The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is likened to an extremist beaver gnawing at the pillars of liberal democracy. The dispute over the Otto-Wels Hall in the Reichstag highlights how symbolic debates benefit the party. Democratic parties must create clarity in 2026 and combat the AfD on substantive issues.
The dispute over the Otto-Wels Hall in the Reichstag building is considered one of the silliest symbolic political debates of the past year. The SPD parliamentary group refused to hand over the second-largest meeting room to the AfD, even though the Social Democrats have been only the third strongest faction since the election. With support from other factions, they kept the hall, providing the AfD with a new victim narrative that it has since exploited.
Such confrontations do not work as a 'firewall' against the AfD, as the party excels in symbol and emotion politics. Emotions are its main tool. Prominents like Sahra Wagenknecht and Juli Zeh declare the firewall failed, while media outlets like Axel Springer and the Berliner Verlag push for Union-AfD rapprochement.
Instead, the firewall must stand at the core: the pillars of democracy. The AfD differs from a right-shifted CDU; it fundamentally questions liberal democracy and would attack if given power. NRW Interior Minister Herbert Reul warned: 'If the Union cooperates with the AfD, I'm out,' he told t-online. CDU leader Friedrich Merz wavers between demarcation and populist statements on 'cityscape' and 'daughters'.
For 2026, the tasks for the Union and democratic parties are: create clarity, deliver politically, and attack the AfD where it hurts.
