“Be careful what you wish for”: The AfD voters themselves would be the main losers from the AfD’s economic and social policy, says a DIW study. Economist Marcel Fratzscher speaks of the “AfD paradox”.
The AfD is at a high in the polls: If there were a federal election on Sunday, one in five would currently check the right-wing populists. This would mean that many AfD sympathizers would cut themselves in the flesh, according to a . Accordingly, the main victims of AfD policy would be their own voters.
DIW President and study author Marcel Fratzscher came to this conclusion by comparing the political positions of the AfD with the economic interests of their supporters. Fratzscher writes: “People who support the AfD would suffer the most from AfD politics, in relation to almost every political area: economy and taxes as well as climate protection, social security, democracy and globalization.”
Fratzscher analyzes that this paradox is based on a false self-assessment of many AfD voters and a misjudgment of social reality. The economist cites studies that show that the income and education of AfD voters tend to be low to medium. Social and political participation is also below average. The response is particularly high among middle-aged men in rural and structurally weak regions in eastern Germany.
Politics for high earners and the rich
It is precisely these social groups that are disadvantaged by many of the AfD’s political projects. The AfD stands for an “extremely neoliberal economic and financial policy” and the dismantling of the welfare state, analyzes Fratzscher. In the analysis, he does not refer to the slogans of individual party representatives, but only to the factual statements that the party made for the Wahl-O-Mat of the Federal Agency for Civic Education in the past federal elections.
In general, the AfD advocates a reduction in the role of the state and more power for the market. She relies on tax cuts, including for heirs and top earners. When it comes to social benefits, she is relying on bigger cuts than any other party in the Bundestag. She spoke out against more tenant protection and a higher minimum wage. “If AfD policy were to prevail, there would be a redistribution of income and social benefits from AfD voters to voters from other parties,” writes Fratzscher.
The social and democratic cuts that the AfD is planning will “primarily affect people with a migration background, but certainly also AfD voters,” writes Fratzscher. The weakening of the European Union and climate protection aimed for by the party will primarily affect the socially disadvantaged in society in the medium and long term – and thus also many supporters of the AfD.
Economist explains AfD paradox
Why is the party successful with this? Economist Fratzscher explains the “AfD paradox” as follows: through hate speech and discrimination against foreigners and people with a migration background, the party suggests to its supporters that they would gain economically, socially and politically if social services or fundamental rights were restricted. “The individual misjudgment lies in the fact that many AfD voters do not realize that a policy of discrimination and exclusion would affect them in a very negative way.”
Those who earn little and enjoy few privileges are particularly dependent on support from the state. “AfD voters in particular would be adversely affected by job losses, poorer infrastructure and fewer services, a weakening of the European Union or tax cuts for top earners.”
The conclusion of the DIW President is: “Be careful what you wish for.” The old adage that one should be careful about what one wishes for applies particularly to AfD voters and sympathizers.
Source: Stern
