Introduction

The lives and political careers of Adolf Hitler and Benjamin Netanyahu, two figures separated by decades and vastly different ideologies, offer fascinating, albeit superficial, parallels. While Hitler led Nazi Germany into the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, Netanyahu has served as the longest-standing Prime Minister of Israel, navigating modern geopolitical issues. Despite their different ideologies and contexts, both leaders share notable similarities in their early lives, military experiences, and political strategies that merit exploration.

Early Life and Family Background

Adolf Hitler was born in Austria in 1889, the fourth of six children. His relationship with his father, Alois Hitler, was strained due to the latter’s emotionally harsh nature. The death of Hitler’s younger brother, Edmund, further isolated him, pushing him into a detached and introverted state. These experiences likely contributed to the formation of his rigid personality and later extremism.

Benjamin Netanyahu, born in Tel Aviv in 1949, grew up in a family deeply connected to the Zionist movement. He spent part of his childhood in the United States due to his father’s academic career. The traumatic death of his older brother, Yoni Netanyahu, in a military operation significantly impacted Netanyahu’s worldview, fostering a focus on security and defence. Both men experienced family loss early on, which may have shaped their trajectories toward leadership.

Military Service: Shaping Nationalism and Political Ideologies

Military service played a key role in shaping the political ideologies of both Hitler and Netanyahu. 

Hitler served in World War I, where he was decorated for bravery with the Iron Cross First Class. His war experience reinforced his intense nationalism and deepened his disdain for those he believed betrayed Germany.

Netanyahu served in Israel’s elite commando unit, Sayeret Matkal, participating in multiple military operations, which helped form his firm stance on national security. His military background allowed him to present himself as a strong, experienced leader, a key element in his political ascent.

Both men’s military experiences shaped their nationalist views and their focus on maintaining power through strength, though they applied this in vastly different ways.

Political Beginnings: Gaining Power

Both Hitler and Netanyahu rose to power through pre-existing political organisations, capitalising on their oratorical skills and the issues of the time.

Hitler joined the German Workers’ Party in 1919, which later became the Nazi Party. His charisma and mastery of propaganda helped him become the party’s leader, and he exploited Germany’s economic woes following the Great Depression to attract a mass following. Through strategic alliances and exploiting political unrest, Hitler was appointed Chancellor in 1933 and later used the Reichstag fire to consolidate power and transform Germany into a totalitarian state.

Netanyahu entered Israeli politics in 1988, joining the Likud Party. His focus on counterterrorism and security struck a chord with Israeli voters, and he quickly ascended within the party, becoming chairman in 1993. In contrast to Hitler, Netanyahu maintained his power through democratic elections, political alliances, and media influence, serving multiple terms as Prime Minister.

Comparing Strategies for Maintaining Power

Hitler maintained power through authoritarian means, consolidating control by passing the Enabling Act, effectively dissolving democratic institutions. His regime relied on terror, propaganda, and the systematic elimination of opposition. Hitler’s approach was rooted in fear and violence, marking one of the darkest periods in modern history.

Netanyahu, on the other hand, has sustained his leadership through coalition-building and political strategy within Israel’s parliamentary democracy. He has capitalised on security threats and built relationships with global leaders to reinforce his political standing. While he has faced legal challenges and allegations of corruption, Netanyahu has managed to navigate Israel’s political landscape effectively, maintaining support from the right-wing factions of Israeli society.

Ultimate Beliefs and Historical Legacies

The ultimate beliefs of these two leaders could not be more different. Hitler pursued an ideology rooted in extreme nationalism, antisemitism, and racial superiority, culminating in the genocide of millions. His belief in Lebensraum, or living space for the Aryan race, drove his aggressive territorial expansion.

Netanyahu, while also a nationalist, focuses on Israel’s security and the preservation of a Jewish state within a volatile region. His policies reflect a pragmatic approach to maintaining Israel’s sovereignty and addressing both internal and external threats. Netanyahu has advocated for free-market economics, opposed the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and supported Jewish settlement in disputed territories.

Conclusion

Despite a few surface-level parallels in their early lives and political ascents, Adolf Hitler and Benjamin Netanyahu are profoundly different leaders in terms of ideology, governance, and historical legacies. Hitler’s reign of terror in Nazi Germany stands in stark contrast to Netanyahu’s democratic leadership of Israel. However, both leaders’ ability to navigate their countries’ political landscapes and maintain power offers valuable insight into the role of personal history and external pressures in shaping a nation’s future.