“AfD above all” – How political world power is constructed from a private club in New York

In several reports in Germany in recent days, one sentence in particular is repeatedly highlighted: “AfD above all.” It appears at the end of a paper written by U.S. actors who call for a “new social order in Germany.” This phrasing alone unfolds maximum impact – it suggests international significance, transatlantic influence, and a political axis reaching into the power center of the United States. But it is precisely at this point that the overreach begins.

The underlying document-website exists. It originates from the private New York Young Republican Club and bears the date August 13, 2025. The quoted sentence does indeed appear there. But that is where the verifiable factual basis ends. Everything beyond that which is asserted or implied requires precise classification – and it is precisely this that is missing in large parts of the reporting. Link

The paper is not a government document, not a resolution of the Republican Party, not a strategy paper of state bodies, and not an expression of official U.S. policy. It is a position paper of a private association. Ideologically sharpened, politically radical in its wording – but without institutional binding. Anyone who makes more of it leaves the realm of description and enters that of construction.

Particularly problematic is the recurring designation of the New York Young Republican Club as an “association of young U.S. Republicans” or as a politically relevant structure. This wording creates associations that are not supported by facts. The club is not an association in the organizational or institutional sense. It is not an official youth organization of the Republican Party, not a political arm, not part of party structures, and not a body with decision making authority. It has no party mandate, no formal integration, and no influence on government or legislation. The connection to the Republican spectrum is ideological, not institutional. It is precisely this distinction that is frequently blurred in public portrayal. When there is talk of “networking into the White House,” it remains unclear what exactly is meant. There is no evidence of official contacts, no mandates, no functions, no assignments. Individual encounters, shared photos, social media proximity, or private appearances do not replace political integration. Influence is constructed from acquaintances – without reliable proof.

This mechanism is also evident in the portrayal of individual actors from the MAGA environment. Figures such as Alex Bruesewitz are presented as Trump adjacent personalities. In reality, they are private political supporters and social media strategists who act independently. Bruesewitz was neither a campaign manager nor a government employee, neither a party official nor an official representative of the Trump administration. His activities took place without assignment, without mandate, without institutional role. Support is not appointment – and proximity is not office.

A similar pattern applies to the gala of the New York Young Republican Club. It is described as a glamorous high point of nationalist networking, with ticket prices of up to 30,000 dollars. These figures are correct. They say nothing, however, about political significance. It is an internal fundraising event of a private association. The gala is not an official Republican Party event, not a state function, and not a venue of political decision making. Anyone who does not clearly name this distinction artificially amplifies the impression of relevance.

This overdosage becomes especially clear in the case of the so called Allen W. Dulles Award, which is to be presented to an AfD politician. The name creates associations with the U.S. security apparatus and the CIA. That is precisely the intent. In reality, this award exists exclusively as an internal construction of the club. It has no connection whatsoever to a real, recognized Dulles Award of state bodies, which is awarded exclusively to U.S. citizens. It is a label with a big name but without institutional weight – a means of self elevation, not of recognizing political significance.

The alleged references to U.S. security strategy are also frequently overstated. That rhetorical overlaps exist is undisputed. But similar wording does not replace coordination, cooperation, or influence. Political language is adopted, copied, and instrumentalized – especially in ideological milieus. To construct a strategic alliance from this goes beyond what can be substantiated. What runs through the reporting is a recurring pattern: Real individual events – trips, meetings, papers, quotes – are framed in such a way that they appear larger than they are. Peripheral contacts become proximity to power, a private club becomes an international axis, ideological agreement becomes a political alliance. This is precisely where the journalistic rupture lies.

See also our documentation on another article: “Documentation: How WELT turns a fringe AfD sideshow into a world political narrative” – at the link: https://kaizen-blog.org/en/dokumentation-wie-die-welt-aus-einer-randshow-der-afd-eine-weltpolitische-erzaehlung-bastelt/ and our article: “The invented proximity – How the AfD advertises with a ‘Trump adviser’ who does not actually exist” – at the link: https://kaizen-blog.org/en/die-erfundene-naehe-wie-die-afd-mit-einem-trump-berater-wirbt-den-es-so-gar-nicht-gibt/

Clarification does not mean declaring everything that exists as maximum cause for panic. Clarification means making distinctions visible: between private and official, between ideology and mandate, between stage and political impact. These dividing lines are too often blurred in current reporting – and it is precisely those who live off significance where there is in fact only scenery who benefit from this.

In the end, it must be stated: Yes, there are contacts. Yes, there are ideological overlaps. Yes, the New York Young Republican Club represents radical positions and seeks publicity. But no: There is no substantiated institutional alliance, no official integration, no political steering reaching into the White House. Anyone who claims this replaces scrutiny with exaggeration. The AfD does not travel to the center of power. It moves on a side stage – loud, flashy, but without influence. The club does not award a prize of significance, but attention in exchange for admission. And reporting that turns this into a world political narrative fails its own claim.

In redaktionellen Medien bedeutet ein interner Faktencheck nicht automatisch, dass alle Aussagen eines Textes zutreffend sind. Auch sachlich falsche oder zumindest In editorial newsrooms, an internal fact check does not automatically mean that all statements in a text are accurate. Factually incorrect or at least unsubstantiated claims can still slip through – especially when terms are used imprecisely, institutional roles are misassigned, or levels of influence are suggested without solid evidence. Such errors arise less from invented facts than from vague attributions and exaggerations, which often remain uncorrected in editorial fact checks because they are treated as interpretation or contextual framing.

By contrast, independent fact checkers such as Mimikama focus exclusively on the veracity of specific claims. Editorial fact checks, on the other hand, primarily serve to formally safeguard an article – they catch spelling errors or incorrect quotations, but they do not guarantee that all presented relationships are factually correct or appropriately contextualized.

This is not trivialization. This is classification. And this is precisely what is too often lacking. The AfD will be pleased by this free attention. It is time to finally stop making this right wing circus troupe bigger than it is. Yes, it is dangerous. Yes, it would be a massive damage to Germany. But why does one stage it in the media beyond its real significance? Why adopt its self portrayal instead of soberly examining and classifying it?

If public funds are misused or even if there is only suspicion, then the path is clear: research, expose, court, done. Regardless of allegedly “official” occasions – provided they even took place. And if there is a real misstep, then without hesitation: research, disclose, pursue legally. What must stop is passing along facts unchecked until they collapse like a house of cards upon closer inspection. That helps no one – except the AfD itself, or is it really just about the money?