Stop Saying Donald Trump Is A Nazi, He's Not

Stop Saying Donald Trump Is A Nazi, He's Not

Calling him such diminishes both the term and distracts from his dangerous political agenda.

Over the entirety of both his campaign and his presidency, President Trump has fielded accusations from the Left that he is a "Nazi." These accusations have only become louder, more common, and mainstream over the last couple of weeks since the terrible events that unfolded in Charlottesville and with President Trump's meager denunciation--if you could even call it that--of the participating white supremacists and Nazis.

However, this kind of rhetoric is both inaccurate and dangerous. For all that Trump is and for all that he has done and said, which, by my estimations, is a lot of bad things, he approaches neither the rhetoric nor heinousness of actions of an actual Nazi. Accusing him of being something he is not weakens the strength of our argument against him and diminishes the severity of the term.

Despite the veiled, dog-whistle racism Trump utilizes in many of his speeches and policies, from "bad hombres" to the Muslim-ban-that-isn't-technically-a-Muslim-ban to his denunciation of violence on "all sides" in Charlottesville, he has never gone nearly as far as to flat-out claim the supremacy of White people like himself over any other race or ethnicity.

There are more than enough things that the Left can accuse Donald Trump of being without falling prey to Godwin's Law and calling Trump what appears to have been just the first thing to pop into our collective minds: "Nazi."

This makes our argument sound weak and immature, as instead of levying legitimate, specific criticisms against Trump and his dangerous and damaging administration and policy proposals, we appear to be merely tossing a valueless insult. This distracts coverage from policy proposals and actions, such as halving legal immigration, curbing voting rights, and refusing to punish abusive police departments, that actually do prop up parts of the white supremacist agenda.

Beyond just distracting from the real issues, levying "Nazi" against someone like President Trump weakens the term. If not in absolute terms, then certainly in the perceptions of right-wingers across America. If we continue to use the term to describe a man who was elected President of the United States and enjoys the support of millions of Americans across the country, it could serve to undermine our use of the term against others who fit the definition more aptly.

By levying the term "Nazi" against a figure as prominent and important as President Trump, we endanger our abilities to engage in meaningful dialogue with people who might be on the edge of supporting vs. not supporting him and his agenda. We also feed into the ridiculous right-wing narrative that anything and everything conservative can elicit being called a racist or a Nazi. It feeds into conservative victimhood.

As dangerous as President Trump's rhetoric and agenda are to the American people, especially those marginalized amongst us, he is not a Nazi. If the Left hopes to have any chance at confronting those particularly egregious parts of President Trump's agenda, we must do so in terms that are less fear-mongering and divisive.

Cover Image Credit: JLee

Popular Right Now

An Open Letter to the Person Who Still Uses the "R Word"

Your negative associations are slowly poisoning the true meaning of an incredibly beautiful, exclusive word.

What do you mean you didn't “mean it like that?" You said it.

People don't say things just for the hell of it. It has one definition. Merriam-Webster defines it as, "To be less advanced in mental, physical or social development than is usual for one's age."

So, when you were “retarded drunk" this past weekend, as you claim, were you diagnosed with a physical or mental disability?

When you called your friend “retarded," did you realize that you were actually falsely labeling them as handicapped?

Don't correct yourself with words like “stupid," “dumb," or “ignorant." when I call you out. Sharpen your vocabulary a little more and broaden your horizons, because I promise you that if people with disabilities could banish that word forever, they would.

Especially when people associate it with drunks, bad decisions, idiotic statements, their enemies and other meaningless issues. Oh trust me, they are way more than that.

I'm not quite sure if you have had your eyes opened as to what a disabled person is capable of, but let me go ahead and lay it out there for you. My best friend has Down Syndrome, and when I tell people that their initial reaction is, “Oh that is so nice of you! You are so selfless to hang out with her."

Well, thanks for the compliment, but she is a person. A living, breathing, normal girl who has feelings, friends, thousands of abilities, knowledge, and compassion out the wazoo.

She listens better than anyone I know, she gets more excited to see me than anyone I know, and she works harder at her hobbies, school, work, and sports than anyone I know. She attends a private school, is a member of the swim team, has won multiple events in the Special Olympics, is in the school choir, and could quite possibly be the most popular girl at her school!

So yes, I would love to take your compliment, but please realize that most people who are labeled as “disabled" are actually more “able" than normal people. I hang out with her because she is one of the people who has so effortlessly taught me simplicity, gratitude, strength, faith, passion, love, genuine happiness and so much more.

Speaking for the people who cannot defend themselves: choose a new word.

The trend has gone out of style, just like smoking cigarettes or not wearing your seat belt. It is poisonous, it is ignorant, and it is low class.

As I explained above, most people with disabilities are actually more capable than a normal human because of their advantageous ways of making peoples' days and unknowingly changing lives. Hang out with a handicapped person, even if it is just for a day. I can one hundred percent guarantee you will bite your tongue next time you go to use the term out of context.

Hopefully you at least think of my friend, who in my book is a hero, a champion and an overcomer. Don't use the “R Word". You are way too good for that. Stand up and correct someone today.

Cover Image Credit: Kaitlin Murray

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

To Fix Taxes, We Have To Rethink 'Wealthy'

"Wealthy" doesn't mean the same for everyone.


When discussing taxes today, so many politicians are quick to rush to the adage "tax the rich." Bernie Sanders has called for the rich to be taxed higher to pay for Medicare for All. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called for a 70% tax on the wealthy.

However, all of these proposals are missing a key thing: a true definition of rich.

When thinking about what counts as rich, it is important to distinguish between the "working wealthy" and the "investment wealthy."

The working wealthy are the people in society that get paid highly because they have a high skill set and provide an extremely valuable service that they deserve just compensation for. This class is made up of professionals like lawyers, doctors, and CEOs. In addition, the working wealthy are characterized by another crucial aspect: over a long term calculation of their earned income over time, they don't come out as prosperous as their annual incomes would seem to suggest. This is because this set of the wealthy has to plunge into student debt for degrees that take years to acquire. These jobs generally also require a huge amount of time invested in lower-paying positions, apprenticeships, and internships before the big-money starts coming in.

On the other hand, the investment wealthy is completely different. These are the people that merely sit back and manipulate money without truly contributing to anything in society. A vast majority of this class is born into money and they use investments into stocks and bonds as well as tax loopholes to generate their money without actually contributing much to society as a whole.

What makes the investment wealthy so different from the working wealthy is their ability to use manipulative techniques to avoid paying taxes. While the working wealthy are rich, they do not have AS many resources or connections to manipulate tax laws the way that the investment wealthy can. The investment wealthy has access to overseas banking accounts to wash money though. The investment wealthy can afford lawyers to comb over tax laws and find loopholes for ridiculous prices. This is tax evasion that the working wealthy simply does not have access to.

That is why it is so incredibly important to make sure that we distinguish between the two when discussing tax policy. When we use blanket statements like "tax the rich," we forget the real reasons that the investment wealthy are able to pay such low taxes now. Imposing a larger marginal tax rate will only give them more incentive to move around taxes while squeezing the working wealthy even more.

Because of this, in our taxation discourse, we need to focus first on making sure people pay their taxes, to begin with. Things like a tax of Wall Street speculation, capital gains taxes, a closing of loopholes, and a simplification of the tax code. These things will have a marked improvement in making sure that the investment wealthy actually pays the taxes we already expect of them now. If we stick to the same message, the only thing we will be changing is the rate that the uber-wealthy are avoiding.

Related Content

Facebook Comments