The article discusses the current crisis in democracy, focusing on how the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) benefits from various controversies and scandals, whether they involve corruption, internal conflicts, or anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. Despite these issues, the AfD maintains its support base, suggesting that traditional democratic mechanisms are ineffective against far-right movements. The author argues that right-wing parties like the AfD do not need to adhere to democratic norms because they embody the very rejection of those norms. Examples from other countries, such as Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and Giorgia Meloni, are used to illustrate how right-wing leaders can engage in unethical behavior while still retaining public support. The piece suggests that neoliberalism has rendered democracy obsolete in the eyes of these leaders, who prioritize economic interests over societal needs.
Bias read (Progressive): The article strongly criticizes the AfD and other far-right parties, portraying them as threats to democracy and using loaded language such as 'Nazi-Parolen' and 'Faschismus.' It frames their actions as inherently undemocratic and highlights the failure of democratic institutions to hold them back.
Why factuality (85): The article discusses the rise of the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) and its impact on democracy, citing examples of right-wing behavior and political dynamics. While no primary source is available, the claims align with broader media narratives about the AfD's influence and the challenges to dem
Why objectivity (60): The tone is strongly critical of the AfD and right-wing politics, using emotionally charged language such as 'Nazi-Parolen' and 'Schlägertrupps.' The article frames the situation as a crisis of democracy and suggests that left-wing resistance is ineffective, showing a clear ideological bias towards




