Germany Should Constrain the AfD Legally and Fight It Politically, Not Ban It
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/timothygartonash. "Here’s how Germany can defend its democracy. Banning the AfD isn’t the answer | Timothy Garton Ash | The Guardian." September 19, 2026. www.theguardian.com
The Gist
The author argues that Germany shouldn't try to ban the far-right AfD party because that would look undemocratic and come too late anyway. Instead, mainstream parties should use existing constitutional powers to prevent AfD from abusing government institutions, while also competing more effectively against them politically—offering better policies and connecting emotionally with voters rather than just opposing the AfD.
Conclusion
Germany should defend its democracy against the AfD not by banning the party, but by using existing constitutional and legal constraints to limit its power while politically out-competing it, including on an emotional level.
Premises
- Banning the AfD is now too late and impractical given it has been a major electoral force since 2017 and leads national polls, meaning a ban would itself look like an assault on democracy by telling millions of voters they cannot support their chosen party.
- Liberal democracy is defined not by majority rule alone but by the rule of law, human and minority rights, and pluralist institutions that constrain any electoral outcome, so these institutional constraints (not bans) are the proper tool.
- The real danger from the AfD resembles Orbán's Hungary in 2010 or Trump's Washington in 2025 (administrative capture of state institutions) more than Weimar's 1933 collapse, so the appropriate response is administrative and legal safeguarding, such as invoking constitutional Article 37 to prevent abuse of state power.
- Evidence from political science suggests that including or normalizing far-right parties in government (the 'Melonisation' strategy) is just as likely to strengthen them as to moderate them, undermining the case for abandoning the political 'firewall.'
- Mainstream parties, especially Christian Democrats, need to offer a positive, affirmative vision (European-scale policy solutions, economic reform) rather than simply opposing the AfD, in order to politically outcompete it.
- Democracy cannot be defended by legal and rational means alone in today's media environment; it also requires emotional and communicative engagement to counter the AfD's populist appeal, as demonstrated by successful figures like Péter Magyar and Andy Burnham.
Assumptions
- Constitutional and administrative tools (like Article 37) can be applied effectively and impartially without being perceived as politically motivated overreach.
- The AfD's current strategy mirrors authoritarian institutional capture rather than an imminent violent or unconstitutional seizure of power.
- Voters who support the AfD are persuadable by improved policy and emotional engagement from mainstream parties rather than being ideologically fixed.
- The comparison to Orbán and Trump is apt and that similar administrative safeguards would be equally effective in the German context.
- Legal and political tools can be sufficiently distinguished and both effectively deployed simultaneously without one undermining the other's legitimacy.