

F*** China, lett'em find their own jobs, or steal jobs from Europe.

F*** the middle east, including Israel. Let Israel sink or swim on their own.

F*** every country that accepts million$ from us but still hates us!

F*** Foreign policy towards our enemies and fu**ing RED COMMIES!

F*** Al Gore & Slick Billy who sold military secrets & our country's security for Chinese Cash.

and...

F*** this B.S. Republican/Democrat conspiracy to eliminate the middle class.

[regfootball]

once we get rid of the current regime, that will help the most.

[MyerShift]

Hooray for an ever more Orwellian world.

[Camino LS6]

Seems a few of you missed the "new" part of my original post.

Interesting reactions, though.

[ehaase]

The current financial condition of the U.S. will force us into a non-interventionist foreign policy someday, even though McCain and the neo-cons don't realize it. We should go back to avoiding entangling foreign alliances as George Washington advised.

[balthazar]

>>"...locally focused sort of way."<<

This has been lagging greatly, and for far too long.

I would support (in theory at least) a 'new sort of isolationism' that prioritizes U.S. issues over that of foreign concerns. I cannot see any validity in doing the opposite.

[Blake Noble]

I cannot see any validity in doing the opposite.

Me either. I thought Social Darwinism and Imperialism died out long, long ago.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Funny you say that Camino... about three weeks ago a few of my co-workers at UPS

jumped down my throat when I suggested that what our nation needs right now is a

dose of isolationism and nationalism.

F*** China, lett'em find their own jobs, or steal jobs from Europe.

F*** the middle east, including Israel. Let Israel sink or swim on their own.

F*** every country that accepts million$ from us but still hates us!

F*** Foreign policy towards our enemies and fu**ing RED COMMIES!

F*** Al Gore & Slick Billy who sold military secrets & our country's security for Chinese Cash.

and...

F*** this B.S. Republican/Democrat conspiracy to eliminate the middle class.

+1...

We will have to do some sort of isolationism soon. Or else, this empire will fall faster than the towers on 9/11.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I cannot see any validity in doing the opposite.

$$$

It's all that counts in this society and it's why our society is dying.

[2005 EquinoxLS]

Right about that. Its time we started taking care of the roblems we have HERE. Not other countries. We have our own things to deal with a lot of it brought on by Mr Bush and his sidekick Mr. Oilman Cheney.

[Sixty8panther]

+1...

We will have to do some sort of isolationism soon. Or else, this empire will fall faster than the towers on 9/11.

Yup. We really ARE living in a modern version of Rome in like 300 A.D.

[CARBIZ]

Yup. We really ARE living in a modern version of Rome in like 300 A.D.

...except that Rome didn't have as amazing toys that the U.S. does today! Rome only imploded and hurt itself; the U.S. has the ability to take the entire planet down with it.

The barn door has already been left open and the horses have bolted. The time for isolationism to have set in would have been sometime after Vietnam. It's too late for that. Even if some kind of Pan-North American alliance was formed, the shock to all 3 of our economies would be devastating for the short term at least.

No, the direction is forward, upward (the Moon, Mars) if necessary, but not backward.

Britannia ruled the 19th Century because she ruled the waves. Whomever will rule the 21st century will do so because they can collect enough friends (alliances) and rule the skies (space.) Undoubtedly, we are witnessing a heating up of the battle of civilizations of which we have not seen the like since the Crusades.

Personally, I think it is a crapshoot as to who will 'win.' The West's greatest strength over the past 600 years has been it's ability to assimilate different cultures and ideas; however, those noble ideals are being twisted and turned against us.

In fact, a better comparison would be the way the Greek Empire waned and the Roman Empire rose. The Romans initially adopted a lot of the Greek ideals, but then warped them out of recognition which ultimately led to their own demise.

[Camino LS6]

I'm really glad to see so many taking this situation seriously, and I'll have much more to say on the matter when I'm not dead tired.

I really do believe that it is essential that we begin to examine the fundamental things within our society - what it is supposed to be as well as what the current reality actually is.

We've strayed... badly.

[balthazar]

The problem with real change (not the candidate's hot air version) is that it hasn't been even possible in decades and decades. Intrenched vested interests won't allow it and no one is willing to step up and put their public service job (president, congress, etc) first. I'd do it if they asked, but I'd expect an 'accident' once I got steam-rollin'.

[Camino LS6]

The problem with real change (not the candidate's hot air version) is that it hasn't been even possible in decades and decades. Intrenched vested interests won't allow it and no one is willing to step up and put their public service job (president, congress, etc) first. I'd do it if they asked, but I'd expect an 'accident' once I got steam-rollin'.

Agreed.

But there are other ways.