Final answer:
The policy of isolationism adopted by the U.S. historically did not economically benefit the nation, as it limited trade opportunities and international engagements that could foster economic growth. Instances from the First World War and economic advancement of countries engaging in international trade imply that non-isolation brings better economic benefits. The U.S.'s hesitance to engage with European nations further restricted its economic potential.
Step-by-step explanation:
There is considerable evidence substantiating the claim that the policy of isolationism followed by the United States did not economically benefit the country. Historical instances during the First World War reveal that while attempting to maintain isolationism, the U.S. also involved in trade with both Allies and Central powers. However, due to Britain's substantial role in U.S. naval, merchant, and credit operations and blockade of Germany, most trade was tilted towards the Allies. This involvement raised questions about the economic viability of the isolationist theory.
Furthermore, as posited by Benjamin Franklin and endorsed by many economists, 'No nation was ever ruined by trade.'. Countries such as Japan, South Korea, China, and India have witnessed rapid economic growth by opening their economies to international trade, contradicting the premises of isolationism. There is no modern example of a country that has prospered while isolating itself from global trade.
The U.S. policy of isolationism, notably in the 1920s and 1930s, limited America's economic growth. The U.S.'s hesitation to get involved in European affairs or to commit to alliances hindered trade opportunities and potential economic benefit. Thus, economic history and relevant data suggest that the policy of isolationism did not economically benefit the United States.
Learn more about Isolationism