The Prime Minister of the German federal state of Schleswig-Holstein was accused of calling for the censorship of the online platform Nius during a televised debate on ZDF, Germany’s second public broadcaster.
When asked on January 7 whether certain media and social platforms should be regulated, censored or banned, the politician, Daniel Günther, from the left-wing of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), replied: “Yes.”
He was referring to alternative outlets such as Nius, which he described as “enemies of democracy”.
Nius is an alternative online news platform with a large following, known for publishing content that often diverges from mainstream media narratives.
The site focuses on political and social news and takes a critical stance towards official institutions and channels. Some of its investigations have sparked serious allegations that the platform affects public debate and bolsters right-wing positions.
Among the most controversial investigations are those examining the politicised activities of a network of NGOs, some state-funded, which allegedly aim to maintain the political and cultural dominance of the Left.
“In Germany, there is a clear centre-right electoral majority,” said Pauline Voss, deputy editor-in-chief of Nius.
“According to many accounts, the CDU and Alternative for Germany [AfD] together exceed 50 per cent of the vote, which could enable local or national co-operation to implement the will of the voters.
“Yet every time the CDU opens the door to collaboration with the AfD, a powerful mobilisation by these left-leaning organisations is triggered. Many are state-funded NGOs, which, despite representing minority positions, organise mass protests to block the CDU,” Voss said.
“As a result, the CDU is intimidated and continues to form governments with left-wing parties, despite their weak election results.”
Voss, a former journalist at the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung, has personally led numerous investigations into this NGO system, whose activities strongly influence the functioning of German democracy.
“It all began decades ago with the emergence of NGOs that received public funding to combat violent right-wing extremism,” she said.
“Over time, this system expanded not only in terms of financing but also in content, targeting positions that were not extreme but simply non-leftist.”
The real turning point came under governments said to be conservative, such as those led by then-chancellor Angela Merkel, which, according to Voss, allowed their cultural policy to be dictated by their left-leaning minority allies.
In 2015, with the launch of the programme Demokratie leben! (“Live Democracy!”), the then-German government promoted initiatives supposedly aimed at strengthening democratic participation, fostering civic values and preventing extremism. In 2025, Demokratie leben! received €182 million and, in 2026, approximately €191 million is expected to be allocated it.
“A large portion of these funds goes to campaigns critical of right-wing parties, known as the ‘fight against the right.’ Right-leaning organisations are practically excluded,” said Voss.
“This left-leaning NGO network mobilises every time the government considers measures that deviate from the left’s line, particularly in three sensitive areas: climate policy, migration, and, above all, the maintenance of the ‘firewall.’
“By ‘firewall,’ we mean Germany’s exclusion of the AfD, which prohibits any co-operation of other parties with it. Current polls see the AfD as the leading party in the country, with the CDU only a few points behind,” she said.
A striking example occurred in January 2025, after a massacre in the city of Aschaffenburg when an Afghan national attacked people in a city park with a knife, killing two – a 41-year-old man and a two-year-old child – and injuring several others, some seriously.
Following this incident, Friedrich Merz, CDU leader and now Chancellor, stated that he would push controversial migration measures “with the support of any agreeing party”, including the AfD, through parliament.
After these statements, there was major street mobilisation by the NGOs, supported by left-wing parties and the CDU quickly revised its position under the pressure.
“This has now become a recurring pattern, in which the CDU is frequently exposed to the influence of this NGO network,” Voss said.
“Every time someone in the CDU even minimally attempts cooperation with the AfD, a massive mobilisation by the NGOs is triggered, supported by left-wing parties and often positively portrayed in the media, bringing thousands of people into the streets, described as ‘civil society.’ This intimidates the CDU and prevents the lifting of the firewall.”
Despite its isolation, the AfD continues to grow in the polls, strengthened by its opposition status, which allows it to maintain its positions.
“The main victim is the CDU, which increasingly struggles from the government benches to implement its election promises, as it must constantly make compromises with its left-leaning allies rather than seeking co-operation with the AfD, with which it has far greater agreement on many issues such as security and migration,” according to Voss.
“This development could become very problematic for the CDU. If the firewall remains in place for long, there is a risk that more and more CDU voters will switch to the AfD, potentially rendering the party irrelevant.
“This is a risk the CDU increasingly faces unless it chooses to challenge the network of NGOs and left-wing parties,” she said.
In 2026, two important elections in the eastern German states of Saxony‑Anhalt and Mecklenburg‑Western Pomerania are expected to be pivotal for the country’s political direction. In Saxony‑Anhalt, recent polls show the AfD leading with around 39 per cent to 40 per cent, with the CDU trailing at around 26 per cent to 27 per cent, a dramatic reversal from previous elections.
In Mecklenburg‑Western Pomerania, the AfD is also polling strongly, often near the 30 per cent to 38 per cent range, again ahead of or close to the CDU and other parties.
These projections place the AfD in position to emerge as the largest party in both states, forcing the CDU to decide whether to maintain its longstanding refusal to co-operate with the AfD or to reconsider that stance if it wants to remain effective in regional governance.
The outcomes of these elections could reshape not only the political leadership of eastern Germany but also the broader strategic choices for the CDU at both regional and national levels.
