Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Parallels and Patterns: George Orwell’s 1984, Hitler’s Nazi, and Trump 2.0

How authoritarian patterns in Orwell’s 1984 and Nazi Germany echo in Trump’s political rhetoric and governance.

Opinion

An illustration of two hands controlling a small person attached to strings.

A comparison of the Trump administration, Orwell’s 1984, and Hitler explores warning signs of authoritarianism, propaganda, and threats to American democracy.

Getty Images, S-S-S

George Orwell’s 1984 is a classic dystopian novel that is a regular part of American high school English and social studies classes. It is usually taught in 9th or 10th grade to introduce students to themes like totalitarianism, propaganda, and censorship. The book remains relevant because it helps students understand how oppression and manipulation operate, offering important insights into their roles as citizens who help protect democracy.

Similarly, American high schools teach about Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 and how the Nazis changed German society, usually in 11th or 12th grade. This history provides students with clear ways to judge modern leaders and helps them spot similar patterns in today’s politics, including those seen in figures like Donald Trump.


During both of his terms as president, Donald Trump’s views and actions were widely shared in the media. TV networks often covered his rallies and press conferences, and social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram played a major role in shaping how people saw him and engaged with his messages.

Hence as a result of this education, many Americans notice similarities between Trump and the patterns found in Orwell’s 1984 and Hitler’s time. These similarities are seen as repeated patterns, not exact copies of totalitarianism. To think more about this, ask yourself: Which signs of growing authoritarianism do you notice most?

Core components

The first of four core components people point to when comparing Orwell’s 1984, Hitler, and Trump is the emphasis on a single leader as the embodiment of the nation, with loyalty to him prioritized over loyalty to institutions, Congress, the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court, and/or the law. This is an echo of fascist leadership cults and Big Brother’s centrality in 1984.

Another point is that Hitler repeatedly told lies until they were accepted, while Mr. Trump’s policies feature blatant falsehoods and misinformation: 30,573 false or misleading claims during the Trump 1.0 administration (Washington Post, Jan. 24, 2021).

Mr. Trump’s discrediting of independent media – “enemy of the people” – and attacks on journalists – “obnoxious reporter,” “stupid,” and “quiet piggy” – evoke both Nazi attacks on the Lügenpresse (lying press) and 1984’s state-controlled information system.

The 47th president’s statement to the public, “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening,” strongly resembles Orwellian doublespeak and demands that you reject the evidence of your own eyes and ears. Americans have seen video footage of two people being killed by ICE agents in Minneapolis, know that 60-70,000 people have been detained during the Trump 2.0 administration (Deportation Data, Jan. 27), and realize 73.6% of those detained have never been convicted of any criminal offense (TRAC Immigration).

1984-style elements

Mr. Trump’s insistence that Americans who are getting facts from the media are getting “fake news” resembles Newspeak and the Ministry of Truth’s role in manufacturing false reality.

Mr. Trump’s efforts to change or rewrite official government documents and websites, punish civil servants who present unwelcome data, or replace independent experts with loyalists are seen as analogous to the constant revision of records in 1984 to fit the party's narrative.

Mr. Trump’s constant focus on vilifying groups like immigrants, political opponents, and critical journalists functions like an ongoing “Two Minutes Hate,” channeling anger at designated enemies to consolidate support.

Hitler-era

Nazi propaganda portrayed Jews and other groups as parasitic, criminal, or a biological threat to the nation. Mr. Trump said “poisoning the blood of our country” and has linked them to an alleged Christian nationalists’ replacement of native-born Americans, which parallels the neo-Nazi’s far-right “Great Replacement” ideology. It’s worth remembering that roughly 97 percent of Americans are descendants of immigrants ourselves, a nation built generation after generation by people who arrived seeking safety, opportunity, and dignity. Our shared history should give every citizen pause before embracing rhetoric that divides us into “real” and “unreal” Americans.

Historians of fascism point out that Nazi authorities used visible humiliation, rough treatment, and publicized expulsions to send a message to bystanders. Reporting on Trump 2.0 describes deportation flights with migrants shackled as deliberate “theater,” meant to demonstrate state power.

Mr. Trump’s repeated suggestions to use the military for domestic enforcement, plus aggressive immigration raids and nationalizing elections, are viewed as analogous to Hitler’s actions in Germany.

Authoritarian playbook

Mr. Trump’s illegal firing of 17 inspectors general, firing career civil servants and demanding loyalty from his cabinet appointees, Congressional Republicans, America’s judicial system, military personnel, and civil servants – intended by America’s founding fathers to be neutral and independent – tracks an authoritarian playbook of hollowing out USA’s checks and balances system that has worked quite well for 250 years.

The difference between America, Orwell’s 1984, and Nazi Germany

Unlike 1984 or Nazi Germany, the United States still has freedom of the press, Constitutionally-driven courts, federally elected representatives, state governments willing to resist, open elections, and a strong civil society where people can organize, protest, and criticize the president without automatic imprisonment.

Many scholars stress that Trump 2.0 is not the same as Hitler or Big Brother but that the patterns – attacks on truth, the rule-of-law erosion, reshaping the population along ethnic lines, scapegoating, and leader-cult politics in the GOP-dominated Congress, cabinet, and Supreme Court – are early warning signs that if left unchecked, history shows they can lead democracies toward authoritarian regimes.

This is no genocide, but history warns us to be careful

Only a strong civil society can ensure that America, in its 250th year of existence, remains a democracy and rejects an authoritarian dictatorship.

Will you help keep it strong, or will you give in to Big Brother?


Steve Corbin is a professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.


Read More

Allies United Holds Cross‑Community Meetings to Protect Civil Rights Across Chicagoland

Fight For Today For A Better Tomorrow sign

Canva

Allies United Holds Cross‑Community Meetings to Protect Civil Rights Across Chicagoland

En español

Operation Midway Blitz outraged much of the Chicagoland community last September when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided neighborhoods, arrested thousands of individuals, and fatally shot Mexican immigrant Silverio Villegas González.

Witnessing these injustices across the country and in Chicago, two local coalitions came together last year to form Allies United, a Chicago-based coalition initially focused on responding to immigration raids, and now prioritizing protecting civil rights and building long-term cross‑community solidarity.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holding a sign in front of the U.S. capitol that reads, "We The People."

The nation has reached a divide in the road—a moment when Americans must decide whether to accept a slow weakening of the Republic or insist on the principles that have held it together for more than two centuries

Getty Images

A Republic Under Strain—And a Choice Ahead

Americans feel something shifting beneath their feet — quieter than crisis but unmistakably a strain. Many live with a steady sense of uncertainty, conflict, and the emotional weight of issues that seem impossible to escape. They feel unheard, unsafe, or unsure whether the Republic they trust is fading. Friends, relatives, and former colleagues say they’ve tried to look away just to cope, hoping the turmoil will pass. And they ask the same thing: if the framers made the people the primary control on government, how will they help set the Republic back on a steadier path?

Understanding the strain Americans are experiencing is essential, but so is recognizing the choice we still have. Madison’s warning offers the answer the framers left us: when trust erodes and power concentrates, the Constitution turns back to the people—not as a slogan, but as a structural reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on April 25, 2026, after the cancellation of the annual White House Correspondents Association Dinner.

Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

For the third time in three years, Donald Trump has come under threat by an attacker. Many facts remain unclear after a gunman stormed the Washington Hilton on April 25, 2026, during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

As the investigation into the shooting continues, Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation’s politics and society editor, spoke with James Piazza, a political violence scholar at Penn State, about what is driving the rise of political violence in the U.S. and what can be done about it.

Keep ReadingShow less