One of the objectives of the study was to give hints and suggestions, “the help, with the contents and arguments, strategies and language patterns of the AfD to address,” write the Marburg extremism researcher Benno Hafeneger and colleague Hannah Jestädt in their recently published study. For this, they took of the inaugural session of the Landtag on may 18. January 2019 until 18. January 2020, the work of the opposition, the AfD group under the magnifying glass. The party brought 347 initiatives: 229 Small requests and Large request, 107 applications, nine-to-date hours and a bill. The AfD had brought to 2018, when the state election was 13.1 percent of the vote, and moved for the first time in the Hessian Parliament.
The analysis revealed that “a wide range of topics will be addressed, and there are also areas of focus and ideological centers”. The researchers see as in a first study from the past year – a “migration policy issues fixation”. The authors come to the overall conclusion: “It is trying to make the Parliament an Arena for populist messages and neurechter discourse of displacement.”
The AfD group Chairman Robert Lambrou rejected the statements of the “centers” and the “discourse shift”. He don’t see any issues fixing, he explained. “The AfD represents a citizens’ policy, in the face of any ideology skeptical.” The parliamentary group is “civil conservative” and represent the corresponding positions of their voters.
In dealing with the AfD, there is according to the study, in the parliamentary practice of various strategies of definition about the content dispute to Serenity. Parliaments as places of public political communication and policy-making were “an exclusive space in which the AfD is a challenge for all of the other parties”.
dpa
