For a century — from Charles Lindbergh to today — “America First” has conjured images of antisemitism and isolationism. But the term’s connotation is based on historical context, not the precise meaning of those two words.
So my question is: What should putting America first really mean? I would argue it means embracing the values, norms and institutions of American democracy. It means defending the Declaration. The Constitution. The rule of law. And it literally means prioritizing those things over other pursuits. In this regard, it is both patriotic and commonsensical.
This isn’t to suggest that you shouldn’t care about other objectives, such as helping foreign countries (militarily or through aid). It simply means those things are contingent on, and subordinate to, conserving the republic — and our freedoms here at home. In other words, you must put on your own oxygen mask before helping others.
Based on this definition, I consider myself to be “America first.” But that designation puts me at odds with some of President Donald Trump’s most loyal supporters.
This occurred to me recently when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) died, and there immediately seemed to be an effort to rehabilitate his image. The revisionist history (put forward by what might be considered anti-anti-Trumpers) goes like this:
Sure, Graham was a Trump sycophant, but his deference was both noble and shrewd. After all, Graham nudged Trump toward supporting Ukraine. And to some degree, it worked. Absent Graham whispering in Trump’s ear on the golf course, who knows what Trump might have done or said. The so-called America First wing of Trumpworld (think Tucker Carlson or JD Vance) certainly didn’t want to help Ukraine. So counterbalancing them with some traditional conservative voices — operating from within the MAGA universe — was vital for Ukraine’s survival.
Graham’s strategy, according to this line of reasoning, was more helpful than the Liz Cheney model of standing on principle and being purged. As they say, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
This argument tempts me because I’m a supporter of Ukraine. To an internationalist like me, who grew up in the Reagan era watching movies like “Red Dawn,” the idea of America helping supply resources to defend a country invaded by Russia seems like a no-brainer.
But not if stopping an authoritarian abroad requires empowering an authoritarian at home. And make no mistake, this fairly explicit transaction was on full display the very day Graham died.
According to Trump, Graham (who had just returned from Kyiv) called him not long before he died to discuss passing the “Save America Act” — legislation that is nothing more than an anti-democratic attempt to disenfranchise voters and erode the power to conduct elections that the Constitution grants to the states.
Graham isn’t the only politician who has decided to prioritize something other than conserving America’s tradition of liberal democracy. This criticism could be applied to almost all of the erstwhile Trump opponents who have found it in their hearts to get on the Trump train.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s bargain seems to implicitly include getting to make major changes in Latin America. If so, his bet has partially paid off with the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. And of course, Rubio’s white whale will arrive if and when the Cuban regime falls. Likewise, some supporters of Israel — such as Graham and conservative commentators Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin — seem to have rationalized that achieving Israel’s immediate interests, i.e. attacking Iran, justifies supporting a man they once condemned in the harshest terms.
Personally, I’m more worried about what Trump and his minions might do to our freedoms than I am about threats from Venezuela, Cuba or Iran. If that constitutes Trump Derangement Syndrome, so be it.
In other cases, the deliverable is more domestic than foreign policy related. Take Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, who made his peace with Trump while achieving his career-long ambition of moving the courts in a conservative direction. McConnell probably deserves more credit (or blame, depending on your perspective) than any other Republican politician for the current SCOTUS majority. But you have to ask: To what end? What does it profit a man to gain the Supreme Court but lose his soul? Or his country?
Rest assured, as McConnell leaves the Senate stage, Rubio jockeys for presidential position and Graham is replaced by his sister, other MAGA universe characters are placing similar bets. On a recent episode of Ezra Klein’s podcast, for instance, prominent conservative activist Chris Rufo made clear that he had put his pet issue — stopping diversity, equity and inclusion policies — ahead of concerns about Trump’s corruption and character flaws. Rufo is well aware of this tradeoff — a topic he and Klein spent a good deal of time unpacking.
Why have so many Republicans pursued this path? Some politicians and activists want to remain “relevant” for their egos — or to give their empty lives meaning and purpose. Some rationalize (self-servingly) that because the voters have elected Trump, they are doing the right thing by working with him.
The best-case scenario is that a politician or activist sincerely wants to advance the ball on an important issue they care about deeply. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with horsetrading, which happens all the time in politics.
But we’re not talking about trading a bridge for a tax cut, or a committee assignment for a vote on school lunches. We’re not even talking about helping a president who cheats on his wife to pass some pork-barrel legislation. We’re talking about aiding and abetting a would-be authoritarian — which means that it really doesn’t matter what you get in return. If you truly believe that Trump is dangerous or corrupt (and all you have to do is go look up what Graham or Rubio or McConnell or Shapiro or Levin said about him in 2016), then the cost-benefit analysis simply doesn’t add up.
In this scenario, focusing on some lesser project — helping Ukraine, helping Israel, confirming more conservative judges — might be something you can try to justify to yourself. It might be a lot of things. But it sure as heck isn’t putting America First.
Matt K. Lewis is a NOTUS Perspectives columnist.
More from NOTUS Perspectives:
Is Josh Shapiro Actually Good at Governing?
Trump’s Garden of American Heroes Is a Great Idea
The Photo of the Woman on the Metro Was Powerful. Was It Also Exploitative?