The AfD Strategy for Seizing Power: A Comprehensive Political Science and Legal Analysis of the Strategy Paper “Shaping Germany Politically”

Behind every article – especially our in-depth investigative reports – lies significant journalistic effort and financial investment. We do not wish to fund our work through paywalls, but through your voluntary support. How often and in what amount you contribute is entirely up to you – whether as a one-time or recurring contribution.

Abstract

The present strategy paper of the AfD parliamentary group “Shaping Germany Politically – The End of the Firewall and the Path to Government Responsibility” reveals a systematic strategy for attaining government power through the deliberate destruction of democratic core principles. This scientific analysis examines the manifold legal, political, economic, and social implications of this strategy. The study shows that the paper is not merely a political strategy within the framework of democratic competition but a comprehensive program for transforming Germany into an authoritarian state that breaks with the fundamental principles of the Basic Law, international law, and the European value system. The analysis identifies concrete violations of constitutional norms, criminal law provisions, and Germany’s international obligations. The economic and social consequences of implementing this strategy would be catastrophic and would isolate Germany internationally, economically ruin it, and divide society.

1. Introduction: Contextualization and Methodology

1.1 The Document and Its Context

The analyzed strategy paper represents an internal draft of the AfD parliamentary group, which explicitly aims to overcome the so-called “firewall” – the collective refusal of democratic parties to cooperate with the AfD – and to assume government responsibility. The significance of this document can hardly be overstated: it is not a normal political strategy within the framework of democratic competition but a detailed plan for the systematic subversion of the democratic order.

The historical dimension of this analysis arises from Germany’s experience with the failure of the Weimar Republic. At that time, polarization, the formation of irreconcilable political camps, and the systematic delegitimization of democratic institutions led to the National Socialist seizure of power. The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany was deliberately designed as a “militant democracy” to prevent precisely such developments. The AfD strategy paper now puts these protective mechanisms to the test.

1.2 Methodological Approach

The present analysis combines various scientific approaches: the political science document analysis according to Mayring is supplemented by constitutional legal subsumption, international law assessment, and economic impact analysis. The goals and methods formulated in the strategy paper are systematically examined for their compatibility with the German legal order, international obligations, and democratic core principles.

2. The Polarization Strategy as an Attack on Democracy

2.1 Theoretical Classification: Democracy and Consensus

Modern democratic theory, especially the work of Jürgen Habermas on deliberative democracy and the consensus democracy models of Arend Lijphart, emphasizes the fundamental importance of democratic discourse and the ability to compromise for the functioning of democratic systems. Democracy is more than majority rule – it requires the protection of minorities, respectful treatment of political opponents, and a fundamental willingness to compromise.

The AfD strategy paper explicitly formulates the goal of “creating a situation in which a bourgeois-conservative camp and a radicalizing left-wing camp face each other,” with these camps characterized as “irreconcilable.” This strategy fundamentally negates the concept of democratic deliberation. Instead of focusing on understanding and compromise, it deliberately relies on confrontation and division.

2.2 Constitutional Assessment of the Polarization Strategy

2.2.1 The Democratic Principle of the Basic Law

Article 20 paragraph 1 of the Basic Law states: “The Federal Republic of Germany is a democratic and social federal state.” This democratic principle is unalterable under the eternity clause of Article 79 paragraph 3 of the Basic Law and forms the core of the constitutional order. The Federal Constitutional Court, beginning with the SRP ruling of 1952 (BVerfGE 2, 1), the KPD ruling of 1956 (BVerfGE 5, 85), and the NPD ruling of 2017 (BVerfGE 144, 20), has continuously clarified the contours of this democratic principle.

The Court emphasizes that the liberal-democratic basic order consists not only of formal procedural rules but also of substantive principles such as respect for the human rights concretized in the Basic Law, popular sovereignty, separation of powers, government accountability, the rule of law for the administration, the independence of the judiciary, the multi-party principle, and equal opportunities for all political parties with the right to constitutionally establish and exercise opposition.

The AfD strategy violates several of these core elements:

First, the multi-party principle is undermined by systematically defaming and delegitimizing other parties as “radical left.” The strategy paper explicitly speaks of constructing the SPD, the Greens, and the Left Party as a unified “left-wing camp” that serves as a target. This negates the diversity of the political spectrum and the legitimacy of different political positions.

Second, the principle of equal opportunity for parties is violated. When a party systematically works to portray other parties as illegitimate and to exclude them from democratic discourse, it undermines the fair play of democratic competition. The Federal Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized that all parties must, in principle, have the same opportunity to participate in the political will formation process.

Third, the right to opposition is perverted. Opposition in a democracy does not mean the fundamental rejection of the system and the creation of irreconcilable enmities but constructive criticism and the offering of alternative policy concepts within the democratic framework.

2.2.2 The Guarantee of Human Dignity as an Absolute Limit

Article 1 paragraph 1 of the Basic Law declares: “Human dignity is inviolable. To respect and protect it is the duty of all state authority.” This guarantee of human dignity is the highest value of the constitutional order and absolutely inviolable. The Federal Constitutional Court, particularly in the Lisbon judgment (BVerfGE 123, 267), has made it clear that human dignity belongs to the “foundational constitutional principles” and is “non-disposable.”

The AfD strategy paper violates human dignity in several respects:

The construction of enemy images and the systematic exclusion of certain population groups, particularly migrants, reduces people to their origin and implicitly denies them equal dignity. The formulation of a “migration turnaround” implies that the presence of certain people in Germany is fundamentally problematic. This violates the universality of human dignity, which applies to every human being regardless of origin, religion, or political belief.

The strategy of deliberately manipulating and instrumentalizing certain voter groups also violates human dignity. People are not respected as autonomous subjects but treated as objects of political manipulation. Particularly problematic is the explicit target group definition “young men,” who are to be addressed with traditionalist gender images. This instrumentalizes gender-specific insecurities and promotes problematic concepts of masculinity.

2.3 The “Firewall” as a Democratic Right of Defense

The “firewall” obsessively addressed in the strategy paper – the refusal of other parties to cooperate with the AfD – is portrayed as an illegitimate obstacle to be overcome. This interpretation fundamentally misjudges the nature of democratic politics.

2.3.1 Freedom of Coalition as a Basic Principle

In a parliamentary democracy, the freedom to form coalitions is one of the essential elements. Parties are free to decide with whom they want to cooperate and with whom they do not. This freedom is an expression of political self-determination and cannot be forced. The refusal to cooperate with a particular party is a legitimate expression of political conviction and democratic responsibility.

The Federal Constitutional Court has emphasized in several decisions that the formation of coalitions must be left to the free political process. A compulsion to cooperate would violate the autonomy of the parties and ultimately undermine democracy itself.

2.3.2 The “Cordon Sanitaire” as a Democratic Instrument

Political science recognizes the concept of the “cordon sanitaire” – the deliberate exclusion of extremist parties from the democratic governing process. This instrument has been successfully applied in various European countries to keep extremist parties away from power. It is not an undemocratic exclusion but a democratic act of self-defense.

The refusal of democratic parties to cooperate with the AfD is an expression of this militant democracy. It is based on the assessment that the AfD represents positions that are incompatible with the core values of the democratic order. This assessment is impressively confirmed by the present strategy paper.

3. Hostility to Society and Human Rights Violations

3.1 The Exclusive Concept of the People as the Basis of the Strategy

The strategy paper operates with an ethnically and culturally defined concept of the people, distinguishing between “real” Germans and others. This concept is in fundamental contradiction to the concept of the people in the Basic Law, which is based on citizenship and not on ethnic criteria.

3.1.1 Unconstitutionality of Ethnic Thinking

The Federal Constitutional Court clarified in its NPD decision (BVerfGE 144, 20) that an ethnically defined concept of the people is incompatible with the liberal-democratic basic order. The Court stated: “The guarantee of human dignity includes, in particular, the preservation of personal individuality, identity, and integrity as well as fundamental legal equality. It is based on a conception of the human being as a person who can determine himself in freedom and shape his fate independently.”

The AfD strategy paper violates these principles by defining people primarily by their origin and assigning them different rights and positions in society. The “migration turnaround” implies a fundamental unequal treatment of people based on their origin.

3.1.2 The Construction of Enemy Images

The systematic construction of enemy images – “radical leftists,” “migrants,” “gender ideologues” – serves to mobilize through fear and hatred. This strategy is well known from research on populism and extremism. Ruth Wodak has shown in her discourse analysis work how right-wing populist parties systematically construct enemy images to stoke fear and mobilize voters.

The consequences of such enemy image constructions are severe: they lead to real discrimination and violence. The NSU series of murders, the attacks in Halle and Hanau, and numerous other right-wing extremist acts of violence show where the systematic dehumanization of certain groups can lead.

3.2 Criminal Law Dimension: Incitement to Hatred and Hate Crimes

3.2.1 The Offense of Incitement to Hatred (§ 130 Criminal Code)

Section 130 of the Criminal Code criminalizes incitement to hatred. The offense is fulfilled when someone, in a manner capable of disturbing public peace, incites hatred against a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group, against parts of the population, or against an individual because of their membership in a designated group or part of the population, calls for violence or arbitrary measures, or attacks the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously making contemptible, or slandering a designated group, parts of the population, or an individual because of their membership in such a group or part of the population.

The systematic agitation against certain population groups laid out in the strategy paper potentially fulfills this offense. In particular, the construction of migrants as an existential threat and the demand for a “migration turnaround” can be interpreted as incitement to hatred. The deliberate creation of “irreconcilable camps” is capable of disturbing public peace.

The Federal Court of Justice has repeatedly emphasized that the offense of incitement to hatred must be interpreted broadly in order to provide effective protection against group-focused enmity. The AfD’s systematic strategy of constructing certain groups as enemies and dividing society moves dangerously close to the threshold of criminal liability.

3.2.2 Incitement to Commit Crimes (§ 26 Criminal Code)

The polarization strategy can also fulfill the offense of incitement to commit crimes. If others are incited to commit crimes against the defamed groups through systematic agitation and the construction of enemy images, the AfD becomes complicit. Experience shows that verbal violence often precedes physical violence.

3.3 International Law Dimension

3.3.1 The European Convention on Human Rights

Germany, as a member of the Council of Europe, is bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 14 ECHR prohibits any discrimination: “The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, color, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.”

The European Court of Human Rights has emphasized in numerous judgments the positive obligation of states to actively combat discrimination. In the case of Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria (2005), the Court found that states are obliged to combat racist violence and discrimination with all available means. The AfD strategy would bring Germany into direct conflict with these obligations.

3.3.2 The UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Germany has ratified, guarantees in Article 26: “All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.”

The UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors compliance with the Covenant, has repeatedly emphasized that states are not only obliged not to discriminate themselves but also to actively counter discrimination by private actors. Implementation of the AfD strategy would bring Germany into violation of its obligations under international law.

3.3.3 The Geneva Refugee Convention

The “migration turnaround” demanded in the strategy paper implies a fundamental departure from the obligations of the Geneva Refugee Convention. Article 33 of the Convention establishes the principle of non-refoulement: “No Contracting State shall expel or return (‘refouler’) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.”

This principle has now reached the status of peremptory international law (ius cogens) and cannot be unilaterally terminated. The AfD’s “migration turnaround” would bring Germany into fundamental conflict with international law and could lead to international sanctions.

4. Economic Catastrophe: The Economic Consequences of the AfD Strategy

4.1 The Demographic Collapse

4.1.1 The Facts on Demographic Development

Germany is facing an unprecedented demographic challenge. According to calculations by the Federal Statistical Office, the population of working age (20 to 66 years) will fall from about 51.8 million today to 45.8 to 47.4 million by 2035. At the same time, the number of people of retirement age is rising dramatically. The Institute for Employment Research (IAB) has calculated that Germany needs net immigration of at least 400,000 people per year to keep the labor market stable.

The AfD’s “migration turnaround” would abruptly end this necessary immigration. The consequences would be catastrophic: entire sectors would collapse. Particularly affected would be:

The care sector: Germany is already short of about 200,000 caregivers. Without immigration, this gap would increase to over 500,000 by 2030. The care system would collapse, and millions of people in need of care would be left without support.

The health system: About 20% of doctors in German hospitals come from abroad. Without them, medical care would collapse. Surgeries would have to be postponed, emergency rooms closed, entire hospitals

The IT sector: Germany has a shortage of more than 100,000 IT specialists. Without qualified immigration, digitalization would come to a standstill. German companies would fall hopelessly behind in international competition.

The skilled trades: The skilled trades are already short of more than 250,000 workers. Without immigration, construction projects would grind to a halt, repairs could no longer be carried out, and infrastructure would decay.

4.1.2 The Implications for the Social System

The German social security system is based on the pay-as-you-go principle: the working population finances the pensions of the older generation. Without immigration, this system would collapse. The Bertelsmann Foundation has calculated that without immigration, the contribution rate to the pension insurance would have to rise to over 30% by 2060, while at the same time the pension level would fall drastically.

Ironically, migrants contribute disproportionately to the financing of the social system. They are on average younger than the German population and pay more into the social funds than they receive in benefits. A study by the Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) shows that migrants bring the German state a net gain of an average of 3,300 euros per capita over their lifetime.

4.2 Capital Flight and Withdrawal of Investment

4.2.1 Political Instability as an Investment Barrier

International investors consider political stability to be one of the most important factors in investment decisions. The polarization and social division sought by the AfD would make Germany a high-risk country. The rating agencies would downgrade Germany, which would dramatically increase the state’s refinancing costs.

A look at other countries shows the consequences: when Turkey under Erdoğan took an authoritarian course, more than 100 billion dollars in foreign investment flowed out within a few years. The Turkish lira lost over 80% of its value, and inflation exploded.

4.2.2 Brain Drain and Loss of Human Capital

Social polarization and the creation of enemy images would lead to a massive exodus of qualified workers. Particularly affected would be:

Scientists and researchers: Germany would lose its position as a research location. International cooperation would end, research funding would be cut. The Max Planck Society, the Fraunhofer Society, and other research institutions would lose their best minds.

Skilled workers with a migration background: Millions of highly qualified people with a migration background would leave Germany. This would affect doctors, engineers, IT specialists, entrepreneurs – people who contribute significantly to German prosperity.

Young, well-educated Germans: Many Germans without a migration background would also leave a polarized, internationally isolated Germany. The brain drain would bleed Germany intellectually and economically.

4.3 The Collapse of the Export Economy

4.3.1 Germany as an Export Nation

Germany is the third largest export nation in the world. About 47% of German GDP is generated through exports. Over 7 million jobs depend directly on exports, and indirectly even more. This export strength is based on three pillars: product quality, reliability as a partner, and integration into international value chains.

The AfD strategy would destroy all three pillars:

Quality loss due to a shortage of skilled workers: Without qualified workers, German companies could not maintain their quality standards. “Made in Germany” would lose its meaning.

Loss of reliability: A Germany that breaks international agreements and withdraws from the international community would no longer be a reliable partner. Supply contracts would be canceled, and new orders would go to competitors.

Collapse of value chains: Modern production is based on complex international supply chains. An isolated Germany would be cut off from these chains. Just-in-time production would collapse.

4.3.2 Trade Wars and Sanctions

International isolation would lead to trade wars and sanctions. Democratic states would impose punitive tariffs on German products, organize boycotts, and terminate trade agreements. The German automotive industry, mechanical engineering, and chemical industry – all would lose their most important markets.

One example: the United States alone imports German goods worth over 120 billion euros annually. A trade conflict with the US would cost hundreds of thousands of German jobs. The same applies to China, the EU partners, and other major trading partners.

4.4 The Implosion of the Financial System

4.4.1 Euro Exit and Currency Crisis

A break with the EU would inevitably lead to a euro exit. The reintroduction of the Deutsche Mark would have dramatic consequences:

Massive appreciation: Experts estimate that a new Deutsche Mark would immediately appreciate by 30-40%. German exports would become instantly uncompetitive, and the export economy would collapse.

Target2 claims: Germany has claims of over one trillion euros against other euro countries through the Target2 system. In the event of a euro exit, these claims would become worthless or would have to be collected in lengthy negotiations.

Banking crisis: German banks, which are heavily invested in euro bonds, would suffer enormous losses. The result would be a banking crisis like 2008, only worse.

4.4.2 National Bankruptcy as a Real Danger

The combination of economic collapse, exploding social costs, and collapsing tax revenues would bring Germany to the brink of national bankruptcy. National debt would explode while refinancing options would simultaneously disappear. Germany would become the Greece of Europe – only without a bailout fund.

5. International Isolation: Germany as a Pariah State

5.1 The Break with the European Union

5.1.1 Article 7 TEU Proceedings

Implementation of the AfD strategy would inevitably trigger an Article 7 procedure. Systematic discrimination, the violation of minority rights, and the undermining of the rule of law would force the EU to act. The experiences with Poland under the PiS government and Hungary under Viktor Orbán show how the EU responds to authoritarian tendencies. Both countries were subjected to infringement proceedings and lost billions in EU funding.

For Germany, the consequences would be even more dramatic. As the largest EU member and a historically burdened nation, Germany would be judged particularly strictly. The EU could not stand idly by while the country that once committed the Holocaust again embarks on a path of systematic exclusion and discrimination.

5.1.2 Loss of EU Membership

In the extreme case, the implementation of the AfD strategy could lead to Germany’s expulsion from the EU. Although Article 50 TEU only provides for voluntary withdrawal, in the case of fundamental violations of core values, the EU could take drastic measures. The other member states could de facto isolate Germany, suspend all cooperation, and thus make continued membership in the Union impossible.

The economic consequences would be devastating. Germany would lose access to the single market of 450 million consumers. Tariffs would be reintroduced, and border controls would paralyze the movement of goods. The reintroduction of border controls alone would cost over 10 billion euros annually, according to estimates by the ifo Institute. The complex supply chains of German industry, which rely on the free movement of goods, would collapse.

5.2 The End of the Transatlantic Partnership

5.2.1 NATO Expulsion and Security Vacuum

NATO is based on shared democratic values. The preamble to the North Atlantic Treaty emphasizes the determination of the members “to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.”

A Germany under AfD leadership that systematically undermines democratic principles and violates human rights would be incompatible with these values. NATO partners, especially the United States, would end cooperation. Germany would lose the nuclear umbrella and would have to organize its defense alone.

The security policy consequences would be dramatic. Germany would have to massively increase its defense spending to compensate for the lack of NATO support. Experts estimate that defense spending would have to rise from the current approximately 50 billion euros to over 150 billion euros annually. This would come amid economic collapse and plummeting tax revenues.

5.2.2 Technological Isolation

The United States and other Western countries would stop transferring technology to Germany. Access to critical technologies in areas such as semiconductor production, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and biotechnology would be denied. German companies would be excluded from international research collaborations.

One example illustrates the magnitude: the German automotive industry relies on American technology for the development of autonomous vehicles. Without access to developments from Google, Tesla, or Intel, the German auto industry would fall behind and become technologically obsolete within a few years.

5.3 Global Ostracism and Diplomatic Isolation

5.3.1 Exclusion from International Organizations

Germany would lose its influence in all major international organizations:

United Nations: The long-sought permanent seat on the UN Security Council would be definitively lost. Germany could even lose its voting rights in the UN General Assembly, as happened to South Africa during apartheid.

G7/G20: Germany would be excluded from the groups of leading industrial and emerging countries. This would result in a complete loss of influence on global economic and financial policy.

OECD: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development would revoke Germany’s membership. Access to important economic data and analyses would be lost.

Council of Europe: As the guardian of human rights in Europe, the Council of Europe could revoke Germany’s membership, as it did with Greece during the military dictatorship.

5.3.2 Cultural and Scientific Isolation

The international scientific community would end cooperation with German institutions. German universities would be excluded from international rankings, and exchange programs like Erasmus would be terminated. German science, which thrives on international cooperation, would sink into irrelevance.

Culturally, Germany would become a pariah. International artists would refuse to perform in Germany, and German cultural figures would be boycotted. The Berlinale, Documenta, Bayreuth Festival – all would lose their international significance.

6. The Destruction of Youth: Radicalization and Manipulation

6.1 The Perfidious Strategy of Youth Manipulation

The strategy paper explicitly identifies “young voters, especially young men” as the primary target group. This targeted approach to young people for extremist purposes represents a particular danger and violates fundamental principles of youth protection and children’s rights.

6.1.1 Psychological Manipulation and Its Consequences

Developmental psychology shows that young people are particularly susceptible to extremist ideologies during the phase of identity formation. Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development describes adolescence as a phase of identity versus identity diffusion. In this critical phase, young people seek orientation and belonging.

The AfD strategy exploits this vulnerability deliberately. By constructing clear enemy images (“woke leftists,” “gender ideologues”) and offering simple identity concepts (“proud Germans,” “real men”), complex social issues are reduced to binary oppositions. This prevents the development of differentiated thinking and critical reflection.

The long-term psychological damage is significant:

Development of anxiety disorders: The constant evocation of existential threats leads to chronic anxiety. Studies show that young people exposed to extremist propaganda are significantly more likely to suffer from anxiety disorders.

Social isolation: The construction of enemy images leads to withdrawal from those who think differently. Social relationships are destroyed, friendships break up. Those affected fall into extremist echo chambers from which it is difficult to escape.

Propensity to violence: The polarization and dehumanization of political opponents lowers the inhibition threshold for violence. Radicalization research shows a clear link between extremist rhetoric and willingness to commit violence.

6.1.2 Gender-Specific Manipulation

Particularly perfidious is the explicit focus on “young men” with traditionalist gender images. This strategy exploits the insecurity of young men in a changing society and offers toxic masculinity concepts as a solution.

Research on toxic masculinity shows the devastating effects of such role models:

Emotional atrophy: Traditional concepts of masculinity forbid the expression of emotions other than anger. This leads to emotional immaturity and an inability to form relationships.

Increased suicide risk: Young men who adhere to rigid masculinity norms have a significantly higher risk of suicide. They cannot seek help because this is considered “unmanly.”

Violence against women: Toxic masculinity concepts are the strongest predictor of domestic violence and sexual assault. The objectification of women and the notion of male superiority legitimize violence.

6.2 Legal Dimension: Violation of Youth Protection

6.2.1 Violation of the Youth Protection Act

The Youth Protection Act (JuSchG) serves to protect children and adolescents from dangers to their development. Section 4 JuSchG prohibits the distribution of content that impairs the development of children and adolescents into self-responsible and socially competent personalities.

The systematic indoctrination with extremist ideologies, the promotion of hatred, and the transmission of anti-democratic values clearly fulfill this criterion. The Federal Review Board for Media Harmful to Minors could index materials based on the AfD strategy.

6.2.2 Violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

Germany has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and has thereby committed itself to considering the best interests of the child as a primary consideration. Article 13 guarantees freedom of expression, Article 17 access to information, but Article 29 also defines the aims of education:

“The States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to… the development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms… the development of respect for the child’s parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own.”

The AfD strategy fundamentally violates these principles. Instead of fostering respect for other cultures, it fosters hatred. Instead of respecting human rights, it relativizes them.

6.3 Educational Catastrophe

6.3.1 Undermining Civic Education

The Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs has stated in its resolution on civic education that schools are tasked with educating students to become responsible citizens of a democratic society. This includes imparting democratic values, promoting critical thinking, and enabling political participation.

The AfD strategy systematically counteracts these efforts:

Anti-science stance: The rejection of scientific findings, especially in areas like climate change and gender studies, undermines scientific education. Students are encouraged to deny facts and believe in conspiracy theories.

Historical revisionism: The relativization of historical crimes and the construction of an ethnic-centric view of history prevent critical engagement with German history.

Authoritarian education: The promotion of obedience and subordination instead of critical thinking produces citizens who are incapable of independent judgment and susceptible to authoritarian leaders.

6.3.2 Brain Drain and Educational Collapse

The best teachers and professors would leave a Germany under AfD rule. International students would stay away, and German students would study abroad and not return. German universities, once centers of science and enlightenment, would degenerate into propaganda institutions.

PISA studies already show that Germany is falling behind in education. Under the AfD, this decline would accelerate. Germany would shift from a knowledge society to a society of ignorance.

7. Security Policy Implosion: Violence, Terror, and Civil War

7.1 The Spiral of Violence

7.1.1 From Verbal to Physical Violence

Research on political violence shows a clear connection between extremist rhetoric and physical violence. Social psychologist Susan Fiske has demonstrated in her studies on the “continuum of violence” how dehumanization and demonization are the precursors to physical violence.

The AfD strategy of creating “irreconcilable camps” and portraying political opponents as existential threats dramatically lowers the inhibition threshold for violence. History shows where this leads: the Weimar Republic ultimately collapsed due in part to street violence between political factions.

Even today, statistics show a worrying trend:

Politically motivated violence: The number of politically motivated violent crimes has steadily increased in recent years. Right-wing extremist violence is at an all-time high.

Attacks on politicians: Local politicians, especially those with a migration background or who advocate for refugees, are increasingly threatened and attacked. The murder of Walter Lübcke was only the tip of the iceberg.

Vigilante groups and militias: In some regions, paramilitary structures are already forming, preparing for a “civil war.” The AfD strategy would legitimize and accelerate this development.

7.1.2 Right-Wing Terrorism as a Logical Consequence

Systematic radicalization and the construction of enemy images inevitably lead to terrorist attacks. The attacks in Halle and Hanau, the NSU series of murders, and the murder of Walter Lübcke – all these acts were committed by people radicalized by extremist rhetoric.

Security authorities are issuing urgent warnings about the growing threat of right-wing terrorism. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution counts over 13,000 violent right-wing extremists in Germany. Under an AfD government, these forces would feel legitimized and escalate their violence.

7.2 The Collapse of the Security Architecture

7.2.1 Infiltration of Security Agencies

The AfD strategy would lead to a systematic infiltration of the security agencies. Extremists would be elevated to key positions, while democratically minded officials would be removed or sidelined. Experience from other countries shows how quickly security agencies can become instruments of authoritarian regimes.

Even today, there are worrying signs:

Right-wing extremist networks: Right-wing extremist networks have repeatedly been uncovered in the police and the armed forces. Under an AfD government, these would not be combated but encouraged.

Weapons thefts: Weapons and ammunition repeatedly disappear from security agency stocks. These often end up with right-wing extremist groups preparing for a “Day X.”

Enemy lists: Right-wing extremists keep lists with tens of thousands of names of “enemies” who are to be killed on “Day X.” Under an AfD government, these lists would become death lists.

7.2.2 Civil War-Like Conditions

The logical consequence of the polarization strategy would be civil war-like conditions. If truly “irreconcilable camps” face each other, violence is inevitable. The examples from other countries are shocking:

Yugoslavia: Systematic ethnic polarization led to a bloody civil war with over 100,000 dead.

Rwanda: The construction of enemy images and the dehumanization of the Tutsi led to the genocide with over 800,000 dead.

Northern Ireland: The conflict between Protestant and Catholic camps cost over 3,500 lives and traumatized generations.

Germany is not immune to such developments. The Weimar Republic shows how quickly a democracy can sink into chaos and violence.

8. Legal Countermeasures: The Militant Democracy

8.1 Constitutional Protection and Surveillance

8.1.1 The Role of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has the task of monitoring anti-constitutional activities and informing the public about them. The AfD is already monitored as a suspected case or as a confirmed extremist effort in several federal states. The present strategy paper provides further evidence of the party’s anti-constitutional nature.

Observation by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution has important consequences:

Information gathering: The office can use intelligence tools to collect information about the AfD. This includes surveillance of individuals, wiretapping communications, and the use of informants.

Public warning: The office can and must warn the public about anti-constitutional activities. This is an important instrument of the militant democracy.

Basis for further measures: The findings of the office can form the basis for further measures, such as the withdrawal of party financing or party ban proceedings.

8.1.2 Limits and Problems

However, experience also shows the limits of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution:

Infiltration: There are indications that the office itself is infiltrated by extremist forces. The case of President of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution Maaßen, who downplayed the AfD, is just one example.

Legal hurdles: The AfD skillfully uses legal means to resist observation. Lengthy court proceedings delay necessary measures.

Political influence: The office is not independent of political influence. In some federal states, monitoring the AfD is prevented or delayed for political reasons.

8.2 Party Ban Proceedings under Article 21 of the Basic Law

8.2.1 The Legal Requirements

Article 21 paragraph 2 of the Basic Law states: “Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behavior of their adherents, seek to impair or abolish the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be unconstitutional.”

In its 2017 NPD decision, the Federal Constitutional Court set very high hurdles for a party ban. A party must not only pursue anti-constitutional goals but also have the “potentiality” to implement them.

The AfD strategy paper provides strong evidence that both criteria are met:

Anti-constitutional goals: The systematic undermining of democratic principles, the creation of “irreconcilable camps,” and the discrimination against minorities – all these are clearly anti-constitutional goals.

Potentiality: With about 20% voter support and the explicit strategy to achieve majorities, the AfD has the potential to implement its anti-constitutional goals. Unlike the NPD, which the court considered too insignificant, the AfD is a real danger.

8.2.2 Political and Practical Considerations

Despite the legal possibility of a party ban, there are strong arguments against it:

Martyr effect: Ban proceedings could make the AfD a martyr and even increase its support.

Underground movement: A ban could lead to the movement going underground and becoming even more radical.

International perception: A party ban could be perceived internationally as undemocratic.

On the other hand, history shows that hesitation in combating extremist parties can be fatal. The Weimar Republic also failed because it acted too late and too hesitantly against the NSDAP.

8.3 Other Legal Instruments

8.3.1 Withdrawal of State Party Financing

Under Section 18 paragraph 7 of the Political Parties Act, anti-constitutional parties can be denied state financing. This would be an important step to deprive the AfD of the financial means for its anti-constitutional agitation.

The AfD receives millions of euros in state party financing annually. These funds are used to implement the anti-constitutional strategy. The withdrawal of these funds would significantly restrict the party’s ability to act.

8.3.2 Criminal Prosecution

Many aspects of the AfD strategy fulfill criminal offenses:

Incitement to hatred (§ 130 Criminal Code): The systematic agitation against minorities fulfills the offense of incitement to hatred.

Formation of criminal organizations (§ 129 Criminal Code): The coordinated implementation of anti-constitutional goals could be considered a criminal organization

Anti-constitutional defamation (§ 90a Criminal Code): The systematic defamation of the state and its symbols is punishable. Die systematische Verunglimpfung des Staates und seiner Symbole ist strafbar.

Consistent criminal prosecution would make it clear that democracy defends itself.

9. Civil Society Countermeasures

9.1 The Role of Civil Society

The militant democracy cannot rely solely on state institutions. Civil society plays a decisive role in defending democracy. This includes various actors and strategies:

9.1.1 Education and Awareness

Educational institutions, from schools to universities to adult education centers, must increasingly provide democratic education. This includes:

Media literacy: The ability to recognize disinformation and propaganda is essential in the digital society.

Historical awareness: Knowledge of German history and the fragility of democracy immunizes against extremist temptations.

Democratic competence: Understanding democratic processes and the ability to participate politically strengthen democracy.

9.1.2 Citizen Alliances and Demonstrations

Experience shows that mass demonstrations can send an important signal against extremism. The demonstrations against right-wing extremism after the attacks in Halle and Hanau mobilized millions of people. Such demonstrations show that the majority of society defends democracy.

Local citizen alliances play an important role in combating extremism on the ground. They organize counter-protests at right-wing extremist marches, support victims of right-wing violence, and create democratic counter-publics.

9.2 Media and Public Sphere

9.2.1 Investigative Journalism

Investigative journalists play a decisive role in uncovering extremist networks and strategies. The publication of the AfD strategy paper itself is an example of the importance of investigative journalism.

Media must fulfill their responsibility as the “fourth estate”:

Fact-checking: The systematic verification and refutation of false information is essential.

Education: Reporting on the true goals and methods of extremist parties informs the public.

Platform denial: Media should not offer extremists an uncritical platform.

9.2.2 Social Media and Digital Counteraction

The digital sphere is a central battlefield in the fight for democracy. Extremists skillfully use social media for their propaganda. This must be countered:

Counter-narratives: Democratic forces must develop and spread their own narratives.

Deplatforming: Platforms must consistently act against hate speech and disinformation.

Digital civil courage: Users must report and oppose hate speech.

9.3 Economy and Working World

9.3.1 Corporate Responsibility

Companies have a social responsibility. They can and must contribute to the defense of democracy:

Diversity programs: Companies that promote diversity counteract polarization.

Political positioning: Companies should clearly take a stand for democracy and against extremism.

Economic pressure: Companies can withdraw advertising funds from extremist media and not support extremist events.

9.3.2 Trade Unions as a Bulwark

Trade unions have historically played an important role in defending democracy. They must take on this role more strongly again:

Political education: Trade unions can educate their members about the dangers of extremism.

Solidarity: Trade unions defend the rights of all workers, regardless of origin or religion.

Mobilization: Gewerkschaften können ihre Mitglieder für Demonstrationen und politische Aktionen mobilisieren.

10. International Dimension of Countermeasures

10.1 European Solidarity

10.1.1 The Rule of Law Mechanism

The European Union has learned from the experiences with Poland and Hungary and strengthened its instruments to defend the rule of law. The rule of law mechanism introduced in 2020 allows EU funds to be cut or frozen in case of violations of rule-of-law principles.

For Germany, this would mean:

Structural funds: Germany receives about 7 billion euros annually from EU structural funds. These funds would be frozen in case of rule-of-law violations. Ironically, the eastern federal states, where the AfD is particularly strong, would be most affected.

Research funding: German universities and research institutions receive billions from EU research programs like Horizon Europe. This funding would be lost, further weakening German science.

Agricultural subsidies: German farmers receive about 6 billion euros annually in EU agricultural subsidies. The loss would drive many farms into ruin.

10.1.2 Diplomatic and Economic Pressure

EU member states would exert coordinated pressure on Germany:

Diplomatic isolation: German representatives would be excluded from informal meetings, and important decisions would be made without Germany.

Economic sanctions: Even without formal sanctions, companies from other EU countries would reconsider cooperation with German partners. Supply chains would be redirected, and investments reduced.

Border controls: Other EU states could reintroduce border controls with Germany, massively hindering the movement of goods.

10.2 Transatlantic Reactions

10.2.1 The Role of the United States

The United States would respond to an authoritarian shift in Germany with sharp measures:

Military withdrawal: The US still maintains significant military bases in Germany with about 35,000 soldiers. These would be withdrawn, which would have not only security policy consequences but also massive economic effects. The US armed forces generate about 2 billion euros in economic activity in Germany annually.

Technology embargo: The US would ban the export of critical technologies to Germany. This would particularly affect German industry, which depends on American high technology.

Financial sanctions: The US financial system is the backbone of the global financial architecture. Sanctions against German banks would cut them off from international payments.

10.2.2 The “Five Eyes” and Other Allies

The “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance (USA, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) would end cooperation with German services. Germany would be cut off from important information on terrorism and other security threats.

Other democratic allies would follow:

Japan and South Korea: As important economic partners, they would reconsider trade relations.

Israel: The special relationship with Israel would collapse, which would be particularly serious given Germany’s historical responsibility.

Democracies worldwide: From India to Brazil to South Africa, democratic states would avoid Germany.

10.3 International Organizations

10.3.1 The United Nations

Germany would massively lose influence in the UN:

Security Council: The long-sought permanent seat would be definitively lost.

UN organizations: Germans would be removed from leadership positions in UN organizations.

Peacekeeping: Germany would be excluded from UN peacekeeping missions.

The UN Human Rights Commission would investigate and condemn Germany. Special rapporteurs would be sent to document human rights violations.

10.3.2 Other International Organizations

IMF and World Bank: Germany would lose its influence in these important financial institutions.

WTO: Trade disputes would increase, and Germany would be regularly condemned.

OSZE: The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe would send election observers and denounce Germany’s democratic deficits.

11. Psychosocial Consequences: The Trauma of a Divided Society

11.1 Collective Trauma and Societal Scars

11.1.1 The Psychology of Division

The deliberate division of a society into “irreconcilable camps” leaves deep psychological scars. Research on societal trauma, especially the work of Vamık Volkan on large group identity, shows the long-term consequences of such divisions.

Transgenerational trauma: Trauma is passed down through generations. Children who grow up in a divided society shaped by hatred carry these experiences with them for life. Research on epigenetics even shows that trauma can lead to genetic changes that are inherited.

Loss of basic trust: In a polarized society, basic trust in fellow human beings and institutions is lost. People live in constant fear and mistrust. This leads to a variety of mental illnesses.

Identity crises: When society breaks into hostile camps, people are forced to choose. Families break apart, friendships end, and social networks collapse. Individual identity is reduced to group affiliation.

11.1.2 The Epidemic of Mental Illnesses

Societal division would lead to a massive increase in mental illnesses:

Depression: Hopelessness and the loss of social bonds lead to an epidemic of depression. The WHO estimates that up to 25% of the population in conflict societies suffer from depression.

Anxiety disorders: Constant threat and uncertainty lead to generalized anxiety disorders, panic attacks, and phobias.

Post-traumatic stress disorders:. Victims of violence and witnesses of traumatic events develop PTSD with lifelong consequences

Substance abuse: As a coping mechanism, many people turn to alcohol and drugs. Addiction problems explode.

11.2 The Collapse of Social Structures

11.2.1 Family Destruction

Polarization would cut straight through families:

Generational conflicts: Young people indoctrinated with extremist ideologies turn against their parents. Respect for older generations is lost.

Partnerships break up: Differing political convictions lead to separations and divorces. The divorce rate would rise dramatically.

Children as victims: Kinder leiden am meisten unter familiären Konflikten. Sie werden instrumentalisiert, müssen sich für eine Seite entscheiden, verlieren sichere Bindungen.

11.2.2 Social Atomization

Robert Putnam described the loss of social capital in modern societies in “Bowling Alone.” The AfD strategy would accelerate this process dramatically:

Collapse of club life: Sports clubs, cultural associations, civic initiatives – political conflicts would break out everywhere. Germany’s rich club life would be destroyed.

Neighborhoods fall apart: Neighbors become enemies. Mutual help and solidarity, which hold societies together, would disappear.

Collapse of volunteer work: Volunteer fire brigades, relief organizations, social services – all would suffer from political conflicts. Civil society would erode.

11.3 Cultural Desolation

11.3.1 The End of Cultural Diversity

Germany has a rich, diverse cultural landscape. This would wither under AfD rule:

Censorship and self-censorship: Artists would be censored or censor themselves out of fear of repression. Critical art would disappear.

Cultural exodus: The best artists, musicians, and writers would leave Germany. Berlin would lose its status as a cultural metropolis.

Provincialization: Without international influences, German culture would become provincial and backward-looking. Innovation and creativity would be stifled.

11.3.2 Scientific Decline

German science, once a world leader, would completely collapse:

Brain drain: The best scientists would emigrate. Nobel laureates, top researchers, innovative thinkers – all would leave Germany.

International isolation: Without international cooperation, there can be no cutting-edge research. German scientists would be excluded from conferences, publications, and research projects.

Ideologization: Science would be subjected to ideological requirements. Research on climate change, gender, and migration would be banned or manipulated.

12. Total Economic Destruction: The Complete Economic Analysis

12.1 Sectoral Collapses

12.1.1 Automotive Industry: The End of an Era

The German automotive industry, the heart of the German economy, would completely collapse:

Export slump: German cars would be boycotted worldwide. The export share of over 75% would vanish. Millions of jobs would be destroyed.

Technological disconnection: Without access to international technology, there would be no e-mobility, no autonomous driving, no innovation. German cars would become technologically obsolete.

Supply chain collapse: The highly complex international supply chains would break down. Without foreign supplies, there is no production.

Plant closures: VW, BMW, Mercedes – all would close factories and relocate abroad. Entire regions would be deindustrialized.

12.1.2 Mechanical Engineering: The Decline of the Export Champion

German mechanical engineering, the world market leader in many areas, would lose its position:

Loss of trust: German machines are bought for their quality and reliability. An unreliable, isolated Germany would destroy this trust.

Technology theft: Without patent protection and international agreements, German technology would be stolen and copied.

Financing problems: Large mechanical engineering projects require international financing. This would no longer be available.

12.1.3 Chemical Industry: Toxic Decline

The German chemical industry, one of the largest in the world, would be poisoned:

Raw material shortages: Without imports, no raw materials. Production would come to a standstill.

Environmental regulations: International environmental standards would be ignored, leading to further isolation.

Pharmaceutical collapse: The pharmaceutical industry, dependent on international research and approval, would collapse. Drug shortages would follow.

12.2 Financial Market Apocalypse

12.2.1 Banking Sector in Free Fall

German banks would plunge into an existential crisis:

Disconnection from the SWIFT system: Exclusion from international payments would render banks incapable of acting.

Massive loan defaults: Companies could not service loans, and individuals would become insolvent.

Bank runs: Panicked citizens would withdraw their savings. Banks would have to close.

Wave of nationalizations: The state would have to bail out banks, causing national debt to explode.

12.2.2 Insurance Collapse

The insurance industry, a stabilizing pillar of the economy, would collapse:

Capital flight: Insurers would transfer their capital abroad.

Refusal of services: International reinsurers would terminate contracts. Without reinsurance, there is no insurance.

Social insurance implosion: Pension, health, and unemployment insurance would collapse. There would be no social security.

12.3 Infrastructure Decay

12.3.1 Transportation Infrastructure

Without investments and skilled workers, infrastructure would decay:

Roads: Potholes would not be repaired, and bridges would collapse.

Railways: The railway system, already problematic today, would completely collapse.

Airports: International airlines would avoid Germany. Airports would become ghost facilities.

12.3.2 Digital Infrastructure

Digitalization would be reversed:

Internet disconnection: International providers would cut connections.

Cyber isolation: Without international cooperation, there is no cybersecurity. Germany would become a cyber war zone.

Technological lag: The existing digitalization gap would become unbridgeable.

12.4 Energy Crisis and Blackouts

12.4.1 Energy Supply Collapses

Without international cooperation, there is no secure energy supply:

Import dependency: Germany imports most of its energy. Suppliers would terminate contracts.

Grid instability: The European power grid is interconnected. Disconnection would lead to blackouts.

Renewable energy: Without international technology and components, there is no energy transition.

12.4.2 Return to Coal

In desperation, Germany would return to coal:

Climate catastrophe: CO2 emissions would explode.

Health damage: Air pollution would lead to massive health problems.

International ostracism: Germany would become a climate pariah.

13. The Historical Dimension: Lessons from the Past

13.1 Weimar Parallels

13.1.1 The Destruction of the Center

The Weimar Republic failed not least because of the polarization between extreme camps. The center was crushed between Communists and National Socialists. The AfD strategy follows exactly this pattern: the democratic center is to be destroyed in order to seize power through polarization.

Historians have analyzed in detail the mechanisms of Weimar’s failure:

Delegitimization of democracy: Wie damals die NSDAP bezeichnet heute die AfD die demokratischen Institutionen als „System“ und ihre Vertreter als „Altparteien“.

Escalation of violence: The street battles between the SA and the Red Front Fighters’ League have their parallel in today’s clashes between right-wing extremists and Antifa.

State of emergency rhetoric: Just as Hitler exploited the Reichstag fire, the AfD would instrumentalize crises to justify emergency measures.

13.1.2 The Failure of the Conservatives

A particularly tragic aspect of Weimar history was the failure of the conservative elites, who believed they could “frame” and control Hitler. Today’s CDU/CSU faces a similar temptation. The strategy paper makes it clear that the AfD intends to instrumentalize the Union.

Franz von Papen and the German nationalist conservatives enabled Hitler’s rise to power under the illusion that they could control him. Within a few months they were disempowered, many were murdered. This historical lesson must not be forgotten.

13.2 International Historical Parallels

13.2.1 The Collapse of Yugoslavia

The collapse of Yugoslavia shows how quickly a multiethnic society can sink into violence and chaos. Slobodan Milošević used ethnic nationalism to come to power. The consequences were catastrophic: over 130,000 dead, millions displaced, genocide.

The mechanisms were the same that the AfD applies:

Ethnic mobilization: The construction of ethnic opposites where coexistence had previously existed.

Media propaganda: The control of the media to spread hatred.

Paramilitary groups: The formation of armed groups that spread terror.

13.2.2 Rwanda: From Hate to Genocide

The genocide in Rwanda in 1994 shows where dehumanization can lead. The Hutu extremists called the Tutsi “cockroaches” that had to be exterminated. Within 100 days, 800,000 people were murdered.

The preparation of the genocide followed a pattern that bears similarities to the AfD strategy:

Construction of enemy images: Years of propaganda prepared the ground.

Radio stations: The hate broadcaster Radio Mille Collines incited daily.

Lists: Death lists were prepared, as is the case today among German right-wing extremists.

13.3 The Lessons of History

13.3.1 Heed the Early Signs

The most important lesson of history is: Heed the early signs. Extremist movements must be fought before they become too strong. The appeasement policy toward Hitler was a fatal mistake. Tolerance toward extremist forces in the hope that they will moderate themselves has never worked.

13.3.2 The Fragility of Democracy

History shows that democracies are not automatically stable. They must be actively defended. The Weimar Republic had one of the most progressive constitutions of its time – and still failed. Institutions alone are not enough, there must be democrats who defend them.

14. Solutions and Recommendations

14.1 Short-Term Measures

14.1.1 Immediate Measures by Security Agencies

Enhanced surveillance: The Office for the Protection of the Constitution must intensively monitor the AfD and its environment. The findings from the strategy paper justify the use of intelligence tools.

Disarmament Right-wing extremists must consistently have their firearms licenses revoked. The legal weapons in right-wing extremist circles are a ticking time bomb.

Dismantling militant structures: Groups like “Nordkreuz” or “Group S,” which are preparing for a “Day X,” must be dismantled.

14.1.2 Legal Steps

Prosecution: Incitement to hatred, threats, and calls for violence must be consistently prosecuted.

Party financing: State financing must be reviewed and, if necessary, withdrawn.

Association bans: Extremist associations in the AfD’s environment must be banned.

14.2 Medium-Term Strategies

14.2.1 Education Offensive

Democracy education: Massive investments in political education in schools and universities.

Media literacy: Students must learn to recognize fake news and propaganda.

Teaching history: The lessons of German history must be conveyed.

14.2.2 Social Measures

Combating social inequality: Social justice deprives extremism of its breeding ground.

Integration: Successful integration disproves AfD propaganda.

Strengthening structurally weak regions: Investments in neglected regions reduce frustration.

14.3 Long-Term Perspectives

14.3.1 Democratic Renewal

Citizen participation: More direct democracy can combat political disenchantment.

Transparency: Transparent political processes build trust.

Accountability: Politicians must be held accountable.

14.3.2 Social Dialogue

Dialogue forums: Spaces for constructive exchange must be created.

Reconciliation: The division of society must be overcome.

Shared visions: A positive vision of the future can unite people.

15. The Hour of Democracy

15.1 The Existential Threat

The analyzed AfD strategy paper reveals an existential threat to German democracy. This is not about normal political competition, but an attack on the very foundations of the free democratic basic order. The strategy aims at nothing less than the transformation of Germany into an authoritarian state that breaks with the values of the Basic Law, international law, and the European community of values.

The analysis has shown that the implementation of this strategy would have catastrophic consequences:

Politically: The destruction of democracy and the establishment of an authoritarian regime.

Economically: The complete economic collapse with mass unemployment and impoverishment.

Socially: The division and traumatization of society with unforeseeable consequences.

Internationally: The complete isolation of Germany as a pariah state.

15.2 The Responsibility of the Present

We are at a historic turning point. The decisions of the coming years will determine whether Germany remains a liberal democracy or drifts into authoritarianism. This responsibility cannot be delegated to others. Every citizen, every institution, every organization is called upon.

History will judge us by whether we have resolutely opposed the threat or whether we have paved the way for extremism through indifference, cowardice, or opportunism. The generation that allowed the Weimar Republic to fail can no longer justify itself. We do not have such an excuse.

15.3 A Call to Action

This analysis is more than a scientific investigation. It is a wake-up call and a call to action. Democracy does not defend itself. It needs democrats who stand up for it.

To politics: Show backbone. No cooperation with enemies of the constitution, no rotten compromises, no pandering to extremist positions.

To the judiciary: Apply the law consistently. Incitement to hatred, threats, violence must be prosecuted, no matter who they come from.

To the media: Fulfill your responsibility as the fourth estate. Clarify, expose, do not give extremists an uncritical platform.

To the economy: Take on social responsibility. No support for enemies of the constitution, clear stance for democracy and diversity.

To civil society: Organize yourselves. Demonstrate, protest, get involved. Democracy needs you.

To every individual: Do not remain silent. Speak up when hate is spread. Vote democratically. Get involved.

15.4 Hope and Confidence

Despite the grim analysis, there is reason for hope. Germany has a strong democratic tradition. The Basic Law has proven to be robust. Civil society is vigilant. The vast majority of Germans support democracy.

The AfD is not invincible. Its strategy can be thwarted. But it requires determination, courage, and solidarity. History shows that democracies can overcome extremism if they are aware of their values and act decisively.

After the catastrophe of National Socialism, Germany built an exemplary democracy. We must not squander this achievement. The responsibility before history, before our children and before ourselves, requires that we act now.

15.5 Final Word

The AfD strategy paper “Shaping Germany Politically” is a document of democratic overthrow. It reveals the true intentions of a party that presents itself as a democratic alternative but in truth wants to destroy democracy.

This scientific analysis has shown the many dimensions of the threat: constitutional, criminal, international law, economic, social, psychological, and historical. The evidence is overwhelming: The AfD strategy is not only dangerous, it is an existential threat to everything Germany has built since 1945.

But this analysis also shows: Democracy has the means to defend itself. Legally, politically, socially. These means must be used now. Consistently, decisively, but always on the basis of the rule of law.

Democracy is not a law of nature. It is a civilizational achievement that must be defended anew every day. This defense is not a task for others. It is our task. Now.

History is watching us. Future generations will judge us by how we acted in this critical hour. Let us live up to this responsibility. Let us defend democracy. Let us show that Germany has learned from its history.

The alternative is no alternative. It is the road to the abyss. We must not and will not go down this road.

Germany must remain democratic. That is what we are fighting for. That is what we stand for. Together. Determined. Now.

Epilogue: The Irreversibility of Democratic Progress

The Power of Enlightenment

The publication and analysis of this strategy paper itself is proof of the strength of the democratic public. In authoritarian systems, such critical engagement would be impossible. That we can have this debate, that investigative journalists can bring such documents to light, that scientists can freely analyze them – all this demonstrates the vitality of our democracy.

The enlightenment about the true intentions of extremist forces is one of democracy’s strongest weapons. When citizens understand what is at stake, when they see through the consequences of extremist policies, then they can make informed decisions. This analysis contributes to that enlightenment.

The Resilience of German Democracy

The Federal Republic of Germany has repeatedly proven in its more than 75-year history that it can overcome extremist challenges:

• The RAF terrorism of the 1970s was overcome without abandoning the principles of the rule of law
• The reunification was managed democratically, despite enormous challenges
• Economic crises, from the oil crisis to the financial crisis, were managed
• The refugee crisis in 2015 did not lead to collapse, despite all tensions

This resilience is no coincidence. It is based on strong institutions, a vibrant civil society, and the commitment of the vast majority to democracy. These strengths must now be mobilized.

The European Context as a Protective Shield

Germany is not alone. As a member of the European Union, it is embedded in a community of democratic states. This embedding is a protective shield against authoritarian temptations. The EU has learned from the experiences with democratic setbacks in Poland and Hungary and has sharpened its instruments.

European integration is irreversibly connected with German prosperity and German security. Any attempt to reverse this integration would face massive resistance – not only from outside, but also from within, from all those who understand what is at stake.

The Demographic Perspective

Demographics work against the AfD. Its core electorate is aging, while young people are predominantly cosmopolitan and democratic. Generation Z, raised in a united Europe, with global perspectives and digital networking, is largely immune to ethnic nationalism.

The AfD is indeed trying to radicalize young people, but the statistics show: The majority of youth stand for diversity, climate protection, and international cooperation. This generation will shape the future, not the backward-looking forces.

The Power of Truth

In times of fake news and disinformation, it may sometimes seem as if the truth has no chance. But experience shows: In the long run, the truth prevails. Lies have short legs, propaganda bubbles burst, reality cannot be denied forever.

The AfD strategy is based on lies and distortions. The alleged “migration crisis,” the conjured-up “Islamization,” the constructed threat of “gender ideology” – all of these are phantoms that collapse upon closer examination. The power of facts, scientific analysis, and journalistic research will bring these edifices of lies crashing down.

A New Social Contract

The challenge posed by extremism can also be an opportunity – an opportunity for democratic renewal. The threat forces us to reflect on our values, to modernize our democracy, to establish a new social contract.

This new social contract could include:

• More citizen participation and direct democracy
• Social justice as the foundation of cohesion
• Ecological sustainability as a generational contract
• Digital participation as a basic right
• Education as the key to the future

The Global Perspective

Germany is part of a global movement for democracy and human rights. From the protests in Hong Kong to the democracy movement in Belarus to the resistance against authoritarianism in Brazil – all over the world, people are fighting for freedom and dignity.

This global context gives hope. Authoritarianism may achieve short-term successes, but the human desire for freedom cannot be permanently suppressed. History shows: In the end, freedom wins.

Personal Responsibility

Every reader of this analysis faces a personal decision: Look away or act? Stay silent or speak? Resign or fight?

History is not made by abstract forces, but by people. By people like you. Your decision, your action, your voice can make the difference. In the sum of individual decisions lies the power of democracy.

The Price of Freedom

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” – this sentence, often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, sums up a fundamental truth: Freedom is not a given. It must be fought for and defended anew every day.

The generation of our grandparents paid a high price for the lessons of National Socialism. Millions died before the world understood where hate and extremism lead. We have the privilege of learning from this history without having to repeat it. But only if we act now.

The Power of Hope

Despite all dangers and challenges, this analysis ends with hope. Hope that is not based on naive optimism, but on the sober assessment of our strengths:

• We have one of the most stable democracies in the world
• We have a vigilant civil society
• We have independent media and judiciary
• We have the lessons of history
• We have European and international partners
• We have a majority that supports democracy

Mobilizing, organizing, and activating these strengths – that is the task of the hour.

The Call

This is not an academic document to gather dust in libraries. This is a call to action. A call to every single citizen, every politician, every journalist, every teacher, every entrepreneur, every artist, every person living in this country:

Defend democracy!

Not with violence, but with the means of democracy. Not with hate, but with determination. Not with exclusion, but with a clear stance against the enemies of freedom.

The Vision

Let us imagine a Germany that has mastered this challenge. A Germany that has emerged stronger from this crisis. A Germany that has renewed its democracy, reconciled its society, and shaped its economy sustainably. A Germany that shows: Democracy is stronger than authoritarianism. Diversity is stronger than narrow-mindedness. Love is stronger than hate. Hope is stronger than fear. This Germany is possible. But it does not come by itself. It must be fought for. By us. By you. Now.

The Last Word

At the end of this comprehensive analysis stands a simple truth: Democracy is in danger, but it is not lost. The AfD strategy is dangerous, but it is not invincible. The challenge is great, but we are greater.

What the AfD does not understand: Germany has changed. It is no longer the homogeneous, authority-submissive country it once was. It is colorful, diverse, open to the world. Millions of people with migration backgrounds call it their home. Millions of young people have grown up in freedom and democracy. Millions of citizens have understood that diversity is not a threat, but an enrichment.

These people will not stand by idly while their freedom, their dignity, their future is destroyed. They will rise. They will resist. They will fight. With the means of democracy, but with all determination.

The AfD may have a strategy. But we have something stronger: Values. Convictions. Solidarity. Courage. And the certainty of being on the right side of history. The firewall will not fall. It will stand. Stronger than ever. Carried by millions of democrats. Defended by a resilient democracy. Protected by the lessons of history. Germany will remain democratic. That is what we stand for. That is what we fight for. Together. Determined. Successful.

Democracy will prevail. Because we want it that way. Because we will make it so. Because we are democracy.

Afterword of the Authors

This analysis was written with scientific diligence, democratic passion, and historical responsibility. It is based on publicly available sources, established scientific methods, and principles of the rule of law. The goal was not to spread panic, but to enlighten. Not polarization, but analysis. Not hate, but the defense of the values that make our coexistence possible. May this analysis contribute to ensuring that Germany never leaves the path of democracy, the rule of law, and human dignity. May it make people reflect, motivate them to act, encourage them to resist. The future is not predetermined. It is shaped by us. In this moment. With every decision. With every action. With every word. Let us make the right decisions. Let us act rightly. Let us find the right words. For democracy. For freedom. For dignity. For Germany. For Europe. For humanity.

Never again is now.

[End of the scientific analysis]

Annex: Methodological Notes

Source Basis

This analysis is based on:

• The AfD strategy paper “Shaping Germany Politically”
• Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany
• Relevant case law of the Federal Constitutional Court
• International treaties and conventions
• Scientific literature on democratic theory, extremism research, and constitutional law
• Historical analyses on Weimar, National Socialism, and other authoritarian systems
• Current statistics and studies on economic and social developments

Methodological Approach

The analysis uses:

• Legal subsumption for legal evaluation
• Political science discourse analysis
• Historical-comparative method
• Economic modeling
• Sociological conflict analysis
• Psychological assessments of individual and collective consequences

Scientific Standards

The analysis follows scientific standards:

• Transparency of reasoning
• Traceability of conclusions
• Differentiation between facts and assessments
• Consideration of different perspectives
• Critical reflection on one’s own position

Limits of the Analysis

This analysis naturally has limits:

• It is based on a single strategy paper
• It cannot predict future developments with certainty
• It is time-bound and must be updated with new developments
• It cannot cover all aspects exhaustively

Further Research

This analysis is intended to stimulate further research:

• Detailed studies on individual aspects of the AfD strategy
• International comparative studies on right-wing populist movements
• Long-term studies on social polarization processes
• Interdisciplinary research on threats to democracy

Acknowledgments

Thanks go to all who are committed to democracy and human rights:

• Investigative journalists who expose grievances
• Scientists who research extremism
• Activists who take to the streets
• Politicians who show backbone
• Citizens who do not remain silent
• My dear wife and Alan’s girlfriend, who once again had to wait for us

Contact and Discussion

This analysis is intended to stimulate discussion. Criticism, additions, and corrections are welcome. Only in open discourse can knowledge grow and democracy thrive. License

This analysis is under a Creative Commons license. It may be freely distributed, quoted, and used for educational purposes. Democracy needs informed citizens.

License

Final Remark

This analysis is under a Creative Commons license. It may be freely distributed, quoted, and used for educational purposes. Democracy needs informed citizens. Final Remark

Let us fulfill it. Together. Now.

*This analysis is based on scientific methods and principles of the rule of law. It serves the enlightenment and the defense of the free democratic basic order. It is a contribution to the necessary social

Rainer Hofmann / Alan Gallardo

Kaizen Blog LTD – The Bristol Office, 2nd Floor, 5 High Street, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, BS9 3BY. England – https://kaizen-blog.org

Investigative journalism requires courage, conviction – and your support.