Political Incitement: Democrats Are Reviving Nazi-Era Tactics

The past is never truly past. History offers not just instruction but stark warnings for those willing to heed them. The Weimar Republic, a fractured, democratic nation beset by internal strife, serves as one such lesson. The tactics used by its political radicals—particularly those of the Nazi Party—did not begin with violence but with rhetoric. They did not initially seize power through physical force; instead, they created a public consensus through words. Words that dehumanized. Words that painted entire groups as threats to society itself. Words that, in their incessant repetition, made violence seem not just possible but necessary.

A strikingly similar pattern is emerging in the contemporary United States. Over the last decade, an increasingly aggressive political and media class has employed incendiary rhetoric against Donald Trump, his supporters, and prominent figures like Elon Musk. These are not merely words of opposition, nor are they the standard fare of political disagreement. They are words that delegitimize, words that strip opponents of their basic humanity, and words that—if history is any guide—inevitably lead to real-world violence.

The Weimar Parallels: How Free Speech Was Exploited for Incitement

The Weimar Republic, much like contemporary America, was deeply polarized. Before seizing absolute power, the Nazi Party relied on a slow yet deliberate transformation of public perception. Julius Streicher’s Der Stürmer did not simply criticize Jewish business practices or religion; it portrayed Jews as vermin, as disease carriers, as insidious threats to the very fabric of German society. This propaganda campaign functioned not to debate but to erase—to make the presence of Jews in public life unconscionable.

Today, the same tactic is employed against Trump and his political allies. Consider the language used by Democratic leaders and leftist activists:

Maxine Waters, in 2018, called for public harassment of Trump officials, urging mobs to make their presence known at restaurants, gas stations, and public spaces. Kathy Griffin, in 2017, infamously posed with a mock severed head of Trump—a grotesque image that, had it been directed at any Democratic president, would have resulted in immediate and universal condemnation. Johnny Depp, in the same year, openly joked about assassinating the president, evoking memories of John Wilkes Booth. In 2024, New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg suggested that Elon Musk, whose only crime is refusing to bow to progressive orthodoxy, was a danger to democracy—an assertion that implies elimination rather than engagement.

This is not political discourse. It is incitement. It is the same rhetorical pattern used in Weimar Germany: the transformation of a political opponent into an existential threat, thereby justifying extreme measures against them.

The Shift from Speech to Action: How Incitement Becomes Reality

The argument that such rhetoric is merely hyperbolic collapses under scrutiny. Words shape reality. They set the boundaries of acceptable action. Just as Nazi propaganda led to anti-Jewish street violence long before the Holocaust, modern leftist rhetoric has already translated into real-world attacks on conservatives:

In 2017, a Bernie Sanders supporter opened fire on Republican congressmen during a baseball practice, nearly killing House Majority Whip Steve Scalise. In 2022, a man was arrested for attempting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh—an act directly linked to the media and political rhetoric surrounding the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In 2023, a man attempted to burn down a Trump campaign office in Florida. In 2024, Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt in which he was shot, a direct result of the relentless rhetoric painting him as an existential threat. Later that year, a second attempt on his life came perilously close to succeeding, highlighting the increasingly violent climate fostered by political dehumanization.

These acts are not isolated. They are the natural result of a political culture that encourages dehumanization. Just as Nazi rhetoric led to Kristallnacht before the Final Solution, leftist incitement is leading to politically motivated violence against conservatives.

The Incitement Standard: Why It’s Not Just “Free Speech”

Some might argue that this is simply a matter of free speech. However, U.S. law recognizes that speech can cross into incitement when it meets the three-prong test established in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969):

1. There is intent to incite violence.

2. The violent act is imminent.

3. The act is likely to occur.

Democratic leaders and media figures are increasingly toeing this line. When Hillary Clinton calls Trump and his supporters a “clear and present danger,” she is not engaging in reasoned critique but in war rhetoric. When President Biden, in his infamous 2022 speech bathed in blood-red lighting, declared that Trump supporters are a “threat to democracy,” he was not merely voicing opposition; he was marking them as an enemy faction to be neutralized.

The Failure of Law Enforcement and Political Institutions

A key reason Nazi rhetoric succeeded in Weimar Germany was the failure of state institutions to curtail it. Courts hesitated to intervene, fearing overreach, and in doing so, allowed hate speech to fester until it became action. A similar dynamic plays out in modern America:

The Department of Justice aggressively prosecutes January 6 protesters, many of whom engaged in no violent activity, while left-wing rioters from the 2020 summer riots face little to no punishment. The FBI targets pro-life activists and Catholic congregations as “extremist threats,” yet ignores the documented rise in left-wing political violence. Democratic leaders who openly call for harassment, deplatforming, and even violence against Trump supporters face no consequences, while conservative figures are banned, censored, or demonized for far less incendiary speech.

This selective enforcement emboldens one side while disenfranchising the other, exacerbating the political divide and making political violence more, not less, likely.

The Danger of Permitting Leftist Incitement

This is not a claim that Democrats are Nazis or that Trump supporters are an oppressed minority. The analogy is not one of direct equivalence but of structural similarity. Weimar Germany shows that when political rhetoric crosses the line into dehumanization and incitement, violence is not just possible—it is inevitable.

Allowing unchecked leftist incitement against Trump, his supporters, and figures like Musk risks pushing America into a historical cycle we should be desperate to avoid. When one side is systematically dehumanized, when its leaders are painted as existential threats, and when violence against them is excused or ignored, the consequences are dire. The lesson of Weimar Germany is clear: a society that tolerates incitement under the guise of free speech ultimately destroys itself from within. The time to recognize and resist this pattern is now.