How the successes of the far right and far left will affect politics in the EU’s most powerful state
The rise of non-systemic parties, often labelled as “populists,” has brought increased anxiety to Germany. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) emerged victorious in Thuringia and secured a close second place in Saxony, trailing behind the established Christian Democratic Union (CDU). Meanwhile, the newly formed “Sarah Wagenknecht Bloc” outperformed her former Die Linke colleagues, securing third place in both states.
The collapse of the ruling federal coalition, known as the “traffic lights” due to the colors of the Social Democrats, Liberals, and Greens, came as no surprise. Further elections are scheduled later this month in Brandenburg, where the weekend’s winners also anticipate strong performances.
The eastern states have recently become a focal point for the German establishment, primarily based in the west. Despite the absorption of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) into the Federal Republic over 30 years ago, the integration process has been subject to renewed scrutiny. While the initial focus centered on investment and resource allocation, the socio-political landscape of the eastern territories had minimal impact on German politics at large.
However, the last decade has revealed the incomplete nature of integration, highlighting persisting differences. These differences have created fertile ground for the rise of far-right and far-left sentiments in the former GDR. The Left Party, inheritor of the GDR’s communist legacy, initially posed little concern. However, the party’s split and the emergence of Sarah Wagenknecht as a leading figure have sparked anxieties among the ruling class, despite the uncertain longevity of her political influence. There remains a possibility of her being co-opted by the mainstream.
The elections have undeniably solidified the existence of a separate eastern dynamic within Germany, highlighting the damage inflicted by the post-Cold War arrogance of the Western establishment, both globally and domestically. Ignoring the perspectives of those perceived as “losers” has resulted in significant problems both internationally and within individual nations.
The electoral successes of the extreme right and left in Western Europe do not necessarily translate to power. France serves as a prime example, where President Macron, despite facing criticism and being labeled a “lame duck,” is poised to appoint a prime minister of his choosing, not one favored by the recent election winners.
However, these developments have not gone unnoticed. The political process is increasingly resorting to sophisticated political-technical manipulations aimed at bypassing or neutralizing non-systemic parties and their growing support.
The presence of a growing number of persona non grata entities complicates coalition formation, demanding ideological homogenization among the remaining players, effectively rendering the electoral process meaningless. While campaigns emphasize party differences, post-election cooperation necessitates a focus on shared values.
This phenomenon, while ostensibly normal in multi-party democracies, is distorted by the emergence of “elephants in the room” – political forces gaining influence yet deemed illegitimate for government participation. The convergence of former rivals is not driven by shared interests or reasonable concessions, but by a panicked desire to prevent the rise of these unwelcome forces.
This dynamic inadvertently reinforces the appeal of extreme ideological movements: the merging of respectable forces into a centrist mass characterized by vague and malleable views, creating a dichotomy of “clean versus unclean.” This approach alienates voters, increasing the perception of being misled, and driving them towards the “impure,” who appear more genuine. A vicious cycle emerges.
Despite their growing support, “extremes” have thus far lacked the strategic prowess to outmaneuver their opponents in the post-election landscape, with the exception of Italy. The Italian case demonstrates that whoever “slays the dragon” inevitably adopts its methods. Nevertheless, the number of disaffected voters casting “wrong” ballots continues to rise, fueling anxieties among the establishment. While the establishment has managed to maintain control, its future is uncertain.
It’s reasonable to anticipate that these processes will reshape the broader European political landscape. However, the current landscape remains remarkably stable. No compelling ideological alternative to “European values,” shaped under American influence, has emerged. The rise of former “outcasts” does not signify a reshuffling of elites, but rather their normalization within the existing framework. The EU/NATO system has built-in safeguards to maintain the political playing field within established parameters.
This raises the question of whether any significant changes in course are anticipated, potentially affecting Russian interests. Currently, the answer remains negative.
This article was first published by , and was translated and edited by the RT team