The United States ought to be Isolationist

"Don't get involved in other people's affairs," because I agree with the advice of Switzerland's popular saint, Nicholas of Flüe, I strongly affirm the resolution. Isolationism (accepted standards for existing Isolationist countries):- Decreased Foreign affairs- No Intervention- NeutralityFramework:The definition of ought implies the side that best shows moral obligation should earn your vote in todays debate. Inevitably, this debate will come down to the major point of helping other countries citizens vs helping your own citizens. Also, keep in mind, I am advocating for the idea of Isolationism, but not necessarily absolute Isolationism. I run off the model of Switzerland and past "Isolationist" countries. The standards for these countries allow trade, allies, and humanitarian organizations, but remain neutral in politics. My foundation for future arguments will hinge on three introductory contentions. Obligation:A governments obligation is to protect their country and their overall societal welfare. Their obligation ought to be to their citizens, as without citizens, a country has no foundation. While protecting citizens of their own country and helping other countries aren't mutually exclusive, putting resources towards the benefit of another country hinders a governments ability to care for their own citizens. Not to say the defense budget would be eliminated, but it would be reduced drastically with a more Isolationist philosophy. Our current spending in defense is 16% of our overall economic expenditures. This could be drastically reduced by less intervention in global politics. In turn, this will allow the government to allocate more of our resources towards current issues within the United States. Education is the key to a future of a country. With a decrease in costs such as International affairs, we can allocate more of our money to the education of our students. The United States has at its disposal the most powerful military in history, and is comparatively more powerful than any single state has been in history. Yet its forces are stretched thin across the globe and embroiled in ongoing conflicts in several regions, particularly its seemingly endless wars in the Middle East. The cost of such military output and the number of soldiers stationed on over 800 military bases around the world is unsustainable. Benefits to the United StatesA - United States:Originally, the United States was conceived as a strict isolationist country. George Washington was very careful in avoiding the affairs of the current European countries. American foreign policy has been based squarely in the principles of non-interventionism. While huge amounts of European economy was allocated towards their conflicts, the United States had room to flourish in it's own areas. The amount of improvement we saw during this time period was huge, and to allow for this development again the United States must seek to disengage itself and to pursue once again a policy of concern for its own interests without concern for the happenings of other states. Success in countries A - Switzerland:Perhaps one of the most prominent examples of modern day isolationism. They adopted Isolationist practices in the 1550s. As a result, Swiss neutrality runs deeper than some other neutral countries in Europe: Sweden (1815), Eire (1921), Finland (1948) and Austria (1955). This neutrality is an important tool in development for the country, as it has allowed protection in the past from conflicts. WWII being a good example. Isolationism has also helped the country fairly recently if we look at their decision not to join the EU. The EU is a union containing European countries which share a common currency of Euros. According to Foreign Affairs. com, "The euro should now be recognized as an experiment that failed. This failure, which has come after just over a dozen years since the euro was introduced, in 1999, was not an accident or the result of bureaucratic mismanagement but rather the inevitable consequence of imposing a single currency on a very heterogeneous group of countries. The adverse economic consequences of the euro include the sovereign debt crises in several European countries, the fragile condition of major European banks, high levels of unemployment across the eurozone, and the large trade deficits that now plague most eurozone countries. " Switzerland, by choosing to avoid the euro entirely (despite being invited multiple times) to remain neutral, see their own currency of the Franks flourish. B - Japan:From 1641 to 1853, the Tokugawa shogunate of Japan enforced a policy which it called kaikin. The policy prohibited foreign contact with most outside countries. The culture of Japan was able to develop with small influences from the outside world and had one of the longest stretches of peace in history. During this period, Japan developed thriving cities and towns and increasing commodification of agriculture and domestic trade, wage labor, increasing literacy and print culture, laying the groundwork for modernization, even as the shogunate itself grew weak. C - China (early history):Early China was very isolationist. The affairs of the Western world did not influence their development. They traded silk, but trade was the only connection until much later in history. This led to China becoming a major superpower. I urge a vote in affirmation[1] Gaddis, John. 2004. Surprise, Security, and the American Experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [2] . http://www.theburningplatform.com...[3] Weinberg, Albert. 1935. Manifest Destiny: A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. [4] . http://www.swissworld.org...[5] . http://www.foreignaffairs.com...