SPD and Green politicians have rejected attempts by the CDU and CSU to portray Germany’s AfD and Die Linke as comparable extremist forces. Experts cited by tagesschau.de argue that, although both parties contain radical currents, their ideological foundations and relationship with the constitutional order are markedly different.
The debate intensified after an event organized by the Young Union displayed the slogan “Never again” alongside an image associated with Berlin’s Left Party and a masked figure wearing a Palestinian scarf. The presentation suggested that Die Linke, which won Berlin’s state election, was extremist and antisemitic and could therefore be compared with National Socialism. Extremism researcher Hendrik Hansen described the comparison as inappropriate.
Political scientist Wolfgang Schroeder said the CDU and CSU were trying to create new political lines of conflict while on the defensive. In his view, this was intended to consolidate conservative support and prevent a potential alliance between the SPD, Greens and Left Party.
In political science, extremism refers to positions outside the limits of Germany’s free democratic basic order. Experts caution against blanket judgments, noting that neither the AfD nor Die Linke can be characterized as entirely extremist. Bremen Mayor Andreas Bovenschulte, however, accused the Union of blurring the distinction between Die Linke and the AfD and of relativizing the threat posed by the AfD.
The number of right-wing extremists within the AfD is easier to estimate because the party is monitored extensively by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution. The agency counted 28,000 right-wing extremists among the AfD’s 70,000 members in 2025.
There are no comparable figures for Die Linke. Hansen said the party’s membership had more than doubled over the previous two years and that initial indications suggested some new members were more radical than existing ones. He cautioned, however, that radical positions can still remain within the boundaries of a free democracy, meaning it has not yet been established whether the influx has made the party more extremist.
The experts also identify different ideological foundations. Schroeder said both parties seek to pressure the democratic center from the political margins, but do so on fundamentally different social, political and ideological grounds. Unlike the AfD, he said, Die Linke basically accepts the equality of human dignity.
Hansen described the AfD’s approach as an ethnocultural policy focused on preserving a specifically German identity. In a 2024 ruling concerning the party’s hostility to the constitution, the Higher Administrative Court in Münster referred to a völkisch concept of society among parts of the AfD. Within extremist currents of Die Linke, by contrast, Hansen identified the construction of a collective of victims that can include Hamas and relativize its violence against Jews.
Regional differences are also significant. Schroeder said the Berlin branch of Die Linke includes figures and groups whose views are highly controversial from a democratic-theoretical perspective. In eastern German states, however, the party is generally regarded as more moderate and has previously proved to be a reliable governing partner.
Hansen said there was practically no moderate AfD state branch left. He described the party’s eastern German organizations as posing a considerable danger to democracy, while even the previously more moderate North Rhine-Westphalia branch is involved in an internal power struggle.
The AfD is not under observation only in Saarland and Schleswig-Holstein; in five German states it is classified as definitively right-wing extremist. For Die Linke, reports by the domestic intelligence service generally mention only individual internal currents. The party’s youth organization Solid, for example, was listed in North Rhine-Westphalia’s 2025 report alongside the communist DKP and MLPD as opposing essential elements of the free democratic basic order.
Die Linke as a whole does not appear in any of the reports cited. Hansen noted that constitutional protection reports often lag behind political developments, leaving open whether the party will receive greater attention in future assessments.
Sources: Tagesschau.