Trump's Tuesday evening speech in Phoenix, Arizona drew the latest comparisons between his campaign-style events and speeches given by autocrats like Adolf Hitler. (Photo: Ralph Freso/Getty Images)
'Shades of 1933 Germany': Trump's Hostile Rally Prompts Third Reich Comparisons
Former British ambassador expresses shock at president's rhetoric as U.N. panel issues warning on Charlottesville response
In the wake of President Donald Trump's "unhinged" address at a campaign-style rally in Phoenix, Arizona, former British ambassador Peter Westmacott joined many Americans in expressing shock at the president's rhetoric on Wednesday--comparing the rally to one that might have been seen during the rise of the Nazi state in 1930s Germany.
The president spent much of his hour-long tirade railing against the press, declaring that most reporters "are really, really dishonest people, and they're bad people" who "don't like our country." The press coverage of the last ten days was a special focus; since last week, Trump has faced heavy criticism for his equivocation regarding a violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Westmacott is just the latest observer to compare Trump's actions to those of autocrats like those of the Nazi regime. Last month the president's speech at the annual Boy Scout Jamboree was as focused as his Phoenix address was on Trump's ongoing battles with the free press and other adversaries, prompting comparisons to a Nazi Youth rally.
Writing in Foreign Policy In Focus on Wednesday, Adil E. Shamoo and Bonnie Bricker argue it's time to take such Nazi-Trump comparisons seriously:
For starters, both rose to power with minority support....At his peak, Hitler managed to muster just 39 percent [of the German vote]. (Contrary to myth, he never won a popular election outright.) Trump took over the Republican Party with a similar style of demagoguery and dumb luck.
Both Hitler and Trump have used bullying and threats to keep government officials in line. Nazi supporters intimidated, beat, and assassinated some of their opponents. Trump is no Hitler--not yet--but he's turned his Twitter account into an intimidation tool and managed to keep the majority of his party in line with him, even with neo-Nazis chanting "Heil Trump" in the streets.
The former ambassador's comments coincided with an urgent condemnation by a United Nations panel focused on race relations to the Trump administration's troubling response to white supremacists in the United States.
Invoking its "urgent warning procedure," The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination denounced "the failure at the highest political level of the United States of America to unequivocally reject and condemn the racist violent events and demonstrations" led by white supremacists. The group also urged the U.S. to "actively contribute to the promotion of understanding, tolerance, and diversity between ethnic groups"--values which the country has historically prided itself on promoting.
The Committee generally only gives reviews of U.N. member countries' race relations every four or five years, but its urgent warning procedure is used for cases of unrest that could "spiral into terrible events," according to its chair, Anastasia Crickley.
In an interview with the New York Times, Crickley expressed shock at the glowing reviews avowed neo-Nazis gave the president after his statements on Charlottesville. "I was horrified as well by the way leaders of [the white supremacist] movement were able to state afterwards that they felt secure in their support," she said.
The last time the panel issued such a decision was last year, when it twice criticized the government of Burundi in East Africa for not addressing its human rights abuses. Before that was in 2014, in a decision concerning the so-called Islamic State group's attacks against civilians in Iraq.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
In the wake of President Donald Trump's "unhinged" address at a campaign-style rally in Phoenix, Arizona, former British ambassador Peter Westmacott joined many Americans in expressing shock at the president's rhetoric on Wednesday--comparing the rally to one that might have been seen during the rise of the Nazi state in 1930s Germany.
The president spent much of his hour-long tirade railing against the press, declaring that most reporters "are really, really dishonest people, and they're bad people" who "don't like our country." The press coverage of the last ten days was a special focus; since last week, Trump has faced heavy criticism for his equivocation regarding a violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Westmacott is just the latest observer to compare Trump's actions to those of autocrats like those of the Nazi regime. Last month the president's speech at the annual Boy Scout Jamboree was as focused as his Phoenix address was on Trump's ongoing battles with the free press and other adversaries, prompting comparisons to a Nazi Youth rally.
Writing in Foreign Policy In Focus on Wednesday, Adil E. Shamoo and Bonnie Bricker argue it's time to take such Nazi-Trump comparisons seriously:
For starters, both rose to power with minority support....At his peak, Hitler managed to muster just 39 percent [of the German vote]. (Contrary to myth, he never won a popular election outright.) Trump took over the Republican Party with a similar style of demagoguery and dumb luck.
Both Hitler and Trump have used bullying and threats to keep government officials in line. Nazi supporters intimidated, beat, and assassinated some of their opponents. Trump is no Hitler--not yet--but he's turned his Twitter account into an intimidation tool and managed to keep the majority of his party in line with him, even with neo-Nazis chanting "Heil Trump" in the streets.
The former ambassador's comments coincided with an urgent condemnation by a United Nations panel focused on race relations to the Trump administration's troubling response to white supremacists in the United States.
Invoking its "urgent warning procedure," The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination denounced "the failure at the highest political level of the United States of America to unequivocally reject and condemn the racist violent events and demonstrations" led by white supremacists. The group also urged the U.S. to "actively contribute to the promotion of understanding, tolerance, and diversity between ethnic groups"--values which the country has historically prided itself on promoting.
The Committee generally only gives reviews of U.N. member countries' race relations every four or five years, but its urgent warning procedure is used for cases of unrest that could "spiral into terrible events," according to its chair, Anastasia Crickley.
In an interview with the New York Times, Crickley expressed shock at the glowing reviews avowed neo-Nazis gave the president after his statements on Charlottesville. "I was horrified as well by the way leaders of [the white supremacist] movement were able to state afterwards that they felt secure in their support," she said.
The last time the panel issued such a decision was last year, when it twice criticized the government of Burundi in East Africa for not addressing its human rights abuses. Before that was in 2014, in a decision concerning the so-called Islamic State group's attacks against civilians in Iraq.
In the wake of President Donald Trump's "unhinged" address at a campaign-style rally in Phoenix, Arizona, former British ambassador Peter Westmacott joined many Americans in expressing shock at the president's rhetoric on Wednesday--comparing the rally to one that might have been seen during the rise of the Nazi state in 1930s Germany.
The president spent much of his hour-long tirade railing against the press, declaring that most reporters "are really, really dishonest people, and they're bad people" who "don't like our country." The press coverage of the last ten days was a special focus; since last week, Trump has faced heavy criticism for his equivocation regarding a violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Westmacott is just the latest observer to compare Trump's actions to those of autocrats like those of the Nazi regime. Last month the president's speech at the annual Boy Scout Jamboree was as focused as his Phoenix address was on Trump's ongoing battles with the free press and other adversaries, prompting comparisons to a Nazi Youth rally.
Writing in Foreign Policy In Focus on Wednesday, Adil E. Shamoo and Bonnie Bricker argue it's time to take such Nazi-Trump comparisons seriously:
For starters, both rose to power with minority support....At his peak, Hitler managed to muster just 39 percent [of the German vote]. (Contrary to myth, he never won a popular election outright.) Trump took over the Republican Party with a similar style of demagoguery and dumb luck.
Both Hitler and Trump have used bullying and threats to keep government officials in line. Nazi supporters intimidated, beat, and assassinated some of their opponents. Trump is no Hitler--not yet--but he's turned his Twitter account into an intimidation tool and managed to keep the majority of his party in line with him, even with neo-Nazis chanting "Heil Trump" in the streets.
The former ambassador's comments coincided with an urgent condemnation by a United Nations panel focused on race relations to the Trump administration's troubling response to white supremacists in the United States.
Invoking its "urgent warning procedure," The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination denounced "the failure at the highest political level of the United States of America to unequivocally reject and condemn the racist violent events and demonstrations" led by white supremacists. The group also urged the U.S. to "actively contribute to the promotion of understanding, tolerance, and diversity between ethnic groups"--values which the country has historically prided itself on promoting.
The Committee generally only gives reviews of U.N. member countries' race relations every four or five years, but its urgent warning procedure is used for cases of unrest that could "spiral into terrible events," according to its chair, Anastasia Crickley.
In an interview with the New York Times, Crickley expressed shock at the glowing reviews avowed neo-Nazis gave the president after his statements on Charlottesville. "I was horrified as well by the way leaders of [the white supremacist] movement were able to state afterwards that they felt secure in their support," she said.
The last time the panel issued such a decision was last year, when it twice criticized the government of Burundi in East Africa for not addressing its human rights abuses. Before that was in 2014, in a decision concerning the so-called Islamic State group's attacks against civilians in Iraq.