Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Isolationism’

Interventionism and Isolationism – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on October 26, 2019

No more sanctions, embargoes, trade wars, travel restrictions, immigration controls, or other government measures that prevent Americans from interacting with foreigners or that punish them for doing so.

That’s not “isolationism.” That’s the opposite of isolationism because although the U.S. government is prevented from interacting with the world through death and destruction, the American people are free to interact with the rest of the world with tourism and trade.


When President Trump decided to relocate a few troops on Syria’s northern border and announced that he would withdraw all the other U.S. troops from Syria, interventionists went ballistic. They said that Trump was leading America to “isolationism.”

That’s pretty funny, given (1) there is still no assurance that the Pentagon and the CIA are going to permit Trump to withdraw all U.S. forces from Syria; (2) Trump is sending troops that he withdraws from Syria into Iraq and Saudi Arabia; (3) Trump continues to maintain troops in Afghanistan despite having had three years to have taken them out; (4) Trump continues to partner with the Saudis in their brutal war in Yemen; (5) Trump imposes sanctions and embargoes against any regime that bucks his will, including Turkey, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, China, and others; (6) the Pentagon and the CIA continue to maintain foreign imperial bases and secret prison camps all over the world; (7) Trump has kept the United State in NATO and other entangling alliances; and (8) foreign aid continues flowing into foreign regimes, dictatorial ones.

If that’s “isolationism,” I’d hate to see what interventionism looks like!

When we talk about foreign policy, there are two different systems from which to choose — the system of the statists, both Republican and Democrat, and the system that we libertarians favor.

The statist system

The statists have brought us a system in which the president, the Pentagon, and the CIA wield the unlimited power to intervene anywhere in the world they choose. Such interventions can take the form of coups, assassinations, invasions, wars of aggression, occupations, sanctions, embargoes, and partnerships with dictatorial regimes.

Under this system, there are no external limitations on the power to intervene and meddle in the affairs of other countries. No one even enforces the requirement in the Constitution that the president secure a congressional declaration of war before he, the Pentagon, and the CIA wage war.

That is the system under which we Americans live today, thanks to the statists, both Republicans and Democrats.

But it is more than that. The statist system is also one in which the American people in the private sector are prohibited from freely interacting with the people of the world. That’s what the sanctions, embargoes, trade wars, trade restrictions, travel controls, border restrictions, and Berlin fences and walls are all about.

Thus, the system under which we live today unleashes the power of the federal government to intervene in foreign affairs while, at the same time, isolates the American private sector from the rest of the world.

Ironically, one justification for isolating the private sector is to protect it from the threats that the  Pentagon’s and CIA’s interventionism produces abroad. Thus, if the Pentagon and the CIA invade a country and kill thousands of people in the process, U.S. officials say that it’s necessary to keep Americans safe from the threat of retaliation. That’s how the secret surveillance schemes and travel restrictions come into play, for both foreigners and Americans.

The libertarian system

There is another system, however — a better one — one that we libertarians favor. It is the opposite of the system under which we live, with respect to both the government sector and the private sector.

Our system calls for no more governmental interventionism in the affairs of other nations. No more coups, foreign military bases, CIA prison camps, invasions, occupations, assassinations, alliances with dictatorial regimes, wars of aggression, sanctions, embargoes, entangling alliances, foreign aid, and the like.

At the same time, our system calls for a dismantling of the national-security establishment — i.e., the Pentagon, the military-industrial-congressional complex, the CIA, and the NSA. Our system calls for the restoration of a limited-government republic, which was America’s founding governmental system.

Ironically, that’s what interventionists call “isolationism.” They say that such a system “isolates” America from the rest of the world because it prevents the military and the CIA from “interacting” with the rest of the world with invasions, coups, warships, troops, bombs, missiles, and the like.

The interventionists forget the other half of the libertarian paradigm — the American private sector, the sector that they strive to isolate under their system. With our system, we do the opposite. We unleash the private sector to freely interact with the people of the world.

No more sanctions, embargoes, trade wars, travel restrictions, immigration controls, or other government measures that prevent Americans from interacting with foreigners or that punish them for doing so.

That’s not “isolationism.” That’s the opposite of isolationism because although the U.S. government is prevented from interacting with the world through death and destruction, the American people are free to interact with the rest of the world with tourism and trade.

The best American diplomats are American tourists and businesspeople. Foreigners love them because they bring friendship and commerce. The worst American diplomats are federal bureaucrats, especially those in the Pentagon and the CIA. Foreigners hate them because they bring arrogance, death, and destruction to foreign lands.

The American people have a choice. If you want more death, destruction, and isolationism of the private sector, just keep supporting the system that Republicans and Democrats have foisted upon our nation. If you want peace, prosperity, normality, and harmony with the people of the world, join up with us libertarians.



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Peace Expert George W Bush Says ‘Isolationism’ Is Dangerous To Peace – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on October 19, 2019

For those who don’t speak fluent neoconservative, “isolationist” here means taking even one small step in any direction other than continued military expansionism into every square inch of planet Earth,…

Humanity was treated to an important lecture on peace at a recent event for the NIR School of the Heart by none other than Ellen Degeneres BFF and world-renowned peace expert George W Bush.

“I don’t think the Iranians believe a peaceful Middle East is in their national interest,” said the former president according to The Washington Post‘s Josh Rogin, whose brief Twitter thread on the subject appears to be the only record of Bush’s speech anywhere online.

“An isolationist United States is destabilizing around the world,” Bush said during the speech in what according to Rogin was a shot at the sitting president. “We are becoming isolationist and that’s dangerous for the sake of peace.”

For those who don’t speak fluent neoconservative, “isolationist” here means taking even one small step in any direction other than continued military expansionism into every square inch of planet Earth, and “We are becoming isolationist” here means “We have hundreds of military bases circling the globe, our annual military budget is steadily climbing toward the trillion-dollar mark, and we are engaged in countless undeclared wars and regime change interventions all around the world.”

It is unclear why Bush is choosing to present himself as a more peaceful president than Trump given that by this point in his first term Bush had launched not one but two full-scale ground invasion wars whose effects continue to ravage the Middle East to this very day, especially given the way both presidents appear to be in furious agreement on foreign policy matters like Iran. But here we are.

From a certain point of view it’s hard to say which is stranger: (A) a war criminal with a blood-soaked legacy of mass murder, torture and military expansionism telling Trump that he is endangering peace with his “isolationism”, or (B) the claim that Trump is “isolationist” at all. As we’ve discussed previously, Trump’s so-called isolationism has thus far consisted of killing tens of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions in an attempt to effect regime change in the most oil-rich nation on earth, advancing a regime change operation in Iran via starvation sanctionsCIA covert ops, and reckless military escalations, continuing to facilitate the Saudi-led slaughter in Yemen and to sell arms to Saudi Arabiainflating the already insanely bloated US military budget to enable more worldwide military expansionism, greatly increasing the number of bombs dropped per day from the previous administration, killing record numbers of civilians in airstrikes for which he has reduced military accountability, and of course advancing many, many new cold war escalations against the nuclear superpower Russia.

But these bogus warnings about a dangerous, nonexistent threat of isolationism are nothing new for Dubya. In his farewell address to the nation, Bush said the following:

“In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led.”

As we discussed recently, use of the pro-war buzzword “isolationism” has been re-emerging from its post-Bush hibernation as a popular one-word debunk of any opposition to continued US military expansionism in all directions, and it is deceitful in at least three distinct ways. Firstly, the way it is used consistently conflates isolationism with non-interventionism, which are two wildly different things. Secondly, none of the mainstream political figures who are consistently tarred with the “isolationist” pejorative are isolationists by any stretch of the imagination, or even proper non-interventionists; they all support many interventionist positions which actual non-interventionists object to. Thirdly, calling someone who opposes endless warmongering an “isolationist” makes as much sense as calling someone who opposes rape a man-hating prude; opposing an intrinsically evil act is not the same as withdrawing from the world.

Nobody actually believes that US foreign policy is under any threat of anything remotely resembling isolationism. The real purpose of this buzzword is to normalize the forever war and drag the Overton window so far in the direction of ghoulish hawkishness that the opposite of “war” is no longer “peace”, but “isolationism”. By pulling this neat little trick, the propagandists of the political/media class have successfully made endless war seem like a perfectly normal thing to be happening and any small attempt to scale it back look weird and freakish, when the truth is the exact opposite. War is weird, freakish and horrific, and peace is of course normal. This is the only healthy way to see things.

It would actually be great if George W Bush could shut the fuck up forever, ideally in a locked cell following a public war tribunal. Failing that, at the very least people should stop looking at him as a cuddly wuddly teddy bear with whom it’s fun to share a sporting arena suite or a piece of hard candy or to hang award medals on for his treatment of veterans. This mass murdering monster has been growing more and more popular with Democrats lately just because he offers mild criticisms of Trump sometimes, as have war pigs like Bill Kristol and Max Boot and even John Bolton for the same reason, and it needs to stop. And in the name of a million dead Iraqis, please don’t start consulting this man on matters of peace.


Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemitthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »