Similarities and Differences between Nazi Germany and the Islamic republic of Iran

By Andy Su

Words: 899

 

Many say that learning about Nazi Germany and the atrocities that they committed, teaches us to never allow something similar to happen again. However, many genocides have taken place and continue to take place today. Many people of the world are oppressed and victimized for their race, gender, and social class. Authoritarian regimes still exist around the world. One such authoritarian regime is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Similar to in Nazi Germany, Iranians face a powerful leader and a police state that is aided by common citizens. One major difference is the place of religion in each regime. While Nazi’s did not favor religion, Iran’s government system is entirely based on Islamic law.

Iran and Nazi Germany both had absolute leaders with veto power over government action. In Nazi Germany, Hitler “made or approved all final decisions on matters of strategy and policy” (Stackelberg, 153). However, most laws were discussed and created “before Hitler made the final decisions” (Stackelberg, 152). Stackelberg argues that the judicial system was a way the Nazis legitimized their power, however, he adds that during the war Hitler announced “his authority to override judicial decisions (Stackelberg, 150). Similarly, the Supreme Leader of Iran has large control over governmental decisions and affairs. The Supreme chooses who can run for office and as head of state he is chief of the military and supervises policy. Although other branches make the laws and rules, he reins over all of the government. Additionally, much of Hitler’s legitimacy and power was from his “charismatic leadership,” and his almost god like status (Stackelberg, 153). The original Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, also led through charisma and popular views that saw him as the father of the revolution and the ultimate sharia jurist consult. Both Nazi Germany and Iran had and have strong leaders that rule with almost absolute power.

 

Khomeini

 




Current Supreme Leader Khamenei

 

Another similarity between the regimes is the power of paramilitary forces loyal to the regime and the significant role they play in the regime success. In Germany the SS were one of the most “powerful institutions in Germany,” with Himmler becoming one of the most powerful Nazi leaders (Stackelberg, 132). In Iran, the Revolutionary Guard was a key supporter during the revolution and formation of the Islamic republic. Currently the group holds significant political power with many worrying that the Guard is becoming too powerful. In addition, the SS gave “lower-class youth” the opportunity to associate with higher classes of society (Stackelberg, 157). Similarly, many poor Iranian men join the Revolutionary guard and Basij forces because both groups give these otherwise underprivileged men power and recognition. Stackelberg mentions that the police state would not have been possible without public consensus and public “denunciations of fellow citizens” (Stackelberg, 156). Iran’s Basij volunteer paramilitary street force has become the morality police of the state. The Basij will violently break up protests and demonstrations, and they enforce laws that restrict personal behavior such as public displays of affection, wearing the chador, and having satellite dishes. Although more formally organized than the Nazi informers, the Basij are citizens that the regime depends on to help uphold its laws. Both regimes used and use violent groups to uphold and enforce their leadership.

Basij attacking Protesters

 

Revolutionary Guard

            The role of religion in each country is a major difference between Nazi Germany and modern Iran. Religion was not a formal part of the Nazi rule and they cooperated with the church so as to not antagonize the “large number of [church] followers” in Germany (Stackelberg, 168). Many Nazi leader felt at best ambivalent to the church, and Hitler even argued that “religion ‘must rot like a dangerous limb’’’ (Stackelberg, 168). The church took away from the cult of Nazism, and the Nazi party did place the church in high regard. Nazi leaders tried to push the church under their control. However, eventually Nazi leaders stopped trying to force “church leaders to submit to the government’s will” after the attempts failed (Stackelberg, 171). In contrast, Iran is an Islamic republic founded on the principle of valayat-e-faqih, a guardianship of Islamic jurists. Sharia, the law of God, is the ultimate law of the land. All government action must be in accordance to Shia law and all legislation and political candidate must be in accordance with Islam. Whereas the Nazi regime was resistant to Christianity and organized religion because of its threat to Nazi power, Iran is based entirely on the rule of Islam and power rests in the hands of clerics. The Nazi’s resisted organized religion because they saw the power that it had to unify and control the people. In Iran religion’s strong ties to the government give the government the control over the religions population that the Nazi’s could not gain. The power of religion helps to unify the Iranian people under the government and their laws.

            Nazi Germany and the Islamic republic of Iran have several similarities in structure and violent enforcement of laws. However, the Islamic Republic’s religious base gives the regime an ability to use religion as a basis of legitimate control. Whereas the Nazi’s used ethnicity to unite the people and struggled to control religion, Iran uses religion and struggles to control its many ethnicities.  Each base of ideological power brings about positives and negatives. The similarities between the two regimes demonstrate that although we may never allow another Nazi Germany, we have allowed many regimes that share many of the same negative traits.

 

Additional Source:

O'Neil, Patrick H., Karl J. Fields, and Donald Share. 2006. Cases in comparative politics. New York: Norton.