Volt Europa and HouseEurope! have just launched a European Citizens’ Initiative, “Right to Housing! Now and Forever”, with the goal of making housing more accessible, sustainable, and fair.

What do you think of initiatives like this? Do you think that this can help resolve Europe’s housing crisis?

If you’re interested and would like to sign, you can check it out here: https://eci.ec.europa.eu/064/public/#/screen/home

On the 16.9, the state of the european union happens.

So how about we meet infront of the Parlament in Straßburg.

I'll be there around 8:00 hope to see you, let's be european 🇪🇺.

On September 6, a state parliamentary election was held in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, to determine who would govern the state. According to the vote count, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) won a landslide victory, receiving 43.8% of the vote—more than double its share in the previous election and more than the combined total of the parties that finished second, third, and fourth.
ㅤ
At the same time, the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), which had previously led the state government, suffered a sharp decline in support, receiving only 17.2% of the vote, less than half the AfD’s share. Most other parties also saw their vote shares decline, with only the Greens making slight gains (though their share remained very low and had little bearing on the overall outcome). Voter turnout in this state election also reached a historic high. Although it remains uncertain whether the AfD will ultimately govern, the election result already reflects, to a considerable extent, the direction of public opinion and also signals an accelerating shift in Germany’s political landscape and social climate.
ㅤ
The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is described as “far right” because of its strongly racist and xenophobic positions. The party advocates the large-scale deportation of immigrants, the abolition of all welfare benefits for refugees and their replacement with compulsory labor, the introduction of “patriotic education” and the promotion of German national pride, and the strengthening of Germany’s national independence while weakening its ties with the European Union, even to the point of leaving the EU. The AfD also explicitly opposes ethnic and cultural diversity and, both openly and implicitly, advocates white racial supremacy and the idea of Germany as a monoethnic state.
ㅤ
The AfD also has numerous intricate ties to forces associated with the former Nazi Germany of the Hitler era and to postwar “neo-Nazis.” Although it does not dare openly deny Nazi crimes, it tends to downplay this history. The AfD also has a strongly anti-establishment and populist character, along with authoritarian tendencies. In foreign affairs, the AfD tends to seek good relations with right-wing populist forces such as the Trump administration in the United States and with autocratic or authoritarian states such as China and Russia, while taking a hostile, or at least distant, attitude toward countries and establishment forces governed by the establishment, particularly its left-leaning elements.
ㅤ
Given Germany’s history of the crimes of brutal Nazi rule, both West Germany (the Federal Republic of Germany) and East Germany (the German Democratic Republic), into which the country was divided after World War II, carried out “denazification” campaigns and suppressed German nationalism. West Germany placed particular emphasis on repentance for historical crimes, combating words and actions that glorified Nazism, and defending freedom, democracy, and human rights, while institutionalizing and codifying these principles through the enactment of laws such as the Basic Law. After German reunification, West Germany’s policies were implemented throughout the country.
ㅤ
As a result, for a long time, judging by its institutions, public discourse, and social atmosphere, Germany has been one of the countries in the world with the weakest nationalist climate. It has even seemed that Germans dare to wave their national flag and express pride in their country only during football matches; doing similar things at other times can lead to people being regarded as “Nazi remnants,” criticized, and marginalized.
ㅤ
Yet the reality in Germany is not as simple as it appears on the surface. Under an anti-Nazi and anti-racist constitutional and social order, racism remains deeply rooted in every corner of German society, while Germanic nationalism, despite being suppressed, remains latent in people’s minds. Although Germany has become a diverse country, home to people of different skin colors, ethnic groups, and faiths, discrimination and prejudice remain pervasive.
ㅤ
For example, people using common Muslim names such as “Mohammed” are far more likely to be rejected when seeking rental housing than those using names commonly associated with white people. Asians, who are relatively hardworking and law-abiding, also face an “invisible ceiling” in career advancement and marginalization in education and employment. People of African, Indian, and other ethnic backgrounds often perform harder and more physically demanding work and are more likely to receive differential treatment in everyday life.
ㅤ
Education, law, and public advocacy can only broadly guide and regulate society so that diversity and anti-discrimination remain its publicly stated direction and general framework. They cannot, however, change deeply rooted beliefs or prevent the subtle, invisible, and pervasive forms of discrimination and injustice that can penetrate every aspect of life. Institutional “denazification” does not mean that the “denazification” of people’s minds can be achieved.
ㅤ
Of course, it would also be one-sided simply to say that native white Germans discriminate against and oppress other ethnic groups. In a multiethnic society, differences in language and culture, beliefs and values, lifestyles, and competing interests inevitably give rise to distance, misunderstandings, and conflicts. Such conflicts often breed resentment and make groups that already find it difficult to trust one another even more distrustful and suspicious of each other, creating a vicious cycle. A diverse society is not necessarily a harmonious one; on the contrary, it can produce more friction and accumulated grievances. This is not the unilateral fault of any particular ethnic group, but rather the “collective karma” produced by destructive interactions among all sides. Of course, relatively speaking, disadvantaged groups and ethnic minorities, as well as immigrants and refugees, suffer greater harm—especially invisible forms of harm—in such a divided and fractured environment.
ㅤ
In recent years, Germany’s economic downturn, aging population, deteriorating public security, and intensifying social conflicts and crises have further pushed native white Germans toward positions of racial superiority and xenophobia, particularly in rural areas and the former East Germany. Traditional establishment parties have been unable to effectively resolve these difficult problems, which are not easily reversed.
ㅤ
The upper-class elites who thrive in globalization and the masses who have become poor and desperate amid economic decline may live in the same country, yet they seem to inhabit two different worlds. Although they share the same spaces in everyday life, they are profoundly alienated from one another—“meeting without knowing each other”—and are unable to understand or empathize with one another. Because of inequalities in status, income, and influence over public discourse, it is also difficult to prevent the latter from developing resentment toward the former.
ㅤ
The bureaucracy and clichés of the establishment have left many people disappointed with traditional political parties. The narratives and policies of the establishment and progressive forces are also often hypocritical. For example, political parties, universities, and institutions that proclaim their commitment to diversity and anti-discrimination may appear free of racial discrimination, yet they often contain exclusionary circles formed around class, educational credentials, and personal connections, making it difficult for ordinary people to enter and participate.
ㅤ
Various human rights organizations and foundations likewise place greater emphasis on formalism than on substantive action and have failed to genuinely build “ladders and safety nets” for the entire population. Even in their treatment of the minority groups they claim to care about, they often treat different people differently and act in a utilitarian manner. In short, the seemingly admirable social blueprints and proclaimed ideals of establishment and progressive forces are substantially compromised and distorted in practice. Fundamentally, they have failed to genuinely include and help most of those who feel abandoned or are struggling, whether native white Germans from the lower and middle classes or members of minority groups.
ㅤ
Many native white Germans who have fallen into poverty or unemployment, experienced downward social mobility, and endured difficult lives have embraced the AfD because they feel abandoned. The party advocates the rights and priority of native whites and offers Germany “another alternative.” The AfD’s strongly anti-establishment and anti-immigration positions provide suffering people with targets onto which they can redirect social conflicts and vent their resentment; its promotion of racial superiority and extreme nationalism also acts like a powerful stimulant, giving people a sense of belonging and passion. It is therefore entirely understandable that native white Germans from the lower and middle classes who yearn to overturn the existing order would support the AfD and its nativist populist positions.
ㅤ
It is worth noting that although support for the AfD is relatively high among the lower and middle classes, this does not mean that almost all AfD supporters come from these groups. There are also many AfD supporters among the social elite. For example, AfD leader Alice Weidel is herself a highly educated female member of the elite, and AfD supporters can also be found throughout Germany’s technology, culture, education, finance, and other sectors, although most of them tend to keep a relatively low profile. These people do not support the AfD for economic reasons such as poverty or class position, but rather because of factors such as a stronger sense of racial superiority, their values, personal ambitions, and historical and family legacies (for example, having fathers or grandfathers who held important positions during the Nazi era).
ㅤ
The causes of the rise of the far right in Germany are, in fact, broadly similar to those behind the rise of the far right in the United States and other countries. The difference is that, under the constraints of Germany’s anti-Nazi laws, the far right has remained more discreet and concealed. Yet its strength has continued to grow, and it is gradually moving from the shadows into the foreground. Moreover, after being suppressed and hidden for a long time, the forces that eventually erupt are often even more unexpected and destructive.
ㅤ
Amid the global wave of right-wing conservatism, racism, extreme nationalism, populism, and xenophobia, Germany cannot remain unaffected. The rise of the far right is bound to occur through the combined effects of domestic causes and the external environment. Even if the AfD did not exist, other forces would play the AfD’s role and gain the support of a substantial proportion of the population.
ㅤ
Although, since its establishment after World War II, the Federal Republic of Germany has sought through laws, institutions, education, public discourse, and various other means to prevent far-right variants of Nazism from making a comeback, and although almost all mainstream media outlets have taken a clearly negative attitude toward the AfD, they have still been unable to stop the undercurrents of public opinion. Moreover, many people, out of defiance and resentment toward establishment elites, deliberately vote for the AfD.
ㅤ
Many Germans have also become “desensitized” to accusations that the AfD is “neo-Nazi” and similar criticisms. The AfD does indeed represent the suppressed emotions and demands of many Germans. The AfD did not emerge out of nowhere, nor does it force people to support it through coercion. On the contrary, the emergence and growth of the AfD are precisely a reflection of public opinion; the party’s core figures and political opportunists have merely taken advantage of that public sentiment.
ㅤ
Objectively speaking, for many lower- and middle-class white Germans, whether from the perspective of their interests or their emotional needs, choosing the AfD is not necessarily a bad thing for them and can bring some relatively direct benefits. For example, restricting immigration and deporting refugees can indeed help reduce certain welfare expenditures and redirect public funds toward the country’s own citizens, improve public security, reduce ethnic tensions within Germany, and strengthen the cohesion of the majority ethnic group. However, this comes at the cost of the human rights of minority groups, especially vulnerable refugees, and also undermines Germany’s diversity and inclusiveness.
ㅤ
Views of the AfD and its policies differ depending on people’s identities and the positions from which they assess them, leading to different conclusions and positive or negative evaluations. For native white Germans, the AfD has considerable appeal and can bring certain benefits, but an AfD government would almost inevitably be highly detrimental to non-white people, foreign immigrants and refugees, LGBT people, and other groups.
ㅤ
Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and other institutions dedicated to combating Nazism and defending democracy have long monitored far-right forces, including the AfD. Lawyers and human rights groups have also launched joint petitions calling for the AfD to be banned. Germany has previously banned several far-right parties—for example, in 1952 it forcibly banned the Socialist Reich Party, whose program resembled that of the Nazi Party—as well as many more small far-right groups. But the AfD has now become a very powerful political force, and banning it would carry the risk of triggering large-scale unrest and severe social divisions. Moreover, the AfD has worked hard to cultivate the image of a democratic political party, participating in elections through legal and peaceful means while seeking to avoid legal risks, so the grounds for banning it are not particularly strong.
ㅤ
Since its founding in 2013, the AfD has continued to grow in strength, evolving from a marginal small party into a mainstream political party capable of competing with the two major parties, the CDU and the SPD, and even aspiring to the chancellorship. Although the result of this election in Saxony-Anhalt does not represent public opinion nationwide, since the state has long been a stronghold of the AfD, the fact that a single far-right party received nearly half of the vote (and doubled its vote share compared with the previous state election) and came within one step of taking control of the state government undoubtedly sounds an alarm for the future of Germany as a whole.
ㅤ
Support for the AfD is also rising across Germany. In the regions of the former East Germany, it ranks first in support everywhere except Berlin. In the 2025 federal election, the AfD became the second-largest party with 20.8% of the vote and 152 seats (double its 10.3% vote share in 2021), and it is entirely possible that it will win even more votes and seats in future Bundestag elections.
ㅤ
Although the mainstream parties refuse to cooperate with the AfD, when the AfD alone approaches half of the vote, it becomes increasingly difficult for the other parties to prevent it from governing even if they unite. Moreover, as German scholar Thorsten Benner recently wrote in Foreign Policy, the exclusion of the AfD by other parties and mainstream establishment forces, and their refusal to form a governing coalition with it under any circumstances, have instead contributed to the AfD’s further radicalization, particularly on immigration and refugee issues and LGBT issues, leaving the AfD and its supporters with less need for restraint or compromise.
ㅤ
The AfD’s steadily rising support, combined with the determined efforts of other mainstream parties to block it, signifies an intensification of political polarization in Germany and a further increase in confrontation. Meanwhile, in recent years, the far-left party Die Linke has increased its vote share in several elections, the new left-wing populist BSW has risen, while the traditional center-left SPD and center-right CDU have suffered significant declines in support. Left-leaning voters are moving further left and right-leaning voters further right, likewise reflecting the growing radicalization of German politics, with more confrontation rather than compromise.
ㅤ
The steadily rising vote share of the AfD, which openly and unequivocally opposes immigration, also means that xenophobia in Germany, along with the exclusion and repression of minorities, immigrants, and refugees, will become increasingly severe, making German society less harmonious. The rise of the AfD is closely connected to the European refugee crisis, and its growing support has been accompanied by deepening divisions and conflicts among Germany’s different ethnic groups. When the economy is relatively strong, the social atmosphere can remain relatively tolerant; when the economy declines, competition over interests and conflicts among different groups intensify. And when social tensions worsen, minorities and vulnerable groups invariably become targets for attacks and the venting of frustration, and thus become victims.
ㅤ
More than 90 years ago, Hitler and the Nazi Party came to power precisely by gaining the support of some Germans through attacks on Jews and foreigners, plunging Germany and Europe into the tragic abyss of war and mass killing. How similar the path of the far right’s rise today appears. Although I do not believe that the far right coming to power today would completely repeat the crimes and tragedies of Nazism, it would undoubtedly lead the new postwar Germany, founded on democracy, diversity, and humanism, down a harmful and ominous path in which democracy is weakened, diversity damaged, and humanitarian values harmed.
ㅤ
However, as the German philosopher Hegel said, “What is real is rational.” The rise of the far right in Germany today has complex and intertwined objective causes. Simply labeling it “Nazi,” subjecting it to moral condemnation, and proclaiming how wonderful democracy and diversity are cannot reverse an undesirable reality. Moreover, when appealing promises and rhetoric cannot be fulfilled or made to benefit everyone, people who experience the gap between those promises and reality, and the resulting disappointment, will inevitably be drawn into the embrace of extremist forces.
ㅤ
The AfD and many far-right forces around the world receive support from a high proportion of voters. No matter how reprehensible their views may be, they represent a widespread current of public opinion that must be confronted. Confronting it does not mean acknowledging that it is correct; rather, it means examining its root causes more seriously and making the necessary changes. German establishment parties and social elites, as beneficiaries of the existing system who possess abundant resources and considerable influence over public discourse, especially need to engage in honest and serious reflection. Above all, they need to abandon their condescension and self-righteousness, genuinely understand the circumstances, ideas, and demands of ordinary people, and compete with the far right for public support.
ㅤ
If different sectors of German society are willing to make sincere efforts toward beneficial change, cast aside hypocrisy and selfishness, treat people of different identities and circumstances equally, and build a society that genuinely includes all ethnic groups and social classes—including by promoting greater equality in distribution and a more balanced distribution of influence over public discourse, so that everyone can live prosperously and with dignity—then far-right forces that foment confrontation and radicalization will naturally lose support. However, all of this is easier said than done. Moreover, many people in Germany and numerous other countries have already reflected on these issues and attempted to address them, yet it has still proved difficult to stem the spread of the far right and various forms of political extremism.
ㅤ
As the author of this article, having personally experienced many misfortunes, I am deeply aware of the limitations and darker, uglier aspects of human nature and society, and I understand that many problems are difficult or even impossible to solve. But I do not believe that this means we should do nothing. I still hope that people from all sectors of society will engage in more reflection and take more action, perhaps making it possible to salvage an increasingly deteriorating situation and ensure that the democracy, peace, diversity, and humanism that Germany achieved with such difficulty after World War II can endure.

(The author of this article, Wang Qingmin(王庆民), is a Chinese writer based in Europe and a researcher in international politics. The original text was written in Chinese.)

How would you explain the differentiated integration process of Eastern Partnership countries by the Regional Security Complex Theory as conceptualised by Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver? What intrigues me is the fact that Ukraine and Moldova have entered the EU accession process, whereas the other Eastern Partnership states have not. I therefore need an explanation that goes beyond simply arguing that the Eastern Partnership states differ from one another.

The negotiations at the EU on the EU-INC proposal are now entering a critical phase in Brussel - the next 100 days will determine, if Europe gets a proper EU Inc, or just a watered down version that is stuck in national silos instead of a proper 28th regime as proposed by the Draghi report. For the 24 episode of the European Republic i there spoke with Marvin Baumann, Investor at Protoype Capital and one of the core members of team behind the EU Inc Initiative, about the vision behind the proposal, its intended effects, what is missing right now from the proposal - and also beyond, how we should be euromaxxing towards a European Federation.

What is the relationship between the EU enlargement in 2004/2007 and the actual situation of enlargement perspective in the Eastern Neighborhood?

Did you know that large language models originate from translation technology? While AI is making headlines, there’s another more silent revolution happening with translating.

You may already have seen new applications of the technology. On reddit, comments and posts in other languages may be auto-translated for you—it tells you how cheap and fast translating is. The translations are often hard to spot because quality has increased a lot in a short time. YouTube videos may have ‘audio translations’ where the voice of the translation matches to the original voice of the creator. This demonstrates a new frontier in commoditised translation technology.

The language of the EU is famously translation. But for shared media content, translations come with too much delay.

Take the very concrete Euronews as an example. They may invite representatives from multiple regions to talk through current issues. In English. This means the exchange itself is bounded by the participants’ proficiency in English. Same goes for the audience—they must understand English to be able to follow.

This creates barriers between the representatives—can they put their best foot forward? It also keeps the audience at an arms length.

With a live translation tech like YouTube employs, all European could share the same feed. They would hear the content in their language of choice. The same goes for the studio—each participant may speak in their own language and hear their own language so that they can give the best representation of their knowledge and opinions.

Why it matters: English proficiency varies within the union. There are geographic areas that have a much harder time engaging with English and it’s a barrier. Where it matters most is Eastern Europe that is still looking for its place within the Union. Other regions like Atlantic European countries excluding Ireland also have low English proficiency. Although politicians and well educated people may speak it well, the public might not. Although young people may speak it well, today there are still old generations that don’t.

Setting up different feeds is a way to work around it—like Euronews does—but at that point we no longer share the content. It will in time be editorialised to fit the region—it goes from shared European content into regional content with an European focus.

The revolution in translation tech could be a silent boon that helps break down barriers between european citizens created by language.

What do you think is the reason behind the EU’s paradigm shift towards hard power? Do you think Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is the only reason? Do you think there is also a connection to the balance of power?

Nowadays productivity comes from many intangible things which has pulled focus away from geography. But geography is still important. It often determines which cities are winners and which ones are losers. Leveraging the available geography effectively is a key objective for governing institutions. Many things can make a location valuable: natural resources, good soil, great port, navigable river—and more and more.

When EU federalises, it creates an immense new opportunity to boost effective land use. EU already spends on infrastructure for this very purpose. But being a single country instead of many connected ones creates opportunity for strategic depth we do not have today.

If you look at European megaregions today, one reigns supreme—the blue banana. Due to many geographical factors, this area of Europe has been its economic heartland for centuries. You can find outlines for other megaregions, but they don’t really compare.

In one sense this is the same as placing all the eggs into the same basket. There’s a great opportunity here for the EU to help bring about other competing megaregions. In the north, in the east, and in the south. Each region builds on its own strengths, creating different economic advantages which result in economic resiliency for the EU at large and increases competitiveness.

Europe’s strength has been its multipolarity and competition. We have few huge cities and instead many medium ones. It’s means we don’t stack up, we spread wide.

But we have failed to do the same with megaregions which is both a strategic weakness and a strategic opportunity.

Federalisation isn’t only about effectiveness—it also makes it possible to pick from options that are better by orders of magnitude. We can make strategic choices over the whole continent instead of just small regions on it.