Tom White 

Holocaust and Genocide Education, Consultation, Lecturer,
Facilitator.

ICE   

Alex Pretti, Geraldo Lunas Campos, Renee Nicole Good, Keith Porter Jr.  were killed by ICE and at least 32 people have died in ICE custody in 2025. Government officials were quick and consistent to make arguments, before investigations were conducted, that they basically deserved it and that ICE was acting in self-defense. "Self-defense" against people labeled as internal threats is the basic operating principle in fascists states that encourages and protects violence. 

As a mid-term election approaches, the FBI executed search warrants on Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's home and later at the elections office in Fulton County, Georgia. Journalists Don Lemon, Georgia Fort and others were arrested for reporting at a protest site. As free speech and elections are under attack, trust in and limits on federal institutions is ebbing. This week on MSNOW, former RNC chair Michael Steele was fed up and decried the polite conversation taking place between hosts by demanding, “What are we doing?” He was sick of talking about the obvious – the very thing we’ve all talked about for at least six years: there is a fascist movement in our country (not just authoritarianism) trying to intimidate us and stop free and open elections. MN Governor Tim Walz, in his exasperation, compared the fear, terror, and apparent murders by ICE with Anne Frank. Is it appropriate to talk about fascism and in addition make comparisons to the Holocaust? Will it help us confront this clear and present danger to our Republic? 

Godwin’s Law:   In 1990 Mike Godwin warned about easy comparisons to Hitler and the Holocaust. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." We have all been careful about being alert to cheap comparisons that in some cases are meant to score cheap political points and in others even have an antisemitic and denier agenda. I council teachers to encourage students studying the Holocaust to write journals and reflections but to not claim the experience. Meaning, it is important to not imagine oneself in the past and speculate. We were not there and do not have that right. Rather, the goal of education is to allow us to get beyond ourselves to recognize and perhaps witness the experience of the other. Michael Berenbaum correctly states that we have made the Holocaust the “gold standard” for evil. It is a reference point, a way for analysis that compares and importantly contrasts context, specificity, and scale. If we invoke any comparison to Hitler or the Holocaust we must be careful, concise, and honest. It is appropriate to call out the warning signs of fascism, to identify the ongoing process that we can interrupt. Using the Holocaust is much more problematic.

January 27   Vice President JD Vance marked International Holocaust Remembrance Day without mentioned Jews or condemning Nazis. That is a problem and a warning. At the same time, administration officials used the Holocaust to call out Governor Waltz’ comparisons to Anne Frank and the USHMM warned of false equivalency and deemed the comparison deeply offensive. Aren't both problematic? Children being targeted is horrific by itself and we do not need to make this out of context connection to make the point. But why would one comment rooted in an emotional, if not historical, connection to the past merit condemnation when another statement that purposefully ignored it is seen as free political speech? We seem to have difficulty separating the rise of fascism, antisemitism, and the Holocaust. In Nazi Germany these were intimately related and mutually informing. That is not the case here. What is similar is fascism.

Fascism    is not an ideology, but a reactionary political behavior – encouraging violent rejection of the status quo. The fascist leader, a “strongman”, capitalizes on discontent and promotes nation over universal values. The movement encourages violence and the creation of an enemy “other” from within. It's ideology focuses on recreated a mythical past with total loyalty to the cult of the leader. Rauch’s article in The Atlantic , “Yes, It’s Fascism” is an appropriate warning. Pointing out Trump’s desire to expand territory (something that was checked in his first administration); politicize justice; deploy paramilitaries; create a system of extra-legal warehouse concentration camps; while claiming unlimited power and moral judgement are red flag warnings. Frankly, he has stated numerous times that he supports the radicalized global far right, admires Hitler and dictators, and does not recognize international law or human rights. His Department of Labor posted a media slogan of "One Homeland, One People, One Heritage" which directly mimics Nazi Germany's slogan of "One People, One Realm, One Leader" while posting images mirroring those seen in Nazi Germany.

None of this is news and was easily predicable (and predicted). Fascism is not a singularly defined political system. Each country, Germany, Italy, Spain, shared guiding principles but it is expressed within its own country’s context. Here, our leader has tapped into misogyny, glorification of violence, vulgarity, social-Darwinism, racism, and even Nazi Germany. He has undermined the trust in institutions. He has impacted the police’s ability to do their work of protecting their communities within an expanding police state of actors enforcing federal agendas without standard police practices, discipline, and community engagement. ICE talks about "theaters of operation" as if they are in a war zone. They perceive themselves that way. Privacy and human rights are violated, all life becomes political, and Constitutional limits are destroyed. The “Blood and Soil” nationalism of Nazi Germany is ever-present but not the Holocaust. So yes, comparisons to other fascist states is appropriate especially when the actors are embracing it. 

Fascism and antisemitism have lives of their own. The Holocaust was its own unprecedented horror perpetrated by the Nazis and their collaborators. Although inappropriate and inaccurate, Governor Waltz was reflecting how effectively the Holocaust has been incorporated into our consciences. The problem was his failure to articulate or acknowledge the difference in context, scale, and outcome to what is happening here and now. It is a false equivalency in a practical and historical sense but not in an emotional one. To confront our challenges and to find solutions we have to be very clear about what it is we are facing. We are not in Nazi Germany but we are afraid that we hear distant echoes. We know that something is alarmingly wrong. We must reflect on and distinguish between the alarming signs of fascism and the history of the Nazi Holocaust. Using either for cynical, narrow political agendas is troubling and self-defeating. 

Holocaust Comparisons   This is much more problematic and probably confusing to many. We know “enough” about the Nazis to know to be frightened. But we are closer to 1933 than 1941. For many, that is the point. Our responsibility is to interrupt the process before we get to 1941. Unlike Germany in the 1930s, we seem to be doing just that. The protests in Minnesota are having an impact. That was not the case in 1933 Germany. Our historical context and experiences are different. We have tools at our disposal rooted in our revolutionary idea about the dignity and freedom of all humans. We have been through this before - especially during the Civil Rights movement. That does not mean that fascism in not a clear and present danger but it does make using the Holocaust as metaphor difficult. We must study and remember the Holocaust as we must study and remember slavery in this country. Each are distinct but also raise fundamental questions. 

My Turn   While suffering and fear are palpable, we are also effectively using the tools of democracy to resist. As we recognize our responsibility it is difficult to express our anger and horror by using someone else's experience as metaphor. We have enough in our own experience to recognize what is happening. It is more appropriate to talk about civil rights, the Civil War, the KKK and how we have continued the struggle towards the moral arc of justice. 

Jews were murdered during the Holocaust because the government sought to destroy Jews, Judaism, and the "Jewish spirit" (often the values of democracy). That is not what is currently happening in the U.S. Something else is. If we are motivated to express anger at injustice and invoke Nazis we must be cautious, consistent, and careful. We are not facing a German problem but an American one rooted in our own history. If we are to label someone a Nazi we can only have credibility if we simultaneously call out antisemitism. It is wrong to pay lip service to fighting antisemitism or using Jewish experiences as metaphorical props while not mentioning Jews during International Holocaust Remembrance Day. We must condemn HAMAS and the silencing of Jewish voices while recognizing the human rights and emphasizing our democratic ideals for all who live in our pluralistic society. Fascism and hate are a threat to all of us. When Jews feel threatened we all must be concerned. Twisting suffering to further individual agendas reflects a reductionist lack of integrity.

It is appropriate to recognize the warning signs of fascism which will continue to attack democratic norms and institutions unless checked. It is appropriate to recognize the evil of the Holocaust and be motivated by its memory to protect our neighbors. It is not appropriate to manipulate the memory of the Holocaust for our own agendas. The scale of the devastation cannot be the litmus test because we will always come up short. Decency requires us to recognize the difference. Responsibility requires us to articulate and reject the horror and suffering in our own context. Conscience requires us to resist.  

Three Speeches    

Churchill   Three speeches stand out for me today. Each shaped our role in the world. The third exposed our betrayal. In 1946 Winston Churchill warned that “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent…Police governments are prevailing in nearly every case.” It was the sobering articulation that Communist evil was subjugating the countries of Europe. He went on to say, “The United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a solemn moment for the American Democracy. For with primacy in power is also joined an awe-inspiring accountability to the future.” 

We chose to defend democracy against nationalism and build an international system supported by a rules-based order and international institutions. The system prevented a third world war and built peace and prosperity fostered by mutual assistance and trust. We were the symbol of freedom and hope, however imperfect the foundations. 

Reagan   In 1987 President Reagan stood at the Berlin Wall that represented fear, police state, and the Cold War and issued a challenge to the Soviet leader, rooted in confidence and hope, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” Democracy, with all its flaws, offered hope while the Soviets represented subjugation, oligarchical cruelty, political repression, incompetence, and corruption. Again, the U.S. was a symbol of hope for humankind. 

U.S. as Pariah   And now, the betrayal. At the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2026 our president threatened, attempted to humiliate, lied to, and dishonored the very nations that had stood with us and sacrificed for democracy and hope. With Greenland verbiage threatening to undermine NATO and the bizarre pay to play “Board of Peace” full of dictators and autocrats, the U.S. had become a pariah while the murderous Putin smiled. 

We now represent destabilization, nationalism, disregard of the international system, oligarchical corruption, tyrants over allies, violence, incompetence, arrogance, and intimidation. We have committed potential war crimes on the high seas and have begun to sanction the murder of our own people to benefit and enrich those in power. We have violated sovereignty at home and abroad. We have become the new threat to world order by undermining what had been established through the sacrifices of World War II and the Cold War. We are a threat to peace and hope. 

We have accepted the weak position of the bully that “might makes right”. There is a social-Darwinist justification (the Nazis also accepted Spencer’s self-justifying “survival of the fittest” as well) that asserts there are no limits or constraints beyond our own greed. From the beginning of the Republic, we knew this was self-destructive and defeating nonsense. Until now. 

Prime Minister Carney   His speech at Davos was as honest, concise, direct, and clear as Churchill and Reagan. It was not so much a warning as an acknowledgement of the catastrophic shift of the U.S. place/role in the world. We have rejected our responsibility.

PM Carney stated, “This bargain [rules-based order] no longer works. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition…more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited. You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration, when integration becomes the source of your subordination. For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection. We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim. This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes. So, we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnE2HTfDivQ

My Turn   We are faced with the challenge of our lifetime. To resist this self-destructive trend for short-term power and reassert our hard-won values. We can, as the PM stated, “build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states.” If we accept a world with growing gaps between poverty and wealth, limited access to goods and services, reliant of race-based or religious nationalism, territorial expansion, and a rejection of sovereignty, we accept a future of Thirty Years’ Wars, World War I, and World War II. 

Society functions by recognizing that we are in a social contract with one another. We cannot simply do whatever we want. We accept laws as reasonable. We obey traffic lights or push our shopping cart on the right side of the aisle. We navigate life together because we live together. The argument of the Trump administration that grabbing what you want because you can is fool’s gold. Our Republic was established to interfere with the mentality of exploitation and tyranny that caused so much suffering. The Bill of Rights is meant to protect the weak and vulnerable not the powerful.

And so, knowing we are called to pick up the mantle of all those who have sacrificed and offered hope before. Collectively we can defend the Republic and our role in the world. We must follow the legal process and when possible hold fair trails that judge the guilt of of our leaders and those who followed their orders. We must remain confident and resolute. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."  We must be the ones who make that happen. 

Did you know that Dr, Martin Luther King and Anne Frank were both born in 1929? Each faced similar hate. I will honor Dr. King today by admitting that I was wrong. The post I was working on today was to be marvelously informative about ICE and how we should perceive events. Instead, because I had the privilege to be at MLK Jr. Day Civic Leaders Breakfast, I had to take a breath and think about building "Beloved Communities". 

MLK Jr. Day Civic Leaders Breakfast   The annual event honors Dr, King and Keene's civil rights martyr Jonathan Daniels. It is sponsored by the city's human rights committee and the wonderful Community Kitchen. Our speaker was the remarkable Adar Cohen, originally from Keene.               

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZu16ZaLgJM

We had an honest, open, and thoughtful discussion dealing with anger, isolation, fear, and sense of powerless given the current polarization and violence. I mistakenly thought I should try to “explain” some of it and the misuse of labels. Instead, I was reminded to engage first. “Conflict loves speed” Adar reminded us. I will slow down. 

Listening not Labeling   I have taught that labeling people sets up a dangerous dynamic. I have seen it as a way to retrench an opponent into a defensive position.  Of course, it also retrenches me. Yes, we want to identify unjust actions but how we do it matters. Rather than attempting to justify or articulate my position I have learned to listen. Listening, in respectful humility (I continue to learn so much), allows me to grow and also listen to and actually hear why others are doing what they are doing. This is not to "explain it away" but to understand someone else's reality and culture. Really, I have found that listening (not judging or evaluating) creates a common space for growth and discussion. It's the teacher in me. (Shout out to our educators!) Not everyone is like me (thankfully) and although I may disagree with them or their actions, a better future – and present – cannot be built without respect. 

As a Holocaust educator I listen to stories and experiences that are not mine. Listening allows me to grow and also recognize that it is not my reality to claim but to be informed by. This will be a focus of the book I am currently working on. There is much anger, fear, and violence occurring in our polarized society. It is not the first time. We had a Civil War and the Civil Rights movement. Democracy gives us a way of perceiving the dangers and create safe spaces to wrestle with and mitigate it. Hearing others' questions is a big step forward.

Revealing Questions   I remember being at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem with an angry colleague seeking answers to justify his grievances. We were talking to Anne Frank’s friend Hannah Pick (“Lies Goosens” in Anne’s diary). As I listened to his query about “how did you get your revenge” I saw someone's pain and need to reach out to find answers. I could not expect the answer that was given.  Hannah responded, kindly, calmly, and with a smile, “I had children”. This assertion that revenge is to choose life and love and not victimhood still shapes my life. Admittedly, I do enjoy it when my hidden child friend Kati Preston puts it a little differently, “Every time I had a child it was like giving the finger to Hitler.” The connection is to choose, to assert, life itself. It also points out the necessity of taking care of ourselves and letting go of things you have no control over.

I have often talked about the student who tried to silence my presentation by yelling “Proud Boys Rule” and my instinctive response (helped by listening to an FBI hostage negotiator the night before) to listen, rather than to label and condemn. He was angry, fearful, and wondering about his future. And yet, he and I, because of mutual respect that developed by listening to each other, came to a different and better place. I must be genuinely curious about that other person. We must listen first, connect to things that are outside of our comfort zone, and trust that we have more in common than that which obviously separates us. Often, the common things are about safety, dignity, and the ability to express oneself to someone who will listen. If we hear statements as questions we can be less defensive, pause, and learn from the possibilities the question opened up. 

In one conversation with a student, he prefaced his comments by saying, “Are you going to cancel me?” if I speak. I reassured him that I don’t do that. But my response was defensive and judgmental. Luckily, it was also curious. I asked him why he felt that way, rather than trying to convince him he was wrong. We had a wonderful talk. If we want to build Dr, King’s vision of a “Beloved Community” we have to listen more and judge less. Nonviolence is not just being nice, it is a strategy to illuminate how destructive and self-destructive violence is. 

Hope of Nonviolence and Limits of Optimism   The Civil Rights movement succeeded because it choose nonviolence as both a tactical and strategic approach. One cannot fight hate and power with either. We can identify expressions of violence as rooted in hate and fear but we must avoid asserting that our way is better through expressions of hate and fear. We must offer hope. I used to teach AP European History and Voltaire's Candide. In it, Pangloss (windbag) is the optimist who continues to assert his optimistic view that everything is great and that we live in the "best of all possible worlds". This, despite religious bigotry, violence, and even the destruction of Lisbon through an earthquake. It is vapid. Instead, we can choose hope. Hope identifies the problems and recognizes that we can fix them. 

In our democratic life we must choose dignity. It is not, as Adar stated, simply about smiling or giving out flowers. However nice that may be, we need to do more and act strategically with our convictions. If we listen, engage eye to eye with curiosity, and accept that the work is not easy, then we can build a common ground, a space where education, not self-defensiveness, can happen. Teachers instinctively know this. Rather than ask, why are you doing this? We can ask, what is important to you? What is one thing you’d like to tell me about yourself? 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1aEG9ghzyw/?mibextid=wwXIfr

My Turn   I recently returned from our annual meeting of the Association of Holocaust Organizations at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC. Like this morning, these people sustain me and help me get beyond myself. Dare yourself to find a group that offers you growth and support. In humility I made my way to the MLK monument in DC. There, I recognized that I am in his shadow. That I cannot hesitate from the work. That his vision of active nonviolence points us in the direction of hope. I am a person of great hope but little optimism.

We Need Each Other    Having just returned from the annual Association of Holocaust Organizations’ (AHO) winter conference I am renewed. Our subject matter is difficult, emotional, and can be overwhelming. And then we remember that our work is to resist and counter antisemitism, hate, fascism and authoritarianism with justice, democracy, and human dignity. We know that education and remembrance can give us hope by identifying the work that needs to be done. It is also important to be reminded that we need others for a successful and fulfilling life. 

From isolation   In the early years of Holocaust education, devoted individuals worked to study, teach, and remember the Holocaust. Often, we worked in isolation. Now we have built the discipline and its support network that provides resources for teachers and encouragement and support for each other. In my previous role I am very proud that I was able to share these resources and support networks with teachers - especially in our extraordinary residential summer institutes. We all recognize the crucial role our work plays in sustaining democratic life. 

Serving on the AHO Board is one of the great honors of my life and one of the most rewarding. These wonderful people sustain me. This is not news to my colleagues and friends as I try to tell them how much they matter every time we are together. I admire their courage, wisdom, skill, dedication, and hope. 

Democratic Life, Together   We can feel overwhelmed these days. Admittedly, seeing the National Guard in and around our hotel was a bit strange, even uncomfortable. But we are not alone. Countering hate, violence, and authoritarianism must be done collectively and with calm and steady confidence. Washington DC enshrines these ideals and also warns and challenges us with the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and the memorial to Dr. Martin Luther King. 

Not Alone   We must continue to seek out and stand with allies. My AHO friends have helped me through crisis and I have come out stronger. Find your allies. We must not feel isolated or represent democratic freedom and dignity alone. We also know that we are part of the long arc of history and that those that came before stand behind and alongside of us. We must remember their wisdom and courage. 

In Granite   I finally fulfilled two bucket list items: visiting the FDR/ER and MLK memorials. In granite, FDR's statements guide us: "Among American citizens there should be no forgotten men and no forgotten races". "We must scrupulously guard the civil rights and civil liberties of all citizens, whatever their background. We must remember that any oppression, any injustice, any hatred, is a wedge designed to attack our civilization." "We have faith that future generations will know that here, in the middle of the twentieth century, there came a time when men of good will found a way to unite, and produce, and fight to destroy the forces of ignorance, and intolerance, and slavery, and war."

Getting terms and history correct are important for democracies. We throw around labels too loosely to silence the opposition rather than engage in conversation. There is a lot at stake when fascist violence destroys institutions, individuals, human rights and dignity and leads to catastrophic ends.  What exactly is fascism and is the United Stated drifting towards it? 

What is fascism?    It is not an ideology, but a reactionary political behavior – encouraging violent rejection of the status quo by embracing an authoritarian leader. Support comes from below as the fascist leader capitalizes on discontent and promotes “masculine” and exclusive populist nationalism over universal values. Note, the key is to reduce complexity to easy "labels". Fascism began with Mussolini and was twisted into Nazism by Hitler. Nazism focused on master races and “inferior”, dangerous peoples. Racism (often White Replacement “Theory”) is used to show that democratic ideals of freedom, inclusion, diversity, and equality are a threat. Nazis oppose any initiatives or institutions that are racially, ethnically, or religiously diverse. Policies for racial purity and unity are promoted while those defined as not part of the “nation” are removed. Identifying and targeting “enemies” is a unifying cause and Nazis imprisons and/or murder opposition and minority group leaders, critics, artists, comedians... 

Labels can be helpful or dangerous. They can identify something but also reduce something, not engage in its complexities, and dismiss or accept it. To have thoughtful discussion, not just condemnation or a sense of powerlessness, let's explore the poison of fascism.

Fascism 101 “bullet” points 

Fascism:

• Is centered on cult of a perceived redemptive, “infallible” leader. Rampant cronyism and corruption are built in. Loyalty to the leader becomes paramount for advancement, payoffs, and safety. Loyalty often becomes more important than competence. Once that narrow path is chosen it is difficult to leave it. 
• Strengthens the power of the state by subordinating the interests of individuals. Rejection/villainization of democracy, democratic institutions, and norms.
• Derives political power by questioning reality, endorsing myth and rage, promoting lies; controlling of mass media, distorting belief in “truth”, promoting an alternate reality fixated on national decline and the blaming and rejection of liberal democracy.
• Is rooted in “action” and instinct over thought or reflection. Not focused on articulating doctrine, programs, ideas, or ideology (although the Nazis clearly do).
• Is fixated/obsessed with perceived national decline, humiliation, victimhood, national security, crime and punishment. It fosters a sense of the “nation” under attack.
• Capitalizes on feelings about master races, their perceived “unjust” lot and rightful dominance over “inferior” peoples. Racism (often White Replacement “Theory”) is used to show that democratic ideals of freedom, inclusion, diversity, and equality are a threat. Opposes any initiatives or institutions that are racially, ethnically, or religiously diverse.
• Pursues policies for racial purity and unity while removing those defined as not part of the nation. Identifying and targeting “enemies” or scapegoats as a unifying cause. Imprisons and/or murders opposition and minority group leaders, critics, artists, comedians... It is an anti-liberal, (anti-Communist) movement.
• Focuses on the supremacy of the military and the embrace of paramilitarism in an uneasy, but effective collaboration with traditional elites.
• Arm people and encourage, justify, and glorify violence as “redemptive”. Often seek to expand territory through armed conflict. Often this comes from necessity as fascist policies tend to restrict markets and they are pressured to take what they need from other countries.
• Disdains human rights and embraces rampant sexism.
• Intertwines religion and government.
• Protects corporate power and suppresses labor power.
• Conducts fraudulent elections, undermines democratic norms, and creates of a one-party state.
• Rejects international systems and institutions.

Appeal? Why does this become permissible?    Some people do not like democratic restrictions and responsibilities and enjoy seeking personal gain at the expense of others. Some are racist, enjoy the appeal of violence, and/or like the permission structure. But for the majority of followers, seeking explanations in a confusing world, accepting that “bad” things “just happen” to them because of who they are makes no sense. Trauma (traditional lifestyles are uprooted or threatened by technological changes, wealth inequity, unequal access to goods and services, and/or changing social mores) allows the embrace of the irrational. It would be a mistake to reduce its followers to racists. Followers are often reclaiming a sense of self-worth and dignity by venting against a world in which they feel unfairly judged and victimized. Contempt for truth and reason (reinforced by mass/social media) reflects the despair of the follower who is frightened, feels disempowered, and may be socially and spiritually adrift and cynical. Political rallies reinforce a sense of belonging, are fueled by confirmation bias, and encourages violence, rejection of and dominance over the so-called “other”. We need to reject those promoting violence and reflect with empathy, not labels, about those who are drawn to fascism (or any extremism including Communism). Justice, law and order, democratic principles and dignity are paramount. As historian John Meacham puts it, "The opposite of fear is hope." 

My Turn   Just because someone acts like a fascist does not make them a Nazi - yet. Fascism is destabilizing because it undermines democratic law, checks and balances, and human dignity. There are certainly echoes of fascism in the United States. Each bullet point requires reflection - both for what echoes and what is different. Having said that, we are not yet a fascist state. Unlike Hitler, but more like Mussolini, our leader has no guiding ideology other than personal power, greed, and corruption.  Some checks remain and Americans are slowly beginning to wake up. Elections continue. Fundamentally, despite ignorance of history and the defunding of education Americans, with all our human flaws, gravitate towards decency and freedom. 

It is not surprising that a leader who spouts antisemitism, fascism, white supremacy, and conspiracy theories has recruited Nazis, racists, antidemocratic, corrupt, anti-immigrant isolationists and less than competent acolytes.  It’s not surprising that he readily utilizes the tools of fascists – including war, violence, and the glorification of violence.  That does not make him a fascist – more of a pathetic wannabe “strongman” who uses whatever he can, including fascism, for his own ends. 

A good number of his supporters do not fit into the categories listed. They are seeking dignity and often just want to be left alone. The glue - either from fear, greed, perceptions of hope, or reliance on presidential; pardons - is the leader. It is not sustainable. The president is old and his schtick is getting old too. Nothing stays the same. Nothing is inevitable. We cannot despair. Will enough destruction and corruption pull his supporters away in time for the mid-terms? I hold out hope. Dignity and freedom are things Americans instinctively understand – no matter how long it takes to realize. It really is up to us whether we accelerate towards self-destructive fascism or reclaim our democratic experiment. The mid terms in November will go a long way in determining that. It is a new year. If we can hold on to our idealism through the cold of winter, continue to fight against tyranny, we can honor those who did so during the American Revolution at Trenton, Princeton, and Valley Forge. 

However, given Steven Miller's articulation of President Trump's policies this evening, we may be running out of time. He painted a social-Darwinistic world where might equals right, where ideals and virtue do not matter, where humanity is held in contempt, and that because we have power we can use it. It is a worldview shared by Putin and Hitler. What has kept us prosperous with relatively stable international markets and law and away from global warfare have been the structures created after World War II. The Trump administration is in the process of openly throwing all that away. It is a disturbing future if we are the country undermining sovereignty, democracy (tomorrow is January 6), reject treaties, allies, restraint, judgement, and the rule of law. We are at the threshold and there is no more wishing it away. We turn instead to our ideals. Like Ukraine, we fight because it is right to do so. To quote Thomas Paine from the American Revolution: "A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody."   "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." 

Ken Burns   I am grateful for Ken Burns. His film on the American Revolution reminds us of our struggle to aspire to something better than being subjects - to seek human dignity rooted in democratic freedom. He shows how we must continually ask questions of ourselves and not avoid the complexities and contradictions. In a November interview with Nicholle Wallace he said the great American question is, “Where do you want to live, in Bedford Falls or Pottersville?” It's a question about dignity and responsibility. Do we accept an amoral universe where the powerful dictate our choices or do we live with a common purpose, bound together in a complex social contract rooted in decency and hope? I am a hopeful person not an optimist. My former students might remember the metaphorical optimist Pangloss (the windbag) from Candide. An optimist ignores negative realities, chooses only to see the good, and passively expects things to work out for the best. A person with hope sees the evil, the despair, the pain and suffering but insists that we must and can do better. "The American Revolution" and "It's A Wonderful Life" challenge us to hope. 

Season of Lights   This week, on the first night of Hanukkah (Festival of Lamps/Lights) Jews were attacked and murdered on Sydney's Bondi Beach. Ahmed al Ahmed, a Muslim whose refugee parents had just arrived from Syria, wrestled one of the guns away from the younger attacker and was shot twice himself. In the darkness we try to hold on to the light, to hope, and release ourselves from religious hate and bigotry that leads to destruction. We seek to resist despair and darkness. 

During this holiday season where our towns and homes are brightened and made more beautiful by various lights, we embrace each other with love and hope. We bring light into the world by rejecting hate, antisemitism, and despair. When Jews or any group is targeted we recognize that all our freedoms are being attacked. We must be the voices that provide hope and leadership by embracing, with confidence, democratic values that dignify life. We know that we are all vulnerable and in need of support and help. Leading by example is crucial.

Bedford Falls    In Frank Capra’s “It’s a Wonderful Life” we are introduced to Bedford Falls (shout out to upstate New York where my son went to college). People face (as individuals or as immigrants), every day struggles, setbacks, loneliness, helplessness, frustrations, and joys. At first, George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart) feels increasingly trapped, his dreams smothered, as the demands and responsibilities of life keep asking more of him. The joy and “wonderfulness” emerge when George comes to realize that his life and self-worth is tied to the common purpose of others – family, colleagues, spouse, and those who depend on him. This was true not only in the movie but in his own life. 

Jimmy Stewart   This was Stewart’s first film after serving in World War II. He had flown twenty combat missions and in 1944, over the German city of Gotha, lost members of his crew. A hole had been blown under his pilot’s chair, and he got his plane home through at least twenty degrees below zero temperatures. He had fought the Nazis but felt responsible for the men he lost. He had come home with a mixture of survivor’s guilt and post traumatic stress. His service and sacrifice was noble but came at a cost. Could he, should he, reclaim his acting life? Donna Reed would help him reclaim his sense of self on and off camera. 

As Bailey's world collapses - and he feels as if he has failed himself, his family, and those who rely on him, he falls into despair that echoed his own life. The most powerful moment of the film was caught in one take. As his world crumbles and he feels that he has failed everyone and himself, Stewart unravels. The utter despair Stewart portrays is real and transcends film and life. He is rediscovering his acting by tapping into his own deeply personal experience of the war. As George breaks down, so too does Stewart. He is facing the idea that he is worth more dead than alive. It was an outcome of his post traumatic stress and decency. The character and the actor became one and thereby enriched both. Throughout it, Stewart was thinking of all those who might feel this way. It was his burden of leadership. Donna Reed knew that he did not need rescuing, but support.  She was his steady rock during the filming. He was not alone.

Pottersville   The loneliness and despair that is Potterville is produced by the desires and power of one man who seeks power by destroying social bonds that bring meaning and joy to life. We can see that Potter’s greed for power, wealth, and materialism make him a lonely man. As he "wins" we lose. I think we are all sensing the growing possibility of a future Pottersville, a place of hate and fear, coldness, destroyed lives, and exploitation make us subjects. It is a place where no one has self-worth and people are isolated from each other’s. It is a window into a world where democratic values are undermined by tyranny. As Americans, we get that. Interestingly, the FBI at the time didn't. It warned that the film was spewing Hollywood "Communism" by attacking capitalism. OK, so much for dealing with complexity. And that's the point, the cautionary tale. The immediate and narrow ideological goal of the FBI was to fight Communism which has proven to be a poisonous and destructive ideology. It would take a few more years to realize that we weren't just fighting communism but fighting for democracy. The focus of the movie is not on Mr. Potter despite the FBI's twisted logic to defend him. Instead, it is a story of hope focused on the rediscovered strength and resiliency of Bailey. 

And that is why we cannot despair. Like Stewart and Reed we must rely on each other to rediscover our worth. Ken Burns stated it clearly, “I want to live in Bedford Falls. I don’t want to live in Pottersville.” Pottersville is a lonely, dark place. We must take care of each other in all of our complex, contradictory humanness. We cannot target each other as enemies nor tolerate those who tell us to do so. We must find ways of living together, or as Ben Franklin said as The Declaration of Independence was signed, "We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." 

My Turn   “It's a Wonderful Life” is a story of light in the darkness. Each time I watch Stewart break down as George Bailey I tear up. (Let's not even talk about the ending!) I am reminded of all those who sacrificed so much, fighting the Nazis or the enemies of freedom, and hope I do not betray them.  I then find the courage to say that I will not. I see his, mine, our vulnerability and know that the Potters of the world cannot win by attacking and exploiting it. To hope, we must recognize our mutual vulnerability, help and not label, and resist tyranny. 

Stewart’s real encounter with darkness gives us the way forward, the way to embrace the light of the season. And so, to quote Elie Wiesel, we have the duty "to reject despair". We do that with honesty, courage, and mutual dependence. “It’s a Wonderful Life” because of those around us. 

The Christian story of the Nativity is all about vulnerability - of refugees seeking shelter. We light a candle when we refuse to accept the brutality of Bondi Beach or the vileness our government when they separate and deport people (including veterans) or accumulate wealth and power at the expense of others. Evilness comes from those who try to snuff out the light within us or around us. They lose if we rely on each other and accept the difficult proposition that we must face despair to overcome it. We must bring the gift of ourself to the manger and to those seeking warmth and dignity. 

Self-inflicted Damage: Eugenics and White Replacement    I just made my annual presentation at a NH high school about eugenics in the U.S. and "racial hygiene" Nazi Germany. As always, their questions and reactions were inspiring and complex. They energize me and give me hope. It’s always fun, and disturbing, to begin by raising the question, “How did an elitist, antidemocratic, race-based, white supremacist, antisemitic ideology become popular and shape the norms and laws of the U.S. in the 1920s and 1930s?” Admittedly, I’m pretty satisfied with how I got that into one sentence. More to the point, what happens if hate goes unchecked? What ethical questions are raised when we discover that American eugenics had a direct impact on Nazi “race hygiene” which escalated to mass murder? Why are eugenics language and ideas reemerging to justify hate of immigrants? or the "genetic superiority" of those certain individuals or groups? Why is antisemitism part of it? I’m not so smugly satisfied anymore. 

Hate Tells Us Nothing About the Target Group    I’m always asked to talk about antisemitism, hate, and bigotry and why certain groups are targeted. I always begin by saying that we will learn nothing about a targeted group when talking about hate. Instead, we will learn about the variety of intersecting and individual motives, fears, and needs of the believer. Blaming the victim is an easy way to justify hate that is destructive and importantly self-destructing. Confederate states committed treason and caused the blood-letting of the Civil War for two reasons: rejecting the election of 1860 and preserving the institution of slavery.  Each succeeding state spelled that out clearly. The end result? Devastation. It is no coincidence that Berlin in 1945 resembled Richmond, Virginia of 1865. Hate is empowering but destroys us. 

Eugenics    Eugenics was the movement to improve society by fixing its genes, a sort of animal husbandry for humans. Who should reproduce? Who was valuable? Who was a threat? Who gets to decide? Eugenics emerged out of rapid social changes brought about by the Industrial and French Revolutions which would continue through the 19^th century. Rapid urbanization brought poverty, disease, exploitation, crime, despair, but also great fortunes for some. Were there enough resources for all? Do we have a responsibility towards those less fortunate? Were traditional power bases and important people safe? A lot of wealthy well educated white guys didn’t think so. 

Origins    With Darwin’s Origins of the Species people began to think of how the rules of nature applied to human life. More to the point, how did this new scientific thinking give a framework to justify maintaining privilege? British thinkers created the idea of “positive eugenics” (that the right sort of people (white, healthy, likely educated and financially sound) should reproduce and “negative eugenics” (that less “valuable” people: workers, the poor, infirmed, weak) should be eliminated. Adopting the idea of “survival of the fittest” gave a convenient “natural” argument (no longer tied to traditional moral constraints) that resources should be diverted from the “worthless” to the “valuable”. This coincided with the social safety net shifting from being the responsibility of traditional care givers (churches, philanthropy...) to the state.  As leaders wrestled with budgets and the ways to solve problems in society, eugenics offered the idea that undesirable traits and behaviors were inherited and genetic. It was not necessarily about choice or even environment. Although debunked now (especially the focus in America that a single gene determines certain behaviors) powerful people came to see their role as containing bad behavior, mitigating it, and if necessary, eliminating its genetic origin through sterilization or just letting "nature" take its course by letting the poor die. 

German Empire    In Southwest Africa (Namibia today) colonial German troops suppressed the Herero and Namaqua peoples at the turn of the 20^th century. Dripping in nationalism (Germany was unified through three wars ending in 1871) and racism, Germans set out to prove why their race was superior. German scientists conducted medical experiments in concentration camps and there was even a killing camp, Shark Island. Intermarriage between natives and Germans was forbidden. If this sounds familiar, Hermann Göring’s father was the governor of SW Africa and some of the post World War I leaders of paramilitaries were veterans of the colonial slaughter. Nazis later dressed up in their brown colonial uniforms in part to relive the imaged good old days and to to affirm their shaky sense of self by projecting racial superiority. 

The U.S.    While Britain and Germany had their eugenic thinkers it remained a relatively small clique of elites. The U.S. showed how these ideas could become mainstream. There were a variety of groups (often with nothing in common) that accepted eugenic language, some with zeal and others out of convenience. Former Confederates, for example, could keep building the “Lost Cause” myth and gain power by playing the race card; antisemitism was always a bedrock, as was anti-immigrant sentiment. Henry Goddard even categorized people's worth by using IQ tests he borrowed from France to create tiers of "moral defectives." "Idiots" were people with a "mental age" of 2 or less. "Imbeciles" were those of a mental age of 3-7. The most dangerous (because they could function and pass themselves off as valuable) were "Morons" with a mental age of 8-12.     

Anti-Immigrant Hate    There’s much to discuss, but I will focus here on post-Civil War America’s embrace of hate of the immigrant. The Statue of Liberty and its lamp of hope went up in New York harbor in 1886. Immigrants had been coming in (mostly from Europe) to seek opportunity and help replenish and rebuild America. However, by 1879, the U.S. barred Chinese and Asians from citizenship and in 1882 passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. Targeting Chinese workers who built the transcontinental railway allowed former Confederates to find allies with racists in California. As Jews began to arrive in the 1880s (escaping the pogroms) Boston brahmans created the Immigration Restriction League. Senator Lodge talked about the usefulness of racism and the League (finding allies in the KKK and elsewhere) saw a threat to the nation’s “race and blood” from foreigners they saw as “breeds” or “species” not individuals seeking safety. "Build a wall" comes from this period. When President Trump uses 'moron" to bully reporters and talks this week about Somalis as “filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime” he is echoing the language of the 1880s. Steven Miller adds to the diarrhea of hate that frames people as inferior species, "You are not just importing individuals. You are importing societies…” "What do we think is going to happen?” 

Hate Education and Immigrants?    Racists often attack education – a main vehicle for democratic dignity and progress. Eugenicists embraced antidemocratic ideas and embraced hate through “scientific” justifications. Of course, they ignored facts that got in the way. A 1917 U.S. Army IQ test administered to many immigrants joining the ranks was designed and twisted to reinforce racial prejudice. Indeed, the “data” collected would be the basis of one of the most important Nazi eugenics books. What they ignored was that blacks who had migrated north and had access to philanthropically funded schools performed much better than poor whites from Mississippi, Arkansas, Kentucky who did not have access to education. Maybe this wasn’t about genes and species after all! American eugenicists wondered why they “have no place to drive the Jews to” and remembered in the good old days, “they burned the witches but it seems to be against the mores to burn any considerable part of our population.” They also argued that “The laws of nature require the obliteration of the unfit, and human life is valuable only when it is of use to the community or race.” Hitler was impressed and praised American “Nordic pride in its politics” (referencing immigration restriction laws). The KKK with its slogan “America First” and other anti-immigrant allies in Boston and elsewhere passed the race-based 1924 Quota Immigration Law. 

My Turn    “What is going to happen to us?” By the late 1930s America (due in large part to the levelling effect of the Great Depression) began to sour on eugenics. Were social position and prosperity really indicators of genetic superiority? Eugenics was more about prejudice than science. Funds dried up while researchers discovered that there were no scientific justifications for sterilizing the “feeble-minded”. As we started to let go the Nazis grabbed it. By 1945 they had killed millions and destroyed themselves fighting their war of “race and space”. 

The U.S., and its Allies won World War II. Our strength was our diversity that offered new solutions and commitment to the cause of building a more just Republic. As was true since the American Revolution, Christian, Jew, Muslim, indigenous men and women fought. Over 500,000 Hispanics served valiantly. The Tuskegee Airmen and the 761^st “Black Panthers” continued valuable black service. Indigenous peoples were code talkers and Japanese Americans (despite or because of their families being locked up in U.S. concentration camps) produced the most highly decorated combat unit in U.S. history, the 442^nd Nisei. My good fortune was to work with “Ritchie Boys” mostly ex-pat Jewish German refugees whose service provided about 67% of the battlefield intelligence that helped us beat the Germans in Europe. 

Those who vilify immigrants and refugees for personal political gain, grown from fear and hate, betray and weaken us. It is in our self-interest to foster freedom and diversity. It is purposefully self-destructive (although perhaps self-enriching) to extinguish the lamp beside the “golden door” of American freedom. 

Once while traveling in Israel my driver passed a blackened, dying forest. I thought maybe a missile had fallen. Oh no, he reassured me. We were stupid. Over there we planted one type of tree. A disease came and they died. Look over there. He pointed to a thriving forest full of a variety of trees. We got smarter. Now when a disease comes, only a few die, and the forest is strong enough to thrive. It is the perfect metaphor.    

The Nuremberg Trials: Selective Judgement    The film Nuremberg has made viewers question and reflect on how a democracy descended into fascism. What sorts of personalities and decision-making shape the violence? Simultaneously we are confronted with potential war crimes by our own Department of Defense with indiscriminatory attacks on boats in the Caribbean and the follow-up killing of the survivors. The media has tried to bring our attention to military ethics and codes of conduct that are under assault by using the cases of Nazi U-852 commander Heinz-Wilhelm Eck who was executed for the war crime of gunning down survivors of a freighter n 1944; U.S. Lieutenant William Calley’s conviction of murder for the Mi Lai massacre of 1968, and the crimes committed by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison in 2003. “I was only following orders” is not a defense. Law and ethics are the guardrails of functioning democracies. 

Murder is a crime, but is mass murder different?    Raphael Lemkin was a student at the University of Lwów Law School in post-World War I Poland. He was disturbed by the Armenian genocide that was in the news in 1921 because one traumatized survivor, Soghomon Tehlirian, was on trial for assassinating Talaat Pasha, the former Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire. Why was he on trial while Pasha, who was convicted in absentia and sentenced to death in the Turkish courts-martial of 1919–20 lived freely in Berlin under an assumed name? Tehlirian was acquitted on grounds of temporary insanity after a brief two-day trial. In 1926 Symon Petliura, alleged overseer of a Ukrainian pogrom in 1918, was killed in Paris by traumatized survivor Shalom Schwarzbard. Like Tehlirian, he was acquitted on the grounds of temporary insanity. Why were individuals forced to take the law into their own hands? Because at the time there were few international laws to punish mass atrocity. States could do what they wished to do to anyone within their borders. Why? 

State Sovereignty    The 1648 Treaty of Westphalia ended the Christian internecine devastation of the Thirty Years’ War. The treaty established the concept of state sovereignty, that the state has supreme, exclusive authority over its territory and domestic affairs. This would create an international system of states meant to maintain order through a balance of power and through avoiding religious wars. This was one of the guiding concepts in both our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. The First Amendment, adding the idea of individual rights of citizens, created the foundation principle of freedom of speech to prevent laws “respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  

Can States Legally Commit Atrocities?    When Lemkin asked his professor Juliusz Makarewicz about his dilemma about Tehlirian and Tallat Pasha he responded, “Consider the case of the farmer who owns a flock of chickens… He kills them and this is his business. If you interfere, you are trespassing.” Makarewicz was a Polish nationalist who resented the 1919 Minorities Treaty of the Treaty of Versailles that singled out Poland for its attack on minorities, especially Jews, after the First World War. He was arguing that states had the right to protect themselves (or their perception of national identity) when, as he saw it, it was being threatened. He was arguing state sovereignty. 

Nuremberg Trials In 1945    Justice Jackson opened the trial of top Nazis by stating, “The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated.” But what crime would Nazis be tried for? It was decided to charge them with war crimes and crimes against humanity. 

War Crimes (based on the Lieber Code of the Union Army in 1863 and Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907) are defined as acts between sovereign states in war/armed conflict violating the laws or   customs of war (murder, killing civilians, child soldiers, destruction without military necessity…) 

Crimes Against Humanity (1945 Nuremberg and UN Charter) are defined as “Murder, extermination,   enslavement, deprivation, or any other inhuman act committed against an entire civilian population   before or during the war, or persecution for political, racial, or religious reasons.” In other words,   crimes directed against any civilian or an identifiable part of a civilian population in war or peacetime.   The trials would judge individual actions committed outside of Germany that violated other nations’   sovereignty. Were no crimes committed in Germany from 1933-1939? 

Genocide    Since 1933 Lemkin had tried to give a name to intentional mass murder. By 1944 he had combine the Greek “geno” (race/tribe) with the Latin “cide” (murder). The 1948 U.N. Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (ratified in 1951) promised to “prevent and punish” genocide.  The new legal concept was meant to be preventative: to identify escalating processes of targeting groups (even within sovereign states), to identify and project intent, and to stop it before the killing began. We will discuss this later. 

My Turn    We are about to judge if our Department of Defense has committed war crimes or just straight out murder because we “cannot tolerate their being ignored.”  Justice Jackson continued his introductory remarks by observing, “That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that Power has ever paid to reason.” We are being challenged to stand up for our ideals and the rights of citizens against unchecked power. It is truly patriotic to ask difficult questions of those in power and of ourselves. We remember that our government speaks for us, We the People. Legal standards, restraint, responsibility for and dignity to others, not their exploitation or destruction, is the work of democracy.

Hyperbole?   In January 2016 Presidential candidate Donald Trump stated, “I Could ... Shoot Somebody, And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters”. According to the Washington Post this week, Secretary of Defense Hegseth ordered the military to “kill everyone” who had survived an attack on an alleged drug smuggling boat. This, after firing many top JAG lawyers and after announcing to top U.S. military leaders forcibly assembled at Quantico in September 2025 that the U.S. would no longer be bound by the military rules of engagement. Are we about to cross the line into being a lawless nation running at the whim of its leaders? Are we to discard the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and let violence overcome legal constraint? Hyperbole you say? It is astonishing that this is the actual opening of a blog in the U.S. in 2025. We are entering the next phase to test the strength of Madisonian checks and balances democracy. I believe we will pass this test. It is important to point out, however, that Germans did not in the 1930s.

Hitler Given Power    Hitler is given power legally In 1923 while in prison for treason (trying to overthrow the government with a coup) Hitler wrote his whiny, self-pitying, hate rant Mein Kampf (My Struggle) that not only invented a false political biography but shifted his political calculations. Rather than seize power he would get it by working within the system, by getting the Nazi Party to win elections. Then he would be able to destroy the state from within. Hitler went from defeat in November 1932 to being named chancellor by a willing coalition of conservatives in a few weeks in the beginning of 1933. President Hindenburg, convinced by backroom plotting by self-serving elites, had given Hitler power legally. It did not take him long to overcome the checks and balances of the Weimar Republic and establish his destructive dictatorship. 

Ending Democracy From Within    Hitler’s first discussion with his cabinet on January 30 was about how to create an Enabling Law to circumvent the Reichstag and let Hitler rule by decree. Conservatives were fine with that. A few days later (February 2) the cabinet adopted an emergency decree for “the protection of the German people” giving police enormous power. Two days later the cabinet adopted an emergency decree to arrest striking workers. They were moving quickly, and conservatives were pleased that they had secured the power to destroy the Left – especially the Communists. Soon it became clear that Hitler had no intention of playing by their rules. Frick, the new Nazi Minister of the Interior, replaced SPD (Social Democrat) leaders with Nazis, mandated prayer in schools, and gave the University of Jena a chair in racial sciences. 

The Reichstag Fire Decree    Hitler’s consolidation of power began in earnest on February 27, 1933. It was one week before the March 5 federal elections. Tension had been building and the SA brownshirts were anxious to fight their opponents, the Communists. And then, the Reichstag was set on fire. Hitler learned of the fire and was driven to the site. Like any good narcissistic leader, he was enraged and took the fire as a personal attack. Hermann Göring, suspiciously on scene (speculation remains that he ordered a paramilitary unit to set the fire), rushed over and convinced Hitler to let him team up with SA to destroy the Left. Hitler responded in fury: “Now there’s no mercy…every communist functionary will be shot where he’s found. The Communist members of the Reichstag must be hanged this very night!” It was a call for political vengeance, but the police hesitated. 

Law and Order    On February 28, Hitler decided to act within the constitution. He blamed the Communists for the fire and urged a ready and willing Hindenburg to use Article 48 to suspend civil liberties. The “Decree for the Protection of Volk and State.” The “Reichstag Fire Decree” enabled Hitler to suspend the constitution and curtail personal freedoms: freedom of opinion; freedom of press; and the freedom to organize and assemble. It dramatically increased state and police intervention in private life: censoring mail, listening to phones, searches without warrant. President Hindenburg approved a new legal category “protective custody” (Schutzhaft) for political dissenters. All criticism of the government was outlawed, and political ‘gossip’ was now seen as dangerous. Hitler was using legislative loopholes to destroy democracy from within. Hitler utilized the police to arrest political opponents. 4,000 political opponents were arrested that night. Within months, the police arrested more than 20,000 people in Prussia; 40,000 political opponents fled to neighboring countries; and within weeks, 25,000 were arrested and tortured in emerging “wild” concentration camps (80,000 total by end of the year). The disunified Left realized this was no longer politics, but annihilation. Special courts were introduced to speed up the process and avoid entanglements and delays. 

Destroying the Legislature    On March 23, Hitler moved to pass an enabling act, the “Law to Remove the Distress of the German People and the State” (a nice, cynical touch) that would transfer legislative authority from the parliament to the Reich Chancellery. To pass, it required a two-thirds majority and 66% of deputies to be present. But many ministers had been intimidated and were not present (including at least 26 SPD hiding for their lives). How to overcome this?  Göring, as President of the Reichstag, simply created a new procedure deeming any absent members as “present” to ensure the “constitutionality” of the vote. The Nazis were still 31 votes short. Now what?  The Nazis lobbied the remaining obstacle, the German Center Party (Catholic). Hitler promised them that he would only use his new powers in emergencies and promised the Catholic Church that they could operate without any interference. Hitler enjoyed lying to those willing to believe him. Thinking they had secured a win, the Catholic Centre Party gave the Nazis the required votes and the enabling act was passed with 441 deputies voting in favor with 94 nay votes. The Reichstag had voted itself out of power. The Enabling Act would be renewed three times in the coming years and was the pseudo-legal foundation for Hitler’s actions. 

Enter, the Courts    The courts, not for the first or last time, shaped and helped Hitler to consolidate his power.  Justice Franz Schlegelberger, State Secretary in Ministry of Justice, played a key role. He had been an opponent of the Reichstag Fire Decree arguing that it was unconstitutional to retroactively impose the death penalty for arson on the unstable Dutch tourist the Nazis had arrested for the crime. The judge was not so concerned with the decree as much as he was concerned that it was retroactive, and thus, in his mind, illegal. This is one of the main reasons the Nazis learned to work within the system. Schlegelberger had trained during the Kaiser Reich and was attracted to the idea of an authoritarian legal order that could maintain social order. He gravitated towards Hitler and believed that individualism undermined the state’s ability to keep order. He would not challenge decisive actions by Hitler if they followed legal forms. Thus, in ruling about the legality of the Enabling Act, he embraced the pseudo-legality of the manipulation of the vote (at least they had gone through a process) and ruled that with the elimination of parliamentary oversight of legislation, the government could now act “with boldness, quickness [and] richness.” 

“Working Towards the Führer”    It was the cooperation from the public that made Nazi control possible. There were relatively few police per capita, and people quickly learned that all they needed to do was to obey the law, try to stay out of trouble, and promote their own interests. Werner Willikens, a bureaucrat in the Prussian Agricultural Ministry, summed it up best by saying, “…it is the duty of every single person to attempt, in the spirit of the leader, to works towards him… which would lead to enjoying “the finest reward” of “suddenly attaining the legal confirmation of his work.” 

The “Night of the Long Knives”    In June 1934 Hitler ordered (and was present) at the slaughter of the leaders of his paramilitary, the Brownshirts, and some of his political opponents. It was outright murder, but Hitler claimed he hadj to do this to defend the nation (from the very group he had utilized?) Hitler had decided to side with the powerful elites (Army, businessmen, bankers…) over his own thugs in order to advance his power. Is Murder Illegal? Even President Hindenburg was impressed by Hitler’s decisiveness. It was clear that no opposition to Hitler would be tolerated. On July 3, the Reich Cabinet issued a law, legalizing the murders after the fact, as an emergency action taken to save the nation. Hitler addressed the Reichstag on July 13, 1934, explaining that, as the supreme ruler of Germany, he had exercised his power against individuals who threatened the existence of the German nation. He was claiming to have acted in self-defense of the nation. Justice Schlegelberger, having already approved the Enabling Act, now accepted the idea of retroactive sanctioning of the killings as it “was absolutely justifiable, because revolt meant a state of emergency.” He had already ruled that Hitler could act with boldness. Murder was now seen as an acceptable act of the state to protect the nation. 

My Turn    There are echoes here about how people who despise democratic checks and balances work hard to get unchecked power. As one who believes in democracy, it is self-evident that individual power must be checked. We are not 1930s Germany. Yes, there are echoes, but also something different, bipartisan push back. An investigation into what Secretary Hegseth is up to (in our name) is a good start. Military veterans speaking up against following illegal orders show a clear difference between our system and Germany in the 1930s. We need to keep supporting those who point out the obvious – that unchecked power and greed is self-destructive and destructive. As we turn back to the 250^th anniversary of our founding and the extraordinary ideas produced by imperfect people, it is important to embrace the significance of those ideals: 

The Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. 

Our Constitution: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity… Our freedom, liberty, safety, and happiness are rooted in recognition of the dignity of each individual. As humans we face challenges, contradictions, motives, and rationalization that  sometimes betray this. 

As we look back, we can be patriots who overcome our own failings by accepting the challenge to live with law and order, not law by order.

Beware   On a fall day in New England a friend and survivor of the Bosnian genocide turned to me and said, "Always beware of paramilitaries. That's where it starts." As I thought about how true that was across the genocides that I was studying, I thought I should add "state sanctioned". Mass atrocity crimes are facilitated by paramilitary organizations that receive the "green light" from those in power. Paramilitaries operate outside the law and avoid oversight or constraint. It is more likely to occur in places where democracy is weak or there is a state legitimacy crisis.

A History of Extra-Legal Paramilitaries   There is a long and twisted history of armed paramilitary vigilantes in the U.S. from the KKK to, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, an estimated 169 private groups operating today. These groups exist outside state-sanctioned militias (ie: National Guard) and are often associated with anti-government and often extremist views. They find legitimacy in part by tapping into traditional symbols of contested history such as the Confederate battle flag. 

2^nd Amendment    I am a New Englander. I actually look forward to Patriot's Day every April that remembers the battles of Lexington and Concord fought by minutemen militias against British tyranny. Throughout the American Revolution colonial militias were a key supplemental force for the Continental Army. At the nation's founding they had been crucial for each colony's defense. When the Second Amendment was codified, it recognized "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". The amendment was crucial for new states to give up some of their autonomy to agree to join and form the United States. The agreement allowed states and their governors to oversee and maintain their defense force while joining a federal state. As in any good democracy the meaning of the amendment continues to be debated. When it became part of the Constitution, smooth bore muskets were prevalent, but not the more expensive rifle. In the lasty twenty or so years the Supreme Court has increasingly ruled that individual gun ownership, with little regulation, is appropriate. Training to be a soldier in the 1980s but not taking my commission, I believe that weapons of war designed to inflict mass destruction belong in the hands of the professional national armed services. Guns continue to proliferate in our society in staggering ways that could never have been anticipated by the Founders. We continue to debate the social cost we are willing to spend. 

Compare and Contrast   As guns become more part of our daily lives one argument that doesn't hold true is the often repeated political (and marketing slogan) that the first thing the Nazis did was to take away the peoples' arms. In a false comparison, the inference is to Patriot's Day, but has little relevance to what happened in Germany. The truth is a bit more muddled and unnerving.   

The Germany Army, Paramilitaries, and Nazis    President Hindenburg named Hitler as German Chancellor in 1933 after listening to the advice of a group of anti-democratic conservate politicians who convinced him to give Hitler a chance. Since being imprisoned for treason after the failed comical Munich Putsch, Hitler wrote his fictional biography and political self-pitying rant Mein Kampf (My Struggle) in which he outlined a new political strategy. He would get power by working within the system not by trying to overthrow it. It almost didn't work, until the Great Depression, para-militarized pressure, and political back door maneuverings helped. That is where the guns come in. 

Kurt von Schleicher was a Major General in the Reichswehr (German Army after World War I). He was scheming to modernize the army by cutting social spending. He feared, with an army of only 100,000 men, that Germans would lose their identities (manliness) if they did not have mandatory military training. He was also scheming for power. In 1930, thinking that Hitler's paramilitary SA (“Brownshirts”) could fill the void, he befriended Ernst Röhm, the SA chief of staff. Schleicher gave the SA access to army depots and arsenals. The two agreed that in a crisis (war or a Communist coup) the SA would come under command of the Reichswehr. Like everyone else, Schleicher mistakenly underestimated the threat of Hitler and the Nazis and thought he could use them for his own ambitions. 

The SA were interested in antisemitism, violence, cruelty, and ending democracy. With guns now plentiful they could terrorize Hitler's opponents. It was a constant problem for Hitler. He loved the violence and intimidation tactics of the SA but was frequently put on the defensive when other leaders of society (especially the police, courts, and the Army) pushed back. In a moment of political clarity, then Chancellor Brüning was working against Schleicher and convinced Hindenburg to ban the SA and SS. To no one's surprise, street violence dropped dramatically and confidence in government stabilized briefly. It is difficult for violence and democracy to coexist. 

And then, Schleicher secretly met with Hitler on May 8, 1932. If Hitler supported him, Schleicher would convince Hindenburg to dismiss Brüning, create a new government, and lift the ban on the SA and SS (Blackshirts).  And so, Schleicher convinced Hindenburg to ask for Brüning’s resignation. A puppet of Schleicher was named chancellor and the ban on the SA and SS was lifted. Hitler would now often rally the SA to flood the streets as he tried to ramp up the pressure. His goal was to make violence the norm so that he could convince people that only he could stop it, only he could bring back "law and order". 

Warnings    Leaders in the German Weimar Republic actively worked with unregulated right-wing paramilitaries and the Army gave them weapons. There had been a long tradition of armed paramilitarism in Germany from the time of Napoleon's occupation in the 19^th century through the post World War I era in the early 20^th century. These military and paramilitary formations were often used to suppress revolt and keep a government (whether left or right) in power. Symbols and badges were interchangeable, such as the Death's Head symbol of the Prussian Hussars becoming the symbol of Hitler's SS. Little of this reflects the American experience whose militias were formed to protect, not destroy, communities. 

My Turn   Once when I was presenting at a U.S. military base during the Days of Remembrance of the Holocaust, a soldier asked, with obvious concern, "What is the difference between a patriot and a nationalist?" A patriot is someone who examines their country's history without fear with the goal of improving its ideals. A nationalist is someone who wants to rewrite history, exclude those who they believe do not belong, and accept violence as a means to an end. 

I'll sight only two of many obvious warning signs to the growing influence and sanctioning of extra-legal paramilitaries in the U.S.: Amongst the January 6, 2021, rioters and attackers of the Capitol were paramilitaries like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Three Percenters and more, who all received presidential pardons. ICE is claiming the role of law enforcement, blurring the lines between their behavior and the police. They act outside the normal restraints and rules while well-regulated militias (professional armed services) are being coopted into the mission. Viewing pictures of German police on the parameters of SA public acts of brutality do strike a frightening, echoing chord from 1933. As a well-armed, government sanctioned and financed paramilitary, ICE has been setting up extra legal camps and disappearing people. I won't go further for now. 

Paramilitaries have skirted the law in the past and inflicted harm on U.S. citizens. President Grant established the Department of Justice to fight the KKK and succeeded, at first. It is a fine line between defense and vigilante behavior. 

When comparing ourselves to Nazi Germany it is important to point out that our system and experiences are different. Significantly, this applies to our professional armed forces. Unlike Germany, whose officers swore an oath of loyalty to the person of the Presidency, our leaders swear an oath to the Constitution. The military is designed, and its values are ingrained, to protect us from enemies foreign or domestic, and follow duly elected public officials. It is crucial to push back against those who wish to blur these lines or change the role from defense to oppression. It is alarming how much our political leadership is working to undermine and shift the mission of our armed forces. It is a troubling warning sign if militia symbols, or symbols from anti-democratic history become acceptable. 

I was alarmed this week when the U.S. Coast Guard lowered the threat level of hate symbols like the Nazi swastika, the so-called Confederate flag, and the noose. And then, I was encouraged when Admiral Lunday asserted the next day that these symbols of hate, treason, and antidemocracy would continue to be banned in the service. We are a democracy continually wrestling with its ideals and leadership matters. We need to be constantly reminded of what our democratic ideals are, support those who bravely clarify when the line is blurring. We must realize that we too are leaders standing in defense of a more just Republic not one that justifies violence for the sake of power.

Believe in the Republic   Up front, I believe in the unfulfilled dream of our democratic exercise. The promise of individual dignity, however, is a work in progress. There’s a sense of despair as we watch anti-democratic leaders, autocrats, oligarchs, and greed- fueled people commandeer the Republic. We must overcome them. If we misread their intent or qualify it, we know the potential outcomes. Mostly, we must realize that the words we use and the world we see and hope for - are not the ones they see or hear. What is strange to us is perfectly normal for them. We need to stop adjusting, rationalizing, and accommodating and instead, make them. As we identify the toxic threat, we can redirect our future. As we continue to show our courage – simply not giving in – the people exploiting us will lose. 

As Ken Burns’ film about the American Revolution is about to air it is important to remember our Declaration of Independence from the monarchs and now oligarchs: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” There is nothing self-evident about this. It is up to us to make it so. 

Be Silly and Focused   I’ve written before about how silliness and joy are powerful weapons against the tyrant and autocrat who cannot understand them. Even so, funny people are grounded. At the end of The Great Dictator, Charlie Chaplin, literally replacing “Hitler” speaks:  “We all want to help one another. Human beings are like that. We want to live by each other’s happiness, not by each other’s misery…Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost…Do not despair. The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed – the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people…” 

It Happens   I’ve just described Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Stalin, Putin, Orban, and should I go on? Each one of these men are insecure and full of fear and perhaps even self-loathing, The end result is pain and suffering. 

Wanna be a lonely, pathetic “strongman”?   Shout out to Ruth Ben-Ghiat’s excellent book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present. If you wish to submit your job application for pathetic “strongman” here’s a guide: Because you need constant adoration, you must require constant statements of loyalty from those around you who are using you for their own gain. Make sure you’re good at threatening people and have the capacity for violence. That shouldn’t be hard as you don’t like people anyway. You’ve likely committed a crime or two so make sure you seek office to gain legal protection. Don’t forget to hate, blame, and manipulate women (or girls) and humiliate the men around you while you’re at it. It’s good for your resume if you are a sexual predator. That will reinforce your definition of powerful manliness, and be a strong motive to get elected to avoid prosecution. Don’t listen or work with others because everyone else is stupid and weak. You’re not getting the job unless you have experience in mass communication so buy a few media outlets or at least get on them. They like things that are angry and shocking so be sure to build up your “manliness” by attacking the weak and vulnerable who are just trying to live their lives in peace and joy. Attacking LGBTQ+ is easiest. Bluster a lot as you plunder. Don’t forget to manipulate populist nationalism to let people know who does and does not belong. It’s better to tell people who doesn’t belong or have the right to exist. That might be trickier in America with the whole Statue of Liberty thing, so be sure to divide people by “race”, religion, ethnicity, or anything else you can come up with. People may not like it so be sure to forbid protests, comedians, our newspeople who criticize you. Oh, good trick, label everyone else “terrorists” or “enemies” of freedom. As you undermine law, order, and decency, it’s fun to use paramilitaries to act outside the law. It's just easier and the best part is that you can say you’re “for” “law and order”. It’s important you don’t laugh to yourself too much about this. Big rallies gives you the adulation you need and gives people something to do when there’s not much on TV these days anyway. Oh yes, don’t forget to pal up with other dictators who are slaughtering or imprisoning their people. People will be confused by that, but what do you care. You have money and they don’t. Create as much chaos, pain, confusion, and economic distress as possible because that’ll distract them. Oh, almost forgot because it’s hard for you to believe this, but it works. Be sure, as you victimize other people, that you constantly tell others that you are the victim. That’s a good one! Who said you didn’t have a sense of humor? 

The “Strongman” as Crazy Uncle   I am still guided by President Roosevelt’s, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” from 1933. He was offering the antidote to fascism. Hope over self-destruction. We have to be able to separate the leader from his followers. I’m not talking about those who have collaborated for self-gain and have hurt so many – that will be a matter of politics and law. But we must recognize that we humans are vulnerable. When people are traumatized or afraid they can embrace the irrational. As they attempt to get some control over their lives in moments when what they “knew” or expected from life are disappearing, we must respond with compassion not condemnation. They have embraced the “strongman” perhaps because he feeds their biases, frustration, and anger. For many, their most important “currency” isn’t financial but social. Family and friends are what makes life worth living. The “strongman” knows this and is playing the role of the crazy uncle. Sure he’s nuts, but he’s one of us and someday he might help us. If you try to use your logic and reason on them to tell them that they’re wrong, good luck! This is about their pride, sense of belonging, and sense of self-worth. 

My Turn   Shout out to the Portland frog! We must keep calm and not take the bait. We’re strong enough to respect ourselves and our democratic hopes. People who try to project power as “strongmen” are pathetic, but dangerous. How long do we accept their buffoonery before we say that we matter? Using non-violent demonstrations and laughing at the strong man is a good start. We must continue to limit access to guns and turn the temperature down. Arming paramilitaries and increasing violence is the tool of choice for dictators. Despite what the rumor mill says, Hitler did not take away the guns. Instead, his SA “brownshirt” thugs got their weapons from the German Army depots in a plot to create violence so that a dictator could justify a crackdown. We’ll talk about the Second Amendment later. For now, it’s good to remember that it focused on the 18^th century concept and federated nation-building idea of “well-regulated militias”. We must investigate white supremacists in the military and police and declare white supremacist movements as terrorist organizations. Demand transparency and oversight. Protect any groups or people that are targeted. Follow the money. We must say enough, there is a better way. We must value and protect the media, comedians and the teachers. When it seemed that we were powerless, a nationwide protest to save Jimmy Kimmel (whether you like him or not) showed that this is up to us. We must educate ourselves about the merits of civic behavior and encourage workplace training. We do this not by focusing on the “strongmen” and giving him air to fill his balloon, but by highlighting the everyday, extraordinary person who stands up for their neighbor and themselves. We have plenty of examples to find.

10 November 2025 

Kristallnacht Remembrance   The Nazi-organized November pogrom (violent attacks on Jewish communities with the aid or indifference of the government) took place on November 9-10. 1938. It was a threshold moment for Hitler and the Nazis who had been given power in 1933 and had destroyed checks to his power, destroyed the Weimar constitution, assumed control of the military and police, and changed German society. This evening marked a radicalizing shift in policy and actions towards Jews. Synagogues, businesses, and homes were violated and destroyed, and tens of thousands of German Jews were arrested or murdered. There were willing collaborators across society and fire and police departments stood by, generally refused to help German Jews, and hosed down adjacent buildings as synagogues and Torah scrolls burned. A new level had been reached, and anti-Jewish policy was increasingly radicalized as World War II approached. For years I helped to direct an annual Kristallnacht Remembrance in partnership with Keene NH’s Colonial Theatre to remember the violence and remind our community that mass atrocity crimes are a process not an event. By paying attention to that process, we have the power to intervene, to stop the acceleration. It was a public event that included the Jewish community, mayor, fire and police chiefs, survivors, witnesses, community organizations like MoCo Arts, school groups, interfaith community, and other community members and officials. City institutions chose to use the remembrance as an opportunity to repeat their mission of service and protection to all – in the light of a time when that was not true. Remembrance allowed us to come together, for each other, and use memory to teach responsibility and awareness. It fortified us and sustained us for many years and created a community alert to antisemitism, hate, and targeting. We are a resilient people when we take care of each other. 

Hate in the 1930s   Of the many friends Hitler had in the United States in the 1930s, I would like to focus on Fritz Kuhn and Fr. Charles Coughlin. Kuhn was a German World War I veteran who immigrated and became a US citizen in 1934. Germany had the second highest immigration quota due to the 1924 Immigration Act that gave preference to white Europeans. The act, being heralded today by some in the administration, was written and passed by members of the KKK and others who jumped on the Anti-immigrant bandwagon. The KKK’s slogan and soon to be allied movement, was “America First!”  Kuhn was a fascist, pro-Hitler, isolationist, and antisemite. He created the German American Bund on the hopes of being Hitler’s man in the U.S. and recruited mostly immigrants who were anti-Communist to his movement. At first, the Nazis offered funding but became increasingly concerned that Kuhn’s antics might draw too much attention at a time when Germany was content to let America be isolationist and ignorant. Fr. Charles Coughlin was a Catholic priest born in Canada who became a U.S. citizen. He was an antisemitic, anti-Communist, pro-Nazi, outraged radio host whose audience was the largest in American history (29 million listeners out of 130 million Americans).   His newspaper, Social Justice, had a circulation of 200,000 in 1940. He had his own paramilitary, the Christian Front militia (“Fr. Coughlin’s Brownshirts”) organized like a terrorist cell. In Boston, they showed Nazi military propaganda films. Like the Oath Keepers today, they recruit from military and police for weapons and credibility. His followers were poor and working class Irish and Germans from Northeast and Midwest. His National Union for Social Justice was a political movement focused on replacing capitalist democracy. He published the fraudulent, Russian-invented antisemitic conspiracy fantasy, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion; Nazi propaganda; Goebbels’ speeches; and praised was praised by Der Stürmer. He verbally attacked refugees as communists and Jews and ranted about the “left-wing” “liberal” media. He worked closely with the German-American Bund. His rallies were replete with American flags and crowds riled up by hatred. 

The America Frist Committee   The AFC brought together isolationists, failed Bundists, Coughlin supporters, far-right extremists, antisemites, religious bigots, the disenfranchised, and the greedy. Many respectable business leaders and politicians gave it legitimacy. They opposed the New Deal and President FDR and feared that war would undermine their European investments and markets. In September 1940 America First became an official nonprofit. They called for “Anglo-Saxon purity” and launched an antisemitic magazine, The Cross and the Flag.  

Resisting   Leaders must constantly remind us to push back against hate, anger, and fearmongering that are toxic to democracy and dignity. President FDR responded to threats and problems with caution, patience, timing, and education. He was clear about believing in democratic norms and helped to reshape American attitudes in ways that would lead to the civil rights movement. Leadership matters. But we can be leaders too. We must reject political violence, anti-democratic forces, and accept our responsibility to build a “more perfect union”. We must have confidence and courage. 

Resisting the Bund   In 1937, Kuhn’s German American Bund tried to establish a Hitler Youth-type training camp in Southbury, CT. Kuhn stated: “The principles of the Bund and the KKK are the same”. How did the people of Southbury respond? How did they meet the challenge? Rev. M. Edgar N. Lindsay was one of two pastors who used the Sunday before Thanksgiving to preach about the Nazi “menace”. The Southbury churches rallied behind their neighbors and demonstrated peacefully, and through zoning regulations, prevented a Bund camp from being built. Southbury is about 25 miles from Yale University where the America First Committee (AFC) began. 

The German American Bund Loses   In 1938 Nazi Germany cut off funding for Kuhn’s Bund and forbade membership for German citizens. Hitler was intent on keeping the U.S. isolationist. In 1939, Kuhn pulled off his greatest event, a rally in New York City’s Madison Square Garden. 22,000 attended as Nazi drums pounded and uniformed Nazis marched and gave speeches. The film of the rally is often used today as a frightening warning. However, what most people forget is that 100,000 protested outside the arena. Mayor LaGuardia was outraged by Kuhn and ordered an investigation into Bund financial records. They discover that the $14,000 raised at MSG rally had been embezzled by Kuhn and he was arrested and convicted. Other Bund leaders were jailed for various offenses and membership dwindled. After December 1941, the Bund was outlawed by the U.S. Fritz Kuhn was imprisoned for larceny and forgery from 1939 to 1943. In 1943, he was reinterned as an enemy agent. In 1945, he was deported and imprisoned in post-war Germany before dying in 1951. 

Father Coughlin Loses   Fr. Charles Coughlin ranted and justified the Nazi November 9-10 pogrom (Kristallnacht): on air by claiming they had it coming to them because Christians were being persecuted. The owner of the WMCA station that hosted Coughlin’s broadcasts immediately ended them. The Nazi German press decried his censoring as the silencing of free speech by "Jewish organizations camouflaged as American.” In 1942 the U.S. government suspended the free mailing privilege of “Social Justice” and the Archbishop of Detroit forced Coughlin to close his newspaper and forbade its distribution by mail. Coughlin vanished from the public arena, working as a parish pastor until retiring in 1966. He died in obscurity in 1979. 

My Turn   Kuhn and Coughlin were defeated because Americans took responsibility for each other and trusted in their confidence in democratic norms. We must resist the temptation to respond to hate with hate. We respond with confidence, humor, discipline, peaceful protests, and the ballot box. We find strength by recalling the destructive events that took place in the past, the people affected by them or targeted today, and we stand together. At the Cohen Center’s annual Kristallnacht Remembrances, the participants recommitted themselves to being members of a community that stands against hatred and violence. Together they would say: 

We remember that night as a moral obligation to the victims and the survivors as well as for ourselves, for the sake of our children, and for our community. We recognize our responsibility to care for others in our midst who might be overlooked, targeted, or victimized in their circumstances. We remember so that                individuals may refuse to become perpetrators, “bystanders” or   collaborators. We remember in the hope that present and future   generations take responsibility for building a world free of   antisemitism, bigotry, intolerance, and hate. Therefore, we     remember Kristallnacht to remind ourselves to care for one another, to build peace, and be a community in which compassion, respect and justice thrive.

On this Veteran's Day, let us also remember the sacrifice of our veterans who risked all to defend the idea of liberty, freedom, and dignity.