No Overlooking the AfD: A Contentious Issue
- by Martin Debes
- 2 Min
- German far-right party AfD Cannot Be Tracked nor Outlawed
The AfD embraces extremists within its ranks, frequently displaying nationalist, racist, and reactionary tendencies. Whether the entire party is classified as "securely right-wing extremist" by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) is debatable. However, its growing radicalization poses a significant threat to Germany's liberal democratic model.
Despite criticism, the AfD is the second-largest faction in the Bundestag and the strongest force in the Thuringian state parliament. In some polls, it has even pulled ahead nationwide. Given these facts, some suggest using the BfV's opinion as a basis for a ban procedure to protect democracy, especially given Germany's history.
There are three fundamental questions that need addressing before making such a crucial decision: Should parliamentary parties be scrutinized by an internal intelligence service? Are the criteria for a potential ban met? What would happen at the end of a ban procedure?
The BfV has a questionable past, having once funded leading neonazis as informants, thus financing the right-wing extremist scene. This failure was a major factor in the initial NPD ban procedure's failure. The second procedure was initiated following the NSU crimes, another result of the BfV's ineffectiveness.
Doubts about a Ban on the AfD
Despite its independence, the BfV, as a subordinate agency of the interior ministries, is deeply entwined in the political process. It has monitored parties like the PDS and the Left, including MP Bodo Ramelow, which Thuringia rightly deemed scandalous. When Ramelow became Minister President in Thuringia, most informants were shut down.
Neither the Bundesrat, the Bundestag, nor the federal government has initiated a ban procedure so far. This is not due to a lack of political will but rather justified doubts about whether the presented evidence by the BfV is sufficient. This skepticism is unlikely to change with the new opinion.
If the evidence were sufficient for a ban procedure, it would drag on for years, potentially ending in failure with disastrous consequences or a ban that could lead to civil war-like scenes. The AfD electorate would likely remain.
I, as an observer in the NSU trial, author of books about the rise of the AfD, and a longtime observer in Thuringia, have witnessed Björn Höcke and his fraction's performance in parliament. Meanwhile, other parties often seem overwhelmed in their attempts to counter the AfD.
Keeping Promises: Freedom, Security, Prosperity
It is clear that the AfD, which oscillates between populism and extremism, cannot be co-opted, ignored, or fought easily. Additionally, it seems difficult to ban. To prevent AfD's rise to power, other parties must fulfill the promise of this democracy: freedom, security, and prosperity, ensuring a fair and open political debate while using legal means and promoting civil engagement.
The BfV is not just an agency. It is a societal responsibility.
- The AfD's presence in EC countries, particularly in the Bundestag and some state parliants, raises concerns due to their extremist tendencies and vocational training in nationalism, racism, and reactionary policies.
- Vocational training for tackling extremism within the AfD is essential, especially considering the party's growing radicalization and its position as the second-largest faction in the Bundestag.
- Policy-and-legislation regarding the monitoring and potential ban of extremist parties, like the AfD, must account for the societal responsibility of the BfV, learned from its past mistakes such as funding neonazis as informants.
- General news outlets should focus on providing vocational training for educating the public about the risks of extremism in politics, as well as promoting civil engagement to counter extremist ideologies in EC countries.
