The Rhetoric of Adolph and Donald: A Comparative Analysis

Brian Sankarsingh's wonders about history repeating itself

Throughout history, political leaders have used rhetoric as a powerful tool to shape public opinion, mobilize supporters, and consolidate power. Two figures who have drawn comparisons for their rhetorical styles—albeit in vastly different historical contexts—are Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump. Even though they are decades apart there is strikingly eerie similarities between what they say and how they are saying it.

While Hitler's rhetoric laid the foundation for one of the most devastating regimes in human history, Trump’s approach to communication has sparked controversy and deep divisions in contemporary American politics. In this article I want to explore the similarities and differences between their rhetorical styles, focusing on their use of populism, scapegoating, emotional appeal, territorial expansion, and manipulation of truth. The idea for this article came from a conversation I was having with my fellow writing partner

Neil Gonsalves

The conversation was about the dangers of patriotism becoming nationalism and the infinitesimally fine line between the two. Neil had just finished doing an amazing live talking about why he chose to display his patriotism when receiving the award and recognition for Durham Community Champion Medallion 2025. BTW - congratulation my friend well deserved!!! But back to the subject.

Both Hitler and Trump positioned themselves as champions of the common people against a corrupt elite. Hitler’s speeches in the 1920s and 1930s portrayed him as the savior of the German people, railing against the Weimar government, Marxists, and Jewish financiers whom he blamed for Germany’s economic and social woes. His rhetoric was deeply nationalistic, invoking the idea of a pure and strong Germany.

Trump built his political brand on populist rhetoric, promising to "drain the swamp" and rid Washington of corrupt politicians. His campaign slogans, such as "Make America Great Again," evoked a sense of nostalgia for a past in which, he claimed, American values were not under threat. Like Hitler, Trump frequently blamed the establishment, the media, and immigrants for the country’s perceived decline.

A key characteristic of both leaders’ rhetoric is the use of scapegoats. Hitler infamously scapegoated Jews, communists, and other marginalized groups, blaming them for Germany’s economic hardship and political instability. This strategy was not only a means to justify his radical policies but also a way to unite his base under a common enemy.

Trump, while not engaging in genocidal rhetoric, often used scapegoating to rally his supporters. He blamed immigrants, particularly Mexicans and Muslims, for crime and economic instability, referring to them as "rapists" and "terrorists." He falsely accused Haitian immigrants of killing and eating people’s pets. He also demonized the press as the "enemy of the people," echoing Hitler’s denunciation of the "lying press" (Lügenpresse), a term used to discredit unfavorable media coverage.

Both leaders relied heavily on emotional appeals, particularly fear, to influence public perception. Hitler’s speeches were charged with dramatic gestures and fiery language that stoked fear of external and internal threats, convincing Germans that only his leadership could restore order and national pride.

Trump’s rhetoric also thrived on fearmongering. His speeches frequently warned of America’s decline, emphasizing threats posed by immigrants, China, and political opponents. For example, his rhetoric surrounding the 2020 election, where he falsely claimed the election was "stolen," created widespread distrust in democratic institutions and led to the violent January 6 Capitol insurrection.

Another striking similarity in their rhetoric is their discussion of territorial expansion. Hitler’s concept of Lebensraum (living space) was a cornerstone of his foreign policy and justification for aggressive expansion. He argued that Germany needed additional land, particularly in Eastern Europe, to provide resources and living space for the Aryan race. This idea fueled the invasion of Poland, the Soviet Union, and other territories, ultimately leading to World War II.

Trump, while not advocating military conquest, expressed expansionist ambitions through his remarks about acquiring Greenland and suggesting that Canada should join the United States. In 2019, he openly discussed purchasing Greenland from Denmark, framing it as a strategic move for economic and security reasons. Similarly, he and some of his allies floated the idea of annexing Canada, portraying it as a natural extension of American influence. Though not comparable in scale or consequence to Hitler’s expansionist ideology, Trump's rhetoric about territorial acquisition reflects a belief in American dominance and a disregard for international norms. Now he is even more blatant about it. In a recent social media post he again complained that "This cannot continue," and threatened to make Canada a 51st state, an annexation threat the Canadian government once dismissed as a joke, now must be taken seriously. Trump said it only makes "sense" for Canada to become another American state to make tariffs disappear, to reduce taxes, secure its military defense, and the border, at the same time he said, he could make the border disappear. "The artificial line of separation drawn many years ago will finally disappear, and we will have the safest and most beautiful Nation anywhere in the World — And your brilliant anthem, “O Canada,” will continue to play, but now representing a GREAT and POWERFUL STATE within the greatest Nation that the World has ever seen!," Trump wrote.

A defining feature of both Hitler’s and Trump’s rhetorical strategies was the manipulation of truth. Hitler’s regime relied on the "Big Lie" propaganda technique, wherein falsehoods were repeated so frequently that they became accepted as truth. He used state-controlled media to spread misinformation and silence dissenting voices.

Trump, while operating in a democratic society with a free press, frequently spread falsehoods and labeled any unfavorable coverage as "fake news." His misinformation about COVID-19, election fraud, and political opponents created an alternate reality for his supporters, much like Hitler’s propaganda efforts shaped public perception in Nazi Germany.

Despite these similarities, there are crucial differences between Hitler and Trump, primarily in their historical contexts and the extent of their power. Hitler ruled a totalitarian state where his rhetoric translated into genocidal policies and world war. Trump, as a leader in a democratic system, may have to face institutional checks and balances that could limit his ability to exert unchecked power. He is however working on diluting, controlling or even removing many of these. The fact is that his rhetoric is a major contributor to political polarization and acts of violence. While direct comparisons between Hitler and Trump must be made with caution, their rhetorical strategies share common elements: populism, scapegoating, emotional manipulation, expansionist rhetoric, and a disregard for truth. The key difference lies in the historical consequences of their rhetoric—Hitler’s led to the Holocaust and a global war, whereas thus far, Trump’s rhetoric has primarily resulted in domestic political instability and erosion of democratic norms. Where does that lead? Only time will tell. Nevertheless, understanding these rhetorical strategies is crucial in recognizing the dangers of demagoguery and preventing history from repeating itself.

Eternal Echoes

The past whispers in the present's ear
A cycle reborn year after year
Lessons ignored, mistakes remain
Echoes of war, sorrow, and pain

The wheel turns, the chapters rhyme
Shadows stretch across all time
Empires rise, empires fall
Heedless hands rebuild them all

The cries of old still haunt the land
Written in dust, drawn in sand
But dust returns, the sand will shift
Memory fades, time drifts

And so we stand where we began
The past whispers in the present’s ear

Bio: BRIAN SANKARSINGH is a two-time award-winning poet and author. He is a Trinidadian-born Canadian immigrant who has published several books of poetry on a wide range of social and historical themes including racism, colonialism, and enslavement. Sankarsingh artfully blends prose and poetry into his storytelling creating an eclectic mix with both genres. This unique approach is sure to provide something for everyone.

Thanks for reading Seeking Veritas by The Professor, The Poet & Friends! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.