PARTEIATLAS

An independent field guide to Germany’s political parties

Federal politics2025 election edition

Compare policies

Side by side

Build a focused comparison

Choose up to four parties and the issues you care about. Your selection is saved in the page URL.

Parties

Choose one to four.

Issues

Choose one or more.

4 parties across 3 issues

Issue

Economy & tax

Open issue deep dive →
CDU

Supply-side. Lower company tax, Soli relief, deregulation.

[6]
SPD

Investment + redistribution. Germany Fund, relief lower/middle incomes, tax very wealthy more.

[10]
Greens

Green industrial policy. Public investment and transformation funds.

[13]
AfD

Low-tax nationalist mix. Cut major taxes, debt brake; protectionist/national-interest elements.

[16]

Issue

Migration & asylum

Open issue deep dive →
CDU

Restrictive. Border rejections, returns, third-country processing, less family reunion.

[6]
SPD

Controlled but rights-based. EU borders/returns + family reunification; no offshoring asylum.

[10]
Greens

More liberal. Defend asylum, family reunion, legal routes and labour access.

[13]
AfD

Most restrictive. Border refusal, leave common asylum system, “remigration”.

[16]

Issue

Climate & energy

Open issue deep dive →
CDU

Climate targets via markets/technology; renewables + nuclear option; cheaper power.

[6]
SPD

Industrial decarbonisation with subsidies/investment, lower network costs, EV support.

[10]
Greens

Core mission. faster renewables/electrification; climate-neutral power by 2035.

[13]
AfD

Reject current climate consensus; abolish CO₂ levies; fossil + nuclear expansion.

[16]

Beyond left and right

Six axes that explain the parties better

The coordinates summarise party programmes across separate policy dimensions. Open any axis to inspect every rationale and source.

Economy

How parties balance redistribution, public provision and state investment against lower taxes, private markets and deregulation.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (More state / redistribution) to 100 (More market / tax cuts)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Die Linke8Wealth and millionaire taxes, public ownership, a sanctions-free minimum income and abolition of the debt brake put the party firmly at the state-led endpoint.[21]
BSW18BSW combines state investment, industrial protection, anti-privatisation measures and higher taxation of large wealth.[27]
SPD32A large Germany Fund, debt-rule reform, higher taxation at the top and relief for lower and middle incomes create a redistribution-and-investment emphasis.[10]
Greens38The Greens favour public transformation investment and debt-brake reform, while retaining a market economy and price-based climate instruments.[13]
AfD69Large tax cuts and the debt brake pull toward the market endpoint, moderated by selected family and pension benefits and nationalist protectionism.[16]
CDU74Lower company taxation, solidarity-surcharge removal and deregulation are central, alongside continued social-insurance and public-investment roles.[6]
CSU78The joint Union tax-and-deregulation programme is reinforced by the CSU's additional emphasis on economic competitiveness and Bavarian interests.[6][41]
FDP93Broad tax and contribution cuts, fewer subsidies, deregulation, private investment and strict debt-brake adherence define the strongest market-liberal position.[24]

Migration & asylum

How parties balance asylum and legal-migration protections against border controls, removals and restrictions on eligibility.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (Broader protections) to 100 (More restrictive)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Die Linke8Die Linke defends asylum rights, safe routes and opposition to externalisation and broad border closures.[21]
Greens19The Greens defend constitutional asylum and family reunification while supporting legal routes and labour-market access.[13]
SPD42The SPD combines EU border control and returns with family reunification and rejection of offshore asylum processing.[10]
FDP59The FDP pairs easier skilled migration with tougher enforcement and reduced benefits for rejected asylum applicants.[24]
CDU73Border rejections, faster returns, third-country processing and reduced family reunification create a clearly restrictive programme.[6]
CSU80The CSU shares the Union programme and adds a more pronounced emphasis on limiting migration and internal security.[6][41]
BSW83BSW calls for sharply limiting migration, stricter removals and no residence entitlement after arrival through safe third countries.[27]
AfD97Border refusal, departure from the common EU asylum framework and a programme of remigration place the AfD at the restrictive endpoint.[16]

European integration

How parties balance common European institutions and capacity against national sovereignty and looser EU structures.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (More integration) to 100 (More sovereignty)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Greens10The Greens' programme and profile support stronger common European action across investment, climate, security and rights.[13][14]
SPD16The SPD's strong EU orientation and support for common European capacity place it near the integration endpoint.[10][11]
CDU25The CDU supports European cooperation and security capacity while preserving a stronger role for member states and fiscal limits.[6][7]
FDP30The FDP is institutionally pro-European but combines this with subsidiarity, market discipline and opposition to an EU debt union.[24][25]
CSU36The CSU supports the Union's European framework but adds stronger regional, national and subsidiarity claims.[6][41]
Die Linke45Die Linke supports European cooperation but criticises existing fiscal, market and security structures, producing a mixed reform position.[21][22]
BSW76BSW favours cooperation between states but resists deeper supranational authority and stresses national democratic and economic control.[27][28]
AfD97The AfD proposes returning powers to states, replacing the current EU with a looser association and retaining an exit option.[16][18]

Climate transition

How parties balance a faster, intervention-led decarbonisation path against slower transition, technology neutrality or rollback.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (Faster / more intervention) to 100 (Slower / more rollback)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Greens8Accelerated renewables, electrification and climate-neutral electricity by 2035 make decarbonisation a central state-supported mission.[13]
Die Linke18Die Linke supports a faster regulation-led transition with costs concentrated on high emitters and wealthy households.[21]
SPD30The SPD supports industrial decarbonisation through public investment and subsidies while balancing employment and affordability.[10]
CDU58The CDU accepts climate targets but emphasises emissions trading, technology openness, lower costs and a possible nuclear role.[6]
FDP63The FDP supports decarbonisation through markets and technology neutrality while rejecting detailed bans and state direction.[24]
CSU66The CSU shares the Union's market-and-technology approach with added emphasis on competitiveness and regional economic concerns.[6][41]
BSW79BSW subordinates climate policy to affordability and industry, opposes several transition measures and supports access to fossil energy.[27]
AfD96The AfD rejects the current decarbonisation path, would abolish carbon levies and expand nuclear and fossil generation.[16]

Social & cultural policy

How parties balance progressive equality, identity and self-determination policies against traditional, conservative or national-cultural positions.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (More progressive) to 100 (More conservative)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Die Linke8Die Linke's programme and profile consistently emphasise equality, anti-discrimination and progressive social rights.[21][22]
Greens12Equality, reproductive rights, anti-discrimination and liberal citizenship and inclusion policy are explicit programme priorities.[13]
SPD25The SPD supports progressive equality and rights policy while retaining a broader social-democratic coalition and more incremental approach.[10][11]
FDP36The FDP is socially liberal on civil rights and self-determination, combined with a more market-liberal and individualist frame.[24]
CDU65The CDU combines mainstream rights protections with Christian-democratic family policy and a more traditional social outlook.[6][7]
CSU76The CSU shares the Union platform but presents a more explicitly conservative position on family, culture and internal security.[6][41]
BSW80BSW describes itself as socially conservative and opposes parts of progressive identity and self-determination policy.[27]
AfD96A nationalist-conservative identity programme and preference for traditional family roles place the AfD at the conservative endpoint.[16]

Ukraine / Russia policy

How parties balance negotiation, restraint and accommodation of Russia against military support for Ukraine and deterrence.

Placement rationale and sources
Editorial coordinates from 0 (Restraint / accommodation) to 100 (Stronger Ukraine support)
PartyScoreRationaleSources
Die Linke9Die Linke prioritises diplomacy, arms control and disarmament and would sharply restrict the Bundeswehr's expeditionary role.[21]
BSW12BSW rejects weapons deliveries and higher defence spending and prioritises negotiations and a security architecture including Russia.[27]
AfD20The AfD calls for ending sanctions and restoring economic and energy relations with Russia rather than continuing current Ukraine policy.[16]
SPD64The SPD supports Ukraine and NATO while stressing diplomacy, proportionality and avoidance of direct NATO-Russia escalation.[10]
CDU80The CDU supports continued weapons assistance, stronger defence capacity and deterrence within NATO and the EU.[6]
CSU83The CSU shares the Union's Ukraine and defence line and adds a pronounced emphasis on strengthening the Bundeswehr.[6][41]
Greens87The Greens call for substantial military, humanitarian and financial support for Ukraine and defence spending above two percent.[13]
FDP90The FDP supports expansive weapons assistance to Ukraine and stronger German and European defence.[24]
How to read the map: BSW demonstrates why one left-to-right label is insufficient: its economic coordinates sit near the state-led end while its migration, cultural and Russia-policy coordinates sit toward the other endpoints. FDP combines the inverse pattern on several axes. Use each coordinate as a cited comparison, never as a verdict on the party as a whole.