The German Federal Election -- a first overview

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

But, for clarity, they don't have any actual policies that you consider to be beyond the pale? There are no far right manifesto pledges?

Deporting "unassimilated" naturalized citizens is a platform pledge.

Immediately recognizing Russian territorial gains and reopening to Russian energy is a platform pledge.

There are of course other things on there (banning same sex marriage) I would deeply oppose, but I don't view these other issues as being disqualifying in the same way.

Since you're obviously engaged in a "they aren't literally Hitler so we can't know if they're bad yet" exercise, I'll submit that many people try to preempt bad outcomes before they're 100000% certain. I think it would be quite naive to view the platform as a comprehensive document outlining everything they would like to do in government. The association with Russian influence groups and neo Nazism suggests their governing instincts lean in a direction that most would consider bad for the country.

[Klaus klauts]

The AFD obviously has not any "bad laws", because until now, they were luckily not in government.

And I think that you Octavius are quite naive if you are just looking at party manifestos to figure out what these parties will do. Since (almost) every party that comes into power has to coalesce, many of the points in the manifesto do not get through. This in itself is not very surprising, but if you read the news carefully, you can guess almost every time, which policies get kicked, and which get through, since many of the policies are only there to catch some dumb votes, never intended to get through. This is enhanced by the fact, that the leading persons in the party have considerable influence over what is being done, and will only partially follow the manifesto. Often times, new policies appear (from the people in charge). That is why I never have a look into the manifesto of a party when I make my voting decision, but follow the news, and look at what the party has done in the past years. The manifesto is essentially worthless (not only for the AFD, but for every party), and you should not consult it, if you are searching for reliably answers (for any party, not just the AFD).

The AFD is known for playing "good boy", so that it does not scare off voters. This is why many policies they want to get through are not in the manifesto, so that they get plausible deniability. In fact, Octavius, many AFD-voters have the exact same attitude as you: they are (understandably) fed up with "standard" politics, and since the AFD has this plausible deniability in place, they feel that voting the AFD is not such a bad ides. They do not realize, that the front maybe somewhat diverse, but the "backroom" if full to the brim with fascists. But if the leaders are fascists, or at least controlled by them, what do you think these additional policies will look like? They will exactly be those very same policies they have talked among themselves about in secret meetings all these years.

[Octavious]

So to summarise, Klaus, your view of the AFD is not based on their political actions (as they haven't had the chance to do any of any significance) nor their stated policies (as you consider manifestos irrelevant), but is instead vibe based fuelled by various news reports and the opinions of rival politicians? You will forgive me for saying this approach seems to lack a certain robustness.

There is also a logical inconsistency. You say manifestos are essentially worthless under a PR system (which is one of the strongest arguments against adopting that system) because coalition government gives too easy an excuse to drop difficult policies. But surely that means that any government with an AFD element will be far less hard right than the AFD would like to be? Whether or not backrooms full of fascists exist they wouldn't be capable of being fascist as a junior coalition partner. AFD in coalition wouldn't see a load of extra nasty policies bolted on, it could only ever see their more ambitious policies shaved off.

Deporting "unassimilated" naturalized citizens is a platform pledge.

I've looked at the manifesto. This doesn't exist. There is a bit about the forced deportation of foreign nationals with no legal right to be in Germany. There is a bit about having a strict skills based immigration system, and making asylum open to political refugees and people fleeing war only for the length of said war.

Immediately recognizing Russian territorial gains and reopening to Russian energy is a platform pledge.

Seems a reasonable position if true. I question the word immediately, but I suspect recognising territorial gains and reopening to Russian energy are going to magically transfer from extremist nonsense to mainstream wisdom over the course of this year

There are of course other things on there (banning same sex marriage) I would deeply oppose, but I don't view these other issues as being disqualifying in the same way.

Again, no sign whatsoever of this in their manifesto and the widespread support they get from the gay community seems to suggest that this is a nonsense. Even if it were true (in the guise, perhaps, of gay marriage being placed under civil partnerships and marriage kept religious) it strikes me as being a policy that would have zero chance of implementation in a coalition government.

[Klaus klauts]

I just remembered some additional piece of information:

The AFD was thrown out of the ID-fraction in the EU parliament in 2024, where many of the other extreme-right parties of Europe come together, because the AFD was much too extreme for them.

[Klaus klauts]

I had a look at the AFD's manifesto:

-- on pages 40/41 it is described how Germany shall buy gas from Russia as quick as possible again

-- on page 87 they talk about how the relations to Russia, China and the USA should be guided by German interest, especially interest concerning "primary energy needs"

-- on page 91/92 they again claim that "russia was always a reliable partner" which whom trade relations should be normalized as soon as possible. They also talk about that Ukraine should be a neutral state out of Nato (this is the official Russian view)

So yes, they do not plainly write that they will immediately recognize Russian gains, but if you read this, and use your brain, this should be and obvious result of the above points.

https://www.afd.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/AfD_Bundestagswahlprogramm2025_web.pdf

You're right, in that there is nothing about kicking out naturalized German citizens (called "Remigration" by the AFD), but that does not stop the AFD to put such slogans on their advertisements:
https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/afd-fraktion-im-landtag-in-potsdam-mit-mehr-rechtsextremen-100.html
(Here you can see an advertisement with the slogan "Remigration sofort starten!")

[Octavious]

So yes, they do not plainly write that they will immediately recognize Russian gains, but if you read this, and use your brain, this should be and obvious result of the above points.

It reads to me that they are in favour of ending the war and normalising relations with Russia, and that they are likely prepared to see Russian territorial gains as part of any peace deal (not explicitly stated) and against Ukraine getting NATO membership.

But the likelihood is that this is rapidly going to become Western mainstream policy. There is nothing remotely fascist here, unless you define fascism as a reluctance to use warfare. All they have done is seen the political reality earlier than most.

You're right, in that there is nothing about kicking out naturalized German citizens (called "Remigration" by the AFD), but that does not stop the AFD to put such slogans on their advertisements:

It is entirely possible that they will claim that refers purely to the deportation of illegal immigrants mentioned in their manifesto, but I agree that it seems designed to appeal to voters who want a more extreme approach to recent legal immigrants. It is the first solid bit of evidence I've seen. But it is evidence that they are actively courting far right voters rather than evidence that they would make the deportation of naturalised citizens a policy. As it stands it is not their policy, nor would it be possible to enact it even if it was.

[Octavious]

What should be happening, if Germany was acting like a mature and sensible democracy, is this. The CDU is the largest party and has such can expect their leader to be the German Premier and will engage in coalition talks. There are two mathematically feasible coalition partners, so the CDU should be talking to both to see which of them will lead to the best deal. Both AfD and SPD will be forced to offer significant concessions, and the CDU takes the best offer ensuring that any policy they find too objectionable from their coalition partner is dropped.

Instead the CDU rules out its ability to choose, making the SPD its only viable option. This gives the SPD, who has just been heavily punished by the German people, a ridiculously strong negotiating position. They will be able to demand compromises almost on an equal footing to the party that actually won. The result will be a leadership remarkably similar to the one the voters have just rejected.

The AfD remain untested and free from the tarnished reputation of government, and the people get increasingly frustrated with voting for mainstream politicians because it doesn't seem to do anything.

[Jamiet99uk]

Again, no sign whatsoever of this in their manifesto.

Octavious, you appear very interested in manifestos.

Can you point to the exact page of their 1933 election manifesto where the NSDAP promised to carry out the holocaust?

Thanks in advance.

[Octavious]

Well, they did say that it would be illegal for anyone not of the German race to live in Germany, and that crimes against the common interest would be punished by death... so that lays the foundations pretty strongly.

[Jamiet99uk]

Well, they did say that it would be illegal for anyone not of the German race to live in Germany, and that crimes against the common interest would be punished by death... so that lays the foundations pretty strongly.

The AfD has called for the deportation or "re-migration" of large numbers of migrants, and those descended from migrants, including those currently in the country legally, and prominent AfD MPs have called for the re-introduction of the death penalty, specifically to allow the execution of "foreigners".

Are these not in the general direction of the same thing?

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

^ This is the dynamic I had in mind when I said the manifesto includes a reference to deporting German citizens.

They do not say "we'll deport German citizens" in the platform, but they don't have to.

Instead they say “the AfD calls for better prevention and forfeiture of German citizenship of all foreign criminals”. Okay, fair enough right? Germany had stronger expulsion policies even in the recent past.

But, they combine it with “anyone who refuses to integrate has to be sanctioned and will finally lose his right of residence".

So being insufficiently "German" is a crime and criminals can be kicked out. You can indulge their game of legal nuance to think they don't mean this, but that's a hard position to maintain when you see prominent party members and official party communications saying that's exactly what they'd like to do.

Your final hiding spot is to think their goal is unrealistic or would get watered down in government. That doesn't seem to actually be the case though, given your own analysis that coalition partners in Germany can wield hugely outsized power due to the way their PR voting works. And even if it were the case, many people prefer not taking even incremental steps in this direction.

It is not some aberration of democracy when other parties decide, for both moral *and strategic* reasons not to work with the AfD. Just because the CDU is conservative doesn't mean they and their voters want anything to do with the AfD. In fact, they're obviously so animated against this they prefer to empower the SPD - which speaks to how badly they perceive the AfD, not some fundamental flaw in their system.

[Octavious]

Of course the CDU don't want anything to do with them. They're a rival right wing party. What they want is for the AfD to go away. If you're a right wing party you accept that there will always be a left wing rival, and probably some protest party in the centre and a few fringe parties... but the one thing you really hate is the idea of another major right wing party.

You seem to be deliberately misunderstanding my analysis. The reason coalition partners can wield outsized power is not because of the way the system works. The system when working as intended works pretty well, gives options, and typically denies outsized power. It is only when artificial limits are imposed that this issue of outsized power crops up. If the system was allowed to function as intended the power would be firmly in the hands of the people who came out on top of the election, as it should be.

But I get the impression that I'm talking to a brick wall on this issue. You are determined to support the status quo which is to protect the AfD from any real scrutiny until either they go away or gain so much voting power that the other parties no longer have the ability to stop them. And if it turns out then that they truly are a load of fascists hidden in back rooms then you are well and truly buggered. But far more likely is that they will be an inexperienced hard right party out of their depth who will lead Germany through a lost decade, and won't it be a shame that they weren't given a coalition seat earlier where there limitations would be clear for all to see?

In other news the UK Labour Party is funding an increase in spending by slashing the foreign aid budget... The Labour Party! You have to laugh, don't you? Taking the Tory's craziest ideas and actually making them happen

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

So Germans should let the AfD into a coalition even though 80% of Germans voted for parties that specifically said they wouldn't allow that, just so that, in your own telling, the AfD can misgovern the country for a decade?

That's a bizarre experiment you hope they run.

My hope is that the AfD serves as a protest party that forces the rest of German politics to take citizens' genuine concerns about immigration seriously without ever actually achieving power. This seems to already be happening. I suspect immigration reform alone will sap support for the AfD, all without Germany ever having to risk finding out just how fascistic they really are.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

The "artificial" constrains you're decrying are democratically decided and are not imposed from on high. The practical consequences of a CDU-AfD coalition is that every other party would vehemently oppose and obstruct their government — that empowers the AfD greatly since they would become the only possible CDU partner. Such a pairing would also make some difficult but much needed changes (like a relaxation of debt limits) impossible, since constitutional changes require more support from more constituencies than the AfD and CDU won.

[Octavious]

The CDU should consider the party the German people put into a clear second place as a coalition partner, yes. They shouldn't limit themselves to only considering the party that has just lost a third of its support, no. I don't know why these incredibly simple democratic principles are so hard to grasp. All democracy is an experiment, and the people who run it should be the people. The people have clearly chosen which parties they believe are worthy to have a chance of running Germany, and the politicians would do well to listen.

If you are of the opinion that other German parties would vote to deliberately harm the German state in order to make life more difficult for the ruling parties... hell, I don't know... you may be right. But if so Germany has far more serious problems than merely the AfD

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

What you are describing would be a huge bait and switch. The CDU made it clear they would not partner with the AfD before the election. It would in no way be more democratic for them to break that promise now. You're the one confusing basic democratic principles — governing coalitions are formed by the consent of the parties, which reflects the will of their supporters. 80% of Germans voted for parties that made it clear they wouldn't work with the AfD.

If I were a German I'd support my chosen party obstructing an AfD-associated government. What you might view as petty obstructionism, I would view as a positive move to limit the damage the AfD could cause while in power.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

If the AfD wants to govern in a coalition all it needs to do is make itself sufficiently likeable to enough Germans such that they support their chosen party dropping it's prohibition on working with them. The onus is on the AfD to make itself acceptable, not on every other party to invite them into the tent no matter how detestable they seem to most Germans.

If the AfD as eager to moderate as you seem to think that shouldn't be a problem — they can prove it before they're granted power by saying explicitly they want immigration reform without deporting naturalized citizens. They could chastise or expel members engaging in WW2 revisionism and associating with neo Nazi groups. That they don't do these things suggests to me they aren't actually in a moderating mood.

[Jamiet99uk]

In other news the UK Labour Party is funding an increase in spending by slashing the foreign aid budget... The Labour Party! You have to laugh, don't you? Taking the Tory's craziest ideas and actually making them happen

The Labour Party can fuck off.

[Jamiet99uk]

So Germans should let the AfD into a coalition even though 80% of Germans voted for parties that specifically said they wouldn't allow that, just so that, in your own telling, the AfD can misgovern the country for a decade?

That's a bizarre experiment you hope they run.

Exactly, Bert.

It's a very strange take for Octavious to suggest that the best way to deal with horrible racist fascists is to let them have a go at being in power for a while.... just in the hope that it turns out a *bit* badly, so people don't vote for them next time.... and banking on it not turning out really fucking badly like rounding up the blacks and the jews and the trans people and sending them to the gas chamber.

[Klaus klauts]

If you, octavious, thinks that only winners should form the government, and you do think that the CDU should keep their options open, why not try CDU-Grüne-Linke? The CDU has stated that it will not work with the Linke, but if you are willing to break promises just like that, why not in favour of the Linke? Die Grüne has not suffered major losses, and die Linke has almost doubled, so this can also be considered a "coalition of the winners". Would you be happy with that?