Banning AfD: A Threat to German Democracy, By Richard Miller (Londonistan)

The Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), Germany's largest opposition party, has surged to prominence, securing 20.8% of the vote in the 2025 federal election and polling as high as 26% in April 2025. Yet, calls to ban the party, fuelled by its classification as a "confirmed Right-wing extremist endeavour" by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) in May 2025, pose a grave threat to Germany's democratic framework. This discussion explores the implications of banning AfD, arguing that such a move risk undermining democratic principles, empowering the Left, and destabilising the political landscape, while urging the centre-Right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) to normalise relations with the populist Right to preserve pluralism.

The AfD's rise, driven by its anti-immigration, anti-EU, and Eurosceptic platform, has alarmed Germany's political establishment. Founded in 2013 by former CDU members to oppose Eurozone policies, the party has shifted Rightward, capitalising on public discontent over migration, particularly after the 2015 refugee crisis. Its electoral gains, doubling its vote share from 2021 to 2025 and winning regional elections in Thuringia, have intensified calls for its prohibition. The SPD, led by Lars Klingbeil, has framed banning the party as a "historical duty," with efforts to appoint justices like Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf and Ann-Katrin Kaufhold to the Federal Constitutional Court's second senate, which oversees party bans. A 1,100-page BfV report labelling AfD as racist and anti-Muslim, provides the legal basis for potential ban proceedings.

Consequences of a Ban

Banning AfD would have far-reaching consequences, threatening Germany's democratic foundations and political stability:

1.Erosion of Democratic Principles: Banning a party with 20-26% public support, representing millions of voters, undermines the democratic principle of representation. AfD's co-leader Alice Weidel has called the "firewall" against the party, an agreement among mainstream parties to exclude it, an "anti-democratic cartel agreement." A ban would alienate voters, producing perceptions of an elitist establishment suppressing dissent, potentially radicalising AfD supporters and increasing politically motivated violence. Political scientist Tim Holterhus warns of a "martyr effect," where a ban could amplify AfD's narrative of victimhood, further galvanising its base.

2.Empowerment of the Left: The German Left, including the SPD, Greens, and Die Linke, relies on opposition to the Right as a unifying force. A successful AfD ban would embolden Leftist parties, potentially leading to a broader crackdown on centre-Right groups like the CDU and CSU. With AfD's assets confiscated and representatives expelled, the Left could dominate parliament, using tools like the BfV to infiltrate and criminalise CDU ranks, harass its members, and deem parts of its platform unconstitutional. This could reduce the CDU to a subordinate "bloc party," reminiscent of the East German SED's control over smaller parties, consolidating Leftist power and stifling political diversity.

3.Weakening of the CDU: The CDU, under Chancellor Friedrich Merz, faces a precarious future. Its failure to reclaim voters lost to AfD, coupled with Merz's controversial decision to pass a non-binding migration motion with AfD support in January 2025, has damaged its credibility. A ban on AfD would not guarantee that its voters return to the CDU; instead, it could radicalise them or drive them to new populist movements, leaving the CDU vulnerable to Leftist attacks. CDU's historical role as a bulwark against extremism, established by Konrad Adenauer, would be compromised if it becomes a target of the same "defensive democracy" tools used against AfD.

4.International Repercussions: An AfD ban could strain Germany's relations with allies like the Trump administration, which has expressed support for the party, and embolden far-Right movements across Europe, including in France, Italy, and Hungary. It risks signalling that democratic dissent can be silenced through legal manoeuvres, undermining Germany's role as a beacon of stability in the EU.

The Case for Normalisation

The CDU must dismantle the "firewall" and normalise relations with AfD to avert this nightmare scenario. Merz's January 2025 vote, though controversial, showed that cooperation on issues like migration is possible without endorsing AfD's position. Normalisation does not mean a coalition, but rather pragmatic engagement to address voter concerns, such as migration and economic stagnation, which fuel AfD's rise. By integrating AfD into the political process, the CDU can reduce its outsider appeal, moderate its rhetoric, and prevent the Left from monopolising power.

Friedrich Merz's hesitation to support a ban, as expressed in May 2025, reflects an understanding that banning parties rarely solves political problems. Instead, the CDU should compete with AfD by addressing legitimate voter grievances while upholding democratic values. Failure to do so risks ceding ground to both the far-Right and the Left, potentially leading to a "kritocratic" state where judicial overreach supplants democratic debate.

Banning AfD would be a catastrophic misstep, alienating voters, empowering the Left, and weakening the CDU, all while threatening Germany's democratic fabric. The CDU must normalise relations with AfD to preserve political pluralism and prevent a Leftist monopoly. As Germany navigates economic and social challenges, the stakes are high, not just for the CDU or AfD, but for the future of democracy in Europe's largest economy. The 2029 elections may be the last chance to avert a legal coup that could reshape Germany into a shadow of its democratic self, if it ever was.

https://www.eugyppius.com/p/banning-alternative-fur-deutschland-175