Is a Non-Interventionism the same as Isolationism?

The most frequent swipe taken against Ron Paul is that he is a "isolationist." When talking to people about Ron Paul the response is often, "Isn't he an isolationist?!?"

Isolationism conjures up images of a militia style survivalists radically relying on his bowie knife and wits to keep himself warm and alive but loath to interact or even talk to his suspicious neighbors.

In an interconnected networked global economy, isolationism sounds kind of crazy. So if Ron Paul is an isolationist, then isn't he kind of crazy too? And thus the slur against Ron Paul does its job and goes unchallenged in the minds of unsuspecting voters.

But what is isolationism, and is Ron Paul an isolationist?

From Wikipedia:

Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). It asserts both:

1. Non-Interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related directly to direct territorial self-defense.

2. Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.

Not to be confused with the non-interventionist philosophy and foreign policy of the libertarian world view, which espouses unrestricted free trade and freedom of travel for individuals to all countries.

Isolationism is nonintervention combined with economic nationalism (protectionism). Most non-interventionists are not isolationists. Most, like Thomas Jefferson and Ron Paul in the United States, favor nonintervention combined with free trade and free cultural exchange.

+ + + + + + +

Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist, rather he, along with our Founding Fathers, is a non-interventionist.

Ron Paul is opposed to our current foreign policy which was crafted by neo-conservatives in the latter part of the 1990's. These neo-conservatives, many of whom are signatories to the Project for a New American Century, espouse a policy of direct intervention in the affairs of other countries because America has a responsibility to be the policeman of the world, and has almost a divine mandate to spread peace, freedom and democracy around the world by using military power!

Our current foreign policy is one of global entanglements and the "spreading of our values" abroad through "pre-emptive war" and other methods of naked and stealth coercion. This is a policy of empire and neo-imperialism. This is not the policy of our Founding Fathers; it is the English policy our Founding Fathers fought to liberate themselves and us - their posterity - from living under.

Does Ron Paul advocate economic Protectionism?

Not at all.

He wants to get America out of these global trade agreements that "manage trade" in a way that is akin to protectionism.

Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is a canard to deflect from a serious debate about America's current foreign policy of "never-ending pre-emptive war for an ever ascending global peace and security." This policy is unconstitutional, it is an affront to the American people in whose name it is advanced, and it is giving us a tyrannical domestic policy and fueling suicide terrorism.

This policy is the problem. Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who is making this point.

Don't let anyone get away with calling Ron Paul an isolationist - he isn't. Calling him one is an attempt to slur him and make him seem crazy.

Go Ron Paul!