I just don't see how it's coherent.
Isolationism born out of non-isolationism? The one would defeat the other.
And that's not even getting into the assertion of capitalism being isolationist in the first place. It seems like the argument is self-defeating outside of the factual, but to go farther,
Capitalism is born of connection and social environments. Where does the capitol come from? Generally associating with others. Why bother organizing those resources in the first place? To provide value to others. Otherwise there's no value in the capital efforts in the first place.
So it's on two different levels that I find your perspective to be very tenuous. Both in terms of the argument and in terms of the premises that the argument is built on, it seems to fail on both levels.
Engagement with other people is at the heart of what capitalism teaches because transactions with others is both the mechanism and the goal. I don't know what you're talking about to assert otherwise.
Maybe look at the wider hashtag story, as I say it's not #mainstreamin "common sense"
Maybe your assumptions are the problem you're pointing at?
The is #KISS history to this, you can find a simplified view of this history on the site, with links to original sources in places.
Hope this path helps.
