In Thuringia and Saxony, where elections were held on Sunday, September 1, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party obtained more than 30% of the vote with a turnout of 73.5%, while the government coalition parties (Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals) and Die Linke suffered a heavy defeat. On the left, however, the new Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance party did well. We talked about it with Reto Thumiger of Pressenza’s German editorial office, pictured below during a rally for the release of Julian Assange.
How can this election result be explained?
The results in Thuringia and Saxony are the clearest expression of the growing discontent of German voters. The ongoing deindustrialization, the sharp rise in the cost of living and energy prices, the dilapidated state of the education and health care system, the country’s increasingly decaying infrastructure, the growing social inequality and the disintegration of the middle class contrast with the billions being spent on the military and the supply of weapons.
This is only the beginning, because the Federal Republic is once again preparing for war. Fears are spreading that Germany could become directly involved in a war. The mood in East Germany is particularly negative, as the population is the most affected by this drift. However, the election result merely continues the trend that was already evident in the European elections, and the polls for the upcoming federal elections also point in this direction, although not to the same extent as in Saxony and Thuringia.
What is the danger posed by the AfD?
The AfD covers a broad spectrum, from conservative to extreme right-wing positions. It is not enough to label it a Nazi party, that would be a simplification. But its leadership belongs to the extreme right and many of its leading figures are true masters at testing the limits of what can be said in Germany. The most famous quote is probably that of Alexander Gauland, honorary chairman of the AfD and member of the Bundestag: “Hitler and the Nazis are just a parenthesis in more than a thousand years of successful German history.” Björn Höcke, one of the most influential and radical figures in the party, openly shows his political views when he states, for example: “The problem is that Hitler is portrayed as absolutely evil”, or writes in his book: “In addition to protecting our national and European external borders, a large-scale re-emigration project will be necessary”. This led Marine Le Pen to exclude the party from her group in the European Parliament, and even Giorgia Meloni refuses to collaborate with the AfD. In short, even far-right parties like the Front National or Fratelli d’Italia, with post-fascist roots, distance themselves from the German AfD.
The disastrous policies of the CDU, SPD, Greens and FDP, combined with the so-called “firewall” – the AfD’s complete political isolation – and the lack of a credible political alternative, have made the AfD the perfect protest vote. Its rise is also the result of the failure of the Die Linke (The Left) party to be perceived as the only real alternative. Moreover, it has been further weakened by constant internal disputes, which eventually led to the split of the alliance around Sahra Wagenknecht, to which I will return later.
Obviously, it is difficult to predict how the AfD will behave and which current within the party might prevail in the event that the firewall were to break down and it were to participate in a government or achieve the absolute majority it aspires to and thus be able to govern alone. In any case, this idea is extremely worrying and it is to be hoped that we will never know.
A closer examination of the program shows that the AfD is clearly a warmongering party. While it supports a negotiated peace in the Ukrainian war, it also supports the 2% military spending target demanded by NATO, i.e. funding massive rearmament and a large increase in the defense budget, which would result in less money available for housing, schools, hospitals, infrastructure and social services.
The AfD is also in favor of NATO’s expansion to the east and north and the supply of arms to Israel. Of course, Islamophobia prevails over anti-Semitism. It is also a neoliberal party: it does not advocate a different tax policy, nor an inheritance or wealth tax, nor does it support higher taxation of higher incomes. Nor does it represent the interests of the general population on wages and pensions.
The reasons for voting for the AfD are often in total contradiction with the actual content of its program. However, these contradictions do not influence the voting decision, which in my opinion can only be explained by the irrationality and cognitive dissonance of our time.
I believe that we are living through a very dangerous evolution from which the AfD benefits, or which it itself embodies as a symptom. When the CDU and AfD together reach 62.5% in Saxony and 56.4% in Thuringia, we have to speak of a massive and worrying shift of the population to the right. If once left-wing parties such as the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Greens have become the main warmongers and enforcers of neoliberalism, we are approaching the United States of America, where there is only a choice between parties representing right-wing, neoliberal and militaristic policies, but with five parties instead of two.
There is no need for the AfD to deliver the coup de grâce to democracy. The disintegration of democratic institutions, media concentration, restriction of press freedom and increasingly authoritarian governance clearly show that global financial capitalism is leaving representative democracy behind, replacing it with a new authoritarianism. In this system, political decisions are increasingly determined by economic elites and multinational corporations, while the political participation of citizens is further restricted.
In this context, democracy becomes a façade that hides power structures based on economic control and global inequality. This leads to a political system based on technocracy and oligarchy, in which democratic values such as equality, participation and freedom are increasingly undermined. Capitalism has already shown in the last century that, while it favors formal democracy as a form of government, it can easily coexist with extreme right-wing and fascist governments. In any case, the AfD does not seem to lack generous donors; after all, capitalism always puts a lot of meat on the grill.
The Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), which describes itself as “left-wing conservative”, achieved a brilliant result. How do you rate this party?
Sahra Wagenknecht resigned from Die Linke together with other members of the Bundestag in October last year because she was fed up with the endless bickering within the party. Nine months after its official founding, her new party, which still lacked a national structure, won 6.2 percent of the vote in the European elections out of nowhere and double-digit results in the elections in the two Länder. This made it the third force to the first, the fastest rise of a new party in the history of the Federal Republic.
For some, the BSW represents the hope of stemming the rise of the AfD and the swing to the right and making left-wing politics felt again. I use the term “left” in the sense of social, progressive, internationalist and pacifist. At the same time, however, the party advocates a very restrictive migration policy. It calls for an end to the reception culture, rejects state subsidies to rejected asylum seekers and supports their deportation. In addition, it favors asylum procedures in third countries, so that refugees do not come to clarify their status in Germany. This position contrasts sharply with the other points supported by Sahra Wagenknecht and contradicts what important party leaders, such as Sevim Dağdelen, Andrej Hunko and Fabio De Masi, have been saying for years. This may be electoral pragmatism, but it is nonetheless serious. As a result, the party is accused of right-wing rhetoric and populism.
Suddenly, immigrants seem to have become the source of all problems, a view that now seems to be shared by the majority of the population and fervently applauded by a growing number of parties. However, this view is completely erroneous, since economic decline, the growing concentration of wealth and the dismantling of the health and education systems have nothing to do with immigration, and the lack of funds cannot be attributed to the so-called “culture of welcome”. These arguments only distract from the real culprits: the failure of governments and their betrayal of the interests of the electorate.
At the same time, the real causes of emigration are completely ignored. The extractive economy and the exploitation of the global South – which have contributed significantly to Germany’s role as world export champion – as well as a consumerist society that squanders surplus resources and pollutes the environment, are key factors. Added to this is military involvement in international conflicts and the supply of weapons to crisis regions. These factors lead to economic exploitation, environmental destruction and instability in the countries of origin, forcing many people to leave their homes.
What role has the war in Ukraine played in these elections?
The increasing war rhetoric and steps towards an escalation with Russia in the Ukrainian war, in which Germany has long been involved, are a source of existential concern. No other European country seems as determined to get involved in a war as Germany, especially The Greens, who along with the other two ruling parties are pushing for militarization.
The fact that the Greens emerged from the protests against the deployment of Pershing missiles as a pacifist party is now a thing of the past. Die Linke and BSW are the only parties in the Bundestag that are consistently in favor of peace and disarmament, but they are only a small minority. Phrases like “No more war”, which had become a central expression of the rejection of militarism and National Socialism in Germany, or Willy Brandt’s quote, “Peace is not everything, but without peace everything is nothing”, are increasingly forgotten, and Defense Minister Pistorius is instead asking Germans to be willing to go to war again.
The fact that Chancellor Scholz accepted Washington’s request to deploy medium-range missiles in Germany without any public debate in Parliament or within his own party is the next step in a highly dangerous policy. Deploying these missiles so close to the Russian border gives Russia virtually no warning time and brings the world one step closer to nuclear war. It also increases the risk of an accident involving the use of nuclear weapons.
The clear majority of the German population is against missile deployment and in favor of a ceasefire and peace negotiations in Ukraine. However, the will of the voters, largely ignored by the established parties, is not reflected in protests or peace demonstrations. The increase in votes for the AfD and BSW could be interpreted as a vote for peace, but in the case of the AfD this is a complete misinterpretation. Although the party presents itself to the right-wing fringe as a dove for peace out of electoral opportunism in connection with the Ukrainian conflict, in reality it is still a warmongering party.
What space can the peace, environmental and immigrant solidarity movements occupy in this situation?
The progressive and humanist forces must not abandon their presence and their activism. The ecological, pacifist, solidarity and human rights movements must collaborate with the progressive fringes of the trade unions to counter dehumanizing and inhuman developments and to confront the major crises threatening humanity: the destruction of the environment, the threat of world war, division and lack of solidarity in society. It is not enough to fight the symptoms: the roots of the problems must be taken into account, even if the actions are focused on specific issues.
Movements must bring people out of resignation and paralyzing fear and awaken hope that a change from below towards a more humane and better world for all is possible. The media have a special role to play. We are all suffering from increasing isolation and alienation. We no longer feel connected to anything and all our efforts seem increasingly futile.
The only way to counter this is to connect with the best part of ourselves and others and work for the common good. In this way, we can also cope with setbacks and failures. In other words: we must give our existence a meaning and purpose beyond the self. And we must do so without naivety, because we have not yet hit rock bottom and must prepare well for what is to come. In the words of “Game of Thrones,” “Winter is coming.”
Now is the time to act. If not, when?
