On a recent visit to the
Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., where I was chaperoning my son’s eighth
grade class, I was struck by the exhibits detailing Adolf Hitler and the Nazi’s
political rise. Some of the same phrases and words used then are echoes in
today’s campaign for president, particularly from one candidate.
For years, the country has
been wrought with financial instability, a government unable to work
effectively, and a segment of the population fearful of perceived threats from
a religious and ethnic minority. That country was Germany in 1933, the year
Hitler and the Nazis came to power, replacing the Weimar Republic, a poorly structured republic with weak
leaders. Many voters wanted a leader with a strong hand. The country became
fertile ground for Hitler and the Nazis.
To be absolutely clear, Donald Trump is not the next Adolf Hitler and Republican
Party leaders are not Nazis, but what is deeply concerning is the language Trump chooses
to use, and the inability in the GOP’s high ranks to demonstrate unequivocally the
party’s opposition to those words. This is where his fellow GOP candidates have
failed. They allowed Trump to bully and intimidate them and now they look weak – could any one of them stand up to North Korea’s boy dictator let alone Vladimir Putin? – and Trump looks invincible.
One of the searing lessons
from Hitler and the Nazis is that words of exclusion and hate spoken from a popular
leader will telegraph to the ignorant and intolerant that hating certain groups
is acceptable in society. Repeat those words often enough – it doesn’t take many times to convey the message – and things get out of control.
Hitler and the Nazis knew
this well. After priming the anti-Semitic pump with state-sanctioned proclamations
of intolerance, they had to do little to get the intolerant, fearful segments
of the population – Hitler’s willing executioners – to attack their Jewish neighbors
and anyone who opposed their ideas. The Nazis just stood by to make sure the
attacks were ruthless enough.
Trump’s atrocious racial
language about Muslims and Latino immigrants has now done the same thing. The
willing executioners are loose, whether Trump wants them to be or not. Ex-Ku
Klux Klan leader David Duke broadcasts to his racist followers that to not vote for Trump is to oppose the white
race. Trump rejected Duke’s
endorsement, but his language has endorsed their intolerant thinking and
behavior.
Like the citizens in the Weimar
Republic, many of Trump’s supporters are disenchanted, rightly or wrongly, with
the federal government and the two political parties. They seek a strong leader
to make things right, like getting rid of Muslims, Mexicans and anyone else they
fear is the cause of their problems.
As Eugene Robinson of the
Washington Post wrote in a recent column, it was just a matter of time before a
candidate like Trump, inspiring the masses by spewing invective speech, would
come along and get in reach of a major party’s nomination.
“It grows from the failure of
our political system to adapt to demographic change, economic disruption and a
reorganizing world,” Robinson wrote.
The same words could have
been written about the Weimar Republic in 1933, which struggled with weak
political parties, social transformation and the Great Depression. Robert
Reich, former U.S. Labor Secretary and now public policy professor at the
University of California, Berkeley, recently wrote this about the
election: “Some
Americans are rebelling against all this by supporting an authoritarian
demagogue who wants to fortify America against foreigners as well as
foreign-made goods. Others are rebelling by joining a so-called “‘political
revolution.’”
In any other time, Trump’s
calls for banning Muslims and walling out Mexicans from the United States would
have qualified him – in the view of Republicans and Democrats – as an intolerant
extremist unqualified to lead a nation whose credo is tolerance; a place where
we welcome all people as created equal.
Instead, as he wins one GOP
primary after another, and makes one hateful statement after another, the
Republican Party appears ready to capitulate in the worst way, by warming up to
him, but only because he could win the White House.
As Dana Milbank of the
Washington Post reported last week, “Republican National Committee Chairman
Reince Priebus told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that it would be a ‘no-brainer’
to support the nominee, even if it’s Trump. ‘Winning is the antidote to a lot
of things,’ he reasoned.”
Perhaps, but when the
intolerant start burning mosques because they were inspired by Trump’s
ascension, what would be the antidote for that? If the Republicans or Trump
think that would be something they could control and stop, then I advise them
to visit the Holocaust Museum.
