The few Social Democrats who dared to vote no were booed; many soon fled the country or were thrown into newly opened concentration camps.
In 53 days, Hitler had used Germany’s own democratic rules to wipe out all opposition and rule by decree. He bullied a weakened system, played on people’s fears, and rose higher than anyone had believed possible. It was a terrifying example of how quickly democracy can collapse if voters, officials, and institutions fail to protect it—and it remains a sobering lesson for us today.
A cold winter morning on January 20, 2025, set the stage for Donald Trump’s unexpected return to power. Following months of fierce debates over election integrity, the inauguration was markedly subdued compared to past ceremonies. Rather than the usual exuberance, television cameras captured more pensive expressions than broad smiles. Prominent editorials noted that although Trump’s poll numbers had slipped in the final campaign stretch, he managed a comeback that few had predicted. With his hand on the Bible at the Capitol, he solemnly vowed to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution—a document he had frequently critiqued in his tweets and rallies.
A closer look at this political landscape reveals some striking parallels with the rise of Hitler in Germany. Although the contexts differ, both MAGA and the Nazi Party used similar strategies to consolidate power.
For example, in the aftermath of the Reichstag Fire in February 1933, Hitler stoked public fear by alleging a Communist uprising. This panic paved the way for the Reichstag Fire Decree, which suspended civil liberties and led to the mass arrest of political opponents. Today, Trump has cast issues like immigration and “gender ideology” as existential threats, using executive orders to amplify concerns over national security and cultural identity, thereby rallying his supporters around these perceived dangers.
Both leaders prioritized unwavering loyalty. Hitler secured the allegiance of conservative elites by promising to safeguard their interests and by ruthlessly suppressing dissent during the “Night of the Long Knives.” Similarly, Trump has sought to win over key conservative groups—especially law enforcement and military personnel—by leveraging the threat of a national emergency and enacting policies that reinforce border security and impose harsher penalties for crimes against police. His deliberate use of patriotic symbols has further solidified the unity of his base, while his close ties with some of the nation’s wealthiest individuals not only bolster his image but also provide significant financial support for his initiatives.
Control over information is another shared tactic. Hitler’s regime masterfully employed propaganda to portray him as Germany’s savior while discrediting any opposition. Likewise, Trump’s administration has leveraged executive orders and strategic messaging to frame its policies as a return to “common sense” and a defense of American values, casting him as the antidote to perceived chaos and extremism.
In suppressing dissent, the approaches diverge in intensity. Hitler systematically dismantled political opposition—banning rival parties and trade unions and using the Enabling Act to eliminate parliamentary checks. Although Trump has not outlawed opposition, his aggressive immigration measures and legal challenges against progressive policies have had a chilling effect on dissent, particularly among marginalized communities and among the Republican Representatives and Senators that he has threatened to “primary.”