A Reminder About Hitler Comparisons
In light of both James Joyner’s post this morning and some rhetoric in the comment thread along the lines of “how’s literally Hitler” working out? Let me emphasize something that I wrote not that long ago and to also lay down some markers.
For the record, I personally have never said Trump=Hitler. What I did, in some detail , was show the disturbing (in my view) similarities between the rhetoric and politicking of the two men. I did, however, state that his approach to politics is clearly fascistic .
Let me note the following, from the first post linked above:
While it is true that Hitler was a fascist, not all fascists are Hitler. Neither Franco nor Mussolini had clean hands, but neither of these fascist leaders were are awful as Adolph Hitler. I note this not to exonerate anyone’s crimes, but to acknowledge the truly grave category of Hitler’s.
Further, when it comes to Hitler comparisons, there is a difference between comparing Hitler at the end of his life, with all the commensurate horrors that that life entailed, and Hitler the burgeoning politician who led the Beer Hall Putsch and who went on to write Mein Kampf.
So, sure, if the comparison is about the scale of mass murder, then no one is Hitler until they kill millions. I mean, I get the rhetorical game, which is why Hitler comparisons go off the rails or are used to mock. Hitler=genocide, so I understand why it is hyperbole to say, which no one around here anyway has, that Trump is literally Hitler. But there is no denying that Trump has engaged, more than any politician since the segregationist era, in using race/ethnicity/nationality-based us vs. them rhetoric, to include threats of force and violence against “them” to solve problems ascribed to “them.”
In all of these conversations, it is amazing to me that the topic of Trump’s behavior in and around January 6th gets ignored. He whipped up the crowd. He sicced them on his own Vice President. He watched TV for hours doing nothing when he could have helped stop the attack. He eventually told the crowd that he understood them and loved them. He recently called that day a “day of love.” And that is all in addition to the various attempts at subversion of the election via the courts, weird schemes, and even calling up the state of Georgia to demand more votes be found.
These are not the actions of a democrat. Moreover, the above paragraph describes actions when he was last in power. In other words, we are not dealing with hypotheticals. He tried to overturn an election in more than one way.
Regardless of whether he pulls it off or not, he is constantly threatening mass deportations and the use of the military on US soil to accomplish it. He threatens purges of bureaucracies. He talks about using DoJ against political and media enemies. If the neighbor constantly carried on about how they were going to rape your wife, you wouldn’t say, “Well, he never really follows through with things, so let’s not get all upset!”
He could have been held to account by the Senate. He wasn’t.
He could have been held account by the courts. He wasn’t.
The Supreme Court handed him a broadened definition of presidential immunity.
Remember, this is the guy who said, “I have an Article 2 where I have the right to do whatever I want as president .” Given the immunity ruling, Trump’s own self-perception, and the people he will surround himself with, there are reasons to be very, very concerned about what he will do in this term–especially in the first two years when he controls Congress and all the member of the House and a chunk of the Senate will be worried about mid-term primaries.
The tests of his authoritarian sway (if “fascist” still seems a bridge too far for some reason): he has made four utterly abhorrent nominations: Pete Hegseth for SecDef, Matt Gaetz for AG, RFK, Jr. for HHS, and Tulsi Gabbard for DNI. Just outside that frightful four is Kristi Noem for DHS. While there have been some objections to these, they are hardly as vociferous as would be the case under normal conditions.
For example, here is the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson speaking to Fox News Sunday:
“Look, Matt Gaetz is a colleague of mine. We’ve been serving together for more than eight years,” Johnson said. “He’s one of the brightest minds in Washington or anywhere for that matter, and he knows everything about how the Department of Justice has been weaponized and misused.”
“And he will be a reformer. And I think that’s why the establishment in Washington is so shaken up about this pick,” Johnson said.
Keep in mind that Gaetz’s legal career was only a few years long, and consisted of things like working with HOAs. He is credibly accused of having sex with a 17-year-old and of using illegal drugs as part of a broad pattern of behavior. This is not the profile of someone who should even be semi-considered for Attorney General of the United States. Moreover, Johnson certainly knows the basics of the ethics investigation that was halted because of Gaetz’s resignation. And yet, he describes him on national television in glowing terms to an audience primed to believe a false image of Trump and to ignore the true horrors of it all.
At a minimum, Johnson is playing along out of partisan fealty to Trump and in acquiescence to Trump’s power. Sure, he may be hoping the Senate does its job, but he is helping solidify and, dare I say, normalize Trump’s behavior.
So here’s a marker: how many of these people make it through? None of the four I listed are qualified save in the sense that there are no constitutional requirements for the offices in question. While I think that Gaetz will prove a bridge too far, I am not convinced that Trump can’t whip up 50 votes plus VP Vance to get him through.
Let’s put it this way.
Under normal conditions, someone who gleefully admitted to putting down a puppy personally, would not have been nominated for a cabinet position, let alone someone whose resume does not match the office. And yet, Noem.
Under normal conditions, a TV commentator with White Nationalist tattoos, a questionable personal life that includes multiple martial infidelities and a sexual misconduct allegation would not be nominated for SecDef. And yet, Hegseth.
Under normal conditions, an anti-vaxxer with a string of bizarre personal stories to include, but not limited to a brain worm, dumping a dead bear cub in Central Park after realizing he didn’t have time to take it home so he could eat it later, and sawing the head off a whale and strapping it to his van, would not be nominated for HHS. And yet, RFK, Jr.
Under normal conditions a person who zero experience with intelligence, and who has repeatedly said questionable things about US adversities like Putin and Assad would not be nominated to be the DNI. And yet, Gabbard.
I am no expert on security clearances, but there is no way Hegseth, Gaetz, and Gabbard could get one, yet consider how much they would be allowed to know in those jobs.
The very fact of these nominations speaks poorly of Trump and his seriousness about governing. That members of the Republican Party feel the need to say nice things about any of these people and to talk about fair hearings instead of saying that, in fact, the Emperor has no clothes, is deeply concerning.
There is a non-zero chance that any one, or even all, of these people, could be confirmed. I have a very hard time seeing the Senate GOP denying him more than one or maybe two (Gaetz is the most likely sacrificial lamb, with Gabbard or Hegseth as the other, but I doubt all three).
These nominations are loyalty tests and demands that the party bend the knee.
So, not Hitlerian, per se, but clearly authoritarian. But the mass deportation thing is, just as a reminder, Hiterlian.
I would note again, that some of the elements of fascism on display here include propaganda, unreality, and anti-intellectualism
As a general matter, the common thread through all the appointment is loyalty to Trump, not expertise, not governance. I also think that when if comes to things like DHS, Defense, and DoJ he wants people who won’t stand in his way for whatever he wants to do.
And while I do not think that the recess appointment scheme is deployed, if it is, that will be crossing into a new, very bad, stage of American politics.
None of this addresses the power of people like Stephen Miller and Tom Homan, who at least rhetorically sound pretty damn fascistic to me.
Then there is the whole Warrior Board proposal. Via Military.com: ‘It Could Be Very Hard to Do Our Job’: Top Military Officers Brace for Trump’s Potential Loyalty Review Boards.
On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported on a draft executive order that is under consideration by the Trump transition team that would establish a so-called “warrior board,” to review top generals over whether they should continue service or not, and whether they lack certain leadership qualities.
The proposal mirrors calls from conservative think tanks, lawmakers and Trump to weed out what they call “woke” generals — broadly defined as officials who have promoted diversity in the ranks or supported taking vaccinations.
I would note that a main pillar of Hegseth’s schtick is based on being “anti-woke.”
I will add the following headline from NPR for those who need a reminder: ‘I need the kind of generals that Hitler had’: The reporting behind Trump’s comment . Loyalty uber alles, dontcha know. And loyalty to Trump, not the Constitution.
And just to add a cherry on the Sunday, there was this: Trump Confirms Plans to Use the Military to Assist in Mass Deportations .
President-elect Donald J. Trump confirmed on Monday that he intended to declare a national emergency and use the U.S. military in some form to assist in his plans for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.
On his social media platform, Truth Social, Mr. Trump responded overnight to a post made earlier this month by Tom Fitton, who runs the conservative group Judicial Watch, and who wrote that Mr. Trump’s administration would “declare a national emergency and will use military assets” to address illegal immigration “through a mass deportation program.”
At around 4 a.m., Mr. Trump reposted Mr. Fitton’s post with the comment, “TRUE!!!”
I would submit: a compliant Noem, who thought that her story of animal cruelty would ingratiate herself to Trump, isn’t going to stand in the way of this. Hegseth won’t. Gaetz won’t. And people like Miller and Homan will be happy to proceed. As such, I don’t buy the argument that the incompetence will save us. My fear is that the goal is incompetent compliance at the Secretary level and then operatives like Miller can do what they want.
Maybe none of this comes to pass, which will be a relief. But every indication is that some form of deportation is coming, as is Trump’s destruction of DoJ’s independence and his politicization of the DoD. I haven’t even gotten into the damage he is going to do to US foreign policy long-term. See Daniel Dresser for that, The End of American Exceptionalism .
So, is he literally Hitler? No.
Are his politics authoritarian, if not fascistic? Yes.
Is he actively trying to tear down competent government and replace it with unqualified lackeys? Absolutely.
Should people like Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski go make nice with him? Absolutely not.
And so, I have less confidence than my dear friend and co-blogger about treating Trump as described in his post.
In that case, it seems to me, one in fact normalizes him in the sense of treating him as though he were indeed the President and then holding him to the standards of a normal President.
When he nominates reasonably qualified people to key posts, it seems perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that. In so doing, it makes calling out obviously-unqualified nominees more impactful.
When he proposes perfectly normal policy ideas one happens to disagree with, disagree with them as though they were a normal policy idea proposed by the leader of a legitimate opposition party. And when he opposes policy ideas that violate the Constitution or basic norms of human decency, label them accordingly.
For me, I am simply relieved when he nominated reasonably qualified people, but think that the overall grade has to factor in the grossly unqualified. I can certainly acknowledge that Rubio to State is a different universe than Hegseth to Defense. But Hegseth plus the others named above clearly demonstrate that he is looking to govern in a way that is more reflective of the Hegseths than the Rubios. It also occurs to me that he, as president, can ignore his Secretary of State pretty easily insofar as to do the kinds of things he wants done in foreign policy that are directly in the President’s control.
But I do not think he deserves any benefit of the doubt or that he deserves a wait-and-see, judge-each-move-on-its-own-merits kind of approach. Sure, I can easily assess the difference between a Rubio pick and a Hegseth pick. However, the grading should not be solely case-by-case in isolation. Because picks like Hegseth, Gabbard, Gaetz, et al. mean more, in the broader context than Rubio or some of the other more standard picks.
A case-by-case approach still treats him as a normal president. He isn’t.
His behavior in office was not normal.
The way he handled the 2020 election (and has continued to do so) should be seen as disqualifying.
His selection of the persons noted above for positions of power underscores this fact.
And, to be clear, I am not saying James disagrees with me on most of this, but temperamentally I think he is more willing to try the case-by-case approach while at this point in this saga, I think a holistical assessment is the way to go.
Again, I will be relieved if I am wrong. I still hold out hope that Senate Republicans will stand up to the nonsense and the mid-terms will come and help stop Trump from doing damage.
But I realistically have to say that he has been demonstrably awful in key ways and that there has always been the hope that the “normals” will stop him or that, this time, he has finally gone too far.
And yet, here we are.
If none of these kooky picks are confirmed, I will both feel better, and critics can tell me I was overreacting (predicated, of course, as to who he still manages to get in there). But for each one who is confirmed, the more it will be confirmed that he will face very little opposition from his party, and that is the real issue on the table right now.
And no one should be going to Mar-a-Lago to kiss the ring unless they are cool with being complicit in it all.