Is A Paleoconservative ‘New America First’ Committee The Answer?

Authored by J.D. Hester via AntiWar.com

With paleoconservatism currently ascendant in the United States, the slogan “America First” has risen to prominence in public discourse. However, this is not the first time that the phrase has been commonplace in American politics. While America First is currently associated with the right, the bipartisan America First Committee (AFC) united anti-war activists across the political spectrum around keeping the US out of the Second World War. With the Russo-Ukraine War raging on and the Israel lobby pushing for more US involvement in the Middle East, it is once again time for a big-tent alliance to oppose war and put America first.

“History is written by the victors” is a popular adage to describe the phenomenon in which the victorious side of a conflict mythologizes their exploits. Anti-war activists, especially for generally popular wars like WWII, are often vilified as bigots or sympathizers of foreign nations. In the modern era, opponents of U.S. support for Israel are often vilified as “Jihadists,” “third-worldists,” or “Islamists.” Likewise, those skeptical of U.S. support for Ukraine are regularly smeared as Putin apologists. Similar slanderous claims have been made about the AFC, despite the principled motives of the vast majority of its members.

While some members of the America First Committee, like the famous aviator Charles Lindbergh, made antisemitic statements, the organization itself fought antisemitism in its ranks. Nevertheless, historical revisionists have often fixated on the small minority of genuine antisemites. As one historian put it: “Thousands of sincere Americans of varied background and from both political parties joined and contributed to [the America First Committee]. It also attracted support from a number of fringe hate organizations, from anti-Semites, and from Nazi sympathizers. This minority support tarnished its reputation.”

The efforts of critics to smear the organization have mostly concealed its successes. However, some prominent individuals have praised the organization for what it was able to accomplish in the short time it existed (about 15 months). Paleoconservative commentator Patrick Buchanan wrote,

“The achievements of [the America First Committee] are monumental. By keeping America out of World War II until Hitler attacked Stalin in June of 1941, Soviet Russia, not America, bore the brunt of the fighting, bleeding and dying to defeat Nazi Germany. Thanks to America First, no nation suffered less in the world’s worst war.”

By resisting the efforts of war hawks to preemptively enter World War II, the AFC likely prevented the deaths of thousands of young American men and demonstrated the power of anti-war advocacy.

Now, the time is ripe for another coalition of anti-war activists from across the political spectrum to oppose the possibility of U.S. military entanglement in Venezuela, Ukraine, or the Middle East. Indeed, a new AFC might be closer than expected. In a previous article, I outlined how Tucker Carlson, a paleoconservative, has found common ground with progressives like Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian on opposing U.S. support for Israel.

While a new antiwar coalition would certainly look different than the original AFC, the modern geopolitics are radically different from the 1930s. The United States is now a nuclear-armed superpower capable of waging war anywhere on the globe. Additionally, the Israel lobby exerts a strong influence over numerous American politicians. A new antiwar coalition will have different goals and employ different strategies. Nevertheless, its core mission––putting America first by resisting unjust wars – would remain the same.

In the end, a new America First Committee might be even more necessary than it was in 1941. With the advent of nuclear weapons, military conflict is an existential threat to our world. In fact, the doomsday clock states that the world is a mere 89 seconds to midnight. Americans across the political spectrum are waking up to this reality. Opposing war is not a matter of ideology; it is a matter of survival. The simple idea that the American government should put the interests of the people it represents first is so obvious, yet often absent in practice.

A modern AFC could pressure the government to act according to the will of the people and prove that dissent is patriotic. The America First Committee offers a historical blueprint, but it is up to us to build the momentum and movement necessary to truly change U.S. foreign policy.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.