There’s growing concern in Germany that society is becoming increasingly polarized. The question of how far right the AfD is threatens to further deepen the divide.
Is the Alternative for Germany (AfD) an extreme right-wing party or not? The German domestic intelligence service, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, recently classified it as “confirmed right-wing extremist.”
However, the AfD has taken the issue to court and now the intelligence service will suspend its use the statement until a ruling has been made. While this is common practice during pending proceedings, the AfD is celebrating the suspension as a win.
A majority of Germans share the view that the AfD’s agenda runs counter to democracy, the rule of law and human dignity. But how best to deal with the AfD is becoming an issue that could further divide German society.
Chancellor Friedrich Merz: Should a ban on the AfD be considered by the Federal Constitutional Court?
Opponents argue that this would further promote social division and that 10 million AfD voters would not simply disappear. Supporters of the ban insist that enemies of democracy should not be put in a position to able to destroy democracy.
Johannes Kiess, deputy director of the Else Frenkel-Brunswik Institute for Democracy Research at the University of Leipzig, believes that an application to ban the AfD should be examined.
“If it comes to the conclusion that the AfD does not endanger the basic democratic order, we will have to continue to deal with it in parliament,” Kiess told DW.
“But if the result is that it is indeed a threat, then we will still have to deal with the issue of social division. But at least we no longer have an actor who deliberately and intentionally promotes this division.”
JOURNALISTS’ TREATMENT OF AfD CRITICIZED
The original reassessment of the AfD by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution has also fueled the debate on how the media should deal with the party in the future. The German Association of Journalists (DJV) has called on journalists to adapt their reporting and make it clearer that the AfD is not a normal party from the democratic spectrum.
Josef Holnburger, managing director at the think tank CeMAS (Center for Monitoring, Analysis and Strategy), believes journalists should change the way they report on the AfD. He refers to a pattern from the federal election campaign at the beginning of the year whereby the topic of immigration was given disproportionate coverage compared to other issues, although the AfD constantly claimed that its talking points do not get covered in the media.
“But the AfD will never be satisfied with the media coverage. That’s why it doesn’t help to take up their issues again and again in the hope of pacifying AfD voters. The party will always take on the role of victim and claim that their issues are being negatively portrayed, even if the microphone is always under their noses,” he said.
WILL MERZ’S BOTCHED CHANCELLOR ELECTION FUEL AfD?
Holnburger argues that the AfD should not be made bigger than it is, adding that Merz’s botched election as chancellor exudes a certain insecurity. On Tuesday, Merz failed to win the first ballot in parliament in a historic defeat before going on to win the second round.
“We know that the AfD always likes to target this insecurity and tries to use it for its political capital. But not every problem with finding a majority and not every problem with the government is automatically a win for the AfD,” he said.
Holnburger believes politicians must counter this with a successful model of democracy in the future, as has recently happened in Canada and Australia. “Polarization can also mean that such forces of reason become stronger,” he added.
If anyone is familiar with the topic of social and political polarization and how it can be tackled, it’s Adrian Blattner. He’s currently taking a close look at the US, Brazil and Germany as part of his research at Stanford University in the US. According to his thesis, so-called “affective polarization” is not yet as pronounced in Germany as it is in the other two countries.
Blattner and his team of researchers presented a highly regarded study three years ago. It was based on a competition of ideas on how best to reduce polarization, in which 25 suggestions were tested in a trial involving 32,000 people, including online games.
There has already been a similar initiative in Germany, with comparable success. Media outlet Zeit Online initiated the project “Germany Speaks” before the 2021 general election, bringing people with completely opposing political views into conversation.
Blattner analyzed the project and came to the conclusion that the participants had significantly more positive feelings toward people with opposing political views after the discussion. He therefore believes the typical urban Green Party voter and the AfD voter in the countryside can be reconciled.
“Some Green Party and Social Democrat voters also support a tougher immigration policy, and there are also supporters of climate protection measures among AfD voters,” Blattner told DW.
It is, therefore, important not to lump together the entire electorate of a party, he said: “That is problematic because it reinforces negative feelings towards the other side. People avoid contact more and more and this creates a vicious circle of polarization. We also have to find ways in our private lives to keep in touch with people who hold different political views. Even if it hurts sometimes.”
In addition to dealing with the AfD, it’s above all the issues of migration, climate protection and unemployment benefits where different groups in Germany seem to be irreconcilably opposed to each other.
And yet, said sociologist Kiess, “it’s still not like in the US where there is a deep divide, no matter what issue you raise, you are either on one side or the other.” Germany as a whole is not yet as polarized as it is sometimes made out to be. “The perceived polarization is much stronger than the actual polarization.” (DW)
