US Foreign Policy

The Case for US Isolationism

 

Isolationism: The policy of isolating one’s country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, international agreements, seeking to devote the entire efforts of one’s country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities. Looking at the consequences of American global involvement in the last one hundred fifty years, this might not be such a bad idea for the US. The advantage of such a policy would be a great benefit in blood and treasure not only for the United States but for the rest of the world as well.

Seeking refuge behind a self -imposed figurative wall that precludes interference, politically or militarily in other countries affairs would save the US trillions of dollars and countless lives of young citizens sent abroad to wage warfare to further American economic and political interests. The ballooning debt could be reduced and eventually eliminated. Monies could be devoted to medical research and education rather than weaponry and failed attempts to build democracies in inhospitable soils. The US presents itself to the world as the altruistic saviour of human rights and democracy but its goal is to impose its own template for governance and so-called values on other countries. In short, to gain global hegemony.

The consequences of this policy have been to put into jeopardy its own economy by debt financing, selling treasury notes and bonds to other central banks. All this has been in aid of financing multiple wars with the objective of achieving control of resources such as oil, and forcing compliance of American ideology. Even democratically elected governments are only recognised by the US if they are promoted by the US and follow the policy paths laid down by the US. “If you are not with us, you are against us”

Therefore, Russia and China, both too large to be bullied into compliance, are not recognised as legitimate democracies, although they both hold elections, albeit not using the American template. Putin has the support of 90% of the Russian people, something that even the American government admits, but because Putin does not render due obeisance to the US and is concerned about Russia’s national interests, he is pilloried by the US government, media and America citizens. The American people react to the government and media’s paranoid driven propaganda with “mimetic animosity”, a term coined by Patrick Smith, the journalist, to describe the sheep like tendency of Americans to be angry at Putin because others, the US government and media, are angry at him. They do this without going to the trouble to understand Russia’s geopolitical concerns or Putin’s appeal to the Russian people.

A Democracy, as defined by the US, is any government serving US interests. In fact, to gain approval, the governance need not be a democracy, It can be an utterly repressive one such as Saudi Arabia or Egypt, but it must serve US national interests, not necessarily that of the people in a given country.

With the likelihood of another US neo-con led congress post 2016 general elections, and the distinct possibility of a neo-con president, it would behove the rest of the world to distance itself from the US. If the US is unwilling to isolate itself, perhaps the rest of the world will isolate the US. Europe, in particular, must be tired of following the US willy-nilly into catastrophic foreign misadventures.

Baoluo

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.