NOW Is It Okay To Call Drumpf A Nazi?

I am tempted to think that now we are perfectly within our rights to call Donald Drumpf a Nazi.

No, it’s not necessarily because of his Hitleresque histrionics and calls for violence against protesters or his racism or xenophobia or his utter hostility toward anything and anyone standing in the way of his will to power.

It is because this morning, at a rally in Ohio, he told the biggest lie of his lie-plagued campaign. He called Bernie Sanders a communist. Again. Yes, he’s done it plenty of times before. But there’s something different about him doing it this morning.

Even his own fellow candidates and some party officials are, finally, expressing concern over the storm of ugliness that surrounds his strange rallies and Drumpf’s failure to rein in the rhetoric that stokes the hate so visible wherever he goes. But rather than come out this morning with a more sober tone—after a bad scene in Chicago last night, where he had to cancel a rally because of the widespread mayhem his campaign is generating—he went on with the same old stuff. And he added a new twist. He blamed the supporters of “Bernie, our communist friend” for disrupting his events and especially for what happened in Chicago last night.

So, that may be it. We may now have permission. The time may have come. Maybe we can, and maybe we should, use the Nazi reference when describing Donald Drumpf’s dark and dreary and potentially deadly campaign.



  1. Anonymous

     /  March 12, 2016

    Sieg Hil!


  2. Hitler was only able to get a plurality in a multi-party system. It might be the only argument in favor of the two party system.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I like the two party system, given the non-parliamentary system we have. It basically forces the electorate to form a coalition before the election rather than wait for the elected factions to form one governing coalition after the election. And, as you suggest, it makes it much more difficult for a fascist to come to power.


  3. I see many parallels between the rise of the Nazi party (“National Socialism”) and what’s going on with the rise of Trump. First, Tige Tibson’s appropriate insight relative to the badly-divided Republican party. The Nazi party was not in the majority when it arose after WW I. Then, the appeal of a political strong man preaching extremism, targeting scapegoats, and advocating violence. Like Trump is now beginning to do, Hitler also effectively turned fear of Communism to his advantage. Trump has even promoted the use of a one-arm political salute, pronouncing disagreement as unpatriotic. Fascism lives and its new face has a comb-over instead of a mustache.


    • I like it: Fascism with a comb-over. I’m stealing it and putting it on a bumper sticker and becoming a gazillionaire.

      You hit on my point of this piece. Hitler did use the fear of communism to his advantage, which is what I see in what Trump is doing using that phrase against Bernie. And a nominated Trump will only go deeper.

      And besides that, if it is okay for the Republican front-runner to call a Democrat a communist, with all we know about how brutal communism has been and how many millions of people communists have killed, it should be okay for us to use the N word against a neo-fascist buffoon who has threatened to purposely kill innocents in the name of American security.



      • The racists and the anti-communists aren’t different factions uniting. They’re exactly the same people with exactly the same motivation and always have been, even in Hitler’s Germany.


%d bloggers like this: