Let’s analyse 13 claims from the 1941 Congressional testimony of Nazi lover and America First-er Charles Lindbergh in opposition to the bill to send aid to Britain as it desperately fought Hitler.
Do let me know if you have seen someone more recently copying this rhetoric. ⬇️
Do let me know if you have seen someone more recently copying this rhetoric. ⬇️
Claim 1: We must oppose sending aid to a close democratic ally threatened by an authoritarian, antidemocratic dictatorship because doing so would… destroy U.S. democracy. 
Claim 2: It is NOT that I want the aggressor to win, of course! It’s just that, you see, we can’t control or influence who does. We need “realism.”
Claim 3: While it’s not that I want the aggressor to win, I don’t want the aggressor to lose, you see. I want a “negotiated peace.”
Claim 4: It’s not like I’m saying peace entirely depends on the will of the aggressive dictator. Hey, look, negotiating is a two-way street!
Same quote as above.
Same quote as above.
Claim 5 (in response to objection that the victims of brutal aggression aren’t exactly an equal side to such a negotiation): Wars have two sides!
Same quote as above.
Same quote as above.
Claim 6: We should not be sending any aid to this ally because they are not capable of winning no matter what.
Claim 7: Aiding this ally will only lead to more bloodshed and devastation.
Claim 7: Aiding this ally will only lead to more bloodshed and devastation.
Claim 8: The U.S. faces no threat from the aggressor trying to destroy this ally. In fact, the threat is from within, from the warmongers who are trying to usurp democracy and subvert the will of the people.
Claim 9: If we send aid to this ally, we’d be dangerously depleting our own abilities to protect ourselves against the aggressor that is, by Claim 8, also not a threat to us at all.
Claim 10: The aggressor the ally faces is omnipotent. It’s completely futile to try to oppose him regardless of how much aid we send.
(A stronger variant of Claim 3)
(A stronger variant of Claim 3)
Claim 11: We aren’t ready for war against that aggressor. Our military needs years to rebuild.
Claim 12: Aiding this ally against the aggressor would involve us in a protracted (“forever”) war that would compromise and even directly threaten the U.S.
(Stronger variant of Claim 9 + the result of claim 11)
(Stronger variant of Claim 9 + the result of claim 11)
Claim 13: If we end up having to fight the aggressor (that both does not pose a threat to us and that poses a serious threat to us), those who want to aid our ally will be to blame!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
