Isolationism, (as) in terms of US, should be either total or not, not onesided.
Pollution, CO2,etc,etc,etc makes isolationism impossible in these days, although it
also has been impossible for many centuries. (militarily, globally any chance of
isolationism ended when the sputnik beeped all over the globe, with a background of
russia not having any natural borders to isolate behind)
Finland has in a way had the most "isolated" (manmade) border, the one to Sovjet/Russia,
but not even that works or worked through isolationism, on the contrary, through lots of
negotiations, mutual understanding of even the most innermost fears and goals.
Have no experience of "Braveheart", but it seem pretty bad, kind of xenophobic from your
very short descripition (warrior "cultures" from afare)
Ilmarinen
The anglomaerican view on vikings is one typical example, both in terms of "warriors" and
"isolationism" (the vikings were basically, mostly traders, but that is not sexy enough
for Hollywood nor "clash of civilisations" historians)
Btw, except for some swedish attempts, the blessing of scandinavia is that there has been
no imperialist aspirations in a long time, and the swedes still suffer from that, 250 years later.
(empires and colonies tend to produce profound mental disturbances, especially in
the homeland, something the swedes almost understood 200 years ago, when they lost
finland to russia)
Major joke that the first realpolitics finn is still seen as royal traitor in sweden, back in 1809,
and the swedes have still not "got it", at least not historically nor academically.
(the finn who negotiated peace with the russian tzar, according to the the idea of "natural
borders", related to military mobility of that time) |
