Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has never been stronger. Riding high in the polls, it might become the second-largest party in the upcoming federal elections. While the prospect of political success has caused other Right-wing parties in Europe to moderate their profile, the AfD sees no reason to compromise.
At the party’s conference this weekend, leader Alice Weidel thundered that if the AfD were to gain power it would initiate “large-scale repatriations” of foreigners, tear down “all wind farms […] those windmills of shame”, “close down Gender Studies and kick out those professors”.
Weidel’s fiery speech was punctuated by rapturous applause and standing ovations. But for her, it was a marked retreat from the more cautious approach she had been promoting for months.
Ahead of the German snap election in February, Weidel has cultivated an image of respectability and moderation. In an interview with Bloomberg last month, she even rejected the idea that the AfD was “Right-wing”, arguing instead that “we are a libertarian-conservative party. We perceive ourselves as standing in the middle.”
Even on immigration, the AfD’s core issue, the draft manifesto for the elections was notably restrained. While many prominent members use the term “remigration” to call for mass deportations of foreigners from Germany, the document pointedly avoided the word.
“Remigration” is associated with the Austrian far-Right activist Martin Sellner, who has advocated the deportation of illegal immigrants as well as people with residency status or even citizenship. For Germany, Sellner suggested around five to six million citizens “might possibly be viable for the remigration policy”.
Last year, a report revealed that AfD figures attended a presentation by Sellner, which sparked large street protests. The federal party leadership then decided to drop the term.
But not everyone was happy with that. Vocal protests came from the radical wing spearheaded by former history teacher Björn Höcke, who leads the AfD in the state of Thuringia. The Bavarian chapter also ignored the directive and adopted a “Remigration Agenda” recently.
This week, a local AfD branch in the southwestern city of Karlsruhe also went further, distributing thousands of deportation notices to local residents with immigration backgrounds as an election stunt. The flyers were dated to 23 February, the day of the election, and read: “your home country is nice, too.”
Weidel never stood a chance of avoiding defeat on a motion to reinstate the term “remigration”. She doesn’t have the authority to bend the AfD to her will. Avoiding conflict rather than headlines so close to the election, she went on the offensive.
She told the conference that the AfD would close Germany’s borders, cut benefits for asylum seekers and “repatriate on a large scale — if that is to be called ‘remigration’, then that’s what it will be called: remigration”. The motion to re-adopt the term passed, with the manifesto now saying: “Our plan to reverse government failure on migration policy is called Remigration.”
Weidel’s faction also suffered a defeat on family policy. She lives in a same-sex relationship with her partner Sarah Bossard, whose two sons the pair raise as a family. Out of respect for her situation, the AfD draft manifesto omitted the party’s usual definition of “family” as “father, mother and children”. But an internal party poll revealed that three-quarters of the membership wanted to reinstate it.
Wiebke Muhsal, a Höcke ally and mother of five, said she was “astonished that we’re even having this discussion”. She fumed that she was “fed up with society-degrading sentences like ‘family is where kids are’ […] Family is where a man and a woman have children together!” Her colleague Pascal Pfannes agreed: “Our ideal remains father, mother and as many children as possible.” The definition went back in the manifesto.
Weidel may have finished the conference feeling “relieved” to have held the party together under her leadership. But it was made very clear to her and everyone else that the AfD is not for moderation.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI think ‘remigration’ is a bad word to use, much better is ‘decolonisation’.
“You dare use my own spells against me, Potter?”
I let out an enormous guffaw!
What would then be a “moderate” definition of “family” if the AFD’s “father, mother and children” is considered as “far-right” ?
‘Parent A, Parent B, and Wards of the State’
No need for 2 parents. Or even for young Wards. Family is just a bit of anyone’s lived experience,if they want it to be.
In California and New York, you would please be compelled to refer to birthing persons and partner(s) (no need to stop at quantity: 2). And re-education would be required if you referred to boys and girls – you certainly wouldn’t want to arbitrarily assign a “gender” which would of course deny their existence in a rather genocidal way.
Who considers it far-right, that’s not mentioned in the article?
I would just consider it incomplete.
I think I’ve written it before, but I’ll write it again: I find it perverse how the word “remigration” triggers such hysteria because it is associated with Sellner and his ilk.
All the while, words like “expulsion” and “deportation” (Ausweisung/Außerlandesbringung and Abschiebung if you’re interested in the German vocab) – words which are commonly applied in connection with the Holocaust – are used quite freely (including by the current German chancellor) with regard to the need to, yes, deport people from Germany and other countries who don’t have the right to be there.
I am absolutely sure the battles waged and time spent going bananas over a single word while the underlying issues continue unabated, causing all kinds of havoc (do I really need to provide examples?) are a big factor in the AfD’s success. And that of the FPÖ in Austria: people want to see action taken, not years-long meltdowns over the semantics.
It would be fantastic if they succeed.
What would be even more fantastic is if the other (former?) establishment parties would just pull themselves together.
They are known for having historically eliminated some of their most intelligent people, so no one should be surprised by the perfectionism behind German genocidal ideologies.
‘Alice Weidel thundered that if the AfD were to gain power it would initiate “large-scale repatriations” of foreigners, tear down “all wind farms […] those windmills of shame”, “close down Gender Studies and kick out those professors”.’
Amen!
European politics engages in so much parochial handwringing. Yet looking further afield, Pakistan is in the process of ‘remigrating’ a million Afghans, and South Africa’s approach to illegals crossing their borders could be described as ‘rapid remigration’.
Ah! but it’s okay for them because they are post-colonial. It’s all our fault, but of course we all knew that already.
Thx Sean. Any links for the South Africa approach?
Remigration is being carried out all over the world today it shouldn’t be such a controversial term here.
Trump will show us how it’s done and set a western precedent at the same time…. Hopefully.
Actually this article quotes are sound bites and some are taken out of context. Alice Weidel referred in “tear down all windfarms .. windmills of shame” to a beautiful Forrest in Germany, called “Märchenwald”(Fairytale Woods), where the Government planned to cut masses of trees to build a huge wind farm. In the old days the Greens would have tied themselves to trees to prevent such a truly “shameful” event. Strangely now as they are in power, it seems perfectly ok to destroy beautiful parts of nature to put up hellish looking windmills into former untouched landscapes in the name of Climate Change.
Also what is wrong with “remigration”? The refugees from Syria joyfully demonstrated during Christmas, literally marching through Christmas Markets, that now as Assad was gone, they would love to go back to their homeland. So far I haven’t seen hundreds of thousand leaving Germany. I also would be surprised, if a million of Ukrainians will be on the move back to the Ukraine, once the peace negotiations are finished.
I believe some of these politicians make foolish decisions. For instance, if you were to send all immigrants back to their countries of origin—especially those with legal status or citizenship—you would inevitably lower your own demographic numbers. This would have two major consequences:
First, reducing your population weakens your workforce and the economic potential tied to it.
Second, you’re not considering the broader implications. Sending educated immigrants back to their home countries would empower those nations, shifting the balance of financial and intellectual power.
Historically, Europe, despite lacking significant natural resources, benefited immensely from exploiting others. Now, if you send all the skilled and educated immigrants home, the financial dominance you believe you possess would crumble in an instant. The foundation of your power would split apart almost immediately.
But who am I? Nobody. Please send them all back home and await the unintended consequences!
The author failed to address the issue of legal citizens and illegal immigrants. There’s a big difference. Why would she do this? The essay reads like political spin.
I think you don’t understand the ‘type’ of immigrants they want to send home. They are a drain economically, culturally and are a clear present and future danger to Europe.
Remigration needs to happen throughout Europe.
It would be excellent, in the long term, for all if all those educated and capable immigrants went back to their own countries.
Very naive.
There is more to life than GDP.
Happy cannot be measured in purely economic terms
The author fails to address the question of deporting legal citizens. Does the AfD want to deport legal citizens, or simply deport illegal immigrants? By failing to differentiate between the two, this essay reads like nothing more than anti-AfD spin.