I hear historians all the time that draw parallels between early Germany in or right before WWII, and the Trump administration today, in regard to attitudes, words and actions taken by the government and its leaders. Are there historians that say any such comparisons between the two are spurious at best?
Not any good ones that are respected, but probably not for the reason you’re thinking of. As a general guideline, historians avoid talking about events until enough time has passed that the political passions have died down and things can be looked at more dispassionately.
Edit. Nevermind. Apparently, this professional norm has been steadily eroding for a while now. Particularly in the last 20 years.
The word comparison does a lot of work here.
I asked Gemini for a list of historians who deny a similarity between Trump and Hitler without being pro-Trump. But when I look at what the historians are actually saying, they are comparing the two. And they are finding similarities. But they are also finding differences. This November 13, 2024 The Hill article by a Rutgers political scientist/historian is an example:
The debate over whether Trump is ‘fascist’ misses the point
I think that there always are going to be a lot of differences between authoritarian leaders who are strongman presidents as opposed to those who bring down a parliamentary government. At a 20,000 foot level, and allowing that everyone should be able to cite a few exceptions, I think parliamentary governments are more resistant to becoming autocratic, but when it happens, it can happen fast and completely. By contrast, presidential republics go bad more often but take longer to go completely down the drain, and usually never do.
(Edit, never mind, I misread the post)
Richard Evans put out an op-ed after 1/6 saying Trump wasn’t fascist, and nobody who is an expert in the field would call him one, because something along the lines of ‘he’s too isolationist, and despite everything, he hasn’t started a war with Iran’.
~Max
Is he an historian?
Yes, and an expert on the Third Reich…but like many historians not necessarily able to apply that discipline to current events nor does he own a crystal ball.
Not sure he’d describe himself as a “historian”, rather as a “student of history” but Dominic Sandbrook, the host of the excellent podcast “The Rest Is History” argues that Trump does not technically fit the definition of being a Fascist.
The conversation was broadcast on the “The Rest Is Politics” podcast with Alistair Campbell, who is just as convinced that he is. Personally, I side with Alistair on the topic.