Yes, Putin Is Like Hitler—but So Was James K. Polk

image
Published: 05 Mar, 2014
Updated: 14 Oct, 2022
3 min read
I broke my own

rule this week and compared somebody to Hitler. It was only a little argumentum ad nazium. I suggested that Russian’s recent move to seize the largely Russian-speaking Crimean region of Ukraine had a lot of historical parallels to Hitler’s 1938 invasion of to annex the largely German-speaking Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia.

Apparently, Hillary Clinton has been thinking the same thing, and has taken the predictable fire that such comparison’s inevitably bring. There was only one Hitler, and to compare anybody else to him disrespects the memory of the millions of victims of the Holocaust. Godwin, Godwin, we have another one. I have said this myself so many times that I can barely bring myself to unsay it now.

But I will. This does not mean that Putin is like Hitler in other ways, that he will start having ethnic Ukrainians shot or that he will set up concentration camps. It does not mean that Putin is as bad as Hitler or that his next step will be to invade France and start lobbing bombs at St. Paul’s Cathedral. It just means that the two situations have a lot of historical parallels and that some of them are reasonably instructive.

And it especially does not mean that Hitler and Putin are in a class by themselves and that all other leaders throughout the world’s history are in another category entirely. In fact, in the specific area of using superior force to acquire territory where one has both nationalistic and strategic interests, Putin, like Hitler before him, is being almost embarrassingly predictable. Very few nations in the world today did not, at one time or another, add to their boundaries in a similar way.

Not even the United States. Especially not even the United States. And the more I think about it, the more I think that James K. Polk’s invasion of Mexico is an even closer historical analog to the current situation than anything Hitler did. Polk, of course, sent the troops into Mexico in 1846—ostensibly to protect Americans in the newly created Republic of Texas, but also to fulfill America’s “Manifest Destiny” to spread from sea to shining sea.

Along with securing those borders, of course, Polk also managed to acquire the rest of Texas—along with Arizona, Utah, Nevada, and California, and portions of Colorado and New Mexico. There is no way to frame this as anything other than a naked land grab by a stronger power against a weaker one. The same is true in Ukraine. And it has been true in tens of thousands of other places as well.

So much of what the Nazi’s did was uniquely evil, but the seizure of the Sudetenland was not. It was non-uniquely evil in that it played by the same rules that have always governed the affairs of nations. This means that if we study it carefully, without succumbing to the "how-dare-you-compare-anything-at-all-to-Hitler-you-Trogladyte" rhetoric that surfaces from time to time, we might learn some useful things about human nature and political motivations--things that might actually help us address the current crisis.

Russia’s seizure of the Crimea, while inconsistent with the aspirational norms of the 21st century, is completely consistent with the way that nations and empires have acted since the invention of nations and empires. It is how most of the nations of the world, including ours, came to be. And, though America’s recent adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been wars of territorial expansion, they do not exactly give one confidence that the world's most powerful nation has abandoned the “might makes right” theory of international relations.

I am not trying to excuse Russia's actions here or to badmouth America first. And I am certainly not suggesting that Hitler was anything other than purely evil. What I am suggesting is that the international response to Russia’s aggression has been predicated largely on selective memory and manufactured disbelief. If we want to say that the world has changed—that there is a new sheriff in town and his name is the International Community—we are going to have to start acting all of the time like we believe it.

Latest articles

Marijuana plant.
Why the War on Cannabis Refuses to Die: How Boomers and the Yippies Made Weed Political
For much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, American physicians freely prescribed cannabis to treat a wide range of ailments. But by the mid-twentieth century, federal officials were laying the groundwork for a sweeping criminal crackdown. Cannabis would ultimately be classified as a Schedule I substance, placed alongside heroin and LSD, and transformed into a political weapon that shaped American policy for the next six decades....
30 Jun, 2025
-
2 min read
Donald Trump standing behind presidential podium and in front of two American flags.
Has Trump Made His Case for the Nobel Peace Prize?
A news item in recent days that was overshadowed in the media by SCOTUS and the One Big Beautiful Budget Bill was a US-brokered peace agreement that was signed between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) – which if it holds will end a conflict between the two countries that has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands of people....
30 Jun, 2025
-
7 min read
Picture of skyscraper in New York behind a bridge.
Knives Come Out Against Reform at NYC CRC Hearing as Independents Rise
Last week in Staten Island, the NYC Charter Revision Commission held its next-to-last public hearing. As Commissioner Diane Savino commented, addressing NYC's closed primary system “is the single biggest issue we’ve heard this year.”...
30 Jun, 2025
-
3 min read