Germany’s Pluralistic Future Imagined

Experts predicted the surge of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Germany’s state-level elections this month, but the results nevertheless prompted panic and paralysis. Many fear the past is making a comeback.

And it is understandable given the revival of Nazi-era symbols in public. In January at a secret gathering of supporters from the extreme right-wing spectrum, there were discussions about the “remigration” of people with immigration backgrounds. Although there was public outcry and the government expedited new citizenship laws, the ideas are now in the public domain. In March on the North Sea island of Sylt, affluent young people were laughing and singing a banned Nazi slogan to pop music, which included shouts of “Germany for Germans! Foreigners out!” The Nazi salute, which is illegal, is now commonplace at rightist rallies.

But the AfD vote is not driven by nostalgia. It is present-day anger with status quo politics that’s given rise to the wealth inequalities and socio-cultural divisions between east and west, rural and urban. As the “alternative,” the AfD presents a “common sense” “German-pride” vision of the future. Like the US MAGA movement’s Project 2025, the AfD manifesto blends a cherry-picked, rose-tinted version of Germany’s past greatness – touting Prussian culture and language – with a gamut of pseudo-solutions for socio-economic grievances.

Since micro-targeting is a key tactic, the AfD manifesto has something for everyone, even if impossible to implement. But emotions trump accuracy. By tapping into people’s fears, hopes and aspirations, they go through hearts to get into heads.

Targeting frustration

Equally importantly, the manifestos address issues that frustrate people across the political and socio-cultural spectrum. For example, in my research on polarization and social cohesion I met representatives from community organizations, local councils, and the federal government to discuss social programming. Everyone was frustrated by administrative burdens, laws that prohibit innovation and agility, and cuts in resources, despite the public’s interest in volunteerism. In a dairy farm in Brandenburg, this frustration was echoed: “We used to fill a three-page form regarding the health and welfare of our cows,” said the resident veterinarian. “Now it’s a 40-page document.” The AfD manifesto calls for reducing such red tape.

Additionally, they distort or simplify centrist policies as being excessively “woke” and out of touch, positioning themselves and their right-adjacent allies as the party of common sense.  “They are passing legislation to control what we eat,” said one conservative commentator, mocking the coalition government. “They want to erase women,” said another in reaction to transgender policies. They also hone in on demographics: “They are letting too many immigrants come in,” say many. It is typically followed by comments pertaining to rising crime. Muslims, especially those wearing hijabs, are blamed for not integrating and posing an existential threat to Germany’s cultural fabric.

This normalization of white supremacist discourse at a time of extreme pluralism fuels division and polarization. It is similar to other contexts where extremists have co-opted, distorted visceral identities such as faith and ethnonationalism including Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and even Buddhism to sow divisions and fuel their struggle for power. Their strategy is to elevate and weaponize a singular ethno-national and faith identity in the midst of a pluralistic society to justify discrimination against others. They also espouse masculine supremacy. They understand women’s importance in families and traditional social structures. Thus, they target and co-opt women to front their movements despite harboring significant anti-women’s rights positions, just as we see with the AfD.

Meanwhile Germany’s three-party coalition of the Social Democrats, Greens and Liberal Democrats is missing the mark in response. By trying to discredit the AfD they risk strengthening support for it as the underdog “alternative.” Trying to shut out the AfD from governance for its historic similitudes, in the name of preserving democracy now, could also backfire. Echoing the anti-immigration tropes further fuels polarization and mistrust in society. Scaremongering people to vote for the centrist parties and against the AfD because they are a threat to democracy, may work in the short term but cannot be a long-term strategy.

A collective vision

To steer the future away from the extremes, centrist parties ironically need to learn from the far right’s playbook. This includes connecting more effectively with similar progressive movements globally, while also reconnecting locally to communities across rural and provincial areas in Germany through trusted local organizations and representatives. Most urgently, they need to imagine the future and be bold in their vision. In this regard, it is essential that instead of leaning into the xenophobia of the far right and left, they need the courage to acknowledge, embrace and celebrate the pluralism that is the present, was the past and is the future of Germany.

In practice this means reassessing some fundamental assumptions about ‘German identity and history’. For example, there is a notion that Germany is not a ‘migrant’ nation historically.

Yet since the 1950s, Turks, Italians, Poles, and others have come to Germany and rebuilt a nation that had been bombed to rubble. They came as workers, but they also brought with them a cornucopia of arts, and cuisines. The ubiquitous döner kebab is just one of the most obvious. Today, with the population aging Germany needs younger workers across the spectrum of trades and professions. Instead of giving oxygen to the distorted notion of “good and bad migrants,” the centrist parties can speak about the cultural vibrancy and contributions that immigrants could make. They could reform the ways in which refugees are processed so that their skills and talents could be assessed and channeled into the economy. Those who have come more recently from Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, and other war-torn, or dictatorial states bring their wealth of talent, education, and energy to build Germany’s future. And instead of assuming that recent successive governments failed in immigration policies because of opening doors to such refugees, they should be hailed for demonstrating Germany’s humanity. Similarly if Muslims, Sikhs, Jews, or others – of German or foreign origin – don a hijab or turban, the political elite should not fuel racism that claims they are a threat to German values and culture. On the contrary: their sartorial choices, should be seen and celebrated as indication that in Germany, the principle of freedom of expression is a lived reality.

Similarly, if people protest Germany’s weapons transfers to Israel, and call the government to stand by the International Criminal Court, they are neither anti-Semitic nor a threat to the German state. On the contrary, they desperately want to give meaning to the words “never again” and prevent Germany becoming implicated in another genocide – this century. They want Germany to be its best self. Their dissidence is a sign of active and engaged citizenry, a key marker of a vibrant and functioning democracy.

There are solutions – big and small – to envision a better future. The fact is that pluralism has always existed in human society. It has been a profound source of innovation and evolution. Those who fear it can fuel division and destruction. So the choice is clear – a future fraught with divisiveness and polarization, or one of trust and social cohesion? Einstein said: “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” It’s time to imagine the future. The good news is much of it is already here, if only we care to look.