Ingo Hahn, July 6, 2021, Freedom in the Universities

Bavarian Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 18/87, pp. 11778-11780.

Worthy praesidium. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Yes, it is already quite a while that we again have been allowed to put forward our draft law in a first reading in plenary session, and yes, we take it from the criticism of the other parties that we would only be making pretenses and there certainly might be in the best Bavaria of all time no current problems in the colleges. Yes, we have again factually examined the draft law and have continued to find it good.

Herr Oetzinger in his speech of April 15 has referred gratefully to the esteemed Frau Bauernfeind of the Christian Democratic Students Circle, the RCDS. I am allowed to briefly quote the lady. She said: “Cases are known to us in which students in other colleges have failed examinations because they have not gendered.” Place before yourselves: Such situations have also been reported in Bavaria.

From the lady it is then besides no further to Sebastian Mathes, the RCDS national chairman, as well as member of the CDU national committee. Herr Mathes expressed himself as follows:

Speech is here abused for political indoctrination by means of left-green ideologies under the cloak of the equality policy. Students may not be forced to gender. Just as certainly, the so-called gender-correct speech may not be elevated to an evaluation standard in examinations.

One hears and is astounded! Yet scarcely one of the students finds the courage to protest. The RCDS will now gather and document all cases in which students were discriminated against because they have made use of a correct form of German. Should that not be an alarm signal for the CSU here in Bavaria, ladies and gentlemen?

Who wants to change society, he must go to the schools and universities. There he finds young people who are directly constructing their value system, who seek orientation and guidance. The responsibility is all the greater for those there who educate and form young people; all the greater too is the danger that this is abused; for school children and students are in a relation of dependence on their teachers and docents. Ideologists thrive in making use of this.

Yet how does it relate to the college teachers themselves? How then appears here the scholarly freedom and free speech, Herr Minister Sibler? We need not deal here specifically with the case of Herr Prof. Lütge; the case is well known. Herr Söder without ado simply threw him off the ethics council because he had a wrong opinion. I am allowed at this point to mention his new book; it namely has the title – I quote – : “And Freedom – How the Corona Policy and the Abuse of Science Threaten Our Open Society”. Hearty congratulations. – Herr Minister Herrmann, you laugh, but this properly would be for weeping. I think the title alone speaks for itself.

And the Confucius Institute exercises an undue [unbotmässigen] influence over scholarly freedom and free speech in the universities in Bavaria. As we deliberated on the problem in committee, almost all looked disconcertedly at the pages and kept quiet. No one from the old parties trusted himself to here for once take a position opposed to the Chinese influence. The State government wants in all cases to caste an “examining eye” on the Confucius Institute; but it does not want to act.

Ladies and gentlemen, even the general public is affected. The results of an Allensbach survey meanwhile document how deep the trenches in the culture war have become. 44 percent of Germans state that one can no longer freely express his opinion here in this country. That is half the population – and is largely the result of, unfortunately, having constructed in the past years a surveillance system which functions with exclusion and defamation. Orwell – known to you – besides named such thinking as “thought crime”, Gedankverbrechen, in his work “1984”. Much of this abuse could in fact be effectively combated with the creation of a freedom commissioner, ladies and gentlemen.

Yet one does not want what the State government does not want. Why not? Does one prefer to control the thoughts and opinions of students and docents?

In his April speech, Herr Oetzinger called the freedom commissioner a “bureaucratic monster”. Why actually? What then are the other commissioners in the colleges: The equality commissioner, the commissioner for people with a disability, and the commissioner for data protection? Also monsters? Teeth-baring, slobbering, man-twisting enormities? By no means! They are an integral component of the college landscape and these days are no longer to be wished away.

Exactly so will it be with the freedom commissioner when you here vote in favor. He will be the sharp sword against the monster of slavery, against the monster of political correctness and the monster of the cancel culture, ladies and gentlemen, the sword opposed to the tyranny of censorship.

Unfortunately, the sword arm of the State appears – I must say, and to the State government – to be asleep. It appears to be too weak to take hold of the blade which will here be offered him. You could now demonstrate courage, ladies and gentlemen, and defend our colleges. I request a vote in favor for our draft law [Drucksache 18/14910].

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ingo Hahn, January 8, 2021, Corona Preventative Measures

Bavarian Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 18/68, pp. 42-44.

Frau President, right honorable ladies and gentlemen. – Yes, the Herr Vice-president is also thereby naturally meant. That is clear. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, and before all, dear Bavarians.

Yes, we find ourselves in a dramatic situation. Yes, things appear to be getting out of control. And yes, the people are unsettled and intimidated [verängstigt]. The position is dramatic because those governing us have generated a climate of angst and discord. Those governing us have robbed us of freedom.

The reason is at hand. The policy of Merkel and Söder does not make known the whole truth to the people. You, Herr Minister-president, go together with Frau Merkel from one lockdown to another. Because the preventative measures do not work, you without flinching intensify them ever further. That is flying blind according to the motto “much helps much”. You do not get the idea that not only are the preventative measures insufficient but are also completely useless. Unteachable as you are, the next restriction nevertheless arrives: A limitation of movement to a radius of 15 kilometers and the anti-family one-person-rule. Thus, many of the DDR grandees would now be guaranteed to be moved to tears and perhaps even to be somewhat envious, since in the long run not even the SED henchmen had dared something of that kind.

I ask you: What comes next? Comes a mask duty in the sewers? Comes an extra police task force which controls the adherence to this duty? Herr Söder, you yourself have even spoken of a third wave. Aha! One hears and is amazed! To this day, the preventative measures during the first and second waves were not evaluated.Who is surprised that it now comes to a third wave? The surveillance state sends its respects.

Nine months have passed and you have learned nothing. Eight months ago, we already knew: One thing is clear, it is not a plague. Yet the new power felt good to you. In the shadows of Corona, you could and can simply undertake disagreeable changes without the people being able to do something in opposition. Each time you emerge here in the Landtag so as to allow yourself to legitimate the latest nonsense, I contemplate the immediate facts: Excessive mortality, rate of mortality, collateral damages, and so on and so forth. Each time I come anew to the recognition that those there above are either on their last legs or are hiding something of significance and importance. Thus I ask you as a scientist who stands before an insoluble equation: Are you concealing information from us? What does it have to do with the virus itself? And I certainly ask myself, what would I actually prefer: To be governed by power-obsessed egomaniacs or to be deceived and taken for a fool? Both possibilities are not very attractive.

I call special attention to an additional topic of your failures on parade: The vaccine. Initially, you praise yourselves to the skies and, in accelerated procedures, force through the means with your pharma-friends – and then there is no vaccine on hand for we Germans. Yet at the same time it was developed here in Germany. He who is in the U.S.A. or Great Britain or Israel will now be vaccinated first. Please do not misunderstand me: I am as always still opposed to his kind of hasty beginning of vaccination with all the possible side-effects. If it is unconditionally wanted – and you do want it – yet it then in that way is botched, then I ask myself whether you have no plan or no conscience. Is that simply chaos management or is it election calculation? This hitherto policy of half-truths, of obfuscation, of trading in secrets, the closed doors, the breakdowns and the contradictions, must finally have an end. Finally lay the facts on the table for the citizens of this country. Give back to the people their dignity.

The at-risk groups are as unprotected as before. The numbers of deaths occur almost exclusively amongst the residents of old-age and care homes. In these places, preventative measures are badly needed. There, the policy must react, but it does not do that. For months it is known that the average age of those dying is 83 years. Yet you prefer to send home children with sleds because the minimal distance will be not observed.

Herr Söder, you have heretofore betrayed yourself. You have in fact said you want permanent on-line instruction. Aha! There long blows the wind. No, Herr Söder, you here in Bavaria are no friend of humanity. You have no understanding of the people’s needs. You perhaps at most have an understanding of your increase of power which in this Corona crisis has already become considerable. You have an interest in the Chancellor’s office. Our Bavarian citizens also meanwhile understand that.

Your policy, Herr Söder, is a catastrophe and indeed in all concerns. It is blind, it is without orientation and it is dumb. It is a tragedy for our deserving elders. It is an offense against our children and it is a crime against the economy, the culture and our entire country. According to you, there is again first normality when all have been vaccinated. So says a Söder citation from the day before yesterday. I ask you, how shall that be? The state media indeed gives everything to make the vaccine acceptable; the people are nevertheless sceptical. A third of the people simply do not want to allow themselves to be vaccinated. Among the care personnel, it is still much more. Those are people who with this know that they are about.

Do you thus wish to compel the people? Do you want to simply lock down the people if they refuse? How do you wish to deal with that? Or do you just not want to again return to normality?

Herr Minister-president, we now need no more flowery language; we must act. Herr Söder, you must act and explain. Tell us: Are you keeping some information from us? I demand that you do not hide yourself in a plenary session of alibis for us in Bavaria, but once more here step up to the podium and tell us the truth.

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Ingo Hahn, October 28, 2020, Environment

Bavarian Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 18/58, pp. 22-25.

Frau President, right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Conserve resources? – Yes! Secure the means of livelihood? – Yes! We all hope for the best for Bavaria’s future in 2050. Yet if we thusly continue, Bavaria’s future in the aforesaid year appears to be entirely other than positive.

I for once ask you quite openly: How then are resources conserved? By, for example, setting up  efficient technologies and innovations. I further ask: How then are the means of livelihood secured? – By being concerned for the good of those who supply us with food. The last question: How is Bavaria’s future through the year 2050 secured? – Quite simple: By not being afraid in the year 2020 to set out on a path of cool, blue reason instead of a planned economy path of over-heated folly. Herr Minister, you seek a new, blue infrastructure. There, you sit well forward and better positioned than ever, and that in full strength, in contrast to other half-delegations in this house.

Outside of Bavaria, we are admired not only for our beautiful farms and beautiful nature. Before all, economic success brings us recognition. This success is in turn a basic pillar of our prosperity. Why do I say that? – Quite simple, because one must be able to afford environmental protection, ladies and gentlemen. The Söder government, however, by means of ever greater charges, puts in play our prosperity and thereby also puts at risk those precautions which may yet be of use to the environment. The Greens are neither in the Federal or the State government, yet have nevertheless transformed you, ladies and gentlemen of the CSU and the Freie Wähler, into the Greens 2.0 and 3.0. It is no longer of significance how you call yourself or to which delegation or party you belong, since you pray to the same idols as the Greens.

 You, Herr Minister Glauber, are the greenest environment minister that Bavaria has ever had, and indeed party-green. To me, it is clear that you as an architect would have clearly been a good building minister. But environment minister? – You speak here of the soil. It is not clear to me whether you at all know the difference between soil content [Bodenart] and soil type [Bodentyp]. I still ask in the first semester before Christmas, how does the sub-soil [Unterboden] differ from the topsoil [Oberboden] and the sea horizon. You have in fact generally remained bottomless [bodenlos].

You here unfortunately pursue an eager obedience to the left-green Zeitgiest. What is bad is you assert you would do everything for the good of environmental protection, yet what you always mean by that is the climate protection. You have here again begun with the climate protection.

I want to adhere to two points: First, the climate cannot be protected. The second is climate protection is not environmental protection. Quite the opposite: Your incessant and quite manic focus on the CO₂ output causes massive damage to our nature. With your wind rotors, you yearly kill hundreds of thousands of birds and field mice. You are responsible for that. It comes to billions of insects. The wild animals draw a red trace of blood halfway across Bavaria which you, Herr Aiwanger and Herr Glauber, still wish to extend into the State forests.

Since, for you, the construction does not proceed quickly enough, the windmills shall soon become a question of national security, thereby finally stopping the citizens’ protests which weigh upon you; since, to you all, it is very well clear that the people desire few additional wind propellers. You with good reason complain but that is all the same to them.

Your photovoltaics likewise demand many more victims to be burned on a sea of silicate plates. The utterly degenerate bio-mass production has transformed our fields into monocultures. Rapeseed and corn to the horizon, as far as the eye can see. And you still wonder over the insects dying?

All of your renewable energies have one thing in common: Before all must first yield grazing, hunting and forestry. What a crime against our Heimat! I truly ask you, dear Freie Wähler, dear Minister Glauber: How long will you play along with this nonsense? You were once a solid, Heimat-loving, freedom party, close to the citizens. Under the Söder government, however, you have become one of Green facilitators. Herr Glauber, last week, you were simply shoved aside so that Herr Söder can alone have the stage here for the umpteenth time. Finally understand: You are merely the place-holder for the love affair of the CSU with the Greens. Or, if you wish to extend it to your five water columns, then you, Herr Glauber, are perhaps the sixth column; namely, the temporary water carriers for the Greens.

All of your demands and measures stand on an ostensibly man-made climate change which in your descriptions has today already reached an apocalyptic scale. You know as well as I that there are always changes. In geologic history, there are even essentially greater variations – long before man and also long before industrialization.

You neglect all of this. Yet then where exactly in Bavaria are the damages resulting from your climate change? Tell us, even if we already know your answer! You would cry: Drought, crop failure, storms, floods, heating – no, over-heating! – The answer however is: There was all of that earlier. There is all of that today. Ja, and there will be all of that tomorrow, with and without man.

We of course cannot control nature…

Yet do not misunderstand me. I in now way deny the necessity of protecting our environment – quite the opposite. I want to persuade you to finally pursue a true protection of our nature. I of course do not want that, for E-mobility, entire eco-systems in South America and Africa be destroyed. I do not want that, for technologies from out of the last millennium, our Bavarian forests be cleared away. And I do not want that, for an over-driven bio-mass production, the native variety of species of plants and animals be sacrificed.

I much prefer to relieve our farmers who, conditioned by Biolandbau [organic farming] and monocultures, have been compelled to economize ever more intensively so as to compensate the loss.

Dear State government, it is for this ministry to protect the Bavarian environmental goods which form the means of livelihood of the Bavarian population. That means keeping the air, water and soil clean as well as as the protection of flora and fauna. That, however, plainly does not mean to squander and sacrifice all of these resources, only because one suffers from the megalomania of wishing to play the little, godly creator.  Your example with Gollum is here only strictly speaking characteristic, Herr Glauber. That appears to be a fantasy of yours which can only harm our environment.

Dear Freie Wähler, as to your new role in the Green climate sect, to or fro – it remains as it ever was: True environmental protection is conservative.

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ingo Hahn, August 7, 2020, EU Plastics Tax

Ingo Hahn

EU Plastics Tax

AfD Kompakt, August 7, 2020

[Ingo Hahn is a chairman of the Alternative für Deutschland delegation in the state legislature of Bavaria. He is a geography professor.]

It is simply an injustice should German citizens, to cover an over-drawn EU budget, be saddled with a plastics tax which is moreover equivalent to EU direct taxation. While the AfD is committed to a reduction of plastic, it is not in the form, if you please, of a hypocritical EU refinancing strategy but one with a realistic focus on the environment. That in the same stroke the emissions deal is to be expanded sets the crown on the whole. Since the emissions deal now furthers a creeping, compulsory taxation of citizens and businesses without developing a recognizably positive effect on the environment.

The question of Europe’s future ought not become the fatal issue for the German Mittelstand which already now has been seriously affected by the economic consequences of the Corona crisis. The further introduction of freely invented surtaxes under the ostensible argument of aid to the environment should no longer be sold to the citizens as an ecological contribution. Since all that this government under Merkel aims at is a redistribution of German tax money towards a failed monetary union which is to be kept artificially alive by the German side.  

[trans: tem]