Jupp53 wrote on 11/20/18 at 08:26:16:
Against 1.d4 d5 it is 2.c4.
Entering the Dutch via this move order is all right for both sides,
Then the simplest approach for you is the Rubinstein Variation 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3. IM Cummings has a nice chapter on this in his book on the English, though I reject one of his recommendations. Overview:
a) 3...g6 4.h4!
b) 3...d6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Qc2 (sample game Nakamura-Anton Guijarro, Gibraltar 2016 but don't forget to look at 5...e6).
c) 3...e6 4.Qc2
c1) 4...d5 5.Bf4 (sample game Savchenko-Schmittdiel, BL 2004).
c2) 4...d6 5.Nf3 (sample game Simon-Naumkin, Münster 1989).
c3) 4...b6 5.f3 (5.Bg5 doesn't impress me) Bb7 6.e3 (eg Lautier-Vaisser, FRAch 2001).
c4) 4...Bb4 5.e3 O-O 6.Bd3 d6 (sample game Barnaure-Cimpean, ROMchT 2015).
Instead of 4.Qc2 you may also consider 4.e3
d1) 4...d5 5.f3 (eg Korchnoi-Nikolic, Sarajevo 1998).
d2) 4...d6 5.Nf3 (Van den Berg-Burstein, Tel Aviv/Haifa 1958).
d3) 4...b6 5.e3 Bb7 6.f3 and
d4) 4...Bb4 5.Qc2 will usually transpose.
Black may consider a setup with ...b6 and ...Be7 or ...Bd6. White might consider replying ...Bb4 with Bd2 iso Qc2 (eg Tolusch-Bronstein, USSRch 1957).
You may not like systematically study an opening, but playing through several high level games (don't neglect golden oldies) will help you well on your way.
The plussides are obvious:
1) no French, just 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nc3.
2) you may consider 1.d4 d6 2.c4 f5 too (2...e5 is the spanner in your wheel) and certainly will enjoy 1.d4 g6 2.c4 f5 3.Nc3 and 4.h4.
3) you fight the game on your own battleground.
4) this classical approach is hardly worse than the main lines with 2.g3 and not worse than entering the French labyrinth either.
5) but it's a lot less work, because White makes an important choice at his/her 4th move.
Someone should write a book about meeting the Dutch with 1.d4, 2.c4 and 3.Nc3.