this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
291 points (94.5% liked)

AskHistorians

675 readers
566 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 84 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You know, for this whole election cycle, many, many people have been commenting on the parallels between Trump/MAGA and the rise of the Nazi party. It hasn't just been people on social media, there have been lots of well cited articles. Take a look at this Guardian piece from the summer.

So yes, the parallels are so significant that it makes people wonder if it's coincidental or a playbook.

[–] Don_Dickle@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (6 children)

In your honest opinion do you think he will try to get rid of voting so he can remain in power like Hitler did?

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago

We are already well along the road of elections being fairly meaningless. Not because the results aren't counted accurately but because elections can be swayed by numerous mechanisms including voter suppression (voter ID laws, redistricting, restrictions on polling places and methods, etc) and propaganda. Combine that with economic suppression via wealth inequality that results in low-information voters being the norm and you have a relatively easy mechanism to "win" elections that's legal and constitutional.

Hitler didn't get into power by being a dictator, he became one through a series of events. The Reichstag fire was a pretext Hindenburg declaring a state of emergency which not only gave Nazi's the ability to frame and dissent or opposition as traitorous, it also lent "credence" to their propaganda about the threat of communism, allowing them to further consolidate power in the 1933 election.

History rhymes.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

He doesn't need to. Elections will happen as usual, but states with Republican-led governments will report favorable results for Republicans regardless of the reality.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

I would definitely not put it beyond him. The only thing that could really prevent this would be his death. Be glad that Trump is way older than Hitler was in 1933.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago

I'll be surprised if he lives long enough for that - he's old and has a terrible diet - but he said at a fundraiser that people would only need to vote one more time, which many took to mean that's all he'd need to stay in power. He tried a failed coup in 2020, so clearly doesn't care if it's lawful or not. Would anyone be surprised?

[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago

Absolutely. If Trump dies till then someone else will just take over. America wont have free elections for decades to come.

[–] HomesliceAbe@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The scary thing is that Republicans have the holy political trinity right now. Control of the executive as well as both legislative branches. They could easily pass an amendment to nix the 22nd.

[–] ZekeSulastin@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

That’s not how the amendment process works. They’d need a 2/3 majority vote in both the House and the Senate to launch a proposal or 2/3 of the states to hold a constitutional convention; once the amendment is proposed, 3/4 of the states would have to ratify it.

Besides, even a simple majority requirement wouldn’t guarantee success - for example, see the clown show for the GOP House speakership, Senators Manchin (I; D before 2024) and Sinema (I; D before Dec 2022) voting no on various Democratic initiatives, or Senator McCain (R) voting no on the ACA repeal.

There was actually a point where we were two state governorships away from the GOP being able to hold that convention, but that’s still just the proposal.

[–] Fontasia@feddit.nl 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He's got the supreme court on his side, what stopping him making up just forcing things through as emergency measures?

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nothing. The Supreme Court has no oversight whatsoever and can rule that anything is legal (or illegal) with no way to challenge it.

[–] TheOtherThyme@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

It doesn't matter how things are should work or how they used to work. Nothing and no one will stop the repugs from doing anything they want.