|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact Deutsch | ||
|
Political Dangers of a “Neutral” Authority – The Classification of the AfD by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in May 2025On April 28, 2025, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) published its long-awaited report on the AfD and now officially classifies the party as confirmed right-wing extremist. Interior Minister Nancy Faeser – acting in a caretaker role since February – emphasized on May 2, 2025, that this had been a “neutral,” “comprehensive,” and “politically uninfluenced” review. However, the timing of the publication – just two months after the federal election and just days before the new chancellor is elected – raises serious questions. It strongly suggests that the BfV – intentionally or not – has become a political actor. 1. Publication comes after the election – but not without political effectAlthough citizens have already cast their votes, the political reality is now being reframed: the AfD, which became the strongest party in several eastern German states and, according to polls, has the most support nationwide, is now placed in an anti-constitutional corner – precisely at the moment when parties are forming coalitions and negotiating the legitimacy of parliamentary majorities.The effect: Anyone even considering cooperating with the AfD now faces massive public criticism. Media, civil society organizations, and political opponents will use the report as a moral pressure tool. Thus, the report does not change the election result, but it does alter its political utility. 2. The Office for the Protection of the Constitution is subordinate to the Interior Ministry – not an independent bodyFaeser’s assertion that there was “no political influence” on the 1,100-page report is structurally hard to believe. The BfV is directly subordinate to the Interior Ministry. It cannot act independently like courts or parliaments. Whoever bears responsibility in the ministry also bears responsibility for the political climate in which such assessments are created – and published.Example: Then-BfV President Hans-Georg Maaßen was dismissed in 2018 under political pressure after contradicting government statements regarding Chemnitz. This action showed how quickly the office can be politically disciplined – a clear signal to the entire authority. 3. Delay tactics instead of transparency?According to Faeser, the report was completed before the federal election. Yet it was not published. It was only released now – with maximum political impact.The questions arise:
4. An authority as political corrective?The deeper problem lies here: when an executive body such as the BfV signals after a democratic election that a particular party is no longer within the constitutional spectrum, it raises fundamental questions about democratic role distribution.Instead of politically confronting unwanted positions, the decision about political legitimacy is handed over to a bureaucracy – removing it from public debate. In a democracy, that’s a dangerous path. 5. Serious accusations – without concrete examplesNancy Faeser cited several serious allegations against the AfD in her statement:
These claims are grave – yet she does not cite a single concrete quote, incident, or piece of evidence. For a 1,100-page report supposedly based on a “comprehensive review,” this is a glaring lack of transparency. In a democracy, such political assessments must be understandable, verifiable, and subject to public debate. Instead, the impression arises that political buzzwords like “racist”, “ethno-nationalist”, or “inhumane” are being tossed around without evidence – with serious impact on political discourse. The Office for the Protection of the Constitution as a political actorThe claim that the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution acts “neutrally” and “without political influence” does not hold up to realistic scrutiny. It is structurally subordinate to the Interior Ministry, subject to its directives, and is now clearly acting in the shadow of an election that marked a political turning point.The belated classification of the AfD as confirmed right-wing extremist is less a legal determination and more a symbolic act – with massive political impact at a fragile moment of government formation. Those who use the BfV in this manner or downplay its political effects undermine trust in the neutrality of state institutions – and ultimately erode the foundations of democracy itself. No publication of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution’s reportThe report referenced by Nancy Faeser is not to be published. The affected AfD members – and all other citizens – are not to know how the BfV came to its assessment. This makes legal action against this classification even more difficult. Such conduct is hardly compatible with the principles of a constitutional state.Author: Американский интеллект | 10.05.2025 |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Eine Reise in die Vergangenheit: Entdecken Sie Weißenfels in der DDR-Zeit! Ein faszinierender Rückblick durch historische Bilder.Weißenfels in der DDR im Sozialismus! Erleben Sie die Stadt durch eine beeindruckende Sammlung historischer Bilder.... zum Artikel |
 | Ehre, wem Ehre gebürt! - Grit Wagner reagiert auf Posts der Kasper-FröscheMein Gedanke zu den aktuellen Postings der selbsternannten Kasperstimme, im Volksmund auch "Kasperköpfe" oder liebevoll "Kasper-Fröschleinchen" genannt.... zum Artikel |
 | What Time Are We Living In?Grit Wagner with her thoughts about the times.... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |