{"id":278915,"date":"2025-07-21T03:02:17","date_gmt":"2025-07-21T03:02:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/278915\/"},"modified":"2025-07-21T03:02:17","modified_gmt":"2025-07-21T03:02:17","slug":"how-the-far-right-afd-determines-germanys-political-agenda","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/278915\/","title":{"rendered":"How the far right AfD determines Germany\u2019s political agenda"},"content":{"rendered":"

For the past week the German newspaper and media world has been dominated by controversies on the failure of the German parliament to elect three federal Constitutional Court judges on July 11.<\/p>\n

Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf on July 15 with Markus Lanz [Photo by ZDF (Screenshot)]<\/p>\n

The media articles speculate whether the failed election \u201cdamaged\u201d the governing coalition and \u201cundermined the authority and functionality of a constitutional body that is also our highest court\u201d (President Frank-Walter Steinmeier); whether \u201cthe promise of strong leadership\u201d by the new Chancellor Friedrich Merz is crumbling (Der Spiegel); whether the \u201cprofessionalism of the federal government and governing factions\u201d has suffered a \u201cdownright botched loss\u201d (Kursbuch); or whether \u201ctoo much transparency\u201d in the election of judges \u201ccan also lead to a loss of trust\u201d (Der Spiegel again).<\/p>\n

All of these comments, however, completely ignore the crucial lesson from the failed judicial election: It demonstrates the extent to which the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) is already sitting at the government\u2019s cabinet table. It makes clear that Merz\u2019s breach of taboo<\/a> on January 29, when the CDU\/CSU and AfD jointly passed an anti-immigration motion in the Bundestag, was neither a slip-up nor a misunderstanding.<\/p>\n

The far-right and, in part, fascist AfD is being systematically used to drive official politics to the right. The migration policy of Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) bears all the hallmarks of the AfD; the AfD was the first party to call for an increase in military spending to 5 percent of GDP, which has become the official policy of NATO and the German government; and now the AfD is also setting the tone in the selection of judges to the country\u2019s highest court.<\/p>\n

The planned election of three new constitutional judges was removed from the Bundestag\u2019s agenda at short notice last Friday because, following a smear campaign by far-right media and the AfD, several dozen CDU\/CSU MPs were no longer willing to vote for the SPD\u2019s proposed candidate, Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, even though the CDU\/CSU leadership had already approved the proposal.<\/p>\n

The campaign was initiated by, among others, Julian Reichelt, former editor-in-chief of the Bild newspaper, who now publishes the far-right media outlet Nius. After the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported on June 30 that the governing coalition had agreed on three candidates\u2014Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf and Ann-Katrin Kaufhold, nominated by the SPD, and G\u00fcnter Spinner, supported by the CDU\/CSU\u2014Reichelt demanded that Brosius-Gersdorf \u201cmust be stopped!\u201d<\/p>\n

According to research by Der Spiegel, Reichelt relied on the AfD-friendly platform Apollo News, which accused the constitutional law professor of supporting abortions and mandatory vaccination. In the following 10 days, Nius published more than 20 hate articles about Brosius-Gersdorf.<\/p>\n

The storm soon reached hurricane force. AfD leader Alice Weidel reposted Reichelt. AfD MP Beatrix von Storch claimed on X that Brosius-Gersdorf was a \u201cleft-wing radical activist who essentially advocates abortion up to the ninth month.\u201d The far-right weekly Junge Freiheit also supported the campaign. Eventually, Bild, Neue Z\u00fcrcher Zeitung and Welt all joined in.<\/p>\n

In the CDU, the ultra-right Brandenburg MP Saskia Ludwig declared Brosius-Gersdorf \u201cunelectable\u201d because she allegedly supports mandatory vaccination. Several CDU members of the Bundestag anonymously signalled their opposition to the candidate in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Tens of thousands of posts against the candidate appeared on X. According to the advisory network polisphere, which analyzed 40,000 posts, the initial focus was primarily on Brosius-Gersdorf\u2019s stance on a ban on the AfD, which she supports under certain conditions, and then on her views on abortion.<\/p>\n

Members of the Bundestag were inundated with emails. The anti-abortion platform 1000plus alone, which provided a corresponding reading tool, sent out 38,000 automated emails against Brosius-Gersdorf\u2019s election.<\/p>\n

The Catholic Church also got involved. Bamberg Archbishop Herwig G\u00f6ssl described the nomination of a judge who \u201cdenies the right to life of unborn people\u201c as a \u201cdomestic political scandal\u201d and \u201ca low point of intolerance and contempt for humanity.\u201d He later backtracked, claiming he had been misinformed.<\/p>\n

The candidate herself received suspicious mail and threats, including those directed at her family and staff, whom she advised to stop working in their professorial offices.<\/p>\n

The allegations against Brosius-Gersdorf were largely fabricated. She is an established professor of public law with a long academic career and currently teaches at the University of Potsdam. Her views, according to Der Spiegel, are \u201cin the legal mainstream.\u201d<\/p>\n

She holds partly liberal positions, especially on issues of family law and equal rights, and partly reactionary ones\u2014for example, when she rejects a basic pension on the grounds that it eliminates the difference for low wages and advocates raising the retirement age above 67.<\/p>\n

Her stance on abortion would not change current practice. Under current law, abortions are illegal but exempt from punishment during the first three months if the pregnant woman undergoes counselling beforehand. To resolve this contradiction, Brosius-Gersdorf wants to legalize abortions in the first three months.<\/p>\n

Her controversial statement: \u201cHuman dignity and the protection of life are legally decoupled\u201d refers to this context. If \u201chuman dignity,\u201d which is inviolable according to the German Constitution, were granted to an embryonic cell, abortion would be illegal from the day of fertilization. Brosius-Gersdorf, on the other hand, supports \u201cprotection of life\u201d from the third month onwards.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, her opponents accused her of wanting to make late abortions up to the ninth month exempt from punishment and of \u201cchopping up babies in the womb.\u201d AfD MP Beatrix von Storch accused her in the Bundestag of believing that \u201ca human being\u2019s dignity doesn\u2019t apply until they\u2019re born.\u201d<\/p>\n

Brosius-Gersdorf addressed these slanders in a written statement and with an appearance on the Markus Lanz\u2019s TV program. However, this, too, was used to accuse her of violating her duty of neutrality as a future judge. Although the defamatory nature of the allegations and their right-wing extremist origins are now widely known, calls for the law professor to withdraw her candidacy are mounting.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) suggested last Friday she withdraw. \u201cMs. Brosius-Gersdorf is certainly thinking about how to handle this situation,\u201d he told the Augsburger Allgemeine newspaper. \u201cAs a candidate for a position on the Constitutional Court, one hardly has the intention of further promoting polarization in society.\u201d Elevating such a person to office would be the wrong response.<\/p>\n

Chancellor Friedrich Merz is keeping all options open. At a federal press conference, he described the criticism of Brosius-Gersdorf as unacceptable, irrelevant, and in some cases insulting and derogatory. However, he declined to commit to voting for her after the summer recess and also raised the possibility of another candidate.<\/p>\n

The SPD is still committed to Brosius-Gersdorf. But anyone familiar with the party knows that this could change in the coming weeks in the interest of \u201ccoalition consensus.\u201d<\/p>\n

So far, the established parties have always endeavored to elect the 16 judges of the Federal Constitutional Court by consensus so as not to jeopardize its authority and supposed neutrality. The court wields enormous power. It can declare majority decisions of the Bundestag unconstitutional and thus create its own law; it is the sole authority able to ban political parties; it regulates disputes between the federal and state governments; and is the highest court in all legal matters.<\/p>\n

The judges are elected by a two-thirds majority, half by the Bundestag and half by the Bundesrat, and remain in office for a maximum of twelve years or until they reach the age of 68. The election is prepared by a twelve-member electoral committee, which includes representatives from all parliamentary groups and meets in private. If the nomination is submitted to the Bundestag, the necessary majorities are generally guaranteed.<\/p>\n

In addition to experienced judges and legal scholars, prominent politicians, such as former Saarland Minister-President Peter M\u00fcller (CDU), have also been elected as constitutional judges. However, the Federal Constitutional Court has not yet experienced political polarization, as in the US, where the Supreme Court is now dominated by a Trump-friendly, fascist majority.<\/p>\n

The controversy surrounding Brosius-Gersdorf shows that this period is over. The massive rearmament and war policy that lies at the heart of the Merz government\u2019s policies, and the associated attacks on social benefits, pensions, wages, and jobs, require rearmament and a shift to the right of the entire state apparatus\u2014the judiciary, the police, the intelligence services, and the government.<\/p>\n

The AfD is being used to effect this shift to the right. Currently, it remains outside the government because its entry would trigger massive protests. But that could change if the coalition crisis deepens.<\/p>\n

On January 29, Merz signaled his willingness to cooperate with the AfD when the CDU\/CSU voted jointly with the AfD for the anti-immigration motion. The SPD, which fully supports the government\u2019s domestic and foreign rearmament program, offers no opposition. It fears any movement from below far more than the AfD. It is responding to its own decline and the rise of the far-right by calling for an AfD ban, which would only strengthen the most repressive forces in the state apparatus and serve as a pretext for the suppression of any left-wing opposition to capitalist rule.<\/p>\n

The only way to stop the rise of the AfD and the rightward shift in the state apparatus is to build an international socialist movement among the working class and youth that combines the struggle against war, militarism, social cuts, and dictatorship with the struggle against capitalism and for a socialist society.<\/p>\n

Sign up for the WSWS email newsletter<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"For the past week the German newspaper and media world has been dominated by controversies on the failure…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":278916,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5310],"tags":[8385,37262,2000,299,105058,1824,34115,12823],"class_list":{"0":"post-278915","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-germany","8":"tag-afd","9":"tag-constitutional-court","10":"tag-eu","11":"tag-europe","12":"tag-frauke-brosius-gersdorf","13":"tag-germany","14":"tag-merz","15":"tag-spd"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114889001974735076","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/278915","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=278915"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/278915\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/278916"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=278915"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=278915"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=278915"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}