Der Weltkrieg hatte den Glauben an eine Sonderstellung der USA und die Ab- scheu gegen jede Verwicklung in die Händel anderer Völker keineswegs beseitigt, sondern eher noch bestärkt,“[181] (transl.: The World War had not rid the U.S. of  its belief in being exceptional and its disgust for entangling into the affairs of other peoples, but rather intensified them. -B. Wahler) assesses Jürgen Heideking of Tü- bingen University the American public’s sentiment towards foreign relations. Basic questions on the position of the United States had to be answered anew: „Wieviel Verantwortung tragen die USA als stärkste Wirtschaftsmacht und potentiell stärkste Militärmacht für ihre Nachbarn und den Rest der Welt? Welche Politik ist am ehesten geeignet, dieser Verantwortung gerecht zu werden?“[182] (transl.: What is the United States' responsibility for their neighbors and the rest of the world in being the largest economic power and the potentialy most powerful military force? What kind of policy suits this responsibility best? -B.Wahler)

   Although the United States now possessed an industrial potential that surpassed the six other great powers’ combined potential, the American people bluntly refu- sed to take a leading role in the world and all the diplomatic and military respons- ibilities that might arise from such a position.[183]  Disappointed about the outcome of the war that had promised ‘to make the world safe for democracy’ they had cast their votes for the Republican party in 1920 which had promised to bring the country back to normality. Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge served as presi- dents in this Republican Era before the immensely popular Herbert Hoover succee- ded them from 1929 to 1933. Secretary of state Charles Evans Hughes and Hoover had conceived the foreign policy of this Republican Era. Hoover served as secretary for commerce under Harding and Coolidge but he had assured himself a say in di- plomacy and was dubbed ‘assistant secretary for everything else’[184]  which de- picts his influence.

   The combination of the two departments, commerce and foreign affairs, visualizes, where the focus of the new American foreign policy would be located. Foreign relations were to be governed by ‘mutual respect’ and ‘good will’ as the USA were to set a course of an ‘independent internationalism’: no total retreat from the world - which would only mean plainly neglecting American interests - but preserving American freedom of action to built a world order favorable to Americans and their businesses. This world order would have to follow the example of ‘American indi- vidualism’ granting the citizens rights and privileges in order to thrive.
America’s task would be to use its powerful economic means - not its political or military power - to oversee the introduction and protection of this worldwide, prosperous, peaceful marketplace free of government interference.[185]

    For Hoover judged that „this system cannot be preserved in domestic life if it must be abandoned in international life.“[186]

   The foreign policy did reflect the public’s desire for ‘isolation’ in the sense that compared to Wilsonian Internationalism, it was ‘isolationist’. It was not based upon a religiously inspired, ideological concept of ‘American mission’, but rather follo- wed somehow Dollar Diplomacy’s economic and ‘prosperity equals peace’ oriented approach. Yet this time, also Europe was a target of U.S.foreign policy since it con- ceived the economy as truely global. A middle-way between  involvement and detachment, this policy might be best described as ‘internationalist individualism’. [187]