As the child of a Holocaust survivor, I am deeply disturbed by how casually and recklessly the term “Nazi” is used in today’s political discourse. Comparing political opponents — of any party — to Hitler or Nazism is not only historically ignorant, it is profoundly disrespectful to those who actually endured that horror. Nazism was not a slogan or a talking point; it was a systematic ideology of dehumanization, coercion, and terror that resulted in the murder of millions.
What is especially troubling is that those most eager to accuse others of “following Hitler’s playbook” often engage in the very tactics they claim to oppose: silencing dissent, labeling disagreement as moral evil, demanding ideological conformity, and justifying intimidation in the name of righteousness. History teaches us that authoritarian movements do not announce themselves as such — they cloak themselves in moral certainty and portray opposition as dangerous, immoral, or subhuman.
The Holocaust did not begin with gas chambers. It began with propaganda, scapegoating, mass intimidation, and the insistence that only one approved narrative was allowed to exist. When we normalize the dehumanization of political opponents and abandon evidence and reason in favor of slogans and outrage, we repeat dangerous patterns — regardless of which side claims moral superiority.
I fear we are becoming a nation too willing to follow the loudest voices instead of the most truthful ones, trading critical thought for tribal loyalty. History demands better of us. If we truly wish to honor the victims of totalitarian regimes, we must resist the urge to weaponize their suffering for political gain and recommit ourselves to facts, restraint, and principled disagreement.
