This should tell you more about how far right America has gotten. What's your definition of extreme-right and why don't they fit it?
Both the GOP and the AFD are acting extra-constitutionally. Trump's administration has shown to Europeans that needed a reminder how dangerous these politics can be.
Is the AfD acting extra-constitutionally? Or are they just proposing to do so? They aren't actually in power, are they? If not, how are they "acting" at all?
(Not German, so I don't know. Honest questions from an incomplete understanding.)
Late answer, but: they did actually abuse their power in an unconstitutional way after last year's elections to the state parliament of Thuringia. The eldest member of the parliament was from the AfD and as such he was given the traditionally ceremonial role of moderating the parliamentary proceedings until such time as an actual president was elected. With absolutely no legal basis to do so he tried to block the parliament from voting on certain matters. The other parties had to get the state constitutional court involved who very firmly ordered the AfD to let the parliament work as intended.
While the AfD complied with the ruling (I don't really see how they couldn't have) and the crisis was ultimately averted, one should make no mistake: this was a test to see if the democratic forces were still strong enough to oppose them. For now, they were.
It's the second option. Should a party that promises to act extra-legally once they get into power be allowed to campaign? I think not, but it is not an easy question to answer.
Europeans have been reminded of the dangers of right-wing populism with what's currently happening in America.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy
And yet... in the US at least, we have an avenue for that. Change the laws. The Constitution forbids what you want to do? You can change that, too. That's the route that you're supposed to take.
If you won't, and you say so publicly, and the people are willing to vote for you anyway... then the powers that be are in a tough spot. They have (at least somewhat legitimate) grounds for excluding you. And yet, they risk your popular support deciding that the system will not accept them.
What they should be doing is figuring out the reason so many people support those who want to tear down the system, and find a way to give them most of what they want within the system, and campaign on that, to cut the ground out from the outside-the-system party. But that may require more competence and savvy than the powers that be have shown...
> your definition of being extremists requires them to be the dominant party and actively committing a genocide?
No, come on, they never wrote this. Someone else wrote:
> Both the GOP and the AFD are acting extra-constitutionally.
And they asked if that was true, as well as for more details about the AFD's real political actions. That's it. It does not even remotely suggest they think the party is not extremist; in fact, they go as far as to say they have no first-hand knowledge of the situation as an explanation for the questions.
I would argue that the American right wing has actually shifted a bit leftward in the past few decades. Gay marriage is now accepted by most Republicans for example. Trump is in many ways a 90s Democrat. His stance on illegal immigration, America first foreign policy, and protectionist tariffs are actually not that extreme historically for our country. The mass deportations are a reaction to the unprecedented scale of illegal immigration that was practically encouraged by the Biden administration.
The reality is that he feels far right because most of the western world has become extreme-far left. I can think of tons of former Democrats who have been alienated by how far left the Democrats have become on social issues. Besides Donald Trump, there is also Elon Musk (he was a huge supporter of Barack Obama), Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and even Bill Maher (who is no fan of Donald Trump by any stretch of the imagination) frequently criticizes how far left the party has become.
EDIT: I’m talking about social left versus right, not economic. For the record, I think the left versus right distinction doesn’t really work given the complex modern political landscape. For Europeans that may be unaware, gay marriage and LGBT rights were actually a controversial political issue in the 90s and even early 2000s with even many Democrats refusing to back it. Barack Obama famously “evolved” his stance on this issue.
A lot of words here but not much knowledge of politics. Calling western people "marxists" while showing absolutely no clue what Marx proposed (hint: common ownership, stateless society...). If reliable healthcare for citizens is "far left" where exactly on the map would we put communism? Or what is then center, and what is right? And what is then "far right", hunting homeless for sport? I don't really care what the one or the other party trumpet claims, but I don't have to like such loud ignorance.
They also: deport citizens without due process, enforce the "unitary executive theory", defund government institutions, remove health regulations, reduce taxes...
None of these things are left-wing, by any conceivable definition of "left-wing". What the fuck are you even saying about how the rest of the world has been shifting "extreme-far left"? It clearly hasn't.
Tell me again how the weak neoliberal party has gotten far-left? Do you think gay marriage is communism or something? Because I don't see the democrats advocating for socialized ownership of the means of production or other crazy shit. Mostly they hold mild and boring technocratic views on everything, and are sometimes slightly progressive when it's convenient.
Both the GOP and the AFD are acting extra-constitutionally. Trump's administration has shown to Europeans that needed a reminder how dangerous these politics can be.