The State: Helper or Obstacle in the Fight against Fascism?

Banning parties and police measures—the state could take action against the German fascist party AfD (Alternative for Germany), but it is not a reliable partner in the anti-fascist struggle. Many people argue that banning the AfD will solve the danger of their fascist ideology. Yet, can the state and its banning mechanisms be trusted in fighting against fascism?

There have been previous attempts to ban Nazi parties in the past. However, these have failed before the Federal Constitutional Court (BVG). The BVG rejected two applications to ban the fascist NPD in 2003 for “procedural reasons” and in 2017 because it did not see any “indications of the successful implementation of its anti-constitutional goals.” At least in 2003, the ruling supported the NPD, which was able to quadruple its share of the vote in the 2005 federal elections. Although the election result of 1.6 percent was well below the five percent hurdle to get into parliament, the court’s ruling strengthened the Nazis’ assertiveness rather than weakening it.

But now the domestic secret service – euphemistically called the “Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution” – would also have to collect enough evidence to ban a party. But the secret service is by no means loyal to the Constitution, as its official name would suggest. Hans-Georg Maaßen, its president from 2012 to 2018, advised the AfD in 2015 on how to avoid observation by his agency; in 2016, he thwarted his agency’s involvement with the AfD, and in 2018, he denied the witch hunts on migrants in Chemnitz, while at the same time ranting on Twitter about “eliminatory racism against whites” “in the political and media space.”

What’s more, the secret service has financed the establishment of numerous fascist organizations through its dubious undercover agent system with taxpayers’ money. For example, the Nazi cadre Tino Brandt, as undercover agent ‘Otto,’ received around 200,000 German Marks from the agency from 1996 to 2001, which he invested, among other things, in the establishment of the right-wing extremist Thuringian Homeland Security – the organization from which the fascist, terrorist group NSU (National-Socialist Underground) emerged in 1999. Brandt, who was convicted of sexual abuse of young people in 2014, is just one of many – and the undercover agent system continues to run like clockwork.

In the series of assassination attempts on migrants by the NSU from 2000 to 2006, the police deliberately steered the investigation in the wrong – racist – direction; on one occasion, a secret service employee was at the scene of the crime when a victim was shot, on other occasions he was in the immediate vicinity. After the scandal was exposed, witnesses died before they could be questioned, some of them in unknown circumstances. The domestic secret service shredded files before investigative committees could begin their work.

Right-wing extremism is also a significant problem in the police: deaths in police custody, right-wing radical chat groups, threatening letters from NSU 2.0, and the networking of officers with fascist groups are all evidence of this. According to research by Stern magazine, the state interior ministries are currently investigating at least 400 police officers on suspicion of right-wing extremist views – but for criminologist Tobias Singelnstein, this is “just the tip of the iceberg.”

But what about the government? Federal Interior Minister Faeser (SPD) banned the fascist Compact magazine on July 16. Yet, simultaneously, the left-wing newspaper Junge Welt is being spied on by the domestic secret service and is listed as “extremist” in the report by the Federal Office for the “Protection of the Constitution.” The German secret services see the same danger coming from the “far right,” “far left” and “Islamists,” as their reports show. The Palestine Solidarity Movement is confronted with the constant undermining of freedom of expression and assembly. Bans and laws that the government ostensibly issues against the right mostly affect left-wing voices and movements.

State bodies only take action against militant Nazis when their actions run counter to their own interests or when the public has become aware of them. So why does the state not only allow fascist organizations to do as they please but sometimes even actively promote them?

Firstly, the reasons are historical: in 1956, the Federal Intelligence Service took over the stay-behind organizations founded by NATO – paramilitary groups that were to be deployed behind the lines of Warsaw Pact troops in the event of an invasion and mainly were recruited from Nazis. Over time, the collaboration proved useful for the state and government. The fascists can take on tasks that would be illegal for the police to carry out. In 1992, for example, the Conservative Kohl government was able to undermine the right of asylum for the first time by citing the racist pogroms in Rostock-Lichtenhagen, which West German Nazi cadres had organized. In addition, fascism is still an option for the elite to rule when parliamentarianism no longer works in their favor, as it did in 1933.

Hence, the bourgeois state is no reliable partner in the struggle against fascism. Quite the opposite: the state sends its police forces after Antifascists when we take action against AfD & Co. The only way that we can fight against the fascists from the AfD and beyond is by fighting against them in the streets and not relying on the state in this struggle. In light of the growing support of the AfD in many Eastern German states, it is our duty to build broad, united fronts to crush the fascists once and for all.