The documentary about the AfD has become a widespread mystery

German party. Photo: © Spicefilm

For whom is this? Simon Bruckner’s “One German Party” cannot avoid exploitation.

Is it any wonder that the leaders of the AfD would allow a director to open fire in their parliamentary headquarters and offices? Probably not, because the party desperately needs attention.

If I’m on a talk show somewhere or give an interview somewhere, then for the first half hour I have to justify myself to Gauland, excuse Kalbitz, excuse Höcke. To all kinds of people who would justify why they would say anything and why I’m still at this party.

They are like this. At least that’s how they want to be seen: brave citizens who have nothing to do with extremists and their slogans and are ashamed of them. But that’s how they are…:

Merkel is a proven woman who has since been smuggled through Kohl…

Between 2019 and 2021, the documentary’s director, Simon Bruckner, was granted privileged access to meetings at various levels of the far-right AfD (“Alternative for Germany”) party, including closed sessions.

The result was his film “German Party”. The film offers no news or surprises, just a colorful jumble of insider opinions: the director manages to show some vulnerabilities, sometimes petty-mindedness, narrow-mindedness, and professionalism in a party constantly stuck between far-right, folk, and nationalist. – Revolutionary attitudes on the one hand and the so-called “bourgeois” values ​​and self-determined “normal life” fluctuate.

Simon Bruckner also shows that the AfD is a victim of its own paranoia, in its outrageous stupidity and exposing slips of the tongue, like this:

… that we are supposed to be immersed here in this resettlement program – more than in any case: there are those … they just came by plane, they were selected in Africa and then supposed to enrich us here …

He also shows them their aggression and extremism and quotes public speeches in which the speaker is not afraid to speak in explicitly extreme language:

The only concept of safe hygiene for our country is to get rid of these politicians.

Milling for junkyard mills pay attention to these

At first glance, it may surprise some viewers that AfD even engages in long-term surveillance of this kind and allows a director who does not come from his circle of sympathizers to record and incorporate non-public sessions, meetings and conversations into a film.




German party. Photo: © Spicefilm


But once you realize how dependent this party is on the public, media presence, and public escalation, and how reliant it is on populism, provocation and resentment, it quickly becomes clear that such a film too – or perhaps especially when made by political opponents – fits the accounts of these relationship workers Radical political public and, ultimately, there is a nucleus of attention addicts mills one way or another.

This consideration leads us to the most important question for this film, its success and its evaluation. The question is not “Did the director allow right-wing extremists to exploit him?”

But the crucial question is: to what extent can a director avoid such exploitation and what are the strategies through which, without his film becoming clumsy counter-propaganda, which in its primitiveness will then add to the mills of the extremists?

In any case, the “one German party” gives the AfD the opportunity to present itself to third parties as tolerant, open, open to criticism and interested in debate – just as a perfectly normal party in political disputes. This is exactly the image that the AfD wants to create for itself.

But since the AfD is not an ordinary party, a documentary about them cannot be an ordinary documentary about any party.

Doesn’t this film benefit the AfD just by being there?

Leave a Comment