How were the effects of America's isolationism and Britain's policy of appeasement similar?

Leading right-wingers like Charles Lindbergh supported America's isolationism, which was a prominent aspect of American policy in the 1930s. It combined a strong pro-German inclination with a desire to stay out of far-off wars in Europe and Asia.

Similarly, given the devastation of World War 1, Britain's appeasement strategy reflected the country's ingrained desire to stay out of a direct European conflict. As a result, Hitler received a series of territorial concessions until misjudging the determination of the British and French, he invaded Poland on September 1, 1939.

Both America's isolationism and Britain's policy of appeasement in the years leading up to World War II were similar in their reluctance to intervene in international conflicts. Isolationism, as practiced by the United States, involved a policy of non-intervention and avoiding alliances with other countries, particularly in European conflicts. Britain's policy of appeasement, on the other hand, was characterized by a willingness to make concessions to aggressive powers, such as Nazi Germany, in order to avoid conflict.

In both cases, there was a desire to maintain peace and avoid another devastating world war like World War I. However, both approaches ultimately proved ineffective in preventing the outbreak of war. America's isolationism limited its ability to intervene in the early stages of the war, while Britain's appeasement policy failed to deter Hitler's aggression and ultimately emboldened him to pursue further expansionist policies.

Overall, while America's isolationism and Britain's policy of appeasement were motivated by different factors and implemented in different ways, they both had similar effects in terms of failing to effectively address the growing threat of aggression and militarism in Europe, ultimately leading to the outbreak of World War II.