The AfD makes network policy? Some of the statements of Alexander Gauland, in the back of the head, the interview in his summer wanted no straight statement by rings. It would be eliminated by the digitization jobs, has manoeuvred he, however, was not his area of expertise “of a strategy can not be a speech”. He also knew at the moment. In the committees and commissions of the Bundestag, the AfD, however, has all rights, also have other groups, that is, they may suggest experts or motions. And it is represented here also.
editor in the features section.
F. A. Z. Facebook Twitter
Miriam Seyffarth seconded Tabea Rössner works for the green Bundestag and supported in their work in the Committee “Digital Agenda”. For this lecture, she emphasized it was not as a private person here, she is also a member of a party. Through their activities, she has insight into what the members of the AfD in terms of network policy, or contribute. To the outside of the penetrate namely the reporting on these topics, focusing exclusively on the government coalition and the democratic opposition parties. In the case of all “alien enemy noise,” says Seyffarth, with barely get someone that at least 91 members of the AfD have positions for network policy.
until now, there was the case of the AfD three experts on Internet policy issues, namely Uwe Kamann, Uwe Schulz, and Joana Cotar. Uwe Kamann resigned in mid-December, the group and the party, the exact reasons for this are unclear. Officially, he has “different views on political and policy views of the party and faction”. In terms of network policy, Seyffarth, there were these three members in the Committee not long ago so krawallig, as you know from the deputies in the Bundestag, they also fell rather by the Connections to the new far-right or extreme-right scene.
International is not your thing
The science center Berlin for social research, took the “Parliamentary practice of England” in an eponymous study under the microscope, and difference different strategies of the members. In addition to the so-called “Riot” there is also the “Parliament-oriented”, the argue calmly and factually, and the Parliament, as the System does not in principle reject. The three politicians are all oriented to the Cooperation. They work together with the other groups, joking with them in the break, and also support once applications that others have introduced.