My comparison between Trump and Hitler is not based on their record of starting wars - Trump has yet to start a major one outside the USA - but rather on their ability to propagandise their ideas, inflame huge rallies,  and speak to the emotional needs of large numbers of citizens who do not have the advantages of third level education, good jobs, or a privileged place in fashionable society.

As Larry Donnelly said at yesterday evening's session (which I missed), Trump has the ability to speak to disadvantaged Americans in a way that almost no Democratic politician can. Whether he end's up delivering huge benefits for these voters (in the way he didn't in his first term) is almost immaterial. He speaks to their emotional needs now.

My great fear is that this could all end in tears (as Hitler's reign did), and as Trump's first term almost did with the attempt to overthrow democracy. But it would also be wrong to overdo the analogy. Unless Russia resorts to nuclear weapons, there is no reason Europe cannot defend itself and every reason why it should develop the capability to do so.

Neither the USA nor Europe has a responsibility to solve the problems of the whole world - some, like Climate change, or the unsustainable population explosion in Africa, can only be solved by global and regional cooperation with the primary responsibility falling on those most affected. Attempts to impose solutions from abroad rarely succeed, with the notable exception of WWII.

But the risks we now face are enormous. What if Putin is emboldened to employ tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine by the knowledge that Trump is most unlikely to retaliate? What if Netanyahu decides to continue on a war of conquest and annihilation in Gaza. Can we really say "not our  problem" if Ireland remains safe?

My piece is intended as a warning, not a prediction.

Index of Frank's Diaries