Not only is Trump not like Hitler, he is not even George Wallace and likely isn’t even a racist.   I know this goes against the popular media refrain, but I do not see there is evidence to make these very serious charges. While it is easy to fall into this lazy habit of hyperbole, in the end the hype never lives up to the words. When that happens, the overall argument falls flat. We saw this when Al Gore’s movie promised Hurricane Katrina’s every year due to global warming. When it didn’t happen, many American’s wrote off climate change as a hoax.   So too with Trump. When we advance to the general election this summer, Trump will abandon some of the radical rhetoric and move to a more palatable form of populism. When he does this, many Americans will see the over the top warnings about Trump as unfounded. We have already seen a preview of his playbook for the general election. A few weeks ago he told the NY Times that the whole “build a wall” business is no more than a negotiating strategy.

Let’s make an honest contrast of Hitler’s rise and Trump’s. By the time Hitler began his rise to power, not only did he have a private army (the SA or brown shirts), he had a track record of using violence to achieve political goals and he had a detailed plan for a movement based on a long history of anti-Semitism. Adolph Hitler was building a movement, Donald Trump is only promoting Donald Trump.   Yes, one can draw superficial parallels, but to do so runs the risk of being discredited.

These days it is common to hear people called racists with only the slightest provocation, actual racist intent or ideology is simply no longer necessary. I think this is a mistake.  Nazism was foundationally a racist ideology. The very word racist was coined to describe it. The fundamental trait that makes someone (or an ideology) raciest is a fixation on one’s own racial/genetic heritage as being inherently superior to that of others.  Nazism’s core belief was that the Germanic/Nordic race was fundamentally superior not only to the Semitic peoples, but of the Slavic’s and Celtics as well.

This race based world view does not seem even remotely related to Trump’s ideology. Instead, he clearly displays all the qualities of a narcissistic sociopath.  Contrary to the view of a racist that sees the world in terms of “my racial group” against some (or all) others, he sees the world in terms of Donald Trump, a group of one, as superior to all other people.  What is more, as a sociopath, he sees all other people as no more than animated objects, and he is the only person deserving of compassion.

To be fair, a great many politicians are sociopaths, but in his case, the unusually high degree of narcissism puts his disdain for other people more clearly on display.  He is far more P.T. Barnum who believes “A sucker is born every minute” than Adolph Hitler.

The other thing that seems to highlight his personality, and separate him from ideological demagogues, is that Trump does not appear to actually have any core political beliefs.  He is a salesman who believes in the adage “The customer is always right” and as such he appears to search for what the audience wants to hear. Then he gives them what they want.  Yes, many politicians do this, but usually they do it as a means to achieve a clear political end. Most politicians enter the political arena with an ideology or sense of duty to the common good. I don’t think Trump has any ideology beyond his personal benefit.

This is where the charges of racism come in.  The charges started when he said the Mexican government is deliberately exporting their criminals to the United States. Yet in the same spiel, he actually praised the Mexican government for the wisdom of their plan.  In this he is clearly not saying Mexicans are inherently inferior, but their government is smart for ridding themselves of criminal elements. This language appears to come right from the Cuban Mariel boatlift of 1980 where indeed the Cuban government had emptied jails and mental institutions to export those problems to the US.  To twist this to be Hitleresque is just dishonest.

Having watched him give a number of speeches, he just rambles on and on (often incoherently) looking for a phrase that gets an applause. He seems to say whatever pops into his mind.  The other thing I’ve learned from watching him over the past six months, is he has a shockingly shallow pool of knowledge. The issues of the Mariel boatlift are part of South Florida lore, and Trump spends a great deal of time in South Florida, so it is no surprise that he thought of that illustration. But on a whole range of issues he appears to be utterly clueless as to the most basics.

Did his comments slander immigrants from Mexico? Does it empower racism and xenophobia? Yes and Yes. But to suggest he is a racist a la Hitler is just wrong and the difference is significant.   To make the unjustified charge that he is a virulent racist simply makes him more sympathetic to those who are tired of the word racist being hurled by the left at the slightest provocation.

I believe the comment about rapist and criminals was likely a throw away comment at the time; however, it was the media response that really started Trump’s campaign.  He instantly went from one of many people seeking the Republican nomination, to the guy with all the press.  First the media played his comments over and over.  Second, this publicity made him the darling of the far right who have been fixated on immigration for decades. Suddenly he became the front runner. He found what would give him press and separate him from the crowded Republican field.

The other two causes for the charges of racism against Trump was the federal charges of housing discrimination from decades ago and his non-answer about David Duke.  However, I think both of these instances, reveal not active racism, but an utter lack of any moral compass. In the housing case it was simply a matter of business; he could make more money by keeping blacks out of his buildings. Of course his actions were  driven by prevailing racism and the effect perpetuated racial segregation. But unlike George Wallace, his motivation was indifference not antipathy.  This is consistent with being a narcissistic sociopath.  You can decide which motive is worse, but they are not the same.

Regarding his failure to immediately disavow David Duke, I watched the interview several times.   What is odd is that at no point did he reveal he was being cagey or had some other motive in mind. What came across clearly was that he did not know what the “right” answer was.  He was evasive because he did not know how to answer the question.  Of course, this is problematic, but does not say he is a racist. Rather is says he is an amoral self-interested coward.  It once again revealed Trump for what he is, someone whose sense of right and wrong is entirely driven by what is good for him personally. His behavior seems to indicate that he would gladly embrace racism if he thought it would benefit him.  But to just call him a Hitler-like racist based on these incidents is fundamentally incorrect and damages the quality of the discussion.

Does any of this mean Donald Trump is qualified to be president? No, of course not. I first wrote an essay for another blog calling Trump out for being a classic demagogue in the early fall, well before the media or the Republican elites saw him as a danger.  My fear is that by making unjustified attacks, the media and political elites are simply paving the only path Trump has for victory in the fall.  That is what worries me.