I keep hearing people say that DC politics today look an awful lot like 1930s Germany.

I keep hearing people say that DC politics today look an awful lot like 1930s Germany.

I must clarify from the onset that drawing direct comparisons between Hitler’s Germany and contemporary American politics is highly sensitive and potentially misleading. The scale, intentions, and outcomes of the actions taken by Hitler and the Nazi party led to war and the death of millions, including the Holocaust. The complexities of those events do not lend themselves to straightforward or casual comparisons with current events in any democratic nation, including the United States.

That being said, it’s valuable to scrutinize the role of political strategy, public discourse, and the use—or misuse—of institutional power. Across time and place, these are elements that have, indeed, influenced political atmospheres.

Rule of Law vs. Rule by Law

The Department of Justice (DOJ) in the United States is an institution built to enforce the law and ensure public safety. It operates based on a set of principles and procedures. In Germany in the 1930s, the judiciary and law enforcement were manipulated as tools for the consolidation of political power, sidelining the checks and balances that typically characterize democratic governance. Now, the key distinction lies in the degree to which these systems are weaponized against political opponents. Accusations have been leveled at the Biden administration for using the DOJ as a tool against opponents, but these actions are subject to public scrutiny, media attention, and judicial review, which acts as a layer of accountability.

The concept of “Rule of Law” vs. “Rule by Law” is a thought-provoking way to consider how societies are structured. It’s a kaleidoscope through which we can view not only the practice of justice but the very soul of a nation. So, let’s put on our thinking caps, and dive deep.

Rule of Law

When we say “Rule of Law,” we’re talking about more than a law-abiding society. We’re discussing a democratic framework where laws apply equally to all individuals, regardless of their position or influence. It’s a symphony of checks and balances, where each branch of government counterbalances the other to prevent an abuse of power. When the DOJ takes action against a citizen or entity, it’s not based on whims but on principles. And this, my friends, is what lends credibility to an institution. The role of public scrutiny here is a bit like the role of a vigilant neighborhood watch—it keeps things honest. In this kind of framework, accusations of political weaponization are examined under a fierce public spotlight and evaluated rigorously by the judiciary. In other words, the system is designed to correct itself.

Rule by Law

Flip the coin, and you find “Rule by Law,” a scenario in which the law becomes an instrument of the state, wielded to maintain or consolidate power. It’s akin to playing a rigged game; the rules might exist, but they disproportionately favor one player. This was the case in 1930s Germany. Law and judicial systems were manipulated to such an extent that they became almost theatrical props in a tragic performance of authoritarianism. Checks and balances? Thrown out of the window faster than you can say “autocracy.”

Comparative Context

Now, when you examine accusations against the Biden administration for using the DOJ for political ends, it’s essential to remember that these actions occur within a democracy that, while imperfect, has robust mechanisms for accountability. We’re talking about public discourse, media outlets that can criticize the government freely, and an independent judiciary that isn’t afraid to push back. These are not mere decorations; they’re structural pillars that sustain the edifice of democracy.

It’s a bit like comparing the diets of different animals—you can’t scrutinize a carnivore for not eating plants if its entire system is designed to process meat. Likewise, we should be cautious in drawing direct parallels between systems designed to operate under different conditions and principles.

Inspiration in Accountability

So, here’s where it gets inspiring. The question isn’t whether the DOJ or any institution is beyond criticism. No entity in a democracy should be. The question is whether the institution operates within a system that allows for correction, for evolution, and—let’s be audacious—for improvement.

This is a call for active civic engagement. A call to wield the tools of democracy to uphold it, to question, to push for transparency and fairness. Let’s not just be passive observers in this grand spectacle of governance; let’s be critics, analysts, and even playwrights, contributing to the narrative.

To stand guard over the Rule of Law is to participate in the shaping of our collective story. And that, in its own right, is a form of public service—an everyday heroism that we can all aspire to.

Checks, Balances, and Investigations

The Republican party has called for investigations into what it sees as the weaponization of federal agencies. The willingness to question, investigate, and hold accountable is a cornerstone of democratic society, which contrasts with the increasingly authoritarian nature of 1930s Germany. In the era of Hitler, opposing voices were swiftly and violently silenced.

Gun Control and Civil Liberties

The topic of gun control is divisive in the United States today. While there are proposals to regulate firearms, they are mostly aimed at preventing mass shootings and increasing public safety. In Hitler’s Germany, disarming the populace had a sinister motive—rendering citizens powerless in the face of totalitarian rule. Again, context is crucial; gun control measures today are subject to debate, legislative voting, and constitutional scrutiny.

The Role of Media and Public Discourse

Both eras have shown us how impactful the tone of public discourse can be. Polarization is at an all-time high today, as it was during 1930s Germany. However, the narrative now is largely decentralized due to the internet, whereas Nazi propaganda was highly coordinated and censored.

Final Thoughts

If inspiration is what we seek, let it be in the form of vigilance and engagement. Democracies are built not only by the institutions that govern them but by the citizens who inhabit them. Rather than making direct comparisons to some of the darkest periods in human history, let’s focus on bolstering the very elements that make democracy resilient—transparency, checks and balances, and above all, informed public discourse.

So, while it’s tempting to draw parallels between different periods and political situations, it’s critical to remember the weight of each and the unique contexts in which they exist. We need less of a rush to comparison and more of a plunge into understanding. Because, at the end of the day, understanding is the path to improvement, and improvement is the route to a better future for us all.