Nevertheless, in the chapter on ‘immigration and remigration’ of the AfD’s government programme for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, for example, it is made clear that people from different cultural backgrounds are not welcome.
The AfD wants to protect “German-influenced society” from a “multicultural society.” Integration policy is redefined as “migration policy.”
Those who help refugees are described as a problem in this programme. The AfD also demands the termination of the Interstate Broadcasting Treaty and the restructuring of public broadcasting into a “basic broadcasting service.”
With regard to Islam, the AfD had already announced a radical overhaul of education policy in the run-up to the 2025 federal elections.
The party wanted to abolish Islamic religious education, eliminate Islamic theology professorships at universities, and replace them with a “non-denominational Islamic studies” discipline.
Instead of integration, the government program for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania includes a demand for “preparatory classes” for children with language deficiencies.
But the AfD doesn’t just endanger religious freedom, the media, and education. The party also poses a serious threat to internal and external security, as well as the justice system.
Several interior ministers, along with Federal Defence Minister Boris Pistorius and Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, recently warned of the consequences of an AfD government.
Thuringia’s Interior Minister Georg Maier said: “We cannot allow secret information from our security authorities to leak to Russia or right-wing extremist circles.”
The AfD has “numerous contacts with authoritarian states” and is “networked with right-wing extremist front organisations.”
Brandenburg’s Interior Minister Jan Redmann also said that “if a party that is partly right-wing extremist gains access to security-relevant information, it endangers our security. This is not a hypothetical scenario, but a real danger.”
But mind you, AfD voters are not aliens. They are your neighbours, club and work colleagues, family members.
This means that the centre of society has become more radical, and that is precisely what is worrying.
The “firewall” was never a guarantee, but rather a self-imposed obligation by the democratic parties, a consensus that is now crumbling.
For years, the established parties treated migration, Islam, and integration as security issues, not as lived reality. This has poisoned society.
The CLAIM Alliance documented 4,096 anti-Muslim incidents in 2025 alone, an average of more than eleven per day. 75 percent of the Muslims surveyed reported experiencing discrimination in government offices. The German Islam Conference was for a long time a security conference, a fatal mistake. Muslims were often perceived less as part of society and more as a problem.
What can the AfD actually implement?
Many of the AfD’s demands fall outside the jurisdiction of a federal state. Abolishing the right to asylum or changing citizenship law are federal matters.
However, the AfD could use the Bundesrat (Federal Council) to initiate legislation and intervene at the state level in matters of education, policing, and administration.
And what about a ban? The hurdles are high, the process lengthy. The AfD would portray itself as a victim. In 1960, the Rhineland-Palatinate Interior Minister August Wolters banned the DRP state branch.
The ban was later lifted, but then reinstated. The NPD ban was also a fiasco. A ban can therefore be counterproductive.
Why has the AfD become so strong? The answer is uncomfortable, but it must be asked.
For years, the established parties failed to take the concerns and fears of the population seriously enough.
Migration was all too often discussed as a threat, not as a social reality. In many places, Muslims were treated as a security problem, not as part of society. This provided fertile ground for the AfD.
The question now is: How does a democratic state governed by the rule of law deal with this new reality?
The firewall alone, however important it is, will not make the AfD disappear. It won’t even significantly weaken it.
The success of the right-wing party is an expression of a profound societal and political crisis of confidence. Many people have lost faith in politics because they feel their concerns are not being heard.
Related
The AfD will therefore not only win state-level elections in the future. It is only a matter of time before it leads a government at the federal level as well.
European examples show that right-wing populists have long since arrived in government. Germany will not remain an exception.
Politics must regain the people’s trust, not through new bans or exclusionary rhetoric, but through credible answers to the pressing questions of our time.
A democracy that no longer reaches its citizens loses not only trust and elections, but also its legitimacy.
Democracy is not sustained solely by institutions or the firewall.
“It thrives on an ethic of civic responsibility—on people who are willing to take responsibility for the common good, even when it is inconvenient. […] The history of resistance shows us: people are not born heroes; they learn to take responsibility long before freedom and human dignity are at stake. Tomorrow’s freedom is decided by our actions today.”
Federal Family Minister Karin Prien pointed this out on July 20 at the Federal Government’s central commemoration of the resistance against National Socialism.
Ironically, this took place at the very same location where the AfD also laid a wreath.
(This article was first published on TRT Deutsch)
