Donald Trump isn’t Hitler, he’s Andrew Jackson

Home Opinion Donald Trump isn’t Hitler, he’s Andrew Jackson
Donald Trump isn’t Hitler, he’s Andrew Jackson

jack

Despite accusations to the contrary, Donald Trump is no Hitler, nor is he a fascist.

Unlike Hitler, Trump focuses on the individual rather than the collective. Instead of championing equality among working men like Bernie Sanders, Trump campaigns for the interests of the common man. He is not emphasizing redistribution and the welfare state, but promoting capitalism and substantially cutting taxes for the rich. At least for now, we don’t need to worry about Trump ushering in a new fascist regime.

But we should be concerned about Trump’s shocking similarities to another historical figure: Andrew Jackson. Jacksonian political techniques and rhetoric have convinced Trump supporters to “Make America Great Again.” Whether intentionally or not, Trump is working from Andrew Jackson’s playbook.

Like Jackson, Trump promises to fight for the common man, not the economic, social, or political monied elite. He projects the voice of the majority in the political national arena. He does not appeal to ideas, but to the interests of the common man: disgust with the ineffectiveness of Washington, fear of ISIS and its ever-looming threat that continues to move closer to U.S. soil, and concerns about personal debt, the economy, and job loss. By convincing voters that his presidency would result in the protection and success of their beliefs, projects, and ideologies, both Jackson and Trump claim to express and stand for popular opinion. This, in part, is due to Trump’s excessive media coverage and 2016’s high turnouts at polling booths. Pew Research Center data indicates that, in the first 12 primaries of 2016, 17.3 percent of eligible voters came out to vote — the highest turnout since 1980.

Trump’s simplistic and abbreviated rhetoric assures the voters that their future leaders are speaking for the people and in terms the people can understand. If the people desire a “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” and “maybe in certain areas closing that Internet up in some way” to prevent online radicalization, that’s what Trump will give them. Populist sentiments of fear and anger are fundamentally at the heart of both Trump’s and Jackson’s America. They are both intent on proving that they will fight to give the people what they want.

Furthermore, Trump shows Jackson’s same “spiritedness” that many believe is necessary for being a successful political leader. Back in January, Trump claimed that he “could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” In 1806, Jackson shot and killed a man who wrote an insulting newspaper article about him. This decisive and dominating attitude convinced his supporters that he would not let himself be steamrolled by or mystified by political opponents. He claims that he will get things done, even if it involves overreach of power or unconstitutional action.

Like Trump, Jackson utilized the “art of the deal” to build his wealth through buying and selling tracts of land in the South, even if it meant kicking Native Americans out. Trumps recommends a similar strategy nationally, allowing him to secure jobs and economic stability by deporting illegal immigrants. Trump’s supporters believed that this “winning” ideology will carry over into politics, allowing him to negotiate his way to the best outcome for the American people.

Even so, what is the value of his spirited, ultra-patriotic, populist campaign if at its core it is inconsistent with the laws of the country and his own statements? Both Trump and Jackson recognize that America is a democracy and, accordingly, that the government should in part be directed by the interests of the people. What both fail to recognize is that America is also a republic, and therefore limited by the rule of law. Both of them fail to understand that the role of the president is to be the executor of the law, not the representative of the people.
In 1824, Jefferson said of Andrew Jackson’s candidacy, “He is one of the most unfit men I know of for such a place. He has had very little respect for laws and constitutions … His passions are terrible … he could never speak on account of the rashness of his feelings … He is a dangerous man.”

Perhaps, however, although Trump is unfit, dangerous, and imprudent, he is a prudent political option in comparison to all the others.