Beatrix von Storch, September 24, 2025, Trump and Turning Point

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/27, p. 2854. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Authoritative powers believe that with the foreign policy it still goes further-so as in the time of Fischer and Baerbock, now somewhat less shrill, yet somehow further-so: Rainbow flags on German embassies, flights of Afghans to Germany, a climate foreign policy, and quite a lot of gender. Trump, you want to wait out, somehow out-last, hoping in the midterms and in the time after Trump. I believe you do not understand what just happened in the U.S.A. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): But you do!

While in Germany the last remains of Fridays for Future crumble, in the U.S.A. begins a revolution, and indeed a spiritual one. 

I am just returned from America which, following the murder of Charlie Kirk, is no longer the same America as before and never again will be. The MAGA movement experiences in these days a fundamental transformation. This movement is now greater than Donald Trump. After him, no void will arise. It will be filled in the sense and spirit of Charlie Kirk. That will change not only the U.S.A., but the entire West and beyond. 

Since the 60s, leftist ideas have determined the direction of the West, and that now comes to an end. The SPD might here in house win the fight over the delegation meeting rooms; the fight for hearts and minds, you have lost. 

Charlie Kirk was a danger for the left not only because he like Trump could mobilize the conservative base, but he could convince young people who were never conservative. Thus, he needed to die. Yet following his death, his ideas will now become still more powerful than they were in his lifetime, much more powerful. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): AfD for the spiritual revolution! I never reckoned on that!

If you believe that you can wall yourself off in a woke fortress in western Europe against that, 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): “Highway to Hell” is what you’re doing here!

then you are blind to the spiritual, moral and political collapse which is taking place in western Europe: Crisis of state in France, revolt in Great Britain, and the black-red after 100 days in principle already at an end. 

Milhail Gorbatschov said: Who comes too late, he is punished by life. 

            Inge Grässle (CDU/CSU): Who comes too early, he also!

You come too late. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Life has already punished you! 

            Hannes Gnauck (AfD), turned toward Ralf Stegner (SPD): You say that,                                Herr Stegner? Take a look in the mirror!

History passes you by, since nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come, and this idea is not leftist and woke and green and godless. 

            Stefan Schmidt (Greens): Can you say something on the budget?

We stand at a Wendepunkt, so christened Charlie Kirk his movement in 2012: “Turning Point” – Wendepunkt. And Europe will turn itself in spirit to the ideas and beliefs of Charlies Kirk, to freedom, 

            Boris Mijatović (Greens): Do you speak on the budget?

family, fatherland, but first and foremost to Jesus Christ. 

Many thanks. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): I don’t get it! Love of neighbor, that was Jesus Christ!                           Impossible!

 

[trans: tem]

Tomasz Froelich, October 21, 2025, Serbia

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)10-21(2-0502-0000). 

Frau President. 

What do you actually want from Serbia? Do you want to make Serbia a second Ukraine? Legitimate student protests against corruption are being mis-used for geopolitical purposes. You goad on assailants who batter the Serbian police. You destabilize a country which has had very, very bad experiences with Western intervention policy. 

Why all of this? Because Serbia maintains pragmatic relations with China and Russia. That is  Serbia’s good right, for Serbia is a sovereign state, and the Serbs are a proud people – a proud people who do not want your arrogant tutoring. And if you doubt your own unpopularity, then simply take a look at the newest numbers of the Eurobarometer: Just every third Serb is for an EU accession – a record low.  At the same time, 60 percent of Serbs are for an accession to the BRICs. You are driving Serbia out of Europe. A fatal failure, since we need Serbia as a strategic partner, perchance in the fight against illegal migration, yet in Europe only Fico and Orbán grasp that. Hands off Serbia. 

 

[trans: tem]

Rüdiger Lucassen, September 17, 2025, Defense Procurement

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/24, pp. 2531-2532. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

There is nothing more useless than the so-called politicians’ ranking. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is in first place. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Jealous?

Yet who profits from the first place? No one. Who profits from this first place? The SPD not once, see Nordrhein-Westfalen.  Boris Pistorius, also not; since he cannot transmute his favorability into political success. That hinders his party friends; see conscription. Pistorius wants it, his party wants it not. And who still believes that the SPD will send Herr Pistorius into the running as the next Chancellor candidate plainly does not know the SPD. Nothing in this party is so unloved as success. The SPD since Gerhard Schröder always decides for mediocrity. See Heiko Maas, see Norbert Walter-Borjans, see Saskia Esken, see Bärbel Bas, see, see, see. 

Who unfortunately also has nothing of the favorability of the Defense Minister are the Bundeswehr and Germany’s security, since, except for announcements and an explanation that runs at length, Boris Pistorius has delivered nothing. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the Federal government’s 2025 defense budget suffers from a lack of concept. The government with the debts empowerment bowls over the future generations and orders everything that the industry offers. Since 2022, the Bundestag has voted for and agreed to 324 procurement proposals, an unbelievable number, without a conceptual basis. No one can say which procurement will be urgently required, and which not. 

Yet what the Defense Ministry has not accomplished is the operationalization of the armament of the Bundeswehr. That would be an urgent prerequisite for the mission-readiness of the armed forces. What shall Germany’s armed forces be able to do operationally? Where shall it be able? How long shall it be able? It plainly does not suffice to throw around keywords like “East Flank Lithuania” or “Hub Germany”. An authentic operational plan needs to go into details and it must set priorities. All of that is not put forward. Thus the coalition also does not prioritize the procurement. You procure what is there, and not what will be needed. 

I want to address a second defect which I hold to be utterly unacceptable, namely the lack of transparency in the armaments procurement. The German Bundestag needs to know to whom are ultimately allotted the weapons which it has agreed to procure. The AfD has basically voted for the armament of the Bundeswehr. We stand for national defense and external security. When however the Federal government takes upon itself the right, immediately upon delivery, to redirect to the Ukraine weapons which we as parliament have procured for the Bundeswehr, that is contempt for the will of parliament, and it is unconstitutional. 

Next point. We also reject the financing of German weapons for the Ukraine by Budget item 60 – primarily because it is German tax money, no political plan is acknowledged beyond the carry-on talk, and the Federal government does not trouble itself for a diplomatic solution of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Yet we also reject these proceedings because it leads to displacement effects in regards our own armaments procurement. You propose to quickly make the Bundeswehr ready for defense, yet with your tax-financed Ukraine procurements, ensure that armaments orders for the German troops will be shoved behind. You thereby sabotage the German defense readiness. 

The Federal government invented the term “Zeitenwende” [change of times], yet cannot do it. The AfD can do it, and we will do it. 

Thank you. 

 

[trans: tem]

Markus Buchheit, October 8, 2025, Combustion Engine Verbot

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE REV(2025)10-08(3-0208-0000). 

Herr President, my valued ladies and gentlemen. 

In 2019, as the Green Deal stood directly in the starting blocks, and as Greta Thunberg here still strode through the meadow, we already had studies which said that we in the next years alone in Germany would lose 200,000 to 400,000 workplaces in the automobile industry, if it came to the Verbot of the combustion engine. Now we stand here again today, and the question is put: Man, the industry, it goes so badly; we just don’t know why it goes so badly. 

Herr colleague Wölken of the SPD: It goes badly for the industry because people like you want to represent an activating industrial policy, and it is called nothing other – the viewers may want to look at the previous video of colleague Wölken – than a planned economy. You want to interfere in the production management of individual firms, and that certainly cannot be. If here is brought in the examples of iphones and the accomplishment in relation to Nokia, of the horse and carriage and the setbacks of the automobile, then to all that can only be said: These projects, these technologies have succeeded – planned by free undertakings, demanded by free citizens. 

What we require is freedom, not still more planned economy, not still more Wölkens in this house here. We again need freedom for our businesses and for our citizens. In this sense: Away with this Verbot, yet also away with the fleet penalty payments! 

 

[trans: tem]

Michael Kaufmann, September 11, 2025, Research and Economy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/21, p. 2096. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable Frau Minister. Honorable colleagues. 

I have the impression that the governing delegations have placed this extra theme on the daily order in the current hour because they have nothing else to present. But let us look more closely. In your Hightech Agenda is initially one positive thing: You finally admit that we in many areas of research and innovation no longer stand at the top of the world, and that we in many fields are in danger of losing the connection. That is honest, and that distinguishes you from earlier governments which ever only spread the rally cry of carry on. Only he who unsparingly describes the starting point can at all achieve improvements. 

But then: Much paper, little plan. Your Hightech Agenda is full of programs, roadmaps and hubs, yet without clear measurable goals. Who wants to, can lose himself in this wasteland, but it does not indicate the way to the future. Just quite at the end, there will be a few more concrete – for all that – yet too few. Explanations of intention are no strategy. 

I do not want to contest that you have good intentions. Yet your euphoria I share not at all; for all of your predecessors have promised one thing: Dismantlement of bureaucracy. And what has happened each time? The opposite. Each year new prescriptions, new formulas, more bureaucracy. You, Union and SPD, have shown in the last 20 years that you cannot do bureaucracy dismantlement. Why should it this time suddenly be different? And, hand on heart: Have you ever dared in Moloch Brussels to defy a new bureaucracy? 

            Holger Mann (SPD): Come still to the theme?

And in regards the financing, there remains disillusionment. The means in the core budget stagnate for years, and a couple of billion euros of special debts alter nothing of that. You speak of a “big heave”. Yet where is it? With the 2025 and 2026 budgets, half of the legislature is already committed. 

            Florian Müller (CDU/CSU): Ja!

Thus when does the game-changer come? In the second half, or not at all? 

You yourselves speak of deficits in regards transfer from research to the economy – fully right. Yet you conceal the origins: Research in Germany, yes; foundings, no. In Germany, research still pays, but foundings long since no longer pay. The highest taxes, ruinous energy costs, bureaucracy without end. So long as it remains so, value creation emigrates to foreign lands. So long as you change nothing of that, your technology transfer remains an illusion. 

The fact is: Our research landscape is exploited so as to create value elsewhere. This is no longer allowed to remain so. You talk of gigafactories in Germany. But you tell me: Where actually is the announced megaplant for chips in Magdeburg? Not even the sponsored 10 million euro subvention could move Intel to this investment. 

            Holger Mann (SPD): You wanted it just so not!

And now gigfactories for giga euros, only with billions from the pocket of the taxpayers. Under today’s conditions, no energy-intensive plant comes to Germany. 

Without fundamental reform, your promises remain illusions. A change of the economy with you, honored colleagues of the CDU/CSU, is not for the making. That, you showed yesterday as in regards TOP 5 – Economic Change for Germany – precisely five CDU/CSU members sat in the plenary session. The Hightech Agenda should be your business plan for the future. Yet quite frankly: Would you approach a bank for credit with this paper? Ich nicht; since explanations of intention replace no concrete measures; vague sketches are no strategy. We need no colorful roadmaps. You need an authentic plan, and which I do not see here. 

            Stephan Albani (CSU/CSU): You need only use the eyes!

You’ve recognized many problems. That is the first step. But now you need to deliver; otherwise, our country’s future is in danger. And, for that, you bear the responsibility. 

Thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Volker Schnurrbusch, October 8, 2025, EU Digital Rules

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)10-08(3-0217-0000). 

Frau President. Valued colleagues.

The core of the EU is the Common Market. Yet what does this Commission do? It builds one hurdle after another. It would be nice if we too had a Silicon Valley. Yet instead of complaining that a few U.S. firms dominate the tech market and the platforms, it would be the duty of the EU to promote the entrepreneurial spirit which first made this dominance possible. Why does the risk capital flow to California and Texas and not to Germany and France? Why do IT professionals emigrate from Asia to the U.S.A. and not here? Why do we experience the emigration of our programmers? 

Because this Commission is hostile to business and growth; because it constructs ever higher bureaucratic hurdles; because it understands the market not as the exchange of ideas but as something un-regulated which is to be surveilled. Thus it invents tools like the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act. The EU wants to control, it blocks entrepreneurial freedom, and it wants to censor freedom of opinion on the internet so that only its own propaganda will be spread, as in Roumania, as in Moldavia, as in Georgia, and lastly also in the Ukraine. We reject that. 

 

[trans: tem]

Michael Espendiller, September 16, 2025, Fiscal Policy, II

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/23, pp. 2316-2317. 

…We here in Germany need to do our household chores, and we require the money, much too much of which at the moment is being transferred to the European Union, in our own country. We therefore reduce our contribution to the EU by about 18 billion euros. And now one may call  me out, that it does not go, there are binding treaties. Then good, it agrees with the treaties. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Ach!

Yet treaties are not laws of nature and can be changed. Best example: Margaret Thatcher, the “Iron Lady” of Great Britain. When it was very bad in her country, she negotiated with the EU and extracted the so-called “British rebate”. Great Britain thus every year saved billions in contributions to the EU. Why should that not also work for Germany? Germany is ultimately the largest net payer to the EU and the stability anchor in the euro area. When Germany falls, the euro also falls. And against this background, we are very optimistic that the EU would prefer to agree with Germany rather than lose us completely. It thus may go, if one really wants to. 

Where do we save? The Federal government provides a large portion of its new debts for military expenditures. As you know, we have ever criticized the bad equipment of the Bundeswehr and committed ourselves in recent years to corresponding budget increases. Yet the present Federal government here exceeds every reasonable measure and schedules for this year debt-financed increases which, in fact, it simply cannot expend this year. For this reason, we in an AfD budget expend 10.7 billion euros less for military spending and thereby come to a total outlay in the defense area of 76.9 billion euros. And that is again very much money. Yet also in the following years, the Federal government in the military area simply wants to expend too much and too quickly. Decades-long shortcomings plainly cannot be compensated with a wave of the hand. 

Yet you not only thereby worsen Germany’s position, but also with delivery of military material to the Ukraine. In 2025, you want to spend all of 8.7 billion euros for the weapons deliveries to the Ukraine. And these costs we eliminate completely. You only prolong the unnecessary dying in the Ukraine. Besides, the Ukrainians themselves have meanwhile grasped this, which is why the number of deserters ever further increases. Yet that interests no one in the government, because reason is on vacation. 

Less reasonable besides are the exorbitant costs for a misguided climate policy. We do not at all save the climate with the deconstruction of industry in Germany. Here too, the red pencil. And we therefore can save with the elimination of the senseless climate projects of the climate and transformation funds around 37.6 billion euros, and indeed completely. 

Still what? The Sozial budget of Bärbel Bas is next, which blows up in our faces. It is absolutely right that we support the pension account with tax monies. That, our pensioners after a life of hard work have honestly earned. Yet it is wrong that we extend it, at the cost of the working middle, to millions of Bürgergeld recipients who are fully capable of earning. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): That’s just not right! What nonsense                                                are you then telling?

Moreover, it thus comes to that around 50 percent of the Bürgergeld recipients have a foreign citizenship. That is further evidence for the uncontrolled mass immigration into our social system. By means of a corresponding adjustment of our laws, we may end this social injustice, and here save an additional 14.6 billion euros. 

And still more money is to be found in the Federal budget: One billion euros as a “reconciliation payment” to Namibia can, for various reasons, go. 

In regards the political foundations, we eliminate means to the sum of 444 million euros. In addition, the Federal government plans to expend one billion euros for the performance of integration courses. The driver’s license in Germany needs to be paid by oneself; we can thus expect a German course will be paid by oneself if then one wants to have the German citizenship. 

The Union-led Federal government in addition herein continues to breed its own political opponents and carry on the financing of the leftist “Democracy Lives” programs. With its abolition, we save an additional 200 million euros. 

This and much more we can eliminate and, except for a few lobby groups, no one in Germany would notice. 

Yet what millions of people in Germany would notice in the purse are the reliefs of our AfD budget, the key points of which I want to here go into. 

We are of the opinion that the present climate policy damages the economic position and burdens the consumers with charges. The CO₂ price and the CO₂ emissions trade we therefore eliminate completely. 

And the trucking fee we cut by around 2.25 billion euros so as to lower the transportation costs in Germany. Everyone who drives to work with an auto, or who plans the next large purchase for the family, will notice that in the supermarket balance. These alone are 23 billion euros of relief for the consumers in Germany. 

And while we’re especially on the families: When both parent spouses are earning so as to feed the family and somehow pay for their own home, the budget account also suffers under the enormously high non-wage costs [Lohnnebenkosten]. This money does not at all land in one’s own account, but goes directly to the state. In our finance planning, enough money is available so that we can stabilize the social security system with 7.7 billion euros. This would prevent that in this year the contribution rate and with it the non-wage costs increase, and that keeps workplaces in Germany. 

Yet not only duties, but also taxes we in our AfD budget can properly save. Alone in regards the wages tax, that is one billion euros. With the income tax, we come to around two billion euros on top of that.  And the enormous burden on our Mittelstand we can reduce with three billion euros in the corporate tax. And the solidarity surtax with 12.45 billion euros we can completely eliminate. Work shall again pay. 

And we also want that good earners continue to remain in the country and plainly not – as presently – in large numbers of around 200,000 men and women each year leave our country, and thereby as contribution- and tax-payers permanently fall out of our social system. 

By means of the lowering of the CO₂ duty and the wage tax, together with the other measures, the small earners at the same time will be relieved by us, so that they can again live from their own income. 

All together, we relieve the citizens with 66.1 billion euros in our draft budget. That is impressive! 

In sum: Saving is something for the advanced. We have shown there is an alternative to limitless debt creation, and put forward a reform budget which we will also still further construct. We are convinced: This is the draft which Germany now needs, and which has what it takes to kindle a dynamic and again bring our economy into the running. 

The AfD is ready, and we hope the Union soon gives up its failed experiment with the SPD so as to include itself in the rescue mission for our country. We can, simply and profoundly, no longer afford this firewall. 

 

[trans: tem]

Marc Jongen, September 11, 2025, European University Alliances

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)09-11(4-0024-0000). 

Herr President. 

We’ve heard it from Frau von der Leyen: The EU wants more sovereignty, more power, more centralization. So as to achieve this, all will be instrumentalized, even education. 

Yes, student mobility by means of Ersamus+ is a good thing. Yet the true sense of the European University alliances is another thing; it shall give rise to a Europe-wide, post-secondary [Hochschul] education conforming to the EU, with EU study courses for ideological programs like green transformation, etc. And universities, once they are dependent on the EU promotion pot, no longer get loose – whose bread I eat, his song I sing. Where that leads, the Bologna process has shown: To a bureaucratic schooling of post-secondary studies which has driven out of the universities the spirit that made Europe great and upon which the EU unjustly calls. 

In fact, the European universities fall ever further back in the international rankings, and the level of our qualification [Abschlüsse] becomes ever worse. Authentic excellence is not achieved by such university alliances, but by optimal conditions for leading researchers, selection of the best students without quota mania and free from ideological guidelines.

 

[trans: tem]