🎓 Christoph Burgmer im Gespräch mit Hajo Funke (geb. 1944). Der Berliner Politikwissenschaftler Hajo Funke analysiert die Gefährdung der Demokratie in Deutschland durch die AFD. Die Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) zählt zu den rechtsradikalsten Parteien Europas und wird sowohl von Wladimir Putin als auch von Elon Musk unterstützt. Ihr Ziel ist der Sturz der Demokratie und die Errichtung eines Führerstaates.
/ 🎓 Christoph Burgmer in conversation with Hajo Funke (born 1944). The Berlin political scientist Hajo Funke analyses the threat to democracy in Germany posed by the AFD. The Alternative for Germany (AFD) is one of the most radical right-wing parties in Europe and is supported by both Vladimir Putin and Elon Musk. Its aim is to overthrow democracy and establish a leader state.
/ 🎓 Christoph Burgmer s'entretient avec Hajo Funke (né en 1944). Le politologue berlinois Hajo Funke analyse la menace que l'AFD fait peser sur la démocratie en Allemagne. L'Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) compte parmi les partis les plus à droite en Europe et est soutenu aussi bien par Vladimir Poutine que par Elon Musk. Leur objectif est de renverser la démocratie et d'instaurer un Etat dirigeant.
📚Veröffentlichungen u.a. / publications a.o. / publications entres autres:
- Hajo Funke: "Die Höcke-AFD. Vom rechtsextremen Haufen zur rechtsextremen "Flügel"-Partei." VSA Verlag, Hamburg 2020.
- Hajo Funke: "Black lives matter in Deutschland. George Flooyd und die Diffamierung von Achille Mbembe als antisemit." VSA Verlag, Hamburg 2021.
- Hajo Funke: "Ukraine - Verhandeln ist der einzige Weg zum Frieden." Die Buchmacherei, Berlin 2023.
- Hajo Funke: "AFD-Masterpläne. Die rechtsextreme Partei und die Zerstörung der Demokratie." VSA Verlag, Hamburg.2024.
👍 audio archiv is self-financed. All podcasts are free of charge. If you like the podcast, leave us your comment 🪶 and give us your like 🫶. Or make a donation: Become a patreon.... ... or buy us a fresh ➙ coffee ☕. Thank you for your support 🌏🦋🙏
Every Friday a new interview. Follow us & Subsribe. Never miss an episode.Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:08):
Welcome to Audioarchiv!
The channel for historical interviews with writers, philosophers, activists and intellectuals
from all over the world.
(00:34):
Hello, what does right-wing populism mean?
What distinguishes right-wing populism from right-wing radicalism or fascism?
The well-known political scientist Hajo Funke gives guidance in this interview.
In times when fascist movements, with the partly secured right-wing radical party of the AfD,
have melted, and the AfD leads a propaganda war against foreigners, migrants, Jews, Muslims,
(01:00):
homosexuals and feminists, and deliberately discredits those in parliament who think otherwise in their hatred.
But is the AfD as a party actually anti-democracy?
Does the AfD strive to abolish the Basic Law?
Does the AfD provide national socialists with the right to extreme and identitary access to
(01:21):
democratic parliaments, finances or supports the AfD logistically, threats against Muslims and
perhaps even attacks against migrants and other thinkers?
Many questions that some AfD voters also ask themselves.
Hajo Funke speaks out against a ban by the AfD.
(01:41):
Because in the ban procedure, the accusation of the AfD voters' inability to democratize is placed.
But what drives over 20 percent of Germans to vote for a party that is supported by Russian
warlords around Vladimir Putin and the American racist Elon Musk?
AfD voters must ask themselves whether they advocate hate and violence against those who think
(02:05):
otherwise, the neighbors, the saleswoman, the club mates in football and the colleagues at work.
and actively contribute to an anti-GDR Hungary and Turkey-remembering everyday life full of mistrust, fear and violence.
The election results of the AfD and the rise of the Höcke-Führerparty to the leading force in
(02:26):
the right-radical camp raise political questions.
Questions about the historical embedding, such as whether the NSDAP can draw a historical line
through the history of the Federal Republic to the AfD, about the fusion of right-conservatives
with right-radical politicians in the AfD, questions about the seemingly ineffective containment
(02:48):
of the party by countless reports, such as the protection of the constitution, about the ineffective
resistance of left-wing and anti-fascist strategies, and much more, such as the acceptance and
support of the AfD through the Trump markers in the USA and Putin's national-fascist Russian oligarchy.
(03:10):
But first, a clarifying question.
In the reporting of mass media in Germany, the term right-populism is always used.
I don't think many listeners know what that means.
How does the term right-populism differ from right-radical party, partly right-radical fascist
(03:32):
party, and why is it still used in your opinion?
So I'll start with this crazy complex of questions, with the question of whether the AfD is right-extreme or right-radical.
And I would say, yes, it is under the leadership, under the power center of the so-called wing
(03:56):
around Jörn Höcke, a right-extreme, partly neo-Nazi party.
And Höcke dominates the party.
He is the ruler, along with some others, especially in eastern Thuringia, in Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt,
the local leader, the one who dominates the party.
(04:18):
And the current leadership is also dependent on the ideas and ideologies of this extreme orientation under Höcke.
The fact that the cooperation with Marine Le Pen was abandoned since Marine Le Pen shows that
they have understood how radical this party is.
(04:41):
That is why there is also the wide criticism, by the way partly in this case also a very good
criticism of the Federal Office for Constitutional Protection.
Whether this will remain so is another question, after he has stepped back.
So this is a clear thing.
It is one of the most right-extreme parties in Western Europe.
(05:03):
And it is surprising that it has grown to over 20 percent.
In the polls and in the East to well over 30 percent.
Why do I call them right-extreme or right-radical and not right-populist?
Because the difference to right-populism is their clear national racist orientation, the fall
(05:28):
of this republic, the fall of the constitution and the like.
Right-populists, on the other hand, are according to my understanding, I also use this word,
more or less settled in the democratic spectrum.
And we have in Germany, especially with the Conservative Party of the CDU-CSU, a right-populism
(05:53):
on occasion and in the meantime often on occasion.
Even in March with a systematic approach.
And that is the attempt to pick up the mood and strengthen it against those who are considered
(06:13):
to be a minority, also chosen and devalued by right-extremists.
So these are all migrants in the meantime.
These are those of Muslim origin in a special way.
This has been prepared in the 1000s, not least by Sarrazin and his million successes.
And that leads to these very good sociological studies, why a part is still authoritarian in
(06:41):
this republic and that the border of the democratization of this republic is clear.
This is now only related to Germany.
And this right-populism, is this description of the connection to the regular table, is that
a simplification of the argumentation or is it simply an exclusive attitude also against gender,
(07:06):
against feminism, against everything that is identified as a minority, so to speak, and is identified as disturbing?
That's why it's called right-populism.
There is also in the diversity of these terms a form of left-populism.
And there are examples in which even left-populists have represented a good government, such
(07:27):
as in one of the South American countries.
What would be left-populism now?
That is, to pick up the mood and to respond with a left-wing policy, i.e. a socially just policy,
a policy of recognition of minorities.
So basically the opposite of what makes right-populism.
Namely, to systematically deprive those who do not belong or fit in ethnically and more or less
(07:53):
can also be defined at will.
So an aggressive, authoritarian, aggressive orientation.
This can also happen with left-populists, if they are kept authoritarian.
But it doesn't have to.
And that's what makes the difference between left and right-populism.
How come someone like Sarah Wagenknecht suddenly represents right-populist theses, especially in relation to migration?
(08:18):
She comes from the left, but together with Oskar Lafontaine she always formulated something
against foreigners, always formulated something against migrants.
When I watched how the BSW was founded, it was very exciting to see that there were several motives.
(08:41):
And then I asked Oskar Lafontaine, why does this have to be so strong with the hostility towards migrants?
Can't you screw that down?
If you want to be successful in a peace-oriented, in a social-oriented and actually have resonance,
also in the East, then you don't have to pull it up.
(09:01):
But it has been pulled up.
We have seen that Wagenknecht and her party left with the AfD to support a migration-hostile
course of the new right-populist banner of the CDU in March.
Many think that the right-wing is a purely ideological force.
(09:26):
Maybe there is also a cultural motive behind it.
Isn't it the further-traded idea of a leader cult over generations? That's an exciting question.
How does the right-wing radical situation develop and what function does the AfD have, which
as the only access to public money sources, to information on the democratic state apparatus?
(09:48):
My impression is that the AfD has been able to bundle a lot, through the relative strength also
in parliament, through the money sources.
It is the central, concentrating force.
It has its outliers or its radical avant-garde groups nearby, also violent, also terrorist-capable
(10:13):
groups, as you can see again and again.
Especially where this AfD basically represents a kind of mass movement, which is often violent
and includes approaches of fascist movements.
So in parts of Saxony this can be observed, actually also in the other East German countries,
(10:38):
because it has been able to integrate much further into society.
So the movements on the edge, partly even in the AfD, are just as important, is in this sense
also a movement party, like the representations in the parliaments and in the municipalities.
(11:01):
So it's both, it's a movement and it's a parliamentary party and the movement character is highly dangerous. With fascist tendencies?
I define fascism as a leader movement, mass-integrated, which wants the overthrow of the liberal
or a democratic order and looks like violence, of course.
(11:25):
It is actually the case that in the subtext of the Federal Republic, something like the cult
or desire of the brands in parts of the population is exerted.
I'm not sure about that.
I believe that these traditional elements were of course maintained, but never a greater exhibition or hardly.
So that applies to the NPD, that applies to the DVO, the Republicans, they all tried to somehow
(11:53):
fail, because they wanted both.
They wanted to be a movement and they wanted a party representation in the parliaments.
And with the AfD it was the first time that they have had a massive representation and influence in parliamentary events.
And in East Germany, they are even the only, quote unquote, authoritarian people's party.
(12:19):
And that's new and that's specifically East, because in the East, I have to differentiate, because
in the East, the agreement in economic and mental terms has been violated for large parts of the population.
In official language, it is also the contribution of the DDR to the Federal Republic and not the reunification.
Yes, it was a conquest.
(12:41):
It was similar, by the way, in the late Soviet Union, in Prussia, in Russia, there was a similar
conquest, a libertarian, neoliberal concept.
Destroy everything, destroy everything, without war in this case, and then we'll see what comes. And Kohl did that.
And that's why Pöhl was withdrawn at the time of the Monetary Union.
(13:04):
Now many people talk about such an AfD ban.
I talked to jurists once.
There is also the possibility of an AfD ban, if you want, and you can definitely block the party from the money sources.
Why is this simply fundamentally thematized?
It is thematized, but only on the edge.
(13:26):
I am under the current democratically political conditions against a ban decision, a ban plan,
so that means a request, as long as not 80% of the population see that this is an absolutely
dangerous party for democracy and destroys human rights.
(13:48):
That is currently not the case.
And the democratic parties, conservative, democratic, whatever, at least not right-wing extremist parties, do not agree. Tactically not, contentually not.
There is too much right-wing populism in the CSU and in the Monetary Union, still different
than in previous leadership formations of the CDU.
(14:10):
And that is not a good condition.
Only if you were clear there, publicly, you could check whether it makes sense.
In addition, the question of ban is ultimately decided by the Federal Constitutional Court.
You can prepare yourself as well.
There is good material for this, that this party is ban-capable.
(14:33):
I think there is no doubt about that.
According to the criteria of the Federal Constitutional Court, also with other judgments, such as the NPD judgment.
But the decision is as on the high seas, you do not know what the court does on the day of the decision.
And you are dependent on it.
(14:53):
And you were surprised that a few years ago the NPD was not banned.
With an argument that for a considerable part, even the connoisseur was surprised.
It was not important enough.
The SAP was also not important enough, at the beginning of the 50s.
The KPD was only important out of fear of Moscow in 1956. There you banned.
(15:17):
Now you have, so to speak, in the last minute, secretly, one could almost say, without a public
debate, decided not to ban the NPD.
Although it is clearly constitutional, according to all the criteria that the Federal Constitutional Court has imposed.
So, democracy, rule of law, human dignity.
(15:39):
And in this respect, it can now be that one says, since one does not want to overthrow the republic,
if one now comes up with a ban, because many do not even see that it is a right-wing extremist
party, that one would rather go without a ban. That is not excluded.
(16:00):
In this respect, one becomes too dependent on these authoritarian processes.
One could, so to speak, introduce a ban on suffering, by simply shortening the access and the means. Yes, yes.
One could do that, and I have nothing against that.
Yes, because one could say, you are anti-democracy, and as long as you are anti-democracy, as
(16:22):
a democratic state, we will not give you any money. Yes, yes.
One can do that, and I think one can justify it well.
That it does not happen is the efficiency weakness of the officials.
I do not believe that it has deeper reasons.
There is a lack of efficiency, and democratic reflexibility, I would say.
(16:44):
One final question about this topic complex, which interests me very much.
Where do the voters of the AfD come from?
The NSDAP had, especially at the end of the 1920s, beginning of the 1930s, as a movement, actually
as a youth movement, many young people, well-educated people, who were afraid of their career
(17:08):
opportunities To what extent does the story repeat itself, if we look at the AfD, perhaps in
its effect, especially young and well-educated people? That is incredibly dangerous.
At the time of the European elections, it was sexy for young people to vote for the AfD.
(17:31):
At the federal election, it was no longer the case.
And young researchers can explain that well.
It depends on the mood, it depends on the social media.
Man, they have a point, right?
And someone as crazy as Maximilian Krah exploited it in the style of social media.
Otherwise, fortunately, it is still in progress.
(17:54):
I don't see a repeat of it.
I see, in any case, ideological claims in the party, which wanted to justify it like the Weimar Republic.
Even the pre-field organizations have made the conservative revolution strong.
(18:15):
And the conservative revolution was nothing other than the anti-democratic, racist, anti-Semitic movement.
And the luckiest heads were the most influential.
So it was Ernst-Jünger, Möller van den Broek, Carl Schmitt and many others.
(18:36):
And Armin Mohler summed it up, very compilative, very cynical, very propagandistic, in the work
the conservative revolution shortly after the Second World War.
And this is what the sharpest ideologues of the Höcke party So the people at the Institute for
(18:56):
State Policy, they are Armin Mohler adepts.
And the core idea is, we do what we did back then, when we became influential on the NSDAP in their time of struggle. So until 1933.
And there they are quite a step forward, by structuring the ideological core of this party at
(19:23):
the Institute for State Policy and Analog Association.
And in this respect, from the ideological point of view, this is a danger.
Whether this is an analogy of the development of the Führer cult and a corresponding mass movement, this is doubtful.
For this, democracy at all borders is much more democratized, also compared to the 60s and 50s,
(19:52):
when this potential was integrated into a strict anti-communism by Adler and others. And the economic success.
In this respect, we have potential in the face of multiple crises, war crises, inflation crisis,
social crisis, which are also a food for especially men, young and middle-aged, who vote for
(20:21):
the AfD more than women.
And then, in fact, especially in the East, through all layers.
I emphasize the East, because there, the tipping into a popular orientation by the dominance
of this party is always conceivable.
For example, next year, at the state elections in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
(20:45):
And if the highly honorable head of the CDU in Saxony-Anhalt, Haseloff, says, if the next time
the AfD comes to power, I have to leave the country.
Then it shows where we stand in the East.
I was now in Rostock a few days ago.
And I was quite shocked when I saw about 15 people, older people, with signs around their necks
(21:11):
standing in front of the town hall with a megaphone and there for three hours in tirades and
conspiracy theories against Muslims and Islam.
And it was neither a demonstration nor was it a meeting.
It was a lecture that actually reminded me where NSDAP people stand in front of shops where
(21:38):
it says don't buy from Jews.
In front of the town hall, yes.
So I asked myself if something like this the democratic public the possibility to express themselves
to demonstrate or something like that would be covered. No, it was allowed.
If you look at the Hetz messages, you can also ban them by police action.
(22:01):
And that depends on the police presidents.
I once had an event with police presidents and we were allowed to do it in terms of the right-wing extremists in Munich.
And there I saw how different police presidents are.
I can't give details who was particularly difficult in South-Hesse and so on.
I'll just take one example.
(22:22):
The police president of Dortmund was very good at a certain point.
He made sure that in the pre-planning in the knowledge of the next demonstration from the far
right the police units were instructed with certain terms.
For example, Israel is our misfortune. anti-Semitism and to intervene.
(22:47):
But that has to be planned.
That has to be prepared.
You have to have the will to do it.
Not only in the presidential lodge but also in the police units.
Then it goes very fast.
And that would probably have to happen in front of the council house in Rostock, if it's somehow legally possible.
(23:11):
And it's usually possible in Hesse.
So that's a weakness of the rule of law.
But we have it even more blatantly in large parts of Saxony.
By the way, Mecklenburg-Westphalia is actually one of the two candidates where the next election
can actually give dominance to the AfD.
(23:33):
One last question, very briefly.
Why is the AfD anti-Semitic? Good question.
It doesn't make it the center, but it makes anti-Muslimism and the corresponding racism the center.
It tries to go along with the right-wing Israeli politics and yet in its core idea it is against
(24:02):
the supposed dominance of Jewish life.
Thank you for being part of Audioarchiv.
Follow us, then you won't miss an episode.
And don't forget the like button.
See you next week, your Audioarchiv team.
(24:31):
Audioarchiv.com
Welcome to Audioarchiv!
The channel for historical interviews with writers, philosophers, activists and intellectuals
from all over the world.
(00:34):
Hello, what does right-wing populism mean?
What distinguishes right-wing populism from right-wing radicalism or fascism?
The well-known political scientist Hajo Funke gives guidance in this interview.
In times when fascist movements, with the partly secured right-wing radical party of the AfD,
have melted, and the AfD leads a propaganda war against foreigners, migrants, Jews, Muslims,
(01:00):
homosexuals and feminists, and deliberately discredits those in parliament who think otherwise in their hatred.
But is the AfD as a party actually anti-democracy?
Does the AfD strive to abolish the Basic Law?
Does the AfD provide national socialists with the right to extreme and identitary access to
(01:21):
democratic parliaments, finances or supports the AfD logistically, threats against Muslims and
perhaps even attacks against migrants and other thinkers?
Many questions that some AfD voters also ask themselves.
Hajo Funke speaks out against a ban by the AfD.
(01:41):
Because in the ban procedure, the accusation of the AfD voters' inability to democratize is placed.
But what drives over 20 percent of Germans to vote for a party that is supported by Russian
warlords around Vladimir Putin and the American racist Elon Musk?
AfD voters must ask themselves whether they advocate hate and violence against those who think
(02:05):
otherwise, the neighbors, the saleswoman, the club mates in football and the colleagues at work.
and actively contribute to an anti-GDR Hungary and Turkey-remembering everyday life full of mistrust, fear and violence.
The election results of the AfD and the rise of the Höcke-Führerparty to the leading force in
(02:26):
the right-radical camp raise political questions.
Questions about the historical embedding, such as whether the NSDAP can draw a historical line
through the history of the Federal Republic to the AfD, about the fusion of right-conservatives
with right-radical politicians in the AfD, questions about the seemingly ineffective containment
(02:48):
of the party by countless reports, such as the protection of the constitution, about the ineffective
resistance of left-wing and anti-fascist strategies, and much more, such as the acceptance and
support of the AfD through the Trump markers in the USA and Putin's national-fascist Russian oligarchy.
(03:10):
But first, a clarifying question.
In the reporting of mass media in Germany, the term right-populism is always used.
I don't think many listeners know what that means.
How does the term right-populism differ from right-radical party, partly right-radical fascist
(03:32):
party, and why is it still used in your opinion?
So I'll start with this crazy complex of questions, with the question of whether the AfD is right-extreme or right-radical.
And I would say, yes, it is under the leadership, under the power center of the so-called wing
(03:56):
around Jörn Höcke, a right-extreme, partly neo-Nazi party.
And Höcke dominates the party.
He is the ruler, along with some others, especially in eastern Thuringia, in Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt,
the local leader, the one who dominates the party.
(04:18):
And the current leadership is also dependent on the ideas and ideologies of this extreme orientation under Höcke.
The fact that the cooperation with Marine Le Pen was abandoned since Marine Le Pen shows that
they have understood how radical this party is.
(04:41):
That is why there is also the wide criticism, by the way partly in this case also a very good
criticism of the Federal Office for Constitutional Protection.
Whether this will remain so is another question, after he has stepped back.
So this is a clear thing.
It is one of the most right-extreme parties in Western Europe.
(05:03):
And it is surprising that it has grown to over 20 percent.
In the polls and in the East to well over 30 percent.
Why do I call them right-extreme or right-radical and not right-populist?
Because the difference to right-populism is their clear national racist orientation, the fall
(05:28):
of this republic, the fall of the constitution and the like.
Right-populists, on the other hand, are according to my understanding, I also use this word,
more or less settled in the democratic spectrum.
And we have in Germany, especially with the Conservative Party of the CDU-CSU, a right-populism
(05:53):
on occasion and in the meantime often on occasion.
Even in March with a systematic approach.
And that is the attempt to pick up the mood and strengthen it against those who are considered
(06:13):
to be a minority, also chosen and devalued by right-extremists.
So these are all migrants in the meantime.
These are those of Muslim origin in a special way.
This has been prepared in the 1000s, not least by Sarrazin and his million successes.
And that leads to these very good sociological studies, why a part is still authoritarian in
(06:41):
this republic and that the border of the democratization of this republic is clear.
This is now only related to Germany.
And this right-populism, is this description of the connection to the regular table, is that
a simplification of the argumentation or is it simply an exclusive attitude also against gender,
(07:06):
against feminism, against everything that is identified as a minority, so to speak, and is identified as disturbing?
That's why it's called right-populism.
There is also in the diversity of these terms a form of left-populism.
And there are examples in which even left-populists have represented a good government, such
(07:27):
as in one of the South American countries.
What would be left-populism now?
That is, to pick up the mood and to respond with a left-wing policy, i.e. a socially just policy,
a policy of recognition of minorities.
So basically the opposite of what makes right-populism.
Namely, to systematically deprive those who do not belong or fit in ethnically and more or less
(07:53):
can also be defined at will.
So an aggressive, authoritarian, aggressive orientation.
This can also happen with left-populists, if they are kept authoritarian.
But it doesn't have to.
And that's what makes the difference between left and right-populism.
How come someone like Sarah Wagenknecht suddenly represents right-populist theses, especially in relation to migration?
(08:18):
She comes from the left, but together with Oskar Lafontaine she always formulated something
against foreigners, always formulated something against migrants.
When I watched how the BSW was founded, it was very exciting to see that there were several motives.
(08:41):
And then I asked Oskar Lafontaine, why does this have to be so strong with the hostility towards migrants?
Can't you screw that down?
If you want to be successful in a peace-oriented, in a social-oriented and actually have resonance,
also in the East, then you don't have to pull it up.
(09:01):
But it has been pulled up.
We have seen that Wagenknecht and her party left with the AfD to support a migration-hostile
course of the new right-populist banner of the CDU in March.
Many think that the right-wing is a purely ideological force.
(09:26):
Maybe there is also a cultural motive behind it.
Isn't it the further-traded idea of a leader cult over generations? That's an exciting question.
How does the right-wing radical situation develop and what function does the AfD have, which
as the only access to public money sources, to information on the democratic state apparatus?
(09:48):
My impression is that the AfD has been able to bundle a lot, through the relative strength also
in parliament, through the money sources.
It is the central, concentrating force.
It has its outliers or its radical avant-garde groups nearby, also violent, also terrorist-capable
(10:13):
groups, as you can see again and again.
Especially where this AfD basically represents a kind of mass movement, which is often violent
and includes approaches of fascist movements.
So in parts of Saxony this can be observed, actually also in the other East German countries,
(10:38):
because it has been able to integrate much further into society.
So the movements on the edge, partly even in the AfD, are just as important, is in this sense
also a movement party, like the representations in the parliaments and in the municipalities.
(11:01):
So it's both, it's a movement and it's a parliamentary party and the movement character is highly dangerous. With fascist tendencies?
I define fascism as a leader movement, mass-integrated, which wants the overthrow of the liberal
or a democratic order and looks like violence, of course.
(11:25):
It is actually the case that in the subtext of the Federal Republic, something like the cult
or desire of the brands in parts of the population is exerted.
I'm not sure about that.
I believe that these traditional elements were of course maintained, but never a greater exhibition or hardly.
So that applies to the NPD, that applies to the DVO, the Republicans, they all tried to somehow
(11:53):
fail, because they wanted both.
They wanted to be a movement and they wanted a party representation in the parliaments.
And with the AfD it was the first time that they have had a massive representation and influence in parliamentary events.
And in East Germany, they are even the only, quote unquote, authoritarian people's party.
(12:19):
And that's new and that's specifically East, because in the East, I have to differentiate, because
in the East, the agreement in economic and mental terms has been violated for large parts of the population.
In official language, it is also the contribution of the DDR to the Federal Republic and not the reunification.
Yes, it was a conquest.
(12:41):
It was similar, by the way, in the late Soviet Union, in Prussia, in Russia, there was a similar
conquest, a libertarian, neoliberal concept.
Destroy everything, destroy everything, without war in this case, and then we'll see what comes. And Kohl did that.
And that's why Pöhl was withdrawn at the time of the Monetary Union.
(13:04):
Now many people talk about such an AfD ban.
I talked to jurists once.
There is also the possibility of an AfD ban, if you want, and you can definitely block the party from the money sources.
Why is this simply fundamentally thematized?
It is thematized, but only on the edge.
(13:26):
I am under the current democratically political conditions against a ban decision, a ban plan,
so that means a request, as long as not 80% of the population see that this is an absolutely
dangerous party for democracy and destroys human rights.
(13:48):
That is currently not the case.
And the democratic parties, conservative, democratic, whatever, at least not right-wing extremist parties, do not agree. Tactically not, contentually not.
There is too much right-wing populism in the CSU and in the Monetary Union, still different
than in previous leadership formations of the CDU.
(14:10):
And that is not a good condition.
Only if you were clear there, publicly, you could check whether it makes sense.
In addition, the question of ban is ultimately decided by the Federal Constitutional Court.
You can prepare yourself as well.
There is good material for this, that this party is ban-capable.
(14:33):
I think there is no doubt about that.
According to the criteria of the Federal Constitutional Court, also with other judgments, such as the NPD judgment.
But the decision is as on the high seas, you do not know what the court does on the day of the decision.
And you are dependent on it.
(14:53):
And you were surprised that a few years ago the NPD was not banned.
With an argument that for a considerable part, even the connoisseur was surprised.
It was not important enough.
The SAP was also not important enough, at the beginning of the 50s.
The KPD was only important out of fear of Moscow in 1956. There you banned.
(15:17):
Now you have, so to speak, in the last minute, secretly, one could almost say, without a public
debate, decided not to ban the NPD.
Although it is clearly constitutional, according to all the criteria that the Federal Constitutional Court has imposed.
So, democracy, rule of law, human dignity.
(15:39):
And in this respect, it can now be that one says, since one does not want to overthrow the republic,
if one now comes up with a ban, because many do not even see that it is a right-wing extremist
party, that one would rather go without a ban. That is not excluded.
(16:00):
In this respect, one becomes too dependent on these authoritarian processes.
One could, so to speak, introduce a ban on suffering, by simply shortening the access and the means. Yes, yes.
One could do that, and I have nothing against that.
Yes, because one could say, you are anti-democracy, and as long as you are anti-democracy, as
(16:22):
a democratic state, we will not give you any money. Yes, yes.
One can do that, and I think one can justify it well.
That it does not happen is the efficiency weakness of the officials.
I do not believe that it has deeper reasons.
There is a lack of efficiency, and democratic reflexibility, I would say.
(16:44):
One final question about this topic complex, which interests me very much.
Where do the voters of the AfD come from?
The NSDAP had, especially at the end of the 1920s, beginning of the 1930s, as a movement, actually
as a youth movement, many young people, well-educated people, who were afraid of their career
(17:08):
opportunities To what extent does the story repeat itself, if we look at the AfD, perhaps in
its effect, especially young and well-educated people? That is incredibly dangerous.
At the time of the European elections, it was sexy for young people to vote for the AfD.
(17:31):
At the federal election, it was no longer the case.
And young researchers can explain that well.
It depends on the mood, it depends on the social media.
Man, they have a point, right?
And someone as crazy as Maximilian Krah exploited it in the style of social media.
Otherwise, fortunately, it is still in progress.
(17:54):
I don't see a repeat of it.
I see, in any case, ideological claims in the party, which wanted to justify it like the Weimar Republic.
Even the pre-field organizations have made the conservative revolution strong.
(18:15):
And the conservative revolution was nothing other than the anti-democratic, racist, anti-Semitic movement.
And the luckiest heads were the most influential.
So it was Ernst-Jünger, Möller van den Broek, Carl Schmitt and many others.
(18:36):
And Armin Mohler summed it up, very compilative, very cynical, very propagandistic, in the work
the conservative revolution shortly after the Second World War.
And this is what the sharpest ideologues of the Höcke party So the people at the Institute for
(18:56):
State Policy, they are Armin Mohler adepts.
And the core idea is, we do what we did back then, when we became influential on the NSDAP in their time of struggle. So until 1933.
And there they are quite a step forward, by structuring the ideological core of this party at
(19:23):
the Institute for State Policy and Analog Association.
And in this respect, from the ideological point of view, this is a danger.
Whether this is an analogy of the development of the Führer cult and a corresponding mass movement, this is doubtful.
For this, democracy at all borders is much more democratized, also compared to the 60s and 50s,
(19:52):
when this potential was integrated into a strict anti-communism by Adler and others. And the economic success.
In this respect, we have potential in the face of multiple crises, war crises, inflation crisis,
social crisis, which are also a food for especially men, young and middle-aged, who vote for
(20:21):
the AfD more than women.
And then, in fact, especially in the East, through all layers.
I emphasize the East, because there, the tipping into a popular orientation by the dominance
of this party is always conceivable.
For example, next year, at the state elections in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
(20:45):
And if the highly honorable head of the CDU in Saxony-Anhalt, Haseloff, says, if the next time
the AfD comes to power, I have to leave the country.
Then it shows where we stand in the East.
I was now in Rostock a few days ago.
And I was quite shocked when I saw about 15 people, older people, with signs around their necks
(21:11):
standing in front of the town hall with a megaphone and there for three hours in tirades and
conspiracy theories against Muslims and Islam.
And it was neither a demonstration nor was it a meeting.
It was a lecture that actually reminded me where NSDAP people stand in front of shops where
(21:38):
it says don't buy from Jews.
In front of the town hall, yes.
So I asked myself if something like this the democratic public the possibility to express themselves
to demonstrate or something like that would be covered. No, it was allowed.
If you look at the Hetz messages, you can also ban them by police action.
(22:01):
And that depends on the police presidents.
I once had an event with police presidents and we were allowed to do it in terms of the right-wing extremists in Munich.
And there I saw how different police presidents are.
I can't give details who was particularly difficult in South-Hesse and so on.
I'll just take one example.
(22:22):
The police president of Dortmund was very good at a certain point.
He made sure that in the pre-planning in the knowledge of the next demonstration from the far
right the police units were instructed with certain terms.
For example, Israel is our misfortune. anti-Semitism and to intervene.
(22:47):
But that has to be planned.
That has to be prepared.
You have to have the will to do it.
Not only in the presidential lodge but also in the police units.
Then it goes very fast.
And that would probably have to happen in front of the council house in Rostock, if it's somehow legally possible.
(23:11):
And it's usually possible in Hesse.
So that's a weakness of the rule of law.
But we have it even more blatantly in large parts of Saxony.
By the way, Mecklenburg-Westphalia is actually one of the two candidates where the next election
can actually give dominance to the AfD.
(23:33):
One last question, very briefly.
Why is the AfD anti-Semitic? Good question.
It doesn't make it the center, but it makes anti-Muslimism and the corresponding racism the center.
It tries to go along with the right-wing Israeli politics and yet in its core idea it is against
(24:02):
the supposed dominance of Jewish life.
Thank you for being part of Audioarchiv.
Follow us, then you won't miss an episode.
And don't forget the like button.
See you next week, your Audioarchiv team.
(24:31):
Audioarchiv.com
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!