Ellsworth

In college I wrote a paper that was titled something like "An Environmental Justification for Isolationism."
The class was called Environmental Ethics.
That was a long time ago.

Over the last five to eight years I revisited the topic. I researched and tracked invasive species. Which ones were moving, both flora and fauna. Where they launched from, and where the landed (Countries of origin and a USA centric, single country of destination). The means of travel, at least when possible to prove or guess.

It is an exercise worth doing.
Look for the patterns
Examine the impact.

Now as an older adult I am less enamored with isolationism, if only because more is accomplished with cooperation.
All my experience proves that, and I'd argue human history also proves that, as well as family systems, politics and commercial activity.

For individual humans, participation in community is healthier than isolation: apply the Domestic Analogy, community is also healthier for Nations.

If you do what I suggest above, and dig into the topic, then you'll realize that it's very easy to weaponize flora and fauna. It just takes redistribution.

And between commerce, drones and weather balloons, you'll see how hard it is to prevent the action.

I can imagine a climate change denier making some arguments for their belief that seem strong.

I cannot say the same thing for a community denier.

An Environmental Justification for Isolationism: Hawaii, California, avocados, murder hornets, clams and blights were all part of my recent research.
Just look for the patterns. And if you want to imagine isolationism, then use bracketing (look at the existing, opposite extremes): compare North Korea to a country in Western Europe, or Canada or America.

This post is meant to pair with my other blog post, East Germany vs. North Korea: reunification comparison.