A Century of Thuringian Elections: Is history repeating?

This political upheaval comes at a time when dissatisfaction with both federal and state governments is at an all-time high. According to the 2023 Thuringia Monitor, a survey that tracks polit-ical attitudes in the state, trust in government has eroded significantly. Only 17% of Thuringians express confidence in the federal government, and just 30% trust their state government. More-over, the Monitor reports a worrying increase of 19% in right-wing extremist attitudes (KUM-REX, 2023).

The AfD capitalised on this dissatisfaction, focusing its campaign on limiting immigration and criticising the government’s policies on climate protection and diversity. Leading the charge was AfD candidate Björn Höcke, who proposed a controversial five-point plan aimed at reshaping Thuringia’s political and social landscape. His plan included ending climate protection initiatives and cutting funding for pro-democracy and anti-extremism programmes (Tagesschau, 2024b). Such positions find resonance with a substantial portion of the electorate, raising concerns about the future of democratic governance in the region. It shows that over 30 percent of the Thuringians support antidemocratic practices. Moreover, Thuringia historically faces a left against right political sphere, which makes both sides extremely polarised and dangerous. So, how can history help us to understand how we reached this point, and what could the possible consequences of this rising right-wing powers be?

Thuringia 100 Years Ago: The “Schicksalswahl” of 1924

A century earlier, Thuringia found itself at a similar crossroad. In February 1924, the state held an election that would later be remembered as a “Schicksalswahl” – a fateful moment in Germany’s political history. Much like the election in 2024, the 1924 vote marked a pivotal shift toward right-wing extremism.

At that time, the conservative coalition, Thüringer Ordnungsbund, won 48% of the vote but fell just short of an outright majority. This left them dependent on smaller parties to form a government. It was the Vereinigte Völkische Liste (VVL), a far-right party that garnered 9% of the vote, that became the key to the coalition’s success. The VVL, which included members of the then-banned NSDAP (Nazi Party), leveraged its newfound influence to push for the lifting of the Nazi ban. This move had dire consequences, as it marked the first time in Germany’s history that a regional government was dependent on the support of far-right extremists. Thuringia quickly became a Nazi stronghold, or “Mustergau,” serving as a platform for the party’s national resurgence. By 1926, the Nazis held their first national congress in Weimar, solidifying their foothold in the region. What began as a regional political shift soon escalated into a national crisis, ultimately leading to the Nazi takeover of Germany in 1933 (Rosa-Luxembourg-Stiftung, 2024).

Echoes of the Past: Similarities Between 1924 and 2024

Voting Left-Wing Parties Out: Both in 1924 and 2024, a significant factor in Thuringia’s elec-tions has been the rejection of left-leaning parties. In 1924, the polarisation between the conservative right and the socialist left led to the exclusion of the latter from meaningful govern-ance. In 2024, we see similar dynamics, the goal of the AfD and the conservative parties was to lower left power, which indeed followed the left-wing parties suffering major losses, echoing the political shifts of the past (Pawelskus, 2011).

Conflict Between Parties: In both periods, intense party conflict prevented effective coalition building, particularly between the conservative and leftist factions. In 1924, the conservative Ordnungsbund found itself reliant on far-right extremists to form a government, laying the groundwork for the Nazis’ eventual rise. The division of factions, with no room for compromise, accelerated

the political extremism that followed (Rosa-Luxembourg-Stiftung, 2024). In 2024, the environment in Thuringia reflects similar tensions, with the CDU not able to collate with the Left party, further complicating the coalition building (CDU, 2020).

Polarisation: Following the above mentioned, one of the most alarming similarities between 1924 and 2024 is the extreme political polarisation. In both instances, the right-wing camp has capitalised on the electorate’s frustration with the established order. Voters who feel disenfranchised by mainstream parties are drawn to radical alternatives. In 1924, this polarisation created a scenario where the conservative parties had no choice but to depend on the Nazi-aligned factions. Today, we are not yet at this point, but the polarisation once again creates a fertile ground for extremism.

Language: A clear parallel can be drawn between the use of extreme language, which has played a pivotal role in both eras to motivate and embolden supporters. In 1924, the Weimarische Zeitung (1924) wrote: “The outcome of the Thuringian elections is both gratifying and valid proof of the strengthening of national and ethnic ideas in all sections of the population […] Now we must not rest and not relax, for we are only at the beginning. The completion, the final victory of the German will to live, has yet to be fought for.”

This rallying cry reflects the nationalist and racial ideologies gaining traction at the time. Similarly, in 2024, AfD leader Björn Höcke declared after the election: “The AfD has proven that it is both the people’s opposition and the people’s party.” – Björn Höcke 2024 and “Nobody will get past us anymore.”

The rhetoric in both instances reflects a push toward legitimising far-right ideologies by framing them as the will of the people. The normalisation of such language shifts the boundaries of acceptable discourse, allowing previously unthinkable ideas to become mainstream. In both eras this method was used by the far-right parties to extend “what can be said” towards their direction (MDR, 2024b).

The Idea of Disenchantment: The disenchantment strategy, which attempted to demystify the allure of far-right ideologies, did not succeed in 1924. In 2024 right-wing politicians are still being given the possibility to present themselves in the media and discourse. In both periods, mainstream political parties and intellectuals believed that they could neutralise extremist ideas by engaging with them in open debate or by exposing their flaws. However, instead of weakening these movements, such approaches often gave them more visibility, allowing them to grow stronger and gain more traction among the public.

Fake News and Conspiracy Theories: Both eras saw the widespread use of fake news and conspiracy theories to manipulate public opinion and sow distrust in democratic institutions. In the 1920s, antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish elites controlling global affairs helped fuel the rise of the Nazis. In 2024, the AfD and its supporters similarly promote narratives about “globalist elites” and secretive powers (Jüdisches Forum für Demokratie und Gegen Antisemitismus, 2022), tapping into the same vein of fear and distrust that characterised the Weimar era. This persistent narrative of a looming threat and a society in decline helps create a sense of urgency, making the electorate more susceptible to far-right ideologies and promises of national rejuvenation.

Culture: The battle for cultural dominance is another significant similarity between the two eras. In 1924, conservative-nationalist forces in Thuringia began systematically undermining progressive cultural movements like the Bauhaus, cutting their funding and stripping them of political support. This shift was part of a broader effort to recast Thuringia as a bastion of traditional German values, free from what was seen as foreign or modernist influences. Similarly, in 2024, the AfD is waging its own cultural plans, advocating for policies that limit funding for anti-extremism programmes, cancel the public media channel MDR and reduce support for diversity initiatives. By doing so, they seek to reshape Thuringia’s cultural landscape in a way that echoes the nationalist and ethnic ideologies of the past (Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung, 2024).

Springboard for Right-Wing Power:  Thuringia has historically served as a springboard for far-right ideologies. In 1924, the region became a “Mustergau” (model district) for the Nazis, a place where they

could test their strategies before rolling them out across the country. The political culture that developed in Thuringia during this period laid the groundwork for the Nazi’s eventual national takeover in 1933. In 2024, we see Thuringia once again becoming a testing ground for far-right ideologies. The AfD’s rise in this state could serve as a template for its broader national ambitions, just as Thuringia served as the Nazi’s foothold a century ago (MDR, 2024b).

Differences: Distinct Challenges and Responses

Higher Numbers but Not in Government: Despite discomfort among some coalition partners in 1924, extremists were allowed to influence the governance on a high level. In 2024, the AfD, while achieving a significant electoral victory and becoming the strongest force in the state parliament, has not entered government nor does it influence it besides remaining in the opposition. This is a status that limits its power but still enables it to shape the political conversation and exert considerable influence. This is known as “Oppositionsmacht”, power derived from opposition. Unlike in 1924, where there were more far-right parties and coalitions that fragmented the political scene, the AfD today is a unified force on the far-right.

While the AfD holds substantial power, it has not yet crossed into full governmental power, protected by what has been referred to as a “Brandmauer” (firewall) that mainstream parties have built to prevent cooperation with the far right. This is a key difference from the past when such a wall did not exist, and coalitions with extremists were tolerated.

Today We Now Know What Can Happen: One of the most critical differences between 1924 and 2024 is the benefit of hindsight. In 1924, the people of Thuringia and the broader German political system did not know the disastrous consequences of legitimising far right extremists. The full scope of what the Nazi movement would become was still hidden in the future. Today, we know all too well the consequences of allowing right-wing extremism to infiltrate and erode democratic institutions. The rise of the Nazis in the 1920s serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of political complacency. In 1924, many political actors underestimated the Nazis and their potential for destruction. Today, parties across the political spectrum have united more strongly against the AfD than the fractured opposition of the Weimar era, where internal disputes and problems often hindered an effective response. While modern parties still face challenges and internal conflicts, they are more aware of the stakes, and there has been a concerted effort to avoid collaboration with extremist parties, a lesson clearly learned from history.

The AfD Is Not Forbidden (yet?): Another significant difference is that the AfD, while controversial, is a legal political party. In 1924, the NSDAP was officially banned following the failed Munich Putsch in 1923, yet its members operated covertly within other far right organisations, such as the Völkische List. The NSDAP’s ban was lifted shortly after, paving the way for its rapid ascent. Today, the AfD operates openly, besides being classified as a suspected extremist case under German law, it is not forbidden. However, more and more an AfD ban is discussed within the German society and parties (AFD-Verbot, 2024).

Different Political and Societal Realities: The probability most notable difference is the comparability of the political and societal conditions in 2024 and those in 1924. In the Weimar Republic, political instability, economic hardship, and the threat of civil unrest were rampant. The Reichswehr (German army) was frequently called upon to maintain order, including in Thuringia. For instance, in November 1923, Reichswehr troops were deployed in Weimar to dissolve the democratically elected coalition government of the workers’ parties. The country was dealing with the fallout of World War I, including the devastating effects of reparations, hyperinflation, and widespread poverty.

Extremist parties on both the left and right had paramilitary wings that regularly engaged in violent clashes, and many feared the outbreak of a fullscale civil war. Neighbouring countries, too, were unstable—there were separatist movements, invasions like the French occupation of the Ruhr, and widespread social unrest. These external and internal pressures contributed to the weakening of the Weimar Republic, which cycled through multiple short-lived governments. Political violence was so prevalent that the country had armed factions, flag parades, and violent confrontations between parties, including far-right paramilitaries (Rosa-Luxembourg-Stiftung, 2024).

In contrast, 2024 Germany, while facing its own challenges such as immigration, economic inequality, and political disillusionment, operates within a much more stable democratic framework. The global context is also more stable compared to the immediate post-World War I period. Germany’s economy is much stronger, and there are robust social programmes and remembrance culture initiatives designed to maintain democratic values. While there are economic and political anxieties, particularly in the former East Germany, they do not compare to the dire conditions of the 1920s.

Conclusion: Same Playbook – Different Time

As we look back at Thuringia’s elections in 1924 and 2024, it’s clear that history offers valuable lessons, but the political landscape has also evolved in significant ways. Both periods reflect the dangers of rising far-right extremism, polarisation, and the erosion of democratic norms. In 1924, the political fragmentation and lack of a united opposition allowed extremists to infiltrate government structures, ultimately leading to catastrophic consequences for Germany and the world. The political culture shifted, opening the door to racist, nationalist, and antisemitic ideologies that took root in Thuringia and later spread across the entire country.

However, key differences in today’s Germany suggest that while the threat remains, the nation is better equipped to face it. The AfD, while powerful in opposition, has not yet broken through into government. The existence of a “Brandmauer” (firewall) among mainstream parties prevents the kind of alliances that empowered extremists in the 1920s. Moreover, modern Germany benefits from a deeper understanding of the consequences of far-right governance, with remembrance culture and democratic education serving as critical buffers

Today, there are no paramilitary groups vying for control in the streets, and Germany enjoys greater political and economic stability than the Weimar Republic ever did. The challenges of 2024 are real—polarisation, dissatisfaction with the government, and a shifting public discourse—but the context is far less volatile than the post-World War I environment. Economic conditions, while challenging for some, are not marked by the same levels of hyperinflation and societal collapse that defined the 1920s.

Yet, these differences should not lead to complacency. The echoes of 1924 remind us that even small, regional shifts can have national consequences. The rise of extremist parties in Thuringia is not just a local issue; it reflects broader trends in Germany and Europe that must be addressed with vigilance. By learning from the past and understanding the dynamics of the present, Germany can navigate these challenges and protect its democratic foundations.

In conclusion, while history may not repeat itself exactly, the playbook used seems to be the same. Thuringia, once again a political testing ground, stands as a reminder that democracy is fragile, and the lessons of 1924 must inform how we confront the challenges of 2024 and beyond.

References

AFD-Verbot. (2024) Das erste von der Zivilgesellschaft finanzierte Beweissammlungsverfahren für ein Verbot der „AfD“. Available at: https://afd-verbot.de [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung. (2024) Thüringen als Mustergau?. Available at: https://www.bpb.de/themen/deutschlandarchiv/549045/thueringen-als-muster-gau/ [Accessed 17/11/2024].

CDU. (2024) Unsere Haltung zu Linkspartei und AfD. Available at: https://archiv.cdu.de/system/tdf/media/dokumente/cdu_deutschlands_unsere_haltung_zu_linkspartei_und_afd_0.pdf?file=1 [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Frankfurter Rundschau. (2024) Höcke pöbelt nach Thüringen-Wahl gegen Moderator – “Immer dieses dämliche Brandmauer-Gerede“. Available at: https://www.fr.de/politik/hochrechnung-ergebnis-ard-landtagswahl-2024-moderator-thueringen-wahl-hoecke-prognose-afd-93274864.html [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Gonschior A. (2002) Wahlen in der Weimarer Republik Available at: https://www.gonschior.de/weimar/Thueringen/LT3.html [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Jüdisches Forum für Demokratie und gegen Antisemitismus. (2022) “Neue Weltordnung”: Björn Höcke verbreitet antisemitische Verschwörungserzählungen am 29.03.22. Available at: https://www.jfda.de/post/neue-weltordnung-bjoern-hoecke-verbreitet-antisemitische-verschwoerungserzaehlungen-am-29-03-22 [Accessed 17/11/2024].

KUMREX. (2023) Thüringen-Monitor. Friedrich-Schiller Universität Jena. Available at: https://www.komrex.uni-jena.de/895/thueringen-monitor [Accessed 17/11/2024].

MDR. (2024a) Vor 100 Jahren: Die „Schicksalswahl“ in Thüringen 2024. Available at: https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/thueringen/schicksalswahl-nsdap-hitler-weimarer-republik-demokratie-100.html [Accessed 17/11/2024].

MDR. (2024b) Schicksalswahl Thüringen- kann sich Geschichte wiederholen?. Available at: https://www.mdr.de/geschichte/zeitgeschichte-gegenwart/politik-gesellschaft/schicksalswahl-thueringen-kann-sich-geschichte-wiederholen-100.html [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Pawelskus, P. (2011) Nazis in Parlamenten : eine Bestandsaufnahme und kritische Analyse aus Thüringen, Heinrich Böll Stiftung Thüringen.

Rosa-Luxembourg-Stiftung. (2024) Das Thüringer Schicksalsjahr 1924: Der Rechtsruck in Thüringen damals und heute. Available at: https://th.rosalux.de/fileadmin/ls_thueringen/dokumente/pdf/RLS-Heft_LandtagswahlThuer1924.pdf [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Tagesschau. (2024a) Das Wahlergebnis im Überblick. Available at: https://www.tagesschau.de/wahl/archiv/2024-09-01-LT-DE-TH/index-content.shtml [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Tagesschau. (2024b) Höckes 5-Punkte-Plan für den Fall, dass die AfD Thüringen regiert. Available at: https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/thueringen/hoecke-fuenf-punkte-plan-afd-106.html [Accessed 17/11/2024].

Weimarische Zeitung. (1924) Ausgabe 12.02.1924.