AfD and the trouble with banning political parties
As support for the far-right party surges, politicians are debating whether it poses a threat to German democracy
More than 800,000 people took to the streets of Germany's major cities over the weekend to protest against Alternative for Germany (AfD), following reports that members of the right-wing party have been discussing a radical plan to expel millions of migrants.
Independent investigative news site Correctiv reported on a meeting of right-wing groups including the AfD and the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU). They were planning "for the so-called remigration, or expulsion, of millions of people who have immigrated to Germany", said Deutsche Welle.
The story "jolted the nation awake from its winter slumber", said The Guardian, "triggering sackings and resignations" and "mass rallies across German cities".
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
It also prompted "a politically risky debate over an outright ban of the country's second-strongest party", the paper added.
'Coloured by the country's Nazi past'
Debate about potentially banning the AfD heated up when Saskia Esken, the co-leader of the ruling Social Democratic Party (SPD), said earlier this month that she was in favour of discussing a ban, if only, as she said, to "shake voters" out of their complacency.
Since then, politicians from across the political spectrum have "weighed in on whether a legal effort to ban Alternative for Germany (AfD), while possible under German law, would be tactically smart", said Politico, or whether it would only "further fuel the party's rise".
Like "so much of German politics", the debate is "coloured by the country's Nazi past", the site added. Conscious that Adolf Hitler had made gains at the ballot box before ultimately seizing power, many politicians have begun to see the prohibition of the AfD as "an imperative rooted in historical experience".
One senior CDU politician, Daniel Günther, recently declared the AfD to be "dangerous", adding that "large parts of the AfD want to eliminate our democracy".
In an interview with Cicero, a Berlin-based political and cultural magazine, Günther said that he has "great sympathy for a [AfD] ban procedure to be initiated," which ought to be "carefully prepared by the federal government".
"A defensive democracy must use its instruments," he insisted, and that means "fighting parties that are unconstitutional with all the means of the constitutional state".
The idea of banning a party is "not only politically fraught", but also poses "a moral dilemma for many", said Euronews.
As Princeton professor Jan-Werner Mueller put it in a 2013 article for Project Syndicate, when it comes to banning extremist parties, democracies are "damned if they do, damned if they don't".
There is also a purely practical issue, said Lorenzo Vidino, director of the programme on extremism at George Washington University. "If you ban a group, it doesn't just disappear," Vidino told Euronews. "AfD has millions of supporters – the problem it poses isn't solved after you ban the party." In fact, by dissolving the party you might simply end up "losing the control you have over it".
Today, Germany's top court "stripped a neo-Nazi party", Die Heimat, meaning the Homeland, of the right to public financing and tax advantages, "a decision that could provide a blueprint" to head off the wider resurgence of the far right, said The New York Times. Die Heimat was too small to receive public funding anyway, but the move was described by Germany’s interior minister Nancy Faeser as a "clear signal" that "our democratic state does not fund enemies of the Constitution".
Some say a similar ban on public financing for AfD "could be an effective middle ground", said the paper. "It would hinder the AfD, without banning it outright."
'Incompatible with a free society'
The calls for a ban are "completely absurd and expose the anti-democratic attitude of those making these demands", said Alice Weidel, co-leader of the party, in a statement to Politico. They also show that "the other parties have long since run out of substantive arguments against our political proposals".
AfD has also insisted that its recent meeting that discussed the idea of sending migrants home has been completely mischaracterised.
In the parliamentary debate prompted by the joint motion led by the SDP, Bernd Baumann, parliamentary secretary of the AfD, told lawmakers it was no more than a "small, private debate club", not a "secret meeting dangerous to the public".
Nancy Faeser, the federal interior minister from the SPD, said that such a suggestion was nonsense. "We are seeing an active effort to shift borders and to spread contempt for democracy and misanthropy into the heart of society," she said.
A ban itself could represent a challenge to Germany's democracy, according to the Bavarian MP Petr Bystron. He told The European Conservative: "The last German chancellor who banned a democratic party was Adolf Hitler. All of those who are now trying to ban the AfD are following in his footsteps."
Opposition leaders like Sahra Wagenknecht, who recently founded a new left-wing party, the BSW, have sharply criticised calls to ban the AfD. "Banning unpopular parties because they become too strong is incompatible with a free society," she said in an interview with The European Conservative in November. She said she found "fighting a political competitor with unconstitutional ban proposals incompatible with democratic aspirations".
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Arion McNicoll is a freelance writer at The Week Digital and was previously the UK website’s editor. He has also held senior editorial roles at CNN, The Times and The Sunday Times. Along with his writing work, he co-hosts “Today in History with The Retrospectors”, Rethink Audio’s flagship daily podcast, and is a regular panellist (and occasional stand-in host) on “The Week Unwrapped”. He is also a judge for The Publisher Podcast Awards.
-
The mental health crisis affecting vets
Under The Radar Death of Hampshire vet highlights mental health issues plaguing the industry
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
The Onion is having a very ironic laugh with Infowars
The Explainer The satirical newspaper is purchasing the controversial website out of bankruptcy
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
'Rahmbo, back from Japan, will be looking for a job? Really?'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
What will Trump mean for the Middle East?
Talking Point President-elect's 'pro-Israel stance' could mask a more complex and unpredictable approach to the region
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Netanyahu's gambit: axing his own defence minster
Talking Point Sacking of Yoav Gallant demonstrated 'utter contempt' for Israeli public
By The Week UK Published
-
Should Sonia Sotomayor retire from the Supreme Court?
Talking Points Democrats worry about repeating the history of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Why has the German government collapsed?
Today's Big Question The faltering economy triggers a crisis
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Last updated
-
Extremism is becoming more common among veterans and service members
Under the Radar Nearly 500 people arrested for extremist crimes between 2017 and 2023 had military backgrounds
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Meloni's migration solution: camps in Albania
Talking Point The controversial approach is potentially 'game-changing'
By The Week UK Published
-
US election: why can't Kamala Harris close the deal?
Talking Point For the vice-president to win 'we need less mulling and more action in a do-or-die moment'
By The Week UK Published
-
Trump blames migrants for the housing crisis. Experts aren't so sure.
Talking Points Migrants need housing. They also build it.
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published