Tea with Trump

In the movie "Tea with Mussolini," Lady Hester, the widow of Britain’s former ambassador to Italy, retains an admiring faith in Benito Mussolini. She visits him, receives his assurances of safety for herself, her friends, and her family, and proudly recounts her “tea with Mussolini.”

In the chapter "Tea with Hitler" from Tim Bouverie’s book "Appeasing Hitler," the author tells the story of British figures who believed that Hitler could be contained through dialogue and partial agreements.

Donald Trump has accelerated, in the seven months of his second term, the trajectory he began in his first, when he was still surrounded by adults who restrained him. This summer, he pushed even further in the march toward dictatorship that defines his administration.

There is no “Night of the Long Knives” in the United States today, and there is no Holocaust or genocide on the horizon (except the one the Trump administration is endorsing in Gaza). But if you read usually moderate commentators such as Graff, Ziblatt, or Freedland, you will find convincing arguments that comparisons with at least some of the intentions of Mussolini or Hitler are no longer exaggerations.

The United States is the oldest and wealthiest democracy, and the principal geostrategic ally and protector of Europe. It is not surprising that there is great reluctance to face this unpleasant truth.

I would argue that there are at least two types of people who attempt to have “tea with Trump.” One group consists of oligarchs who rationally believe they can benefit materially from him. The other consists of frightened people who fear punishment from a mafia boss.

As for the first group, perhaps one reason economists were surprised by the stock market’s “non-reaction” to threats against Central Bank independence (CBI) is that institutions like CBI were originally designed to “protect” policies from left-wing pressures. When the threat comes from the right, markets often accept it, calculating that they stand to gain more from deregulation and tax cuts than they might lose from inflation or policy uncertainty.

Trump is different from Mussolini and Hitler because the United States in 2025 is different from Italy and Germany in the 1930s. But he is worse than Orbán, Erdoğan, Bolsonaro, or Modi (bad enough as they are). He is more unstable, more powerful, and more unpredictable. He is also worse than Xi Jinping, who at least appears serious and organized. Trump is closer to Putin or AMLO, but likely even more erratic and vicious, with his relentless rhetoric and constant lies.

When Trump returned to the White House, European leaders seemed unsure of how to respond. Now, their strategic choice has been accommodation rather than confrontation. This will have to change if Europe is to survive. If not outright confrontation, then at least a strategy to distance the EU from the current United States is urgently needed.