I just got back from two weeks in Bavaria & Austria, and one of the best things about this trip was that I ignored current events, including the impending election, pretty successfully. I didn’t listen to or read news almost at all. What a nice break that was!

Except…I was a tourist in Germany, and one thing about tourism in Germany is that their Nazi past (and the nationalist fervor of leaders like Ludwig II and the beloved composer Richard Wagner) comprise a huge percentage of the tourism draw. Even in Austria, which was much less forthcoming about its Nazi past (99.73% of Austrians voted in support of Hitler’s annexation of their country, although only 10% had voluntarily joined the Nazi party), our Fraulein Maria tour was also basically about Nazis (Don’t kiss Rolf, Leisl! He’s a Nazi!). The movie almost white-washes the country’s Nazi fervor to make them seem far less willing to go along with native son Hitler’s ambitions.[1]

Add to that the fact that fascism is on the rise worldwide, including in Germany, as is anti-fascism, and basically, it was impossible not to ruminate on the lessons from history as well as the similarities and differences from today’s autocratic tendencies and the rise of an actual dictator, Hitler vs. one who claims he’ll only be a dictator on “day one.”

I’ve already had one rebuke from commenter and blog favorite Josh H for making this comparison, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t bear further discussion and scrutiny. In fairness, I’ll also be pointing out the differences, not merely the similarities. A key difference that can’t really be compared is what Trump hasn’t yet done in his political career. How far will he take things? What will he do in the future? We can’t know for certain. With Hitler, we know. This is one reason that it’s justified to be cautious when comparing anyone to Hitler. Arguably, Hitler was one of the most evil human beings to live, bearing responsibility for the murder of 2 out of ever 3 Jews living in Europe. What we can compare is largely related to tactics both employed in seizing political power, rhetoric used, and other methods.

How are they similar?

Staging a Coup. One of the places we visited in Munich was the site of the Beer Hall Putsch. This is where Hitler attempted to overthrow the government in 1923 by stoking their anger over the country’s loss in WW1 and the restrictions of the Versailles treaty. Hitler falsely claimed they had not lost the war and that democrats and socialists had betrayed the country, controlled secretly by Jews. 4 police officers were killed in the confrontation, along with 15 of Hitler’s supporters. Hitler, who marched at the head of the coup (unlike Trump), very narrowly escaped death as the man marching next to him was fatally shot. Eventually when Hitler rose to power, he erected a monument to the “martyrs” of the failed coup (his followers, not the police who were killed) and required all citizens to salute the monument when they passed it. Today there are golden cobblestones that mark a path down a nearby alley where dissenters would skirt the monument to avoid saluting traitors. Those caught avoiding the monument were sent to Dachau concentration camp for being “asocial” or political dissidents. Trump parallel: There are quite a few similarities to the January 6th insurrection. Trump has also promised to pardon his jailed supporters and has referred to them as “hostages.”

Not being held sufficiently accountable. Hitler by all rights per German law, as a traitor, should have been convicted of treason and executed; however, he was only sentenced to 5 years in prison, and only served 9 months before he was paroled, during which time he wrote the popular Mein Kampf which increased his popularity. Trump parallel: Trump’s role in the insurrection is less direct and includes more shades of gray. However, the slow-rolling of his prosecutions means that none of these important legal matters will be decided before the next election, making it entirely possible that he could be re-elected. Hitler learned that he must operate within the system rather than trying to overthrow it from outside using agitators, so he focused on political maneuvers and using the levers of democracy to increase his party’s power.

Charisma. While Hitler was a bit of a failure as a youth, he was a gifted orator who electrified his audiences with his ideological speeches. Hearing what actual citizens said about him from quotes taken at the time, it was eerily similar to some of the things Trump followers say about him. It sounded more like they were trying to touch the hem of Jesus’ robe than trying to see a politician speak. Trump parallel: Both leaders created a cult of personality following.

Populism. Hitler’s message was focused on the needs of rural, working class Bavarians primarily. He energized their fears and grievances and harkened back to a time when Germany was the dominant power in Europe, not the economically ruined shambled it was after its WW1 ambitions had failed. Trump parallel: Trump has, in many ways, changed the alliance of blue collar workers from the left to the right by focusing on populist messages, no mean feat for someone who was raised as a billionaire.

Telling “the Big Lie.” Hitler’s big lie was that Germany did not really lose WW1. Trump parallel: Trump continues to falsely claim that he won the 2020 election and that it was stolen from him, a lie that is now a requirement for politicians on the right to support.

Conspiracy Theories. Hitler stoked some of the most outrageous anti-semitic conspiracy theories, including the idea that Jews drank the blood of children. Trump parallel: The rise of QAnon coincided with Trump’s rise, as well as all sorts of conspiracy theories that have led to violence.

Slogan of “Make [America/Germany] Great Again.” Both men literally used the exact same slogan.

Racist Rhetoric. Hitler’s platform was explicitly anti-semitic, although he also expressed anti-black sentiments. Trump parallel: Trump has used racist rhetoric, albeit less jarring than Hitler’s (which was 80 years ago).

Calls to Violence. Both individuals used right-wing militia groups to attack dissenters and governments alike, stoking their anger with violent rhetoric. Unlike Trump, Hitler had the advantage of many who had just fought in WW1 who wanted to believe his lie that they didn’t really lose the war and who wanted to fight against the restrictions placed on Germany by the Versailles Treaty. They believed, wrongly, that their country had been stolen from them. Trump parallel: Trump has celebrated violent actions against his opponents, threatened BLM protestors with violence, joked about Paul Pelosi’s home invasion attack, and lionized individuals who killed protestors. I was alarmed when he suggested “those second amendment people” should take care of his opponent Hillary Clinton, and that type of “joking” rhetoric was just the tip of the iceberg.

Political Retribution. Hitler jailed his opponents and anyone found to be a political dissident. Some of these individuals were shot extra-judicially as traitors, although many were simply detained in deplorable conditions in concentration camps like Dachau. (Between 1933 and 1938, only 500 prisoners at Dachau died; after 1939, 43K were killed there). Trump parallel: Trump has stated that in a second term, he plans to exact retribution on his enemies and to use the justice system against them. He has claimed executive privilege to do so, a legal question that will be decided by the conservative-majority SCOTUS he created.

How are they different?

Expansionism. Hitler sought to expand Germany, to overtake neighboring countries. He occupied those countries and enslaved their citizens, forcing them to labor for German families. Trump difference: Trump wants to close the borders. Although he joked (?) about buying Greenland, and making Mexico pay for a border wall that benefits the US, he doesn’t appear to have any deep interest in conquering other nations. On the contrary, he seems to prefer making deals with other nations individually (Hitler did carve up Poland with the USSR, so..) and to exit alliances that he sees no use for like NATO.

Personal Violence. Hitler, a former soldier, was at the front lines in his own coup attempt. He frequently said he would kill himself if his ambitions didn’t work out, which is ultimately what he did. Trump difference: Trump likes to talk tough, but when push comes to shove, he wants others to get their hands dirty on his behalf. Like most of us, he loves living too much to put himself in harm’s way.

Views on Vets. Hitler was particularly good at redirecting his former comrades-at-arms to rally behind him, as he had fought with them in WW1. Trump difference: Trump has no interest in vets unless they can do something for him. If they died in the line of duty, he has called them “suckers and losers.”

Ideological Fervor. Hitler’s platform was based on his own vision for Germany, his strongly anti-semitic views, and his ideas. He used his platform to convince others. He used anti-semitic laws to erode support for Jews by isolating them and stripping away their rights. He led; Germany followed. Trump difference: Trump is transactional with his voter base, the Evangelical right. He is willing to do their bidding in exchange for their votes. His own values start and end with himself and his own interests. He is not an ideologue or visionary.

Age. Hitler was young when he rose to power. His political ambitions started when he was only 30 years old, in 1919. When he died by suicide, he was only 56 years old. As explored in the Phillip K. Dick counterfactual The Man in the High Tower, if the Allies had lost the war, Hitler and his ideology might have led the world down a completely different path. Trump difference: Trump was 70 years old when he was elected and would be 78 if elected again for a second term. Even if he wins a second term and then refuses to leave office (if that somehow works this time), he’s not going to live forever, and thus far, none of his offspring or key deputies seem to have the same charismatic pull he has.

Historical Context. Hitler rose to power in a time when Germany was between two wars and undergoing huge upheaval and economic disaster. Trump difference: Trump was elected during a fairly stable time in a country with strong democratic institutions. While he has worked to erode trust in those institutions, he has still largely worked through those systems, while pushing their boundaries.

Things that are frankly too early to compare include the lasting legacy and impact of the Trump presidency. There has been serious damage done to trust in institutions. Plans like Project 2025 would only further erode our institutions, if allowed to happen. While there are more dangers to a second Trump presidency than there have been from any previous US president in my lifetime (per my own reckoning), that doesn’t make the dangers on par with what Hitler wrought. These are different times. And I can sit here and state my opinions freely because Trump does not have 90% support. We do still have free speech and a free press.

But, if we do not learn the lessons of history, we are doomed to repeat them. The parallels here should be sobering at least. The fact that the majority of current church members continue to support Trump may not be such a surprise since the majority of German church members (like their fellow citizens) supported Hitler. German Mormons specifically cited the 12th Article of Faith as justification to support the Nazi party, including viewing teen activist Hellmut Huebener who was excommunicated by his local leaders (and executed by the Nazi party) as a traitor.

“The Church knew what was going on in Germany, but emphasized cooperating with the Third Reich.” – David Conley Nelson, author of Moroni and the Swastika: Mormons in Nazi Germany

This is a depressing thought, and frankly even worse than the tacit support of Trump that so many current church leaders have displayed. And yet, one thing I left Germany believing more than ever is that anyone living in 1930s Germany would have had an incredibly difficult time bravely opposing the government Hitler installed. We all like to think we are stalwart heroes whose values are unshakable, but at heart, we are social creatures and cowards, often bound to compromise when society’s values differ, even when we know they are not right. We find the justification. We rationalize our silence.

Naziism, while not wholly without American supporters, was not our nation’s original sin. That was slavery, which some now want to water down in our school’s curriculum rather than talk honestly about it. Actually, that’s not the extent of it. Many events from our nation’s slave-owning past were never really taught openly in schools. Movies like Gone With the Wind make the slave-holding south seem like a quaint, lovely place where enslaved people were treated like family. In Germany, by contrast, it is illegal to deny the holocaust or make the Nazi salute. Maybe our nation’s day of really reckoning with our past is still in our future.

  • Do you find it helpful or distracting to compare like this?
  • Do you think we are learning from history as a church? As individuals?
  • Do you find these parallels troubling or see the differences as sufficiently mitigating?
  • Is there anything in these comparisons and contrasts that you see differently or would add?

Discuss.

[1] One story that our guide shared was about the filmmakers requesting to use the main square to film Nazis marching. The city said no, that they didn’t want people to associate them with Nazis. The filmmakers countered that instead they would just use the actual footage which was far, far worse as it showed Austrians in a fever pitch, shouting and waving swastikas in support of their chosen leader.