The state branch of the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in Lower Saxony has been officially classified as a “right-wing extremist organisation”, opening the door to further state surveillance of its officials.
Lower Saxony Interior Minister Daniela Behrens announced in Hanover on Monday that the AfD state branch had been classified as an extremist group, while claiming that so-called right-wing extremism represents the “greatest threat” to German society.
However, rather than detailing any specific plots to overthrow the government or any violent intent, the left-wing Social Democrat politician merely cited publicly espoused positions on issues such as immigration.
“It treats our state and our democratic institutions with contempt. People with migratory backgrounds are made into second-class citizens. It unapologetically propagates the so-called ‘remigration’ of millions of people from the heart of our society. This is again proven. The continuation of surveillance by the Lower Saxony [Office for the Protection of the Constitution] is a logical consequence given this backdrop,” Behrens said in comments reported by state broadcaster Deutsche Welle.
Local branches of the AfD are already classified as “right-wing extremist organisations” in four other German states, including Brandenburg, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, and Thuringia. The branches in Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland were also classified as such; however, the designations are on hold while under legal appeal.
This situation is similar to the one that the party faces at the national level as well, with the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) announcing last year that it considered the party as a whole a right-wing extremist organisation. However, during the appeal process, the classification is not yet official, and the party has consistently dismissed the move as a bid by the left to weaponise the machinery of the state against them.
The move to classify the AfD in Lower Saxony comes despite the party currently standing as the third-largest party in the state, having won 11 per cent of the vote in 2022.
The AfD also currently stands as the second most popular party in Germany, with the most recent polling from the RTL/NTV barometer finding that 25 per cent of the public support the anti-mass migration party, compared to 20.8 per cent at last year’s elections. Meanwhile, the government leading Union, comprising the Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU) and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria (CSU), stands at 26 per cent.
The coalition partner, the Social Democrats, currently trails the AfD by over 10 points, with its support collapsing to just 14 per cent, down from 16.4 per cent in last year’s elections and 25.7 per cent in the 2021 general election. Rounding out the field, the Greens currently stand at 12 per cent, and the Left Party is in fifth position at 10 per cent.
The decision to brand the branch as an extremist organisation comes amid a national debate over the potential outright ban of the AfD, as has been suggested by top leftist politicians. However, briefing Süddeutsche Zeitung on Monday, intelligence officials warned against an immediate ban. Not out of concern for German democracy, but rather because it may disrupt their covert investigations into the party, allegedly including infiltration of the party’s leadership apparatus.
However, there have been moral arguments raised against the push to ban one of the nation’s top political parties. Over the weekend, Bild columnist Harald Martenstein excoriated leftist proponents of banning the AfD, arguing that they represented the true threat to German democracy.
In a mock trial at the Thalia Theatre in Hamburg over whether the AfD should be banned, Martenstein said: “The crucial question is whether such a party pursues legitimate or illegitimate goals. It is not a question of whether you or I consider these goals to be right. Illegitimate goals would include, for example, the elimination of freedom of expression, the deprivation of fundamental rights for segments of the population, or the banning of parties deemed disruptive by those in power. Illegitimate goals are therefore precisely the goals you advocate.”
The veteran journalist noted that history is replete with examples of people using the justification of “saving democracy” to punish their political opponents and thus undermine the very thing they claim to want to protect, citing the “Anti-Rightist Campaign” under Communist Chinese dictator Mao Zedong, which saw millions arrested and imprisoned in labour camps, while transforming the country into an effective single party state.
“You know there are some differences between Heinrich Himmler and Alice Weidel. An openly lesbian woman like Alice Weidel, who was involved with someone of a different race, would have ended up in a concentration camp under the Nazis. Anyone who calls all right-wingers Nazis just because they aren’t left-wingers is truly historically illiterate. But that would be forgivable, I think. Ignorance isn’t a crime. What I accuse you of is knowing what you’re doing. You know that you’re not trying to prevent the Fourth Reich, but merely to eliminate your political competition.”
Follow Kurt Zindulka on X: Follow @KurtZindulka or e-mail to: [email protected]
Read the full article here