Editing Isolationism (section)

===United States===
{{Main|United States non-interventionism#Isolationism between the World Wars}}

Some scholars, such as [[Robert J. Art]], believe that the United States had an isolationist history, but most other scholars dispute that claim by describing the United States as following a strategy of [[unilateralism]] or [[United States non-interventionism|non-interventionism]] rather than a strategy of isolationism.<ref name=ArtGrandStratpg172-173>{{cite book|last1=Art|first1=Robert J.|title=A grand strategy for America|date=2004|publisher=Cornell University Press|location=Ithaca, N.Y.|isbn=978-0-8014-8957-0|pages=172–73}}</ref><ref name=McDougallPLCSpg39-40>{{cite book|last1=McDougall|first1=Walter A.|title=Promised land, crusader state : the American encounter with the world since 1776|date=1998|publisher=Houghton Mifflin|location=Boston, Mass.|isbn=978-0-395-90132-8|pages=39–40}}</ref> Robert Art makes his argument in ''A Grand Strategy for America'' (2003).<ref name="ArtGrandStratpg172-173"/> Books that have made the argument that the United States followed unilaterism instead of isolationism include [[Walter A. McDougall]]'s ''Promised Land, Crusader State'' (1997), [[John Lewis Gaddis]]'s ''Surprise, Security, and the American Experience'' (2004), and [[Bradley F. Podliska]]'s ''Acting Alone'' (2010).<ref>[[Bradley F. Podliska|Podliska, Bradley F.]] ''Acting Alone: A Scientific Study of American Hegemony and Unilateral Use-of-Force Decision Making''. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2010. {{ISBN|978-0-7391-4251-6}}</ref> Both sides claim policy prescriptions from [[George Washington's Farewell Address]] as evidence for their argument.<ref name="ArtGrandStratpg172-173"/><ref name="McDougallPLCSpg39-40"/> Bear F. Braumoeller argues that even the best case for isolationism, the United States in the interwar period, has been widely misunderstood and that Americans proved willing to fight as soon as they believed a genuine threat existed.<ref>Braumoeller, Bear F. (2010) "[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1743-8594.2010.00117.x/asset/j.1743-8594.2010.00117.x.pdf?v=1&t=idkox1xs&s=0a733ff5e5ab90b455a9d501387f32935e75ac6b The Myth of American Isolationism.]" Foreign Policy Analysis 6: 349–71.</ref> Warren F. Kuehl and Gary B. Ostrower argue:
<blockquote>Events during and after the Revolution related to the treaty of alliance with France, as well as difficulties arising over the neutrality policy pursued during the French revolutionary wars and the Napoleonic wars, encouraged another perspective. A desire for separateness and unilateral freedom of action merged with national pride and a sense of continental safety to foster the policy of isolation. Although the United States maintained diplomatic relations and economic contacts abroad, it sought to restrict these as narrowly as possible in order to retain its independence. The Department of State continually rejected proposals for joint cooperation, a policy made explicit in the Monroe Doctrine's emphasis on unilateral action. Not until 1863 did an American delegate attend an international conference.<ref>Warren F. Kuehl and Gary B. Ostrower, "Internationalism" ''Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy'' ed. Alexander DeConde (2002) [http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Internationalism.aspx online]</ref></blockquote>