Donald Trump’s return to power has pushed extremist language and imagery from the fringes into the US state itself. This is not about careless slogans. It reflects an institutional tolerance for ideas once linked to fascist movements.
The Argument in Plain Sight
Eighty years after the defeat of Nazi Germany, echoes of fascist language now appear in official US government communication. Under Donald Trump’s renewed presidency, these signals no longer come from online extremists or marginal figures. They come from state departments, official social media accounts, and senior appointments, as documented by The Guardian in its reporting on the Trump administration’s use of white supremacist language. This pattern matters because the language used by power shapes who belong, who are excluded, and which ideas are treated as legitimate.
This is not an argument about tone policing. It is about how governments communicate authority. When a state borrows the visual and linguistic grammar of extremist movements, it sends a message about whose fears matter and whose rights are conditional, a concern also raised in an analysis by PBS NewsHour of official posts echoing extremist rhetoric.
From Neo-Nazi Texts to State Messaging
In 1978, William Gayley Simpson, a former Christian pastor turned neo Nazi ideologue, published Which Way, Western Man. The book praised Adolf Hitler and framed white identity as a civilisation at a crossroads. For decades, its reach remained limited to far-right circles.
That boundary broke when the US Department of Homeland Security shared an ICE recruitment image asking, “Which way, American man?” The slogan was not neutral. It closely mirrored Simpson’s framing. Investigations by CNN and NBC News showed this was not a one-off error. Similar themes appeared repeatedly across official messaging, a pattern also examined by The New Republic in its reporting on the ICE recruitment drive.
Crossroads imagery, narratives of decline, and civilisational panic form the core language of fascist propaganda. These choices do not appear by accident. They reflect an ideological comfort with framing politics as a struggle for racial or cultural survival, as argued by Zeteo in its analysis of Nazi dog whistles in DHS communication.
The Racial Logic Behind the Visuals
The same structure appeared when the official White House account posted a cartoon of Greenlandic huskies choosing between Washington and rival powers, captioned “Which way, Greenland man?” On its own, it looked like crude geopolitical messaging. In context, it echoed the same racialised logic. Politico later confirmed the origins and intent of the post in its reporting on the Greenland imagery controversy.
Fascist movements have long framed politics as a moral crossroads that demands unity and obedience. Disagreement becomes betrayal. Diversity becomes decay. When governments adopt this framing, they narrow the space for pluralism. Policy debates turn into tests of loyalty rather than questions of evidence.
When Slogans Echo History
Visuals are only one part of the story. Language used by federal departments has also raised alarms. The Department of Labor shared a video declaring “One Homeland. One People. One Heritage.” The phrase closely resembles the Nazi chant “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer”, a connection highlighted by researchers of historical propaganda at the German Propaganda Archive.
Another official post declared, “America is for Americans.” According to analysis by the Southern Poverty Law Center, such language aligns with white nationalist narratives that define belonging through blood and ancestry rather than law or shared civic values. This is not patriotism. Patriotism rests on equal citizenship.
Extremism Inside the Bureaucracy
Rhetoric shapes culture, but people enforce policy. Here, staffing choices under Trump deepen concern. In 2025, reporting revealed that James Rodden, an ICE prosecutor in Texas, had operated a social media account praising Hitler and declaring America a white nation. Investigations by the Texas Observer and Texas Standard confirmed that he returned quietly to his role after a brief removal.
This was not a junior staffer. It was a federal prosecutor enforcing immigration law. The case signalled that open admiration for Nazi ideology carried few professional consequences, prompting further scrutiny from civil rights groups and lawmakers.
Similar questions surround Paul Ingrassia, now acting general counsel at the General Services Administration. Concerns about his past remarks and associations were detailed in a letter to the White House by House Democrats and later examined by NPR.
Trump’s Own Words
The ideological tone comes from the top. Donald Trump has repeatedly used language rooted in fascist traditions. He described immigrants as “poisoning the blood” of the nation. Historians and outlets such as NPR and Axios have traced this phrasing directly to Nazi racial theory.
Trump has called political opponents “vermin”, a term used by Hitler to strip enemies of humanity. He has hosted figures like Nick Fuentes and Ye at Mar-a-Lago, as reported by Politico, and has avoided clear denunciations, a pattern also documented by ABC News.
Even Trump’s former chief of staff, John Kelly, told PBS NewsHour that Trump spoke admiringly of Hitler’s generals and claimed the dictator “did some good things”. These are not verbal slips. They reveal a consistent worldview that treats authoritarian power with respect rather than caution.
Denial No Longer Works
Supporters argue that accusations of fascism are exaggerated. The word should indeed be used carefully. But this argument does not rest on labels. It rests on patterns.
When state accounts borrow imagery from neo Nazi texts, when departments repeat slogans with clear historical lineage, and when officials who praise Hitler face limited consequences, the issue is no longer rhetorical excess. It is institutional tolerance. As Reuters reported, neo-Nazi leaders themselves have celebrated Trump’s rise. Dalton Henry Stout of the Aryan Freedom Network said Trump “awakened a lot of people” and that “our side won the election”.
The Danger of Normalisation
You have been educated about information that exists until October in the year 2023. The arrival of fascism does not happen suddenly but rather develops through the use of symbols and language and through the gradual destruction of social norms. The system operates effectively when organizations do not establish restrictions, and people stop taking responsibility for their actions.
The United States has maintained its position of opposing totalitarian systems throughout its entire history. The government allows Nazi adjacent rhetoric, which undermines totalitarianism efforts and harms the United States, which uses this claim to defend its moral authority abroad. The policy puts minorities, migrants, and dissenters at increased danger throughout the country.
The test is simple. If an administration does not want to be associated with fascism, it must stop hiring those who praise it, stop echoing its slogans, and stop amplifying its imagery. These are choices. And they shape the future of democratic life far beyond a single presidency.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
Syed Salman Mehdi is a seasoned freelance writer and investigative journalist with a strong foundation in IT and software technology. Renowned for his in-depth explorations of governance, regional conflicts, and socio-political transformations, he focuses on South Asia and the Middle East. Salman’s rigorous research and unflinching analysis have earned him bylines in esteemed international platforms such as Global Voices, CounterPunch, Dissident Voice, Tolerance Canada, and Paradigm Shift. Blending technical expertise with a relentless pursuit of truth, he brings a sharp, critical perspective to today’s most pressing geopolitical narratives.