It was a controversial TV duel between AfD extremist Björn Höcke and CDU man Mario Voigt. There were a few surprises and the question of who would win.
Berlin - Whether the TV duel between the right-wing extremist AfD politician Björn Höcke and the Thuringian CDU top candidate Mario Voigt will be seen as a successful unmasking of Höcke or as a breaking of taboos and a platform for his ethnic ideas cannot be answered clearly. Both sides, both Höcke's and Voigt's camp, declared themselves the
winners of the duel after the broadcast on the private broadcaster
Welt
. The moderators ensured the decisive moment of the encounter.
AfD politician Höcke falters in the TV duel
In the middle of the duel, which was originally scheduled to last 45 minutes but ultimately lasted 70 minutes, Höcke stumbled. Jan Philipp Burgard, editor-in-chief of
Welt-TV
, and Tatjana Ohm, chief presenter, confronted the AfD politician with passages from his book almost five months before the state elections in Thuringia. In this book, Höcke accused the current SPD Bundestag Vice President Aydan Özoğuz of having, apart from the language, “no specifically German culture” and therefore having “no place in Germany”. Despite repeated prodding, Höcke evaded and refused to answer the moderators' question as to whether he wanted to expel a German politician. Ultimately, he stated that he could no longer remember exactly the relevant section of the book.
Also striking was Höcke's reinterpretation of the term "remigration", which was coined in the new right scene and describes the expulsion or expulsion of millions of people with a migration background. When asked, Höcke explained that he understood the term to mean bringing Germans back from abroad. However, a look at the right-wing extremist's previous speeches shows that Höcke certainly used the term in the spirit of right-wing ideologies.
Höcke did not want to talk about extreme quotes in the TV duel
Such moments made it clear that Höcke wanted to appear statesmanlike on the big stage and did not want to emphasize his most extreme statements from the past. However,
the moderators from
Welt
didn't let him get away with it, even though they generally held back during the duel. The big stage for Höcke was a risk for the broadcaster, but ultimately those responsible should be satisfied with the result. Voigt also pointed out Höcke's evasive behavior and said: "I would have expected you to have more courage to stand by your theses."
The TV team referred to a fact check that ran in the background and was only published the day after the duel. In addition to his reinterpretation of the “term of remigration”, further classifications would have been helpful during the broadcast. For example, Höcke claimed that energy prices are “going through the roof,” that “60 percent of Germans say you can no longer freely express your opinions in Germany,” and that “German” anti-Semitism is low compared to that of people with a migrant background be.
Fact check shows: Höcke's statements fail
In fact, the prices for many forms of energy are now back to the level before the start of the Ukraine war. The statement about freedom of expression is also incorrect. Höcke was probably referring to the 2023 Freedom Index, which asked people: "Do you feel that you can express your political opinion freely in Germany today, or is it better to be cautious?" 40 percent of those surveyed answered with “Can speak freely.” However, that does not mean that 60 percent believe the opposite, there were more than two possible answers. His comparison of anti-Semitism is also refuted by the Central Council of Jews, which continues to see right-wing extremist anti-Semitism as the greatest threat to Jewish life in Germany.
And what about Mario Voigt? He went into the duel with the strategy not to call Höcke a Nazi, but rather to address his content: “It's easy to call him a fascist, a court has already done that. It's about the factual questions.” On issues such as the shortage of skilled workers and immigration, Voigt made it clear that Höcke's extreme anti-migration stance was not suitable for ensuring that German companies had enough workers. “You are breaking the backbone of prosperity,” said Voigt, accusing Höcke and the AfD of populism: “Inflating your cheeks, describing problems, but not solving a single problem.”
CDU politician Mario Voigt wanted to expose Höcke
Voigt mostly managed to stick to his line. However, he came under pressure when Höcke confronted him with the European climate policy of the “Green Deal” by Ursula von der Leyen (also CDU) as well as the Merkel years and accused the CDU of having too green a policy. Höcke called Voigt a “destroyer of wealth” and blamed his party for the disillusionment with politics in the country.
Despite the heated debate that developed over the course of the duel and which, despite the upcoming state elections, hardly focused on Thuringia, Höcke ultimately offered his CDU opponent a joint coalition. Voigt refused. Overall, Höcke came under pressure more often than Voigt; he hardly wanted to comment on his most extreme positions. Voigt's strategy of factual confrontation was largely successful.
TV duel has no clear winner
However, there is no clear winner; both sides can find arguments for themselves. Voigt, who was previously relatively unknown, can now hope for more attention. And Höcke managed to be invited to a top duel for the first time as a politician on the far right. It is uncertain whether the duel in the state elections in September will still play a role in the voting decision.