Polls Rising, Candidates Dying: AfD’s Fight For Survival

Germany now faces an ominous moment. On May 2, 2025, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) classified the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the nation’s leading opposition party, as a confirmed “right-wing extremist” organization. This unprecedented move, justified by a sprawling 1,100-page report, redefined the AfD not as a democratic rival but as a threat to the constitutional order. Yet while the legal battle over this designation unfolds, a darker story is playing out: AfD candidates are dying in startling numbers ahead of the September 14th elections.

By early September, authorities in North Rhine-Westphalia admitted that 16 AfD candidates had died under suspicious or unexplained circumstances in the run-up to local elections. Just a week earlier, the number was reported at seven. Alice Weidel, AfD co-chair, confirmed that candidates from towns like Bad Lippspringe, Blomberg, Rheinberg, and Schwerte were among the dead. Police investigations are ongoing, but the scale alone is alarming. No other major party is experiencing anything close to this level of attrition. In a democracy, candidates are supposed to be removed from ballots by voters, not by death notices.

The deaths occur against a backdrop of AfD momentum. As of September 2, polling shows the party surging with a +19% rise, cementing its status as Germany’s most potent electoral force. Voters are not abandoning the AfD in the face of state repression; they are rallying to it. This dynamic terrifies the ruling coalition of CDU, CSU, and SPD, which holds only a fragile majority of 328 out of 630 Bundestag seats. The SPD, despite its humiliating collapse to 16.4% in February’s national election, clings to power through key ministries. For these parties, suppressing the AfD is not about protecting democracy but preserving their own political survival.

The BfV’s classification grants the government sweeping surveillance powers over AfD members: tapping communications, planting informants, and destabilizing the party from within. Although the courts have temporarily paused implementation, the designation itself remains in force. The chilling effect is immediate. Supporters fear surveillance, donors hold back, and the specter of state reprisal looms over every candidate. When coupled with the disturbing wave of unexplained deaths, the picture begins to resemble not democratic contestation, but political warfare.

Germany’s leaders justify their actions by invoking the specter of Nazism, claiming democracy cannot be naïve about extremism. But the Weimar Republic did not collapse because it tolerated dissent. It collapsed because elites distrusted their citizens and institutions proved too brittle to channel opposition constructively. Today’s Germany risks repeating the error, this time by crushing a populist party that commands millions of votes. If a fifth of the electorate is silenced through labels, surveillance, and now unexplained fatalities, what remains of democracy?

The implications extend beyond Germany. Imagine if President Trump had declared the Democratic Party an extremist organization, placed informants in its campaign offices, and IRS agents targeted its donors, all while Democratic candidates began dying in clusters. Would anyone call that democracy? The analogy is not exaggeration. It is the mirror of what is now unfolding in Berlin.

International voices have already expressed alarm. Matteo Salvini of Italy denounced the move as a theft of democracy. Elon Musk provided Alice Weidel a platform on 𝕏 after legacy outlets froze her out. US Vice President JD Vance met with Weidel in early September, signaling American awareness of Germany’s authoritarian drift. To outsiders, the narrative is clear: Germany is less concerned with defending democracy than with narrowing the choices available to voters.

What is at stake is not the AfD alone but the principle of pluralism itself. Once it becomes acceptable to neutralize the leading opposition party through intelligence decrees and candidates fall dead in shocking numbers, no opposition can feel secure. Today it is the AfD. Tomorrow it may be any movement threatening entrenched elites. The lesson is chilling: voters may cast ballots, but their choices are bounded by those who hold power.

Germany presents itself as a guardian of democracy, yet its actions reveal profound mistrust of the very citizens it claims to protect. The paradox is stark. To save democracy from so-called extremism, it is dismantling democracy in real time. The rituals of elections may persist, but the freedom to choose is being extinguished. This is not democratic resilience. It is democratic euthanasia.

The world should take heed. The measure of democracy is not how it treats ideas it likes but how it treats ideas it fears. By that standard, Germany is failing. The AfD is surging in the polls despite state repression. It should be challenged in open debate, not strangled by secret police powers or erased through the mysterious deaths of its candidates. Once the line is crossed, once suppression replaces persuasion, the descent into authoritarianism is not a risk. It is already underway.

If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing: https://x.com/amuse.

Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

READ NEXT: [WATCH] Ghislaine Maxwell’s Lawyer Sparks Conspiracy Frenzy