Oh where do I begin:
--E.g. Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine were American government policies, like the Wilsonians use--
The United States has had "government policies" since 1776! What is your point? The Monroe Doctrine dealt with the NEW World (i.e. our "backyard") and how to protect it. Manifest destiny was Americas expansion to the pacific--Mexico's holdings north of the Rio Grande stood in the way.
-- How about TR's mediation of the Russo-Japanese War, --
That was 1905 (i.e. TWENTIETH CENTURY)!! Go back to your history books--and I blame TR along with Woodrow Wilson in putting the US on the death road to empire and getting mired in the problems of the Old World.
--or our invitation of the French navy to fight the British during our revolution--
France crashed the party to get back at Britain for kicking its butt during the Seven Years (French and Indian) War (taking Canada etc.) Typical of France, it interviened when the Continental Army had pretty much won (Britain lost the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic and was barely holding on to Georgia and the Carolinas when France interveined).
I have not abandoned autarky at all--one thing at a time, fella. See another post above for further arguments in favor of autarky.
1) Got a contemporary example of a successful autarchy? If not, give up on it. 2) You conceed my point then, that prior to 1900, US foreign policy included "Wilsonian" elements of active engagement in the world at large, maybe less than now, but we certainly weren't closed in trade or in policy.