Sergej Minich, July 10, 2025, Digitalization and CDU

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/18, pp. 1807-1808. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

The Federal government has created a new ministry for digitalization and state modernization. The plans sound great: Less bureaucracy, more tempo, finally digital, the lean state as a goal. 

Yet how exactly should that be implemented? Citizens shall surrender their data just once, the so-called Once Only Principle. That means once I report my address or my income to the office, then the state itself should then pass it on – sounds logical, sounds good. The truth however is: The authorities have different standards. I still need to give it multiple times: Once for the taxes, once for parents funds and once for housing funds. That is no digitalization, that is data ping-pong. And it costs us, according to internal estimates, over one billion euros every year because everything runs in duplicate and triplicate. 

Digital administration – such a nice theme; it was mentioned – promised for years, that all can be settled on-line: Building permission, Kindergeld, re-registration. And what have we today? Instead of on-line service, many citizens receive a pdf for printing. That is like “say digital, but deliver by stagecoach.” Only around 100 of over 500 benefits are really digital. The goal was ruinously missed. And hundreds of millions of euros were put into advisors, platforms, projects which scarcely anyone uses. 

The same with bureaucracy deconstruction – it was mentioned today. The new Minister says: We make the administration simpler. How shall that go? New projects, new platforms, new rules, yet no real simplification. A start-up in Berlin requires 26 forms and five office visits. In Estonia: One click, 15 minutes, done. In Germany, one application lasts a week – with luck. 

And then there’s the matter of the money. The State Modernization branch has been approved for 150 new posts. 

            Ronja Kemmer (CDU/CSU): Those are not new!

Many of them are still unoccupied. And where positions are unoccupied, external consultants are retrieved for a lot of money. After months, there are also interim bureaus. By the time you become able to act, we have the next election, and you again have achieved nothing! 

            Ronja Kemmer (CDU/CSU): Such rubbish!

It was desired to set up a new IT concept. Cost: Over four million euros. Result: It is not practical. The consultancy firms rejoice; they earned four million – for nothing. That is not progress, that is a squandering. 

The fiberglass construction should by the end of the year, thus 2025, reach 50 percent. We can gladly wager on whether you still reach it. We have a Ministry which wants much, but does little; a Ministry which wants to save, yet incinerates money; and a Ministry which wants to modernize, yet remains clinging to an old bureaucracy. “State Modernization” is not allowed to remain a slogan. We require clear data standards, mandatory [verbindliche] goals and, before all, consequences if things don’t work. For the state belongs to the citizens – you are only service providers – and they deserve something better than your expensive promises without effect. 

Herr Wildberger, perhaps just a small tip: In this coalition, you simply have not a chance. Previously, all of this coalition’s election promises were broken. Why should it be different with you? 

Dear Union, you act as if you were for the first time in government. In that regard, you however are guilty: In the Merkel years, you turned Germany into a digital developing country. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Michael Espendiller, July 8, 2025, Fiscal Policy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/16, pp. 1449-1451. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear audience in the hall and at the screens. 

Governments can be voted out, but not debts. Alone in this year, the black-red Federal government plans with its budget new debts in the sum of 143.1 billion euros. That means that every fourth euro which is over-spent from this Federal budget comes from new debts, thus from money which we certainly do not have, and also to which no income is matched [gegenüberstehen]; since to the planned total budget in a sum of 564.3 billion euros, there is matched a total income of only 421.4 billion euros. Serious appears otherwise, Herr Klingbeil. 

In the mid-term finance planning to 2029, thus in the next four years, it appears worse. Black-red will here take up overall new debts in a sum of 846.9 billion euros, almost one trillion euros in just four years. Herren Merz and Klingbeil will thereby increase the current indebtedness within one election cycle by a whopping 50 percent. They have thereby even topped all the horror calculations which we here have queued-up, following your coup d’état of a Basic Law alteration with the voted-out Bundestag. Were the Union in the opposition, an outcry would go through the country. Axel Springer would fire from all barrels and the downfall of this country within the briefest time would be prophesied. 

Yet Friedrich Merz is Chancellor, he who longed to be a Chancellor of change, who however unfortunately wants only to be an extern Chancellor. Thus everything remains quiet as a mouse. All look away, stick the head in the sand. Many think: He hopefully will know what he is doing. Others are simply paralyzed and doubt the reality. It is the monstrosity of this indebtedness which basically nips in the bud every criticism. Who willingly places himself against such a huge tsunami? Now, to that, there is an answer. We do it, once more the only ones in this country. We, the AfD Bundestag delegation, decisively oppose this madness, are against this financial policy run amok. This mountain of debt is not without an alternative. 

Yes, the problems in this country are great: A decaying infrastructure, a healthcare system on the verge of collapse, ever further climbing costs of the social security system. And the economy finds itself, despite well-tempered, kiss-kiss summer selfies, ever still in decline. Yet all of this need be no permanent situation. What we now require is a clear analysis of our spending policy. For what do we spend money? Which purpose does this thus pursue? Do we thereby at all achieve this purpose? Is there not also another way? We need thus to ask ourselves in regards each, single budget item: Is it required? Need that really be? And then we of course need the courage to say: That can go, that we no longer do; since we are simply no longer able to manage that. We can thus arrive at an authentic budget consolidation and thus again enable the state to effectively concentrate itself on its core duties. 

We require fundamental structural reforms, and need to finally stop just talking about deconstruction of bureaucracy, and finally do it. Our economy, our doctors, our teachers, all are oppressed by a flood of prescripts which take from them the joy in their work. The work ethic [Arbeitsmoral] in Germany is grounded. 

            Kathrin Michel (SPD): By you!

It is aground due to the daily, massive, bureaucratic tutelage with which the people need to struggle, and which costs our economy billions, and brings purely nothing. 

Although everyone knows this, continually come new prescripts and regulations. Why actually did not the government for once get started with that before it started the debts torpedo? Instead, Friedrich Merz travels through world history and devotes himself to the pet projects of all the other parties: Give away billions in tax money to foreign countries and the EU. And the finishing touch on that is the Chancellor wants to buy with the new mega-debts 43 billion euros worth of weapons for the Ukraine, while in this country the promised electricity tax reduction still does not yet come for the citizens. That is an absolute insolence against the working middle of this country, and it is evidence of an incapability that you here again have broken your word. 

Still more: It is a fatal signal that the seriousness of the situation in Germany and the signs of the time are ever still not acknowledged. If we want to get our economy underway, then we need to really unchain it. We need to reduce the taxes for citizens and business, and that permanently. Every euro which the state loosens from the citizen in excess taxes reduces the motivation [Leitsungsbereitschaft] of every, single individual. Why should one strain himself if from his own work so little remains; that one asks himself whether work at all still pays? And should one do overtime when the state withholds half the pay, and then spends it for dubious NGOs, or the clothing worn by Georgine Kellermann? 

The worst is: A large part of the Union quite precisely knows all of this. Presumably, many even agree with me – secretly, of course. Yet as a result of the decision to enter into a coalition with the SPD, Germany now receives a red-red-green Politik. That looks very nice to the Greens’ present lack of concepts. All that they have imagined in their most daring dreams will now be implemented by black-red. 

They certainly no longer know what they still should say all day long. Yet this red-red-green socialism, the people in the country have voted out. The German have voted for a fundamental change of course. They have voted for financial policy stability, and issued a refusal to the further-so of the downfall. 

The Union basically misplayed it. Yet we will well set it right. We rejoice at the pending budget consultations, and once again stand ready with many good proposals for making Germany better. 

Many thanks for the attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Jörn König, June 26, 2025, Tax Reform and Merz

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/14, pp. 1238-1239. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear taxpayers. 

Germany has at its disposal a tax income of 1,000 billion euros and thus has no income problem, but a spending and justice problem. Families and Mittelstand are burdened while multi-millionaires profit, accompanied by an inflated bureaucracy. We say: An end to that! 

It is high time for a new start – a new start with a tax rate of 25 percent for all. No more special rights for the rich or concerns. Simple, fair, and no longer to be manipulated. 

There is a high allowance of 15,000 euros per adult and 12,000 euros per child. A family with three children and 85,000 euros employee gross income [Arbeitnehmerbrutto] with us in the future pays zero euros income tax, saves almost 12,000 euros and receives additional Kindergeld. We promote those who go to work and raise children and thus fulfill the generations contract. 

And what does the coalition plan? They deliver a tragedy on installment. A couple of years of diminishing balance, after which a tiny reduction of the corporation tax, yet just from 2028, over five years at times one little percentage point. That is at best a mini-reform. That is the administration of a standstill. You do not once do what you promise in the coalition contract and progress program of the beginning of June – to implement the reduction of the electricity tax for consumers and business. 

The SPD asserts we would relieve only the rich. Completely false! According to the DIW [German Economic Research Institute] and the Handelsblatt of February 10, those with a small purse profit especially with a relief of 5.1 percent at an income of up to 41,000 euros. And he who earns millions with us in any case pays 25 percent, yet on a broader basis and thus more than today. 

The Union is besides no better. Herr Merz was chairman of the board at BlackRock. BlackRock by means of tax tricks withdraws at least 50 million euros yearly from Germany; in the EU over six years, it is up to one billion. Herr Merz, you unfortunately are now Chancellor. 

            Hendrik Hoppenstadt (CDU/CSU): We find that quite good!

These tax loopholes you need to close in your new job. 

The Alternative für Deutschland’s Tax Reform 25 [Drucksache 21/590] closes these loopholes also for the local authorities. The cooperative community tax [Gemeindewirtschaftsteuer] as a local authorities surcharge finally creates reliability, instead of shaky business taxes. 

Counter-financing [Gegenfinanzierung]: We have it! We simply eliminate ideologically loaded spending in the billions. 80 billion euros for migration and foreign benefits. 53 billion euros for symbol policy in climate protection, many billions of euros for left-green NGOs. In addition to that comes a 32 billion euro growth effect by means of bureaucracy dismantlement, likewise confirmed by the DIW, Berlin. 

The government instead makes gigantic debts which our children and grandchildren will work off. The debts broken promise, Herr Merz, you already prepared before the election. You had an opinion drawn up on how to circumvent the debt brake, and with the old Bundestag, a giant debts package can be concluded. The Chancellorship of Friedrich Merz is based on a big lie. We, the Alternative für Deutschland, commit to the truth. We commit to relief instead of redistribution – for the families, for the Mittelstand and for those who produce the benefits. We need the Tax Reform 25. Now! 

 

[trans: tem]

Beatrix von Storch, July, 2025, AfD Strategy Process

AfD Bundestag Delegation, July, 2025. 

To shape Germany politically – the end of the firewall and the way to government responsibility. 

Ideas and proposals for a strategy process of the AfD Bundestag delegation. 

Introduction 

The AfD achieved a great success at the last Bundestag election. It dislodged the SPD as the second strongest power in Germany and has become by far the strongest power in eastern Germany. In Germany, there is a clear middle-right majority with which the migration change and the economic change can be implemented. 

Despite the great election success and the voters’ large assent, the firewall prevents a sharing in the government by the AfD, the exclusion of the AfD continues to be enforced, and the AFD is even threatened with a ban. To become a permanent people’s party, to overcome the firewall and to pave the way to government responsibility is an enormous challenge for which a strategy is required. The following paper offers proposals for an AfD delegation strategy process in the German Bundestag. 

Prerequisite for the fall of the firewall and government responsibility for the AfD: 

The AFD strives for government responsibility in Germany. The actions of the black-red coalition prove that neither a migration change nor an economic change is possible without the AfD as a driving power in the government. The political change in Germany is only to be achieved when the AfD overtakes the government responsibility. So that the AfD can design politically, the the firewall needs to fall. 

The firewall will fall and the way for assumption of government responsibility will be open when 

1.      The AfD is firmly anchored by its core voters who vote for the AfD out of adherence and conviction, the AfD exploits additional parts of its potential, and has clearly gained in acceptance beyond the AfD voter base (Part I).

2.      Other party-overlapping coalitions are no longer possible because the rift between Union and the leftist parties can no longer be bridged (Part II). 

In the following will be sketched possible ways of creating the prerequisites for such a scenario. 

Part I. Create majorities – the people for the government responsibility won by the AfD. 

For the analysis, we separate into three relevant groups the electorate for the AfD: The AfD’s voter base, the AfD’s potential, and the scope of acceptance [Akzeptanzumfeld]. 

To the AfD’s voter base belong those who with great certainty vote for the AfD and can be permanently united to the AFD. 

The potential are those voters who basically can imagine themselves voting for the AfD and who also are attainable as possible voters. 

The scope of acceptance are those voters who do not vote for the AfD and do not intend doing so, yet under certain circumstances may welcome or at least do not reject a government participation by the AfD. 

According to INSA, the AfD’s voter base is around 18 percent; additionally, with the present voters and the potential voters, the AfD could achieve up to 30 percent of votes. Yet even if the AfD completely exploited its potential, that is no guaranty for the end of the firewall and a participation in government. In addition, there needs be a scope of acceptance which indeed does not vote for the AfD, but is not unfavorably opposed to a participation in government by the AfD. 

So that the AfD can attain government responsibility in Germany and shape the Politik in Germany, it needs to permanently unite to itself its voter base, exploit the greater portion of its potential, and expand and attain a basic acceptance of its participation in legislation and government. For all three groups, voter base, potential, scope of acceptance, the AfD requires a differentiated strategy. 

1. Unite base voters: Ostdeutsche, workers, rural area, young voters, Russlanddeutsche.

The goal is to create a tight milieu anchoring and a permanent voter base. Voters should not vote for the AFD primarily out of protest or frustration, but because they identify themselves with the AfD. In the following milieus and regions, a tighter anchoring is already visible: 

Ostdeutsche, workers, citizens in villages and small and mid-sized cities, Russlanddeutsche and Germans from the post-Soviet space, and first time voters, especially young men. 

So as to permanently unite the voter base to the AfD and to strongly anchor the AfD in these milieus, the delegation prepares in three areas: 

The AfD delegation identifies the political interests and problems of these groups and develops concrete legislative initiatives which therein aim to accomplish the base voters’ concrete interests and to improve their living situation. 

The AfD identifies the channels of communication and creates referral networks so as to continually and permanently communicate with the base voters. 

The AFD works towards a positive self-image of the base voters and their sense of life  which is tightly bound with the AfD. 

The AfD directs to this purpose work groups which identify the interests of base voters, develops a communications strategy, and draws up a positive picture of these groups; for example, workers as the providers of performance, Ostdeutsche as an avant garde of democracy and freedom, rural people as carriers of good, traditional values, young Germans as bearers of hope of a better future. Thus shall be developed a common AfD purpose image as a free, conservative people’s party which embraces its voter coalition. 

2. Identify potential: Over-60 generation, women, academics, churched [kirchcennahe] Christians, big cities.

In regards specific groups, the election results clearly lagged behind. The following groups can be identified in which the AFD has not exploited its potential and which represent a large portion of the German people: 

Women, citizens with a college education, citizens in big cities and metropolitan areas, voters over 60, and professing [konfessionsgebundene] Christians. 

These groups are not homogenous and cannot be addressed as a unit. So as to increase and win for the AfD these hard-to-access groups, we require a socio-demographic micro-analysis of these groups. Partial groups need to identified to be able to build a bridge to them. 

Examples of such partial groups: 

A partial group of women is, for example, housewives and mothers; of academics, engineers and graduates of technical training; of big cities and metropolitan areas, citizens in focal points or outlying locales; in regards the over-60 generation, pensioners concerned about crime or older people with traditional values; and a partial group of professing Christians is conservative Protestants and Catholics. 

The delegation’s work groups should deeply occupy themselves with the social groups in which the AfD is weaker. They may identify hindrances and problems at talks with these groups and develop solutions, find sub-groups which may be addressed for the AfD, and propose measures for themes and a communications strategy so as to become stronger in these groups.

             3. Enlarge the scope of acceptance.

Even strong elections results are no guaranty for an AfD participation in government. As important to the mobilization of base voters and to the address to potential voters are concrete public opinion indicators for the scope of acceptance: Surveys of AfD Verbot procedures, for acceptance of various forms of cooperation with the AfD, for government participation and for fundamental rejection and fear of the AfD. 

The goal is to reduce below 50 percent the portion of voters who express fear of the AfD, who are for banning the AfD and who reject a cooperation with the AfD.

For that, it is important to analyze by means of collections of public opinion which negative images, negative narratives and notions of the AfD exist, and how these are mediated and strengthened. On the basis of the knowledge is then a proper strategy developed for a targeted counter-communication which refutes the arguments against the AfD, a positive purpose image developed, and proposals formulated on how the scope of acceptance can be clearly enlarged. The target groups of our efforts for enlarging the scope of acceptance are: 

Citizens who do not belong to the voter base or the potential of the AfD, and whose rejection on the basis of their ideological location and party affiliation is not insurmountable. 

Part II. Split black-red – Prevent party-overlapping coalitions.

Majorities without the AfD were hitherto possible by means of party-overlapping coalitions, coalitions of the Union with the SPD or Greens. The firewall will fall when these political options have failed and are no longer possible. In the end, the Ampel broke down because the opposition between the expectations of the FDP”s bürgerliche voters and those of red-green were ultimately no longer bridgeable. The conflict potential between the CDU/CSU and the SPD, especially between the conservative market economy wing of the Union and the SPD-Linke, is especially great. The AfD has two ways to enlarge these rifts: 

1. The polarization of debate leads to the separation of bürgerliche-conservative camps from leftist radical camps: The demarcation [Abgrenzung] of the radical leftists, who for the majority of Germans represent unacceptable positions, facilitates the AfD positioning itself as a bürgerliche-conservative power. The strengthening of the radical leftists proceeds at the cost of the SPD and Greens, and forces these onto a course which makes the agreements with the Union considerably more difficult. 

2. The pressure on the CDU/CSU increases: The AfD will launch motions and initiatives which meet with a high agreement within the Union voter base, especially the voters who voted for the CDU/CSU for a migration and economic change, yet now are disillusioned by black-red. Besides the migration change, the AfD takes in view the economic change as a central theme field so as to increase the pressure on the Union and make accessible new competences and voters for the AfD. 

1. Polarization against the Linke. 

            1.1 Drive forward separation of the bürgerliche-conservative camps from                                 Leftist camps.

Presently, polarization in Germany proceeds all too often between AfD voters and all others. Our aim is to create a situation in which the political rifts no longer run between the AfD and the other political streams, but a bürgerliche-conservative camp and a radicalizing leftist camp oppose one another, comparable to the situation in the U.S.A. 

The starting point for such a development is given: 

The Linke have become a driving power in the leftist camp which makes it difficult for the Greens and SPD to engage in compromises with the CDU/CSU; for example, in regards migration and economy. 

The AfD and the Linke form the two ideological poles of the social argument. As a counter-pole to the ideological and woke Linke, the AfD can sharpen its bürgerliche profile. 

The AfD can essentially contribute to that the argument in politics and society becomes a “duel” between the two irreconcilably opposed camps, culminating in an  election between the AfD and Linke: Weidel or Reichinneck. 

The consequences of this polarization already show themselves with the Bundestag election in regards the first-time voters. There, the FDP and Greens were relieved as the strongest political powers by the AfD and Linke. If this trend spreads through the entire electorate, the political poles will be stronger, the rifts between both camps greater. The rifts within the camps, such as between AfD voters and CDU/CSU voters, becomes smaller because the Linke have a strong interest in attacking even moderate conservative and CDU-like positions as being close to the AfD.   

            1.2 Differentiate communications strategy. 

The communication needs to be thematically, rhetorically and argumentively differentiated between the argument with the opposing leftist camp and the argument within the bürgerliche-conservative camp. 

The argument with the leftist camp will be conducted on a fundamental level with the central point on socio- and cultural-political basic conflicts:  Family versus gender, nation versus open borders, freedom versus socialism. 

The argument with the Union needs to be primarily conducted on the themes of credibility and trust, substantially [konkret] on the political failures in regards the practical implementation of the migration change and economic change. 

In a Kulturkampf with the Linke, the AfD positions itself as the only relevant opposing force; as the credible original in political competition with the CDU/CSU, it delivers what the Union in the election campaign has only promised. 

2. Political pressure on the Union. 

            2.1 The AfD can become the strongest party with variable voters from                                    the CDU/CSU.

In the 2025 Bundestag election, the CDU/CSU gained four million voters from the SPD, FDP and non-voters; 1.76 million voters from the SPD, 1.35 million voters from the FDP and .9 million non-voters voted for the Union. These new voters for the Union gave as a reason for the vote decision that the Union after Merkel had changed course. Economic growth, domestic security were the most important themes of the CDU/CSU voters. 

If the AfD succeeded in winning these variable voters from the CDU/CSU, it will be the strongest power and expel the Union to the second place. If the AfD gained these four million voters, the absolute number of its voters climbs from ten to 14 million. That corresponds to an election result of about 28 percent, which largely corresponds to the AfD’s measured voter potential. The CDU/CSU would correspondingly lose votes and come out even worse than in 2021, as it attained with its Chancellor candidate Armin Lachet a historic low of 24 percent. 

For that it may succeed in motivating these new Union voters to a change to the AfD there speaks: 

            That these new CDU/CSU voters have already shown themselves ready to change 

            That they have voted out of protest against the Ampel CDU/CSU 

            That they are in agreement with the AfD’s positions on domestic and                                    economic policy 

            That the Union by its coalition with the SPD disillusioned these groups of voters 

The way to win these earlier SPD, FDP and non-voters, who at this election gave their votes to the Union, lies in, besides the migration policy, the key question of economic competence.  

The Union stands before the dilemma that compromise with the SPD makes it easy for the AfD to win these voters from the Union – the fight over these voters inevitably brings it into conflict with the SPD and Greens. 

2.2 The AfD as the party of the sozial market economy: Overtake the CDU/CSU in economic competence. 

The “core brand” of the CDU/CSU lies in its economic and financial competence. In the voters’ attributions of competence prior to the Bundestag election, it was far ahead of all other parties. “Economic growth” was a central motiv for the election of the CDU/CSU. The AfD strongly increased in these competence fields in the last Bundestag election, yet still lay far removed from the Union’s competence values other than in regards to that of migration where the competence attributions lay more closely one with the other. 

The economic competence is the key question so as to exploit the potential, to win the Union’s variable voters, and to enlarge acceptance for the AfD’s government responsibility. The goal is to essentially reduce the Union’s margin in regards attribution of competences in the areas of economy and finance, and to conclusively overtake the Union. In the eyes of the voters, the AfD needs to stand not only for the migration change but also for the economic change. 

The starting point for that is given: 

The lifting of the debt brake cost the Union considerably in credibility. The growing state debt and interest burden will become in the coming years a permanent theme. 

As a result of the coalition with the SPD, wide-ranging and necessary structural reforms are practically impossible. The massive problems for Germany as a business venue and for the social security system are not to be solved by the least common denominator of the CDU/CSU and SPD. 

The AfD can make market economy, ordnungspolitische and financial policy demands and program points of its own without the Union, as a result of its captivity in the coalition with the SPD, being able to oppose something credible to it. 

The AfD is the only party which, without regard to leftist climate discourse, can acknowledge itself for economic growth and can act in the central energy themes without ideological restrictions. 

The theme of economic growth and the prosperity promises united with it, besides the themes of migration and domestic security, can be an additional mainstay for the AfD, and at the same time be the clothes pin between the AfD’s various voter groups: From the unemployed to workers to the self-employed, from the former SPD to the former FDP voters, and also thereby for CDU/CSU’s variable voters. 

3. Foreign policy should create no additional problems. 

The base electorate as well as the AfD’s potential voters are primarily to be addressed by means of domestic and economic policy positions. The AfD’s foreign policy positioning has the duty to avoid controversies within its own electorate, to minimize areas of attack and thereby contribute to enlarging the AfD’s scope of acceptance. A duty of AfD foreign policy is to early identify the danger of potential internal conflicts and current negative effects for the AfD by a wise  positioning and a stringent communication agreed to within the delegation. 

Outlook: Use the members’ experience and competence. 

An overall strategy, especially in regards to the many various voter groups, should use the experience and competences of the members of the Bundestag delegation. The delegation has at its disposal comprehensive knowledge from its voter circles, from the citizen contacts, and a reservoir of life and vocational experience with which that of no other delegation is comparable. 

In a strategy process itself arise new ideas, especially in the address to the base voters, the potential, and the scope of acceptance, but also in regards considerations of tearing down the firewall and opening the way for government ability. Work groups for individual voter groups make it possible to speak beyond the usual snips of political themes, of access to the various target groups, and to speak of the solution of outlined problems, to use experiences, gather together ideas, to use available sources, so that they can flow into the overall strategy. 

The socio-empirical evaluation and analysis and strategic adaptation is thereby a permanent duty with the goal of optimizing our result and making possible the political change in Germany. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Christine Anderson, July 9, 2025, EU Stockpiling

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)07-09(3-0405-0000). 

Herr President. 

In Soviet communism also was stockpiling managed – giant, secret storehouses full of grain, fuel and medical supplies which often remained unused. Now the EU Commission, under the covering of resilience, builds up stocks inaccessible for citizens, administered by non-elected elites, according to guidelines for which no one has voted. The Russian dissident Vladimir Bukowski already warned of this rising EUdSSR, a bureaucratic super-state with economic planning as per a Soviet model. One just thinks of the mRNA injections debacle. 215 million doses disposed of, having decayed. Four billion euros simply gone – thanks to the EU Commission. As always, the reckoning is paid by the taxpayer – families, workers, farmers – while inflation shoots up to the heights and supply chains collapse. Europe requires freedom so as to build, to trade, and to prosper. Crisis provisions, yes; but um Gottes willen, no storage economy under Brussels incompetence. Here, solely and alone are demanded the member states. 

 

[trans: tem]

René Aust, July 9, 2025, New Majorities

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)07-09(3-0018-0000). 

Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

I want to initially begin with something positive, for the national states have allowed a hint that they want to weaken the supply chain guidelines. Finally thus the Council too goes in the right direction, as it also often and increasingly happens in this parliament – unfortunately however always too slowly; for the world is changing, it changes rapidly, profoundly and irreversibly. Radical technological change, demographic shifts, geopolitical tensions – everywhere we feel the change. Only one continent in comparison to the speeds of other parts of the world apparently stands still, namely Europe. While China runs away in artificial intelligence, while India rises to be a global technology site, and the U.S.A. opens new growth centers, we unfortunately lag behind. 

What we experience is no accident; since as before this continent is fettered by a left-green ideology. Much too seldom do politicians in responsible positions have the courage to use the new majorities in this parliament, but also on this entire continent, to the benefit of a patriotic change. We are available for that. We know that Europe works when its richness is respected, and not when it produces egalitarianism; and besides, only when there is freedom of opinion, and it is not circumscribed, as you seek to do. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, June 24, 2025, Germany, the U.S.A. and Peace

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/12, pp. 986-988. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Even following the ceasefire called for by U.S. President Donald Trump, the danger of an escalation of the Israeli-Iranian conflict into a wildfire is still not banished. In this situation, it is important to use all existing channels at one’s disposal so as to actually take leave from the dynamic of military escalation. A foundation for that is a realistic estimate of the situation. Israel’s right to exist thereby stands beyond any discussion. Israel has the legitimate right to a maintenance and guaranty of its security. An Iranian atomic bomb would not only be an existential threat to the State of Israel but also for stability and peace in the Near and Middle East and in the entire world. 

Iran, like every other country in the world, has the right to peaceful and exclusively civil use of nuclear power. It needs to not only acknowledge a renunciation of the development and manufacture of nuclear weapons, but also to open all facilities and establishments of nuclear development and research for independent international control. With the removal of Iranian nuclear capacity and rocket launch facilities by Israel and the U.S.A. lapses a central reason for the further pursuit of an exchange of military strikes. This opens the opportunity for a diplomatic solution which takes into account Israel’s security interests. The U.S. American Vice-president J. D. Vance has expressed himself in this sense and thereby indicated the way which now needs be taken. That will not be possible without the participation of world nuclear powers allied with Iran, especially Russia. The Israeli-Iranian war forcefully demonstrates how severely [bitter] necessary an American-Russian understanding for peace and security would be in this world.   

The EU states and Germany have needed to painfully experience that in this discussion also they  play no role. For mindless action for action’s sake, and embarrassing false estimates, the German Foreign Minister Wadephul, his European Office Minister and the overwhelmed EU Foreign Affairs Commissioner are thoroughly to blame. A European Union which is primarily occupied with itself can play no serious role in the world. Who harms himself with a ban on combustion engines and a climate planned economy, squanders his resources in the manipulation and restriction of citizens’ rights, and is grimly fixated on the prolongation of war in the Ukraine, takes himself out of the game. 

Still a word to you, Herr Chancellor: Unserious tough talk over supposed “dirty work” damages Germany’s image, primarily in international matters. I could not believe it as I heard it. 

Germany and the European nations need to find a way back to a realistic estimate of their own possibilities and limits so that they can credibly enter on the way of mediation; since it is most urgently in the German and European interest to quickly end the warfare in the Near East. It threatens commercial movement and supply of raw materials, and contains the danger of new migration flows which destabilize the European continent and especially Germany. 

Where we ourselves can act, we need to take the matter in hand. It is of concern to us to prevent, with robust border protection, a new wave of immigration of Islamists and those posing a danger into our country. It is within our power to put a stop to the import of conflicts and civil wars from other regions, in which we consistently deport foreign instigators and rigorously punish anti-semitic excesses. Therein ultimately depends the continuation of Germany as a democratic and freely constituted Republic of Germans. This existence right of Germany should be in the hearts of us all at least even so as the uncontested and legitimate existence right of Israel. 

Hundreds of thousands of soldiers have already fallen in the Ukraine in this American-Russian proxy war. To quickly end it is in any case in the German and European interest. The key to peace lies in Moscow and Washington. That a new American leadership is ready in that regard signifies a grand opportunity. 

It is frankly absurd when, Herr Merz, in a grotesque self-overestimate, you believe you needed to take responsibility to continue the proxy war in which even the U.S.A. has for long lost interest. While you with martial rhetoric dig the graves ever deeper, the U.S. President long since sounds out the possibilities of future economic cooperation in Russia. 

You instead are enthusiastic that for the 17 EU sanctions packages against Russia an 18^th is to follow which will again harm the German economy. President Trump besides rejects new Russia sanctions because the U.S.A. would thereby – I cite – lose “billions of dollars”. The American President is right! 

            Markus Frohnmaier (AfD): German interests!

And on the other hand, your Foreign Minister as it happens says – I cite – “Of German claims there need be now no consideration taken”. This disdain for the interests of our country frankly appears to be the leitmotiv of your government. 

You are silent when the EU Commission plans, to Germany’s disadvantage, to completely forbid gas deliveries from Russia, and to thereby drive the energy prices still further to the heights, and you even signal agreement when the EU by law permanently prevents any restart of Nord Stream 

            Hendrik Hoppenstadt (CDU/CSU): Who turned it off?

and in this way wants to retroactively legitimate the criminal assault on Germany’s infrastructure. It would actually be a post facto witticism [Treppenwitz] if the exploded Nord Stream gas pipelines were restarted as it happens by a U.S. consortium. Advantageous pipeline natural gas from Russia is indispensable for the supply of Germany with secure and affordable energy. Expensive imports by sea of liquified gas are in the long-term no alternative. 

The foolish remark of your Foreign Minister Wadephul, Russia will ever remain our enemy, is revealing. The overcoming of the fatal hereditary foe thinking by the generation of Konrad Adenauer and Charles de Gaulle was once the foundation for peace and prosperity in Europe. And you regress [Sie fallen dahinter zurück]! Geography does not allow itself to be simply denied! Russia will in the future be our European neighbor. No way, short or long, leads past agreement with Russia and a new security architecture of all actors and their legitimate security interests. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Borders of 1937?

Now would be the point in time, Herr Chancellor, for a first step on this way to peace. 

Many hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Mary Khan, June 19, 2025, Hague Judgments Convention

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)06-19(4-0103-0000). 

Herr President. 

This convention shows how international cooperation without Brussels patronization can work. Great Britain is no longer part of the EU. For that, we have to thank the patience and steadfastness of a free people; of that, the British can be proud. And yet it succeeded in creating legal certainty on an equal level. 

A sovereign state, a treaty of international law, clear rules, quite without expense in the billions of an officials’ apparatus, without ideology – precisely that is our way. We need to reduce the European cooperation to the essentials: Interior market, protection of exterior borders and voluntary, bi-lateral treaties between sovereign national states. 

Instead, we experience an EU which inflates itself into a political super-state which costs billions and which meddles ever deeper in national decisions. We will vote in favor because it shows how an authentic partnership appears: According to a state of law, voluntary and sovereign. 

 

[trans: tem]

Anja Arndt, May 21, 2025, Carbon Border Adjustment

EU Parliament, Brussels, P10 CRE-REV(2025)05-21(1-0244-0000). 

Herr President. 

The Green Deal has become a gigantic economy destruction program. European businesses needed to pay 39 billion euros in the year 2024 alone for emissions certificates. In Germany in the last year, 120,000 industrial workplaces were lost. Imports from non-EU countries meanwhile are essentially more advantageous, and are causing problems for our producers. 

And now shall CBAM – the CO₂ Border Adjustment – bring it again into order? From 2026, our importers of, for example, steel, aluminum, cement and fertilizer shall now also pay CO₂ penalty duties. Shall that reconstruct the competitiveness? That is the big question. A dangerous semblance of a solution. A very dangerous semblance of a solution. Farmers will be further ruined, who are dependent on the international economy. Deloitte estimates that, as a result of the CBAM, a VW Golf will become 1,500 euros more expensive, and even wheat around 7 percent on account of higher prices for fertilizer. The CO₂ certificate and the CBAM will have no influence on the Earth’s temperature, and ought to be abolished without replacement. All else is extremely dangerous. 

Germany needs the AfD. Europe needs the ESN.

  

[trans: tem]

René Springer, May 15, 2025, Sozialpolitik

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/4, pp. 216-217. 

Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear guests. 

Frau Minister, for a beginning: We wish you all the best and much luck. You will need the luck; since you overtake not only an important ministry, but also a social policy field of rubble. 

Eight million pensioners in Germany are under the level of the basic security. A hairdresser who worked 40 years gets a pension of 700 euros, while a Syrian with two wives and four children receives 5,000 euros for doing nothing. That is absurd, that is wrong. Those who criticize this are not right-wing extremists, they are simply extremely right. 

High energy prices, expensive groceries, and the tax burden drive broad swathes of the population into poverty. The Tafeln report record crowds, the unemployment increases. A country in which a fresh apple and a warm dwelling become luxuries has a failed social policy. He who works in this country will be systematically taken advantage of. The Bürgergeld rises while the real wages sink. The social state becomes an apparatus for punishing the diligent. And then comes Herr Merz tottering around the corner and says to the Germans they need to work more so as to secure the prosperity in this country. 

What is sold to us as skilled labor immigration is much too often an immigration into our social system, into a maintained dependency. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): That is a lie!

More than half of the young foreigners in Germany have no occupational certification, and the number of foreign Bürgergeld recipients is exploding. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): That is mendacious.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is no modern Sozialpolitik. That is a failure of the state. 

            Tanja Machalet (SPD): That is a falsehood, what you are telling!

That, what you of the so-called progressive coalition have left behind, is not progress. That is decay! That is the bitter consequence when leftist-green ideologues are allowed to govern, who think there is a basic right to migration, not depending on training level, not depending on the qualification, and without use for our country. 

Those who are convinced that a well built social state can combine with unlimited immigration, those are beyond help, and they are not to lead this country [denen ist nicht zu helfen, und die haben nicht dieses land zu führen]. 

And then we still have the ideologues to whom equality is more important than justice, and redistribution more important than relief. He who produces in Germany will be punished; who does not produce will be paid. The Bürgergeld stands emblematically for your madness. Those same ideologues dream of saving the world climate and of intentionally expensive energy, heating, dwellings and driving. For many, that means freezing in winter, daily renunciations, rising unemployment, and poverty as a new normality. That is no environmental protection. That is a social-political powder keg! 

151 AfD members have been elected to stop this ideological blind flight of the cartel parties. We now need a clear change of course – away from ideology, into reason; away from global redistribution, into responsibility for one’s own people. It is time for a Sozialpolitk for Germans. 

Precisely for this reason we demand the following measures: 

First. Stop the immigration into the social system. Germany may no longer be a magnet for poverty migration. Foreigners maintained long-term have nothing to lose in the Bürgergeld. The social state must be there for our citizens and not for social tourists. 

Second. Lower taxes for small and middle incomes! Abolition without replacement of the CO₂ duty. An end to green inflation! He who carries the country needs to be relieved – immediately and long-term. More net from gross is no act of grace. It is what the people have earned, those who keep this country running. 

Third. An end to social transfers without conditions into Bürgergeld. We need an activating basic security with clear rules and considerations. We need tough sanctions for those who are exploiting us. 

Fourth. A life’s work deserves respect – you mentioned it – and not alms. Who has worked for decades can in old age plainly not become a social case. And who has worked must in old age always have more than anyone who has plainly not done that. The whole would be able to be financed if the plundering of the pension accounts by non-insurance benefits was stopped. 

Fifth. Let us use the potential we have in our own country. 1.6 million young people have no occupational qualification. We need to give them a perspective with a real occupational training, a targeted qualification. The skilled labor shortage will plainly not be solved by mass immigration, but through training and innovation. 

Frau Minister, if you really want social justice, then end this ideologically driven self-destruction of our social state. Finally protect what millions of Germans and well integrated foreigners have built. If you are not in the position for that, then vacate the field, and leave to us this responsibility. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): Certainly not! 

            Tanja Machalet (SPD): Never!

I thank you for the attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Siegbert Droese, May 21, 2025, Nord Stream and Trump

EU Parliament, Brussels, P10 CRE-REV(2025)05-21(1-0286-0000). 

Herr President. Esteemed colleagues. My dear elders in the gallery. 

The total de-coupling from the Russian oil and gas market truly presents the height of nonsense. The consequences can be observed in my Heimat Germany: Years-long recession, businesses fleeing to foreign countries, and everyday there are mass lay-offs of skilled workers. Just today the economic experts reported of a further worsening of Germany’s economic situation. If one speaks with businessmen, without exception reference is made to high energy costs. Prior to the Nord Stream 2 explosion, Germany had competitive energy prices. The Commission’s present plans are willful nonsense. Still more: The Commission lies to the people: Neither are the sanctions effective against Russia, nor were the Russians unreliable trading partners before the Commission decided on Europe’s economic suicide. There where trade is managed for mutual advantage – that was once Germany’s strength – is as a rule no shooting at one another. I commend Donald Trump’s wise policy of interests. Donald Trump is even considering, in common with the Russians, to repair and operate Nord Stream 2. Bravo! Nord Stream 2 as a peace project – a beautiful concept for the new Europe. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, May 14, 2025, Politics and Policy

German Bundestag, May 14, 2025, Plenarprotokoll 21/3, pp. 102-104. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

New Federal governments have one thing in common: They bear the burden of the failed Politik made a half-century before. The bad infrastructure in transport and communication, in health and education, has a pre-history, and this is substantially connected with CDU/CSU, SDP, Green and FDP governments. Chancellors come and go, yet one thing remains: There never was the will for courageous and honest reforms. 

Meanwhile, one thing has become more difficult about the political competition. The inconvenient change from the government to the opposition and back is history, since in this parliament more than three parties make Politik. For Politik means: To make compromises. And yes, it is more strenuous that more parties need to be won. Each delegation thereby represents a number of voters, for my delegation following this Bundestag election, over 10 million who have given their votes to the Alternative für Deutschland. Herr Spahn, it is plainly not just the frustrated who have voted for the AfD. We think it is time to engage with these voters with respect. For you to make general accusations, and to thereby curl yourself up in political Berlin, convinces ever fewer voters. We speak now in the third legislature of vice-presidents, committee chairmen, and meanwhile even over whether we can use a delegation hall which corresponds to the occupational safety and evacuation regulations. Last year, the business and house order was passed, ja polished, so as not to need to designate it strategically changed. There were media campaigns orchestrated which want to deprive my delegation of the parliamentary practices in accord with making Politik in the interest of our country. All of that is long since no longer little games, ladies and gentlemen. 

Now the Social Democrats do not want to make available to us a work room, the delegation hall. In that regard, two points: 

First, the historic Reichstag building belongs to no party, but to country and people.

Second, we all, members and parties, are elected by the sovereign, the German people, as it is out there on the building, to a time in this parliament. This maneuver thus discredits this parliament and thereby also the citizens of Germany who elected all of us to this position. In likely four years are the next Bundestag elections. Until then, make good Politik. Then perhaps with a strong delegation, you have a good chance to enter 22^nd Bundestag, and advance a claim to a larger hall for your delegation meetings. Until then, dear colleagues, defend the dignity of the parliament, and end this little game! 

Frau President Klöckner, I hereby expressly request you support my delegation’s ability to work. You said following your entry into office, “There are clear…rules” Precisely that, I hope, applies for all delegations. I take you at your word. 

Ladies and gentlemen, let me briefly enter into the Constitution Defense theme. The staging of  May 2, 2025, as I unfortunately need to designate it, caused not only a quake in the media world, but also left behind an utterly insipid taste of a political exercise of power against an opposition party. The departing Interior Minister used her next to last day in office to announce to the media an opinion which in fact was not evaluated by the Federal Interior Ministry, yet was apparently leaked exclusively to individual representatives of the press, but not to the affected party which learned of it from the press. That contradicts not only the equality of opportunity, but also squanders the trust in state organs and measures. As we today know, the opinion is supported on public sources, whether even by parliamentary connections is presently being examined. Everything else will be clarified by legal experts and the courts. For our parliamentary work, it will have only so much influence as we take seriously the duty of the largest opposition delegation. We stand for the freedom of opinion and for the Basic Law. We will closely pursue the government’s Politik, and comment, and indeed hard but constructive. 

In this connection, I need today to speak to the role of non-governmental organizations. To their role in political decision making processes and the thereby associated state financing, a stop needs to be ordered; since all parties should, according to German party law, cite: “Take care for an […] active association between […] people and state organs.” Certainly therefore are biases not only unacceptable, but also contradict the equality principle. In this regard is to be mentioned the denied, as before, financing of the party-associated Erasmus Foundation. Also here, new reasons will ever again be gathered to forgo the state finances to the Alternative für Deutschland, and to distribute to the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, the Böll, the Luxemburg Foundation, and the Ebert Foundation, etc. It’s gladly kept amongst themselves. 

I want to again expressly point out that on the the day of the Chancellor election, we did not provide for the famous result of two ballots. Those, Herr Chancellor, were clearly your majorities which did not come about, the majorities from CDU/CSU and SPD. Besides, afterwards, the CDU approached my delegation and asked for a vote in favor of a time period waiver so that Herr Merz could still become Chancellor on May 6^th. We besides voted for it. The rest of the story, you all know. We were and are ready for constructive cooperation. All channels of discussion for the sake of the people are for us in all cases open. 

I want at this place to enter into the role and significance of eastern Germany [Ostdeutschland]. In your coalition contract, the word emerges three times. Gratefully, you designate the achievements of the eastern Germans as extraordinary. The five new Federal States were and will still be financially supported, by the billions in debt besides everything else. Only, after 35 years of German unity, most of the citizens in the east have not succeeded to stand there in similar financial independence like those in the territory of the old Federal Republic. Much more, the following generations inherit a debts package which is without equal. Beyond that, you plan nothing to improve the east’s infrastructural basic equipment. To that belongs not only roads which lead in the direction of the east, but also advantageous energy prices so that firms can be founded without years-long subventions, settle in and, before all, survive. 

The Mittelstand was and, in the east, certainly is the backbone of the German economy. Here, training- and work-places are created. Here, taxes are generated and social duties paid. That is value-creating work. Precisely that makes up Germany. Precisely that Germany needs. Instead, we receive ever more state operations which only live from public means. 

Interesting in that regard is the position of the eastern commissioner. Why actually is this again necessary? The CDU in the election campaign regarded the permanent office as superfluous. Do you believe that your new eastern commissioner of the SPD is really representative for the east? 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Nein!

It’s now really sporty that an eastern commissioner of a party which in Thüringen, Saxony and Saxon-Anhalt unites behind it between 5 and 7 percent of the voters is clothed with this office. That has nothing to do with acceptance. 

Let alone that: The role of eastern commissioner anyway my party, the Alternative für Deutschland, has overtaken. And here I again invite you: Come along with us into discussion. 

I welcome besides the elimination of commissioners’ posts. You thereby implement an important program point which we also for long demand. A commissioner alone bears no responsibility, makes no laws and, before all things, solves no problems; governments and parliaments do that. 

Still a few words for the foreign policy situation. With interest, I follow your approaches to give to the continent of Europe a perspective. It first required a U.S. President by the name of Trump so as to formulate one’s own goals. And we say that European cooperation is basically right and good. Continual new sanctions and ultimatums nevertheless do not contribute to peace. You work for the most part awkwardly, Herr Merz, when you want to make no statement on weapons deliveries. That unsettles all sides. Your predecessor in office remains on this point with a consistent Nein. You should just so leave it as is. 

Otherwise, I very much hope that with you the Great Forgetting does not become a sustained event. From the firewall word, through securing the borders, to the Bürgergeld, you’ve already left behind some impressions. 

We are besides agreed that we in Germany need investments, yet not only those of the state. Finally make an audit so that unnecessary expenditures can be eliminated, and also private investors may find incentives for investing in Germany. 

For last, yet a glance at the energy supply. The Nord Stream pipelines are, following negotiations with Russia, possibly soon in the possession of the U.S.A. Herr Chancellor, do you then have the power to speak out for advantageous gas? The German business and citizens have deserved it. 

To you and your government remain the famous 100 days – even if Germany does not have 100 days’ time for it – to set the switches for the future. We as the largest opposition party will thereby critically accompany you, hard and honest in tone, and fact-oriented. We as opposition delegation are responsible for control of the government. We need, may and will not say what you want to hear. 

Many hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, May 14, 2025, Democracy, Migration, Extremism

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/3, pp. 89-92. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Weakness and instability are the signals which proceed from your historic false start, Herr Merz. You are the Chancellor of the second ballot, and from this stain you will no more be free. You are weak primarily for one reason: You are a Chancellor of the leftists. 

            Heidi Reichinnek (Linke): We are not to blame for everything! 

            Sören Pellman (Linke): This is an impudence, what you say! That is ridiculous.

Your way to the Chancellor’s office is lined with broken election promises and capitulations before the Linke and Greens. The debt brake, to which you high and holy wanted to adhere, you have removed in a financial policy coup d’état, with help of the Greens, with an old Bundestag voted out of office. 

This manner also shows your character, Herr Merz. Up to 1.7 trillion euros in new debt are thereby authorized at one blow. In sum, that is the doubling of the Federal debt – and this in times of recession, of the shrinking economy and the accelerating impoverishment of the citizens. What you thereby serve up, you know quite precisely, since you yourself before the election warned of it. This money will trickle away in all possible channels. The urgently necessary consolidation of the state finances is thereby sacrificed, and the costs for the taxpayer and consumers will drastically rise. In regards another opportunity, you flirt with new taxes and tax increases. And that is an additional broken election promise. Almost 47 billion euros of tax money was devoured in 2024 by the Bürgergeld – you name it basic security – which has long since mutated into migrant money. 47 billion! Almost every second recipient is a foreign citizen. The naturalized foreigners have already fallen out of the statistics. 

            Luigi Pantisano (Linke): What’s with the foreigners from Switzerland?

Around 4 billion euros go to Syrians. That corresponds to the entire budget of the Federal police. Afghans – the nationality with the highest criminality charge in regards violent crimes – received around 1.6 billion euros, as much as foreseen for the social housing construction. It cannot so continue! You however are too weak to change course. 

It continues: The promised abolition of the heating Verbot and the cold expropriation of homeowners by means of the compulsory heat pump is also already again disowned. Exactly like the combustion engine Verbot. You go further with the destruction of the German automobile industry. And you continue Habeck’s heat pump coercion by other means in which you namely make heating with oil and gas even more expensive by the CO₂ air management. 

Instead of ending the planned economy wrong way of the energy change, you even give it a new push, for you, under pressure from the Greens, have even written climate neutrality into the Basic Law. You have additionally cemented the German wrong way drive into impoverishment and de-industrialization. That is dramatic! Heating now becomes more expensive by around 20 percent – the situation this week in the newspapers – tendency rising. The assets of private households in Germany, which in European comparison as well lie in the lower range, according to the Bundesbank’s newest numbers adjusted for inflation since 2021, sank around 20 percent. 20 percent for private households!  The industrial production is in a dive in any case, while the unemployment rises steeply because the production in Germany recedes. It will be stopped. Why? Because the energy prices are too high. 

Without a reliable and affordable energy supply, no economic reconstruction is possible. That goes only by means of a fundamentally different energy policy. End the energy transition. You need to push the re-entry into nuclear power, coal power and the use of advantageous natural gas from Russia! 

            Konstantin von Notz (Greens): Still going to Moscow!

All of that, you do not want. The election promises to correct the nuclear power exit by a responsible CDU Kanzerlin, you in any case have broken. The rest of the world commits to nuclear power. You cling to the Greens’ fetish, hostile to technology. You thus ruin Germany as a business venue. 

Even when you hit upon something correct, half-measures and chaos come forth. The turning back of illegal migrants who enter from secure third states needs be forcefully pursued. It is not discretionary. Border controls and turning back need to ensue without a break and long-term, and not just as momentary pacification measures. Since the illegal immigration into Germany and into the German social system needs to be driven back to zero. 

Turning back at the borders is just a first step, and you even stumble over that. The migration magnets need to be turned off, which lead poverty migrants from all the world over the EU borders to Germany. The Bürgergeld is only one of them. The family reunifications for refugees and asylum seekers, as well as the practices of turbo- and mass-naturalization, need to be immediately completely set aside! Millions of people in illegal ways have come into the country in the last ten years as a consequence of the migration policy rule of injustice which a CDU Kanzerlin set in motion. Hundreds of thousands are immediately obliged to depart, for countless others the residency status needs to be examined and if necessary revoked. To that end, nothing comes from you. 

The migration criminality as a consequence has exploded. The murders, knifings and rapes go on, day by day, week by week. To speak out on these facts is, in the eyes of your subordinated Constitution Defense, allegedly hostile to the constitution. I named named facts, which is urgently necessary so as to finally correct this mis-development. 

The citizens await your plans for sending back and deportation [Abschiebung]. They will well need continue to wait; since your coalition partner, the SPD, does not want to cooperate in any of that. You are stuck in the asylum case, Herr Merz. You yourself have actually built this case because you submitted yourself to the dogma of the anti-democratic firewall which, for the Linke voted out of office here, shall secure a long-term subscription to power. 

And the domestic secret service, the Constitution Defense, which in regards the fulfillment of its actual duties, the defense against Islamic terror and foreign espionage, has miserably failed, arbitrarily and abusively cements this dogma. 

            Konstantin von Notz (Greens): Agent Moscow!

The absurd confidential opinion, which the SPD Interior Minister voted out of office launched shortly before the end of office, is the best evidence for that. Under pressure of the legal situation, the Constitution Defense needed to meanwhile take back its classification. 

            Konstantin von Notz (Greens): Such rubbish! 

            Luigi Pantisano (Linke): That is false!

To you, despite that, it is right to discriminate against our delegation and over 10 million voters, and withhold from us essential parliamentary rights. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): No idea! You would have it gladly!

That the Constitution Defense’s defamations are ludicrous, you know quite precisely. An ethnic term for the people is not counter to the Basic Law; since the Basic Law itself takes it as a basis [Ein ethnischer Volksbegriff ist nicht grundgesetzwidrig; denn das Grundgesetz selbst legt ihn zugrunde]. 

            Saskia Esken (SPD): Then re-read it!

Ah, ja, that was a caesura, because you all have experiences with real extremists. Since an extremist is he who installs and maintains the destructive policy of the open borders. The U.S. foreign minister Marco Rubio certainly needs be recalled: An extremist is he who under the label of Corona preventive measures spreads panic, arbitrarily limits basic rights, and with hate campaigns, with the aid of the public broadcasting, covers, defames and discriminates against those not vaccinated. 

That you laugh, I can imagine.

An extremist is he who destroys the welfare of the citizens and the nation with an eco-socialist transformation. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): You’ve gotten lost with your speech!

An extremist is he who, with majorities voted out of office, manipulates the constitution so to present himself with a debts blank check – at the cost of the taxpayer and of the future generations. 

And now you come in!

            Katharina Dröge (Greens): What was that then?

An extremist is he who with a hammer gang attacks those who think differently, and for that, with the blessing of Bavarian Minister-president Söder, receives a culture prize, paid for by the state, for smashing life and limb [Gelenke und Leben zu zertrümmern]. You should be ashamed! 

An extremist is he who like the Linke wants to overthrow the system, and shoot the rich, or stick in works camps, and, despite that, will be flattered by you with submissive pandering. 

An extremist is

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Who speaks like you!

he who wants to abolish our free, democratic basic order – you screech the entire time, I know that it hits you – 

Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Yet you know what’s what with the theme! Look at your ranks!

the pluralism, democratic basic principles, bürgerliche freedoms and the freedom of opinion. He is an extremist! 

To maintain this mendacious, leftist, double morality, you plan, under the false label of the fight against hate and agitation, an attack on the freedom of opinion which even exceeds the excesses of the Ampel. You want to intimidate and silence the citizens, thereby to still be able for a while to go on in the old, false paths and sun yourself in the shine of power. 

To the same purpose serves the martial rhetoric with which you spread the war mood so as to divert from the mountains of domestic problems and conflicts. The agitators in your own ranks still bloviate, far from every reality, of Ukraine’s victory over Russia, without saying that would be without having a third world war – and with a third world certainly not. You yourself flash with your advances that the European leadership should dissemble [simulieren sollen], just so in Washington as in Moscow. That is no wonder; since vis-à-vis both powers, you yourself have already shattered very much political porcelain. Of a return to diplomatic reason in the Foreign Office under your government, is also not much to see. If it’s up to you, weapons deliveries to the Ukraine should no longer be spoken of in public. Does that mean you want to deliver Taurus cruise missiles to Kiev, secretly, silently, easily, so as to manage the escalation of the Ukraine war and make Germany a target? 

The citizens have a right to learn what you propose. You however have no answer. Since your government is not a government for citizens, but a government for warmongers and the maintenance of one’s own power. And before all, you have no answer to the question which most moves the citizens: Where remains the political change for the voters, which the people in this country voted for? When finally comes the break with the false, leftist policy which has thrown our country into prosperity annihilation and de-industrialization, into servitude and insecurity? Should there still be anyone in the Union who still has a sense of responsibility for our country 

Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Please do not speak of that!

and wants these questions answered, he knows where he may find the alternative majorities. 

I am grateful. 

 

[trans: tem]