Mitch McConnell has implied that “America First” rhetoric parallels the sense of that rhetoric in the 1930s in the run up to WWII. In an interview with the Financial Times, McConnell cautioned against the perils of isolationism, stating, “We’re in a very, very dangerous world right now, reminiscent of the period before World War II.” He continued, “Even the slogan is the same—‘America First.’ That’s what they said in the ’30s.” Addressing foreign conflicts, McConnell remarked, “For most American voters, the instinctive response is, ‘Let’s stay out of it.’ That was the argument made in the ’30s, and it simply won’t work.”
The “America First” concept has a long and evolving history in US political discourse, associated with prioritizing American interests above international commitments. You might wonder what is wrong with putting America First. The short answer is, for the common man, nothing. But McConnell wants you hear “America First” rhetoric pro-Hitler talk, even though Hitler hasn’t been around for almost as long as McConnell has been living—which is a very long time. Why? Because he is a functionary for transnationalist corporate power, the real fascist force in the world today.
One might remark that McConnell apparently forgets Ronald Reagan employed “America First” rhetoric during his political career, albeit his usage, and crucially the context, differed from some of its earlier and later invocations. In distinction to the Bush family, the Clintons, and Obama, Reagan was an economic nationalist, emphasizing American competitiveness and self-reliance in the global economy rather than subservience to it. His “America First” appeal conveyed economic revival, including policies to strengthen American manufacturing, reduce government regulation, and lower taxes to enhance the nation’s competitive edge. He criticized policies he believed disadvantaged American workers or businesses. “Our present troubles,” he said in his Inaugural Address, could be conquered by “reawakening this industrial giant” and beginning “an era of national renewal.” Was Reagan expressing the “palingenetic form of populist ultra-nationalism” Roger Griffin details in his work on fascism? Hardly (even if we accept Griffin’s definitions are valid).
Reagan is often portrayed as belligerent for his expansion of military spending (which began, for the record, under his predecessor, Jimmy Carter). But Reagan’s focus on military strength was connected to his belief in national sovereignty and defense of the homeland in the context of the Cold War (as late as it was). His foreign policy, especially his stance against the Soviet Union, focused on restoring American military might, framing it as essential for national security and leadership in the world. He emphasized the need for the US to act independently, when necessary, placing American interests above multilateral agreements or international constraints. Reagan’s spirit was that of optimistic patriotism. His “Make American Great Again” and “Morning in America” slogans, and overall messaging, highlighted “American exceptionalism.” His rhetoric invoked a vision of America as a “shining city on a hill,” America is a moral leader, a nation with a special destiny. His rhetoric aligned with populist “America First” sentiments by asserting America’s unique role and preeminence.
As with Reagan’s use of “America First” rhetoric, Trump’s use of the rhetoric lacks the isolationism associated with the pre-World War II America First Committee, which opposed US entry into the Second World War. For those who see parallels between the threat posed by Hitler’s Germany and that of Putin’s Russia, there are frankly no parallels really to be seen here. There are no indications that Putin harbors ambitions to conquer Europe or other parts of the world. The Russia-Ukraine conflict is a territorial dispute antagonized by the West. The association of Trump’s foreign policy with those of the America First Committee is a cover for expansion of the transnational power eastward. It is indeed the Mitch McConnells of the world who are pushing military belligerence and expansionist policies. We know what his ilk’s goals are.
Where Reagan and Trump differ significantly are on matters of immigration and free trade. However, concerning the latter, Reagan also sought protections for US industries when necessary. Trump’s is far more reaching, understanding that for much of American history, governments sought to protect American business, and, furthermore, generated revenue through tariffs, which have largely been replaced by the income tax. As for immigration, Reagan did not enter office with his predecessor having induced the largest immigration increase in American history. Average annual immigration under Reagan was fewer than a million. A conservative estimate of the average under Biden has been around two and a half million annually. In four years of Biden, the nation has experienced millions more immigrants than during the entire eight years of Reagan. The influx under Reagan could not threaten the integrity of the nation; by the end of Reagan’s presidency, roughly eight percent of the US population was immigrants. Today, more than fourteen percent of the US population is foreign born—and they are coming from all over the world, where cultural sensibilities are often antithetical to those that sustain America.
McConnell’s insinuation that Trump’s patriotism smacks of those who delayed the United States entry into World War Two is shameful. But more importantly, it tells you whose side he is on. And it’s not ours.
freedom and reason 