Lehmann, Pola; Zehn e , Lisa
A icle — Published Ve sion
The Sel -P oclaimed De ende o F eedom: The A D and
he Pandemic
Go e nmen and Opposi ion
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Lehmann, Pola; Zehn e , Lisa (2024) : The Sel -P oclaimed De ende o F eedom:
The A D and he Pandemic, Go e nmen and Opposi ion, ISSN 1477-7053, Camb idge Uni e si y
P ess, Camb idge, Vol. 59, pp. 1109-1127,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/go .2022.5
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/251772.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
ARTICLE
The Sel -P oclaimed De ende o F eedom: The
A D and he Pandemic
Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e *
Depa men o Democ acy and Democ a iza ion, WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
*Co esponding au ho . Email: [email p o ec ed]
(Recei ed 22 June 2021; e ised 12 Janua y 2022; accep ed 17 Janua y 2022;
i s published online 30 Ma ch 2022)
Abs ac
The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged nea ly e e y aspec o li e and supe seded issues
a he co e o populis adical igh (PRR) pa ies’ideology, dispossessing hem o one o
hei main na a i es. This also challenged he Al e na i e o Ge many (A D), a ela i ely
young bu s ong PRR pa y in opposi ion. We explo e how he pa y has adjus ed i s pol-
icy supply o his unp eceden ed si ua ion and how his has a ec ed i s popula i y among
Ge man o e s, building ou analysis on p ess eleases issued by he A D be ween Janua y
2020 and Ma ch 2021, o e in en ion da a and ecen elec ion esul s. Ini ially, he pa y’s
eac ion was inconsis en , bu om au umn 2020 he A D ocused on uelling discon en
wi h he go e nmen ’s lockdown measu es, ac ing as a suppo e o he an i-co ona i us
demons a ions. I amed i s esponse as eli e c i ique. So a , i s siding wi h he lockdown
p o es e s, howe e , has no had any posi i e e ec on suppo o he pa y.
Keywo ds: COVID-19; populism; poli ical pa ies; p ess eleases; A D
The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged nea ly e e y aspec o li e. By becoming
he domina ing issue in public discou se, i has supe seded issues a he co e o
populis adical igh (PRR) pa ies’ideology, dispossessing hem o one o hei
main na a i es. In a ma e o days he pandemic domina ed he policy agenda,
no only dep i ing PRRs o one o hei co e issues (mig a ion) bu also c ea ing
a dilemma o PRR pa ies in opposi ion on how o posi ion hemsel es wi h ega d
o wo o hei main cha ac e is ics: an i-eli ism and au ho i a ianism. As go e n-
men s we e aking ha d measu es, he PRR pa ies in opposi ion had o choose
be ween ei he c i icizing he go e nmen and he eby gi ing up on suppo ing
ha sh measu es o demanding such measu es bu he eby siding wi h he go e n-
men . This also challenged he Al e na i e o Ge many (A D), which has es ab-
lished i sel in he Ge man pa y sys em a e a long pe iod wi hou a success ul
PRR pa y. How did he A D eac o his unp eceden ed si ua ion and was he
pa y able o p o i om he c ises o did i lose suppo ?
© The Au ho (s), 2022. Published by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess on behal o Go e nmen and Opposi ion Limi ed. This
is an Open Access a icle, dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion licence (h ps://c ea i ecom-
mons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed e-use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided
he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
Go e nmen and Opposi ion (2024), 59, 1109–1127
doi:10.1017/go .2022.5
This a icle is pa o a special issue ha explo es how PRR pa ies eac ed o he
pandemic by means o single-coun y case s udies. He e, we look a he case o a
ela i ely young bu s ong PRR pa y in opposi ion. Fo ease o compa ison all a i-
cles in his special issue add ess he same h ee esea ch ques ions: How did he PRR
pa y espond o he pandemic (ques ion 1), how did i ame i (ques ion 2) and
wha e ec s did he pandemic ha e on i s popula i y (ques ion 3)?
A c isis equi es as and d as ic measu es. Thus, in such a si ua ion he ocus lies
on he execu i e, while he possible cou ses o ac ion o he opposi ion a e limi ed.
Especially a he beginning o he c isis, he main ques ion o opposi ion pa ies
was whe he o side wi h he go e nmen o o oppose i . Thei main ool o in lu-
ence in his si ua ion was how hey communica ed abou he c isis and how hey
amed he pandemic. The e o e, we s udy he A D’s esponse o and i s aming
o he pandemic, building on an analysis o he p ess eleases issued by he A D
and he pa y’s pa liamen a y g oup be ween Janua y 2020 and Ma ch 2021. We
ind ha a he beginning o he pandemic he A D ook he co ona i us e y se -
iously and demanded e en s ic e measu es. By la e Ap il, howe e , he pa y had
swi ched posi ions and c i icized he go e nmen o locking down he popula ion
a he cos o ci il igh s and an economic c isis. This posi ion s ayed qui e s able
o e he cou se o he pandemic, wi h he A D con inually demanding he eopen-
ing o shops, es au an s, ho els and so on, desc ibing masks as useless and essen-
ially c i icizing all measu es aken by he go e nmen o con ain he i us.
The ames he pa y used clea ly ollow PRR pa ies’co e ideology. In an
an i-eli is way i con inued o c i icize he go e nmen and expe s, who would ‘go -
e n like au oc a s’(A D 29.03.2021, B andne ) agains he people. In a na i is ash-
ion he A D published p ess eleases which desc ibed he i us as being b ough o
Ge many om o he coun ies and exp essed i s pleasu e ha ‘ he legend ha
Ge man bo de s could no be con olled …was now obsole e’(A D 21.01.2021,
Gauland).
1
Au ho i a ianism only played a ole a he beginning o he pandemic,
when he pa y had no ye ound i s posi ions wi h ega d o COVID-19 and ac ually
demanded s onge con ainmen measu es han he ones aken by he go e nmen .
Despi e he g owing numbe o co ona i us- ela ed p o es s, his policy supply
seems o no ha e had any posi i e e ec on suppo o he pa y. Vo e in en ion
o he A D d opped o below 10% a he s a o he pandemic and s ayed qui e
s able o he whole pe iod unde examina ion. One eason o his seems o be
he ‘ ally- ound- he- lag e ec ’(Muelle 1970), acco ding o which in imes o c isis
o e s u n o he pa ies in powe . E en when he p e iously con inuously high
suppo o he go e nmen and he measu es collapsed in 2021 (In a es dimap
2021: 8), i did no s ongly bene i he A D. These indings go agains he no ion
ha populis pa ies p o i om c ises (Mo i 2015; Pappas and K iesi 2016).
Howe e , his migh be due o he ac ha , i s , he possible eac ions o an oppos-
i ion pa y a e limi ed and ha , second, he A D could no p omo e wo o he
de ining a ibu es o he PRR. Issues connec ed o na i ism (such as mig a ion)
ha e no been as salien du ing he pandemic and, as he A D p esen ed i sel as
a de ende o eedom, he pa y could no ely on au ho i a ianism ei he . Being
le wi h populism only, his did no pay o in e ms o popula i y. As Cas
Mudde and C is óbal Ro i a Kal wasse (2017) ha e no ed, i is he combina ion
o na i ism, au ho i a ianism and populism which makes PRR pa ies success ul.
1110 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
Righ -wing populism in Ge many
Fo a long ime, Ge many was conside ed a ‘lagga d in in e na ional compa ison’
(Bebnowski 2015: 33) and a ‘la ge nega i e ou lie ’(A zheime 2015: 540), as no
igh -wing populis pa y had managed o es ablish i sel on he na ional le el.
Why his was he case is beyond he scope o his a icle (see, o example,
Decke 2008 and Dolezal 2008).
Wha is signi ican is ha his changed when he A D en e ed he poli ical scene
in 2013. O iginally he pa y’s ocus was on economic issues, bu his quickly chan-
ged. A i s , he A D de eloped om an an i-eli is , Eu oscep ic pa y o being a
‘ unc ional equi alen ’o a igh -wing populis pa y (Be bui e al. 2015: 174)
ha could ill his gap in Ge many (Häusle and Roese 2014), i he si ua ion
a ose. Such a ‘window o oppo uni y’(Caiani and G aziano 2019) p esen ed i sel
in 2015 wi h he so-called e ugee c isis, which caused he pa y o shi i s hema ic
ocus (F anzmann 2016; Lewandowsky e al. 2016) owa ds he h ee de ining a i-
bu es o he PRR: na i ism, populism and au ho i a ianism (Mudde 2007), now
undeniably u ning i in o a PRR. In he 2017 gene al elec ion, he A D ecei ed
12.6% o he o es and no only en e ed he Ge man pa liamen , bu also became
he bigges opposi ion pa y, he eby belonging o he g oup o PRR pa ies in
opposi ion analysed in his special issue.
Al hough he A D’s eac ions o he pandemic as an opposi ion pa y a e con-
s ained, i can un old i s ull po en ial as a PRR pa y by aming he pandemic
in ela ion o he h ee co e cha ac e is ics o he PRR’s ideology. He e we e ain
om discussing hese cha ac e is ics in de ail as hey ha e been p esen ed in
mo e leng h in he heo e ical amewo k o he in oduc o y con ibu ion o his
special issue (Ro i a Kal wasse and Tagga 2022). Ins ead we di ec ly apply
hem o he case o he A D, whe e hey apply in a ying in ensi y.
Na i ism, which desc ibes a o m o xenophobic na ionalism (Be z 2017) ha
‘subsumes acism, e hnocen ism, and an i-immig an sen imen ’(A zheime
2015: 537), has become a co e ea u e o he A D. E e y hing ha he pa y coun s
as non-na i e is seen as a h ea o he na ion s a e and i s homogenei y, claiming
ha he cul u al iden i y o immig an s, especially o hose om Muslim coun ies,
is incompa ible wi h Wes e n alues. Policies like closing bo de s and es ic ing
mig a ion a e he e o e suppo ed. Wi h his policy p o ile, he pa y exploi ed
he ac ha immig a ion domina ed he poli ical discou se in Ge many o qui e
some ime. The co ona i us c isis, howe e , shi ed a en ion om immig a ion
owa ds heal h and economic policies. As he A D has no issue owne ship in
hese ields, his ep esen s a challenging si ua ion o he pa y. We he e o e expec
he pa y o coun e ac his by aming he i us in na i is e ms and connec ing i
o immig a ion.
Populism as a ‘ hin-cen ed ideology’(Mudde 2004: 544) comes in o ull play in
connec ion wi h na i ism. The ‘pu e people’a e iden ical wi h he na i e Ge mans
only, while he people’s an agonis is po ayed as he ‘co up eli e’, which e e s o
ac o s on he na ional, in e na ional and EU le els. Since he pa y’s ounda ion,
c i icism o he eli e has played an impo an ole in he A D’s messaging: om c i-
ique o EU eli es o demonizing he Ge man go e nmen and Chancello Me kel
in he so-called ‘ e ugee c isis’(Rosen elde 2017). Wi h he s a o he COVID-19
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1111
c isis, public heal h au ho i ies (such as he Robe Koch Ins i u e (RKI) in
Ge many) as well as i ologis s and epidemiologis s ha e played an unp eceden ed
ole in in o ming and ad ising he Ge man go e nmen . Simul aneously, wi h he
leng hening du a ion o he pandemic, he popula i y o and suppo o measu es
like he lockdown ha e declined (In a es dimap 2021: 2). To c i icize hese scien-
i ic au ho i ies and he go e nmen is in line wi h he A D’s populis no ion and
one ha migh seem wo hwhile gi en he g owing dissa is ac ion wi h he mea-
su es. We he e o e p esume ha he pa y uses he pandemic o c i icize he go -
e nmen and i s handling o he c isis o a leas he same ex en as in imes be o e
COVID-19. Mo eo e , in line wi h he dec easing suppo o he measu es, he
longe he pandemic las ed, he s onge he a acks by he A D on he
es ablishmen .
Au ho i a ianism desc ibes he idea o a hie a chical no ion o socie y in which
adi ional alues a e he no m. Any de ia ion om his no m is supposed o be
se e ely punished. Au ho i a ianism is no an i-democ a ic pe se, bu a he illib-
e al, as i ejec s plu alism and mino i y igh s (Mudde 2007). The policy p o-
g amme o he A D s esses such au ho i a ian alues. The p o ec ion o
adi ional mo al alues especially plays an impo an ole in he A D’s p og amme,
which suppo s he conse a ion o adi ional amily alues, a gues o s ic d ug
policies and calls o a s eng hening o police o ces (Lehmann e al. 2019: 128–
130). The pandemic c ea ed a si ua ion in which na ional s a es, including
Ge many, adop ed ha sh measu es like closing bo de s and exe ing na ional so -
e eign y. As s eps had o be aken quickly, he Ge man go e nmen had pu i s
ocus on he ‘own’popula ion, be o e seeking in e na ional o a leas EU-wide
solu ions. Exe ing con ol and adop ing s ong es ic ions a e ypical au ho i a -
ian demands. Thus, in o he si ua ions he A D would demand ha he go e nmen
ac s mo e es ic i ely. Bu i he go e nmen akes his pa h i sel , he A D –as a
s ong opponen o he go e nmen –has o ake a di e en s and. I canno c i i-
cize he go e nmen and suppo i s ha sh measu es a he same ime. In his
unusual si ua ion, we an icipa e ha he A D –agains i s co e ideology –is p o-
mo ing less au ho i a ian measu es in o de o p esen i sel as he de ende o
‘ eedom’.
S udying he A D’s COVID-19 esponse in i s p ess eleases
Undoub edly he COVID-19 c isis has been an unp eceden ed si ua ion, challen-
ging he whole s a e and also he poli ical pa ies. While go e nmen pa ies quickly
had o ake measu es o con ain he i us and coun e ac i s impac on public
heal h and all o he a eas o public and p i a e li e, he possibili ies o opposi ion
pa ies o eac we e much na owe .
2
They could mainly impac he si ua ion by
how s ongly hey c i icized he go e nmen and by how hey amed he pandemic
i sel and he go e nmen measu es. An impo an aspec o he opposi ion’s eac-
ion can hus be cap u ed in how hey communica ed abou he c isis. A ele an
sou ce o a pa y’s communica ion s a egy a e i s p ess eleases. Pa ies use p ess
eleases o add ess he media di ec ly, and h ough ha he public (F anzmann
2016: 6). In con as o, o example, pa liamen a y speeches, pa ies do no ace
any cons ain s he e; hey can decide eely which issues o add ess and which o
1112 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
igno e and when and how o do his (Klü e and Saga zazu 2016: 386). A he same
ime his means ha p ess eleases only cap u e he message a pa y wan s o send;
hey a e no e lec ing each eac ion gi en in public appea ances by pa y o icials o
in he speeches by A D pa liamen a ians. In addi ion, p ess eleases a e published
h oughou he whole yea and hus allow us o s udy how a pa y eac s o a ce ain
si ua ion o e ime.
In his s udy we he e o e use he A D’s p ess eleases o analyse how he A D
eac ed o he pandemic o e ime and how i amed he poli ics o he pandemic.
We collec ed all p ess eleases issued by he pa y headqua e s and he pa liamen-
a y g oup in he Bundes ag be ween Janua y 2020 and Ma ch 2021.
3
In o al he e
a e 2,059 p ess eleases; 1,504 o hem published by he pa liamen a y g oup and
555 by he pa y.
4
To s udy he A D’s esponse o COVID-19 and he go e nmen measu es, we
manually coded he main ocus o each p ess elease. To do his we de eloped a
ca ego y scheme speci ying 19 policy opics and a esiduals ca ego y (see
Table 1). The ca ego y scheme was c ea ed induc i ely. We s a ed by clus e ing
Table 1. Saliency o Topics in A D P ess Releases be ween Janua y 2020 and Ma ch 2021
Topic NSha e (%)
COVID-19 measu es 310 15.06
Mig a ion, asylum and in eg a ion 175 8.50
Ex e nal ela ions 143 6.95
In e pa y dispu e 132 6.41
EU 130 6.31
Islam and iden i y poli ics 127 6.17
Democ acy and ule o law (incl. co up ion) 115 5.59
Law and o de 112 5.44
Economy and COVID 96 4.66
Heal h and social secu i y 91 4.42
Ene gy and clima e 86 4.18
Ag icul u e 82 3.98
Economy and labou 74 3.59
Women, gende and amily 64 3.11
Vaccina ion 55 2.67
Sel - ic imiza ion 53 2.57
Public se ice b oadcas ing and media c i ique 52 2.53
Finance 42 2.04
T anspo 31 1.51
Residuals ( opics appea ing in ewe han 15 p ess eleases) 89 4.32
To al 2059 100.00
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1113
all p ess eleases in o 15 g oups wi h he help o a opic model. Based on hese clus-
e s we de e mined he main unde lying opics, which se ed as he s a ing poin
o ou coding scheme. Howe e , we decided o spli some o hese ca ego ies. Fo
example, we di ided he ca ego y ‘economy and COVID’in o one ca ego y ha
deal wi h all p ess eleases ha speci ically ocused on he impac o COVID-19
and he go e nmen measu es on he economy and a second ca ego y ha
subsumed p ess eleases ha made s a emen s on economic issues wi hou any e -
e ence o he pandemic. Finally, we also added a ‘ esiduals’ca ego y o all p ess
eleases ha did no i in o any o he exis ing ca ego ies. Equipped wi h his ca -
ego y scheme, we manually coded all p ess eleases.
The A D and he pandemic: eac ions and ames
In his sec ion we will i s use he quan i a i e coding esul s o analyse how
COVID-19 and he go e nmen measu es ha e in luenced he A D’s policy agenda
o e di e en phases o he pandemic, and hen we will look a he p ess eleases in
mo e de ail o s udy which measu es and eac ions he A D p oposed in ligh o he
pandemic and o illus a e i and how he pa y applied he ypical PRR ames o
he pandemic.
5
Wi h his h ee-s ep p ocess we keep zooming in, s a ing wi h he
analysis o how he o e all policy agenda was a ec ed by COVID-19, hen looking
a he speci ic answe s o he pandemic and inally he ames he A D used o
hese answe s.
Ou analysis is s uc u ed along i e phases: a p e-COVID-19 phase (Janua y–
Feb ua y 2020), a i s wa e (Ma ch–mid-May 2020), summe (mid-May–
mid-Sep embe 2020), a second wa e (mid-Sep embe 2020–mid-Feb ua y 2021),
and a hi d wa e (mid-Feb ua y–end o Ma ch 2021). We iden i ied hese phases
based on he numbe o COVID-19 cases (Figu e 1) and COVID- ela ed dea hs
(Figu e B1 in he Online Appendix).
6
P e-COVID
The mos dominan opic in he p e-COVID phase is ‘in e pa y dispu e’– ha
is, p ess eleases which mo e o less ocused on c i icizing he es ablished pa ies
(Figu e 2), a ocus mainly d i en by p ess eleases om he pa y headqua e s.
This opic clea ly eeds in o he populis na a i e. The second mos impo an
opic in his phase is ‘mig a ion, asylum and in eg a ion’–a opic a he co e
o he PRR ideology aligning wi h na i is iews. While he i s co ona i us
case in Ge many was epo ed on 27 Janua y 2020, he i s ime he A D men-
ioned he co ona i us was in a p ess elease om 13 Feb ua y, one day a e a
deba e in pa liamen on ma e s o opical in e es (Ak uelle S unde), which
was called by he go e ning coali ion o he Ch is ian Democ a ic Union/
Ch is ian Social Union (CDU/CSU) and he Social Democ a ic Pa y (SPD).
7
The A D desc ibed he dange s o he i us and called o ‘con ols and e ec i e
measu es agains u he sp ead’and e en sugges ed a ‘wo ldwide ac ion plan’,
bu also c i icized he ‘i esponsible dependence [o Ge many] on Asian manu-
ac u e s’ ega ding pha maceu ical p oduc s (A D 13.02.2020, Spangenbe g/
Schlund).
8
While he pa y he e akes he i us and he consequences o a
1114 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
wo ldwide sp ead se iously, i also shi s he a en ion o ano he issue, namely
Ge many’s dependence on o he coun ies, which i s in o he populis ame
o a s ong, independen na ion s a e.
Figu e 1. Daily COVID-19 Cases: Ma ch 2020–Ma ch 2021 in Ge many
Sou ce: Da a om Robe Koch Ins i u e.
No e: Ba g aph displays he daily COVID-19 cases, line g aph displays he weekly mean.
Figu e 2. The Th ee Mos Impo an Topics in A D P ess Releases, pe Phase
No e: Mig a ion includes asylum and in eg a ion.
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1115
Fi s wa e
By Ma ch, he numbe o cases s a ed o inc ease quickly (Figu e 1); as a conse-
quence he go e nmen s a ed aking s ic e con ainmen measu es which,
acco ding o he Go e nmen Response T acke om he Uni e si y o Ox o d,
eached a high pla eau om he end o Ma ch h ough o Ap il (Figu e 3). The
da a ack he measu es go e nmen s all o e he wo ld ha e aken o coun e ac
he COVID-19 c isis. Repo ed he e is he s ingency index, which is buil om
eigh con ainmen indica o s.
The wo mos impo an opics in he p ess eleases a his ime a e he
‘COVID-19 measu es’, ollowed by ‘economy and COVID’(Figu e 2). In hi d
place we ind ‘mig a ion, asylum and in eg a ion’. In conjunc ion his shows ha
e en hough he A D’s co e issues lie in o he ields, he pa y needs o eac o
changes on he poli ical agenda. Once COVID-19 had cap u ed he agenda, he
A D, oo, u ned i s ocus o hese issues. None heless i also con inually ied o
pu i s co e issue on he agenda, which was mo e o less elimina ed om public
discou se a he ime.
A pa y sea ching o i s posi ion: unse led be ween s ic measu es and ci il libe ies
While, as jus shown, he COVID-19 measu es domina ed he A D’s agenda, he
pa y needed some ime o de ine i s posi ion on hese issues. In he beginning,
he A D esponded o he ising numbe s by ecommenda ions ‘ o cancel all public
pa y e en s ha a e no absolu ely necessa y o p e en ion easons un il u he
no ice’(A D 04.03.2020a), demanding ha schools should be closed, wa ning
abou consequences he pandemic migh ha e o he Ge man economy, explici ly
s a ing ha ‘ he ou b eak o he co ona i us is no longe only a heal h c isis’(A D
04.03.2020b, Schielke-Ziesing/Pohl). Howe e , he A D’s posi ion owa ds he
Figu e 3. Go e nmen S ingency Index in Ge many
Sou ce: Da a om Hale e al. (2021).
1116 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
Ch upalla asked whe he his was ‘a s uc u al p oblem wi hin he Union’(A D
08.03.2021, Ch upalla).
The A D’s popula i y
Ou analysis o he A D’s p ess eleases demons a ed ha he A D’smains a egy
du ing he pandemic was o c i icize he go e nmen and i s measu es, ying o po -
ay i sel as he only de ende o eedom igh s. Bu did his communica ion s a egy
pay o o he A D in e ms o popula i y among he Ge man popula ion? To assess
his, we ely on mon hly epo ed o e in en ion da a (so-called Sonn ags age) om
he Allensbach Ins i u e (I D 2021). Figu e 4 clea ly shows he ‘ ally- ound- he- lag
e ec ’(Muelle 1970) o he Ge man go e nmen in 2020. While in Ma ch 2020
suppo o he CDU/CSU, Chancello Me kel’s pa y, was a ound 29%, i ose o
38% in Ap il and May and e en c acked 40% in June. Suppo a es d opped sligh ly
he ea e , bu wi h 37% epo ed in Decembe , his was s ill signi ican ly mo e han
be o e he pandemic. This inc ease o almos one- hi d is excep ional: ‘no o he go -
e ning pa y came e en close o hese numbe s’(Wond eys and Mudde 2020:7).
Howe e , he si ua ion d as ically changed in Ma ch 2021, when he public became
inc easingly impa ien wi h he slow accina ion oll-ou , scandals abou ‘mask deals’
became public (Ol e man 2021) and he hi d wa e commenced. In succession he
a es o he CDU/CSU d opped o 28.5%.
The junio pa ne in he g and coali ion, he SPD, had om he s a no bene-
i ed om he ally- ound- he- lag e ec o he same ex en . In ac , es ima ed o es
inc eased only sligh ly by a ound 2–3 pe cen age poin s om 14.5% in Feb ua y
and s ayed on his pla eau o he whole pe iod unde examina ion. This is in
line wi h he ‘almos in isible [e ec ] o junio coali ion pa ies’(Wond eys and
Mudde 2020: 7).
Figu e 4. Sonn ags age Allensbach
Sou ce: Da a om Allensbach Ins i u e, Sonn ags age.
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1123
Being he bigges opposi ion pa y in Ge many, he A D is he ha shes de ac o
o he go e nmen e en in non-pandemic imes. Be o e he pandemic hi Ge many,
he A D was con inually es ima ed o win be ween 13% and 15% o he o es i an
elec ion we e o ake place nex Sunday, bu by Ap il 2020 suppo had d opped o
9% and ose only sligh ly a e ha , culmina ing in a esul o jus abo e 10% a he
ede al elec ion in Sep embe 2021.
10
In ha sense, he A D can be seen as one o
he ‘ ic ims o he pandemic’(Wond eys and Mudde 2020), a leas in e ms o
elec o al suppo .
This is an in e es ing inding, because e en hough suppo o he go e nmen
was high h oughou mos pa s o he pandemic, he e has also been inc easing
dissa is ac ion wi h he go e nmen , c ea ing a ese oi o po en ial A D o e s.
To cap u e he size o his p o es po en ial and o s udy why he A D was no
able o make be e use o i we d aw on da a om he Moni o ing Sys em and
T ans e Pla o m Radicaliza ion (MOTRA) p ojec (G ande e al. 2021).
11
The MOTRA su ey da a (G ande e al. 2021) e eal ha no all p o es e s a e
necessa ily po en ial A D suppo e s. Among hose who show unde s anding o
he p o es s (P o es e s ehe ), iden i ica ion wi h he A D is highes (25.8% on
a e age) and has inc eased o e ime (up o 30.2% in No embe 2020). While in
compa ison o he o he pa ies his is a high numbe , i also means ha a ound
70% o he p o es e s a e no (ye ) A D o e s, and because o he high di e si y
o p o es e s i emains unclea whe he he A D will e e be able o win hei sup-
po . The common denomina o among he co ona i us p o es e s is a s ong dis us
owa ds he ede al go e nmen s as well as conce ns abou he es ic ions o ee-
dom. So a he A D has no been able o use his dissa is ac ion o mobilize mo e
suppo o he pa y. Howe e , due o he suscep ibili y o conspi acy heo ies, a
conside able po en ial o adicaliza ion owa ds he ex eme igh exis s, which
migh also o e an inc eased o e po en ial o he A D.
Conclusion
When he COVID-19 c isis hi Ge many, he A D was s ill a e y young PRR pa y.
Founded in 2013, i had only en e ed he Ge man Bundes ag o he i s ime a he
p e ious elec ion. The pa y had gained mos o i s suppo in he so-called ‘ e ugee
c isis’in 2015 and had since hen ocused on he immig a ion issue, playing a na i -
is ca d, i s policy p og amme scaled high on he au ho i a ian dimension, and in
all i s s a emen s i s ood ou as he s onges opponen o he go e nmen .
The COVID-19 c isis imposed a clea challenge o he pa y, as i no only sup-
p essed i s main issue, immig a ion, bu also c ea ed con lic be ween he o he wo
ames he pa y had so a elied on: eli e c i ique and au ho i a ianism. In his
a icle we ha e s udied how he A D eac ed o his challenge and whe he and
how i managed o apply he co e ames o PRR pa ies o he pandemic.
We s udied he A D’s esponse o he pandemic based on i s p ess eleases issued
be ween Janua y 2020 and Ma ch 2021. By looking a he p ess eleases we ocused
ou analysis on he pa y’s s a egically chosen communica ion s a egy. As a PRR
pa y in opposi ion he A D’s possibili ies o eac ion we e limi ed, mo i a ing ou
decision o s udy i s o icial communica ions s a egy, bu he choice o p ess
eleases as he p ima y da a sou ce does no come wi hou limi a ions ei he .
1124 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
While his communica ion channel can be used wi hou ex e nal cons ain s, he A D
and i s pa liamen a ians also posi ioned hemsel es in u he a enas. Fu u e s udies
should also look a he communica i e ( e-)ac ions o PRR pa ies on social media and
in pa liamen o ge an encompassing pic u e o he PRR no only in imes o a pan-
demic, bu du ing c ises mo e gene ally. Howe e , we belie e ha his s udy o he
A D’s o icial communica ion is an impo an pa o his pic u e.
The analysis has shown us ha he ames he A Dused odesc ibe he pandemica e
clea ly connec ed o he de ining a ibu es o he PRR, which played a dis inc ole in
he pa y’s communica ion and we e used o di e en ex en s a a ious poin s in ime.
Since one o i s co e issues, mig a ion, was nea ly elimina ed om public discou se, i
ied o ind o he ways o exp ess i s na i is s ances by aming he pandemic, how
i de eloped, and how i should be o e come in his way. In an an i-eli e ashion, he
A D s ongly c i icized he go e nmen ’s handling o he pandemic, disc edi ing i s
measu es as ‘unlaw ul’and dange ous and opposing nea ly all co ona i us measu es
aken by he go e nmen . In imes o s ay-a -home ecommenda ions and manda o y
ace masks in supe ma ke s o public buildings, he A D demanded mo e eedom
igh s and c i icized o he s as being oo au ho i a ian, while –in non-pandemic
imes –being an au ho i a ian pa y i sel .
The ac ha he A D could no ely on wo o i s main co e ea u es, na i ism
and au ho i a ianism, le he PRR pa y in opposi ion wi h populism only. In
e ms o popula i y his has no won he A D conside able o e suppo . While
opinion polls saw A D suppo a ound 13% be o e he pandemic, suppo d opped
below 10% in Ap il 2020 and s ayed he e o he es o 2020 and he beginning o
2021. As he sel -p oclaimed de ende o eedom, he A D could no p o i om
he c isis –e en when sa is ac ion wi h he go e nmen was low –which is in
line wi h he assessmen ha he key o PRR success is he combina ion o he
h ee de ining ea u es (Mudde and Kal wasse 2017).
Supplemen a y ma e ial. The supplemen a y ma e ial o his a icle can be ound a h ps://doi.o g/10.
1017/go .2022.5.
Acknowledgemen s. Fo esea ch assis ance and p oo eading we wan o hank Juliane Hanel, Leonie
Schwich enbe g and Leila an Rinsum. We a e also e y g a e ul o aluable commen s by C is óbal
Ro i a Kal wasse , Paul Tagga and h ee anonymous e iewe s. Thei commen s s ongly helped imp o e
he pape . We g a e ully acknowledge inancial suppo ecei ed om he Ge man Resea ch Founda ion
(DFG) in he con ex o he long- e m unding o he Mani es o Resea ch P ojec on Poli ical
Rep esen a ion (MARPOR).
No es
1Online Appendix A lis s all he p ess eleases wi h hei ull sou ce in o ma ion. See also no e 3 below.
2He e i is impo an o no e ha he A D was he only ‘pu e’opposi ion pa y in Ge many a he ime, as
all o he pa ies we e, a leas on he Lände le el, pa o one o mo e go e nmen (s).
3The p ess eleases ha e been sc aped om he websi es o he A D (www.a d.de/p esse/) and he A D’s
pa liamen a y g oup (www.a dbundes ag.de/p essemi eilungen/). The sc aping ook place be ween 2 and
11 Feb ua y 2021 ( o he p ess eleases om 2020) and on 12 Ap il 2021 ( o he p ess eleases om
2021). I we di ec ly e e o a speci ic p ess eleases in he analysis, we ci e i by p esen ing da e and au ho .
Online Appendix A lis s all hese p ess eleases wi h hei ull sou ce in o ma ion.
4We excluded 74 p ess eleases, because hey did no con ain any in o ma ion abou when hey we e
published.
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1125
5When speaking o ames he e, we e e o he concep o ‘emphasis ames’, whe e ac o s s ess o pu
emphasis on speci ic aspec s o a ce ain opic and he eby in luence i s pe cep ion (D uckman 2001;
Nelson e al. 1997).
6The sou ce we ely on o his da a is he Robe Koch Ins i u e. This is he Ge man ede al agency
esponsible o in ec ious diseases. I publishes he o icial da a on COVID-19 cases and COVID- ela ed
dea hs (Robe Koch Ins i u e 2021).
7www.bundes ag.de/en/pa liamen / unc ion/sc u iny/ins umen s_sc u iny-245710.
8All quo es om he p ess eleases ha e been ansla ed by he au ho s.
9A he ime o w i ing, a manda o y accina ion is being discussed –which is, howe e , no he same as
o ced accina ion.
10 I mus be no ed, hough, ha A D suppo migh ha e also been a ec ed by se e al decisions by
he Fede al O ice o he P o ec ion o he Cons i u ion (Bundes e assungsschu z), which decided o
classi y he A D-subo ganiza ion ‘De Flügel’as a igh -wing ex emis endea ou and o upg ade i
om a suspec ed case o a classic objec o obse a ion in Ma ch 2020 (www. e assungsschu z.de/de/
oe en lichkei sa bei /p esse/pm-20200312-b -s u -a d- eilo ganisa ion-de - luegel-als-gesiche - ech sex emis ische-
bes ebung-ein). In Ma ch 2021 he whole pa y was hen decla ed a ‘suspec ed case’(Diehl e al. 2021), a
decision ha was, howe e , suspended by he Cologne adminis a i e cou only a ew days la e (Deu sche
Welle 2021). A he ime o w i ing, no inal decision has been made (Tagesschau 2021).
11 Thei s udy i s p esen s in o ma ion abou p o es s ha ook place in Ge many, he numbe o pa i-
cipan s as well as he hema ic ocus o hese p o es s, and second he esul s o a ep esen a i e na ionwide
su ey among mo e han 5,000 esponden s wi h ques ions abou he co ona i us demons a ions. The
eigh su ey wa es we e ca ied ou be ween June and No embe 2020.
Re e ences
A zheime K (2015) The A D: Finally a Success ul Righ -Wing Populis Eu oscep ic Pa y o Ge many?
Wes Eu opean Poli ics 38(3), 535–556. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01402382.2015.1004230.
Bebnowski D (2015) Die Al e na i e ü Deu schland: Au s ieg und Gesellscha liche Rep äsen anz Eine
Rech en Populis ischen Pa ei. Weisbaden: VS Ve lag ü Sozialwissenscha en.
Be bui N, Lewandowsky M and Si i J (2015) The A D and I s Sympa hise s: Finally a Righ -Wing
Populis Mo emen in Ge many? Ge man Poli ics 24(2), 154–178. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09644008.
2014.982546.
Be z H-G (2017) Na i ism ac oss Time and Space. Swiss Poli ical Science Re iew 23(4), 335–353. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1111/sps .12260.
Caiani M and G aziano P (2019) Unde s anding Va ie ies o Populism in Times o C ises. Wes Eu opean
Poli ics 42(6), 1141–1158. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01402382.2019.1598062.
Decke F (2008) Ge many: Righ -Wing Populis Failu es and Le -Wing Successes. In Albe azzi D and
McDonnell D (eds), Twen y-Fi s Cen u y Populism: The Spec e o Wes e n Eu opean Democ acy.
London: Palg a e Macmillan, pp. 119–134.
Deu sche Welle (2021) Ge man Cou Suspends Su eillance o Fa -Righ A D, o Now. DW.com. www.
dw.com/en/ge man-cou -suspends-su eillance-o - a - igh -a d- o -now/a-56785125.
Diehl J, Mülle A-K, Siemens A and Wiedmann-Schmid W (2021) Ge man O icials Seek o Tu n Up
he Hea on he A D. Spiegel, 5 Ma ch. www.spiegel.de/in e na ional/ge many/moni o ing- he- igh -
wing-ge man-o icials-seek- o- u n-up- he-hea -on- he-a d-a-c44c0a38-ee6b-4dc1-ac94–9 bee59b706 .
Dolezal M (2008) Ge many: The Dog Tha Didn’ Ba k. In G ande E e al. (eds), Wes Eu opean Poli ics in
he Age o Globaliza ion. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, pp. 208–234.
D uckman JN (2001) The Implica ions o F aming E ec s o Ci izen Compe ence. Poli ical Beha io
23(3), 225–256. h ps://doi.o g/10.1023/A:1015006907312.
F anzmann ST (2016) Calling he Ghos o Populism: The A D’s S a egic and Tac ical Agendas un il he
EP Elec ion 2014. Ge man Poli ics 25(4), 457–479. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09644008.2016.1201075.
G ande E e al. (2021) Alles Co ididio en? Poli ische Po enziale des Co ona-P o es s in Deu schland. Be lin:
WZB Wissenscha szen um Be lin ü Sozial o schung.
Hale T e al. (2021) A Global Panel Da abase o Pandemic Policies (Ox o d COVID-19 Go e nmen
Response T acke ). Na u e Human Beha iou 5(4), 529–538. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1038/s41562-021-
01079-8.
1126 Pola Lehmann and Lisa Zehn e
Häusle A and Roese R (2014) Rech spopulismus in Eu opa und die Rech spopulis ische Lücke in
Deu schland. E u : Mobi e.V.
I D Allensbach (2021) Sonn ags age. www.i d-allensbach.de/s udien-und-be ich e/sonn ags age/gesam .
h ml.
In a es dimap (2021) ARD Deu schland end Ap il 2021. www.in a es -dimap.de/um agen-analysen/
bundeswei /a d-deu schland end/2021/ap il/.
Klü e H and Saga zazu I (2016) Se ing he Agenda o Responding o Vo e s? Poli ical Pa ies, Vo e s
and Issue A en ion. Wes Eu opean Poli ics 39(2), 380–398. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01402382.2015.
1101295.
Lehmann P, Ma hieß T and Regel S (2019) Rech s De Ande en: Themen und Posi ionen De AFD im
Pa eienwe bewe b. In Sch öde W and Weßels B (eds), Sma e Spa le : Die A D Zwischen Bewegung
und Pa lamen . Bonn: Ve lag J.H.W. Die z Nach , pp. 122–143.
Lewandowsky M, Gieble H and Wagne A (2016) Rech spopulismus in Deu schland: Eine Empi ische
Eino dnung de Pa eien zu Bundes agswahl 2013 Un e Besonde e Be ücksich igung de A D. PVS
Poli ische Vie eljah essch i 57(2), 247–275. h ps://doi.o g/10.5771/0032-3470-2016-2-247.
Mo i B (2015) How o Pe o m C isis: A Model o Unde s anding he Key Role o C isis in
Con empo a y Populism. Go e nmen and Opposi ion: An In e na ional Jou nal o Compa a i e
Poli ics 50(2), 189–217. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1017/go .2014.13.
Mudde C (2004) The Populis Zei geis . Go e nmen and Opposi ion: An In e na ional Jou nal o
Compa a i e Poli ics 39(4), 541–563. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x.
Mudde C (2007) Populis Radical Righ Pa ies in Eu ope. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Mudde C and Kal wasse CR (2017) Populism: A Ve y Sho In oduc ion. Ox o d and New Yo k: Ox o d
Uni e si y P ess.
Muelle JE (1970) P esiden ial Popula i y om T uman o Johnson. Ame ican Poli ical Science Re iew
64(1), 18–34. h ps://doi.o g/10.2307/1955610.
Nelson TE, Oxley ZM and Clawson RA (1997) Towa d a Psychology o F aming E ec s. Poli ical Beha io
19(3), 221–246. h ps://doi.o g/10.1023/A:1024834831093.
Ol e man P (2021) Co up ion Claims Th ea en o Damage Ge many’s CDU Pa y. Gua dian, 9 Ma ch.
www. hegua dian.com/wo ld/2021/ma /09/co up ion-claims- h ea en- o-damage-ge manys-cdu-pa y.
Pappas TS and K iesi H (2016) Populism and C isis: A Fuzzy Rela ionship. In Pappas TS and K iesi H
(eds), Eu opean Populism in he Shadow o he G ea Recession. Colches e : ECPR P ess, pp. 303–325.
Robe Koch Ins i u e (2021) Gesam übe sich de p o Tag ans RKI übe mi el en Fälle, Todes älle
und 7-Tage-Inzidenzen nach Bundesland und Landk eis. www. ki.de/DE/Con en /In AZ/N/Neua iges_
Co ona i us/Da en/Fallzahlen_Da en.h ml;jsessionid=978B5D8D50548D80F2BED5B40C3D9D83.in e -
ne 122?nn=2386228.
Rosen elde J (2017) Die P og amma ik De A D: Inwie e n Ha Sie Sich on Eine P imä
Eu oskep ischen Zu Eine Rech spopulis ischen Pa ei En wickel ? Zei sch i Fü Pa lamen s agen
48(1), 123–140. h ps://doi.o g/10.5771/0340-1758-2017-1-123.
Ro i a Kal wasse C and Tagga P (2022) The Populis Radical Righ and he Pandemic. Go e nmen and
Opposi ion: An In e na ional Jou nal o Compa a i e Poli ics. Fo hcoming.
Tagesschau (2021) Kein U eil zu A D o Bundes agswahl. Tagesschau.de, 8 July. www. agesschau.de/
inland/b w21/ e assungsschu z-klage-bundes agswahl-a d-101.h ml.
Wond eys J and Mudde C (2020) Vic ims o he Pandemic? Eu opean Fa -Righ Pa ies and COVID-19.
Na ionali ies Pape s, published ea ly online, Oc obe . h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/nps.2020.93.
Ci e his a icle: Lehmann P, Zehn e L (2024). The Sel -P oclaimed De ende o F eedom: The A D and
he Pandemic. Go e nmen and Opposi ion: An In e na ional Jou nal o Compa a i e Poli ics 59,
1109–1127. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/go .2022.5
Go e nmen and Opposi ion 1127
