Eliminating the "Isolationism" label in 30 secondsSubmitted by John Adams on Sun, 08/14/2011 - 13:30
The term "non-interventionism" is meaningless to most people as it's too complicated for them to comprehend. So, the media has had an easy time calling Ron Paul an isolationist because he doesn't want to drop bombs on people.
Obviously this makes no sense, because there's nothing more isolating than killing people, yet somehow killing people = international relations and not killing people = isolation.
Here's a simple example that anyone can understand:
What is isolation? Isolation means being alone from everyone else, basically think about it as being home alone on a Saturday night and no one has invited you to hang out or go to a party.
Let's say that you live in a neighborhood and you go around telling people what to do and if they don't listen to you or tell you to mind your own business, you punch them in the face (or kill them if you want to use a more extreme example). How many people are going to invite you over? Do you think you will have any friends? No, people will stay away from you b/c of your bad behavior and reputation. You'll be home alone on a Saturday night- in other words, isolated. Just like America is isolated when we drop bombs on other people, they don't want to be our friends and we scare other people off.
But instead of fighting with people, let's say you were friendly and you said hi, you were nice, and you said good morning to everyone, but didn't get in their business. You'd be popular and people would want to be friends with you. Then you'd get invited to parties and you might even meet a nice girl or guy. Bottom line, you wouldn't be isolated.
That's a simple example that anyone could understand. If you punch people in the face or drop bombs on their house, they won't want to be around you and you'll be all alone (isolated). If you're friendly and nice to people, they'll like you, want to be around you (not isolated), and respect you and be more likely to listen to what you have to say and try to work things out if you have differences.
Instead of using big words like "non-interventionism", Ron Paul should use the phrase "friendship instead of violence/war"; he should say instead of bombing people, we should make them our friends/customers instead of our enemies.
Imagine, instead of blowing up people in Iraq, we could be selling them American made goods and creating jobs for Americans right here at home so we could pay our bills and feed our families. That's where jobs come from, selling something to other people. But you can't sell people things when you kill your customers. Dead people don't buy stuff.
Can you imagine if Walmart shot everyone that came to the entrance of their stores? Do you think people would keep shopping there? Of course not. Well what do you think happens when America starts wars with everyone? Do you think they want to keep shopping here? And when people stop shopping with us, you lose your job. It's that simple.
This also relates to national security. When you drop bombs on people, there's a chance that innocent people might get killed. When you lose your whole family, and you have nothing left to live for, it's natural to want revenge. If China went after terrorists that were hiding in America and dropped a bomb on your house and killed everyone in your family, would you shrug your shoulders and say "oh well, collateral damage, it happens"? Or would you want to kill some Chinese people to get revenge? Think about how people in other countries feel when, despite good intentions, our country drops bombs on weddings and wipes out people's whole families, don't you think they'd want revenge too? This just breeds more hate and terrorism. The simple solution to this is, DON'T DROP BOMBS ON PEOPLE AND KILL THEIR FAMILIES, THEN NO ONE WILL WANT REVENGE, AND THERE WON'T BE ANY TERRORISTS TO WORRY ABOUT.
If RP used simple examples like these during a debate or interview, there's no way Fox could spin him as an isolationist, because it makes sense to even the stupidest of people that if someone punched you in the face, you wouldn't want that guy around. And if Fox tried to spin that, they'd be totally caught out as liars.