Kay Gottschalk, April 12, 2024, Tax Relief

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/164, pp. 21103-21104. 

Right honorable Frau President. Dear colleagues. Dear taxpayers in the gallery. 

            Katharina Beck (SPD): We’re taxpayers , too! 

And before all things: Dear tax kleptomaniacs – it cannot be otherwise said – of the Debts Coalition! 

I want to again help you on the point upon which we speak here today. We are speaking on that the minimum livelihood be made tax free. This besides results from the ability to pay [Leisitungsfähigkeit] principle. Okay, that is difficult for the Greens, – it cannot be quite comprehended there – yet for the SPD meanwhile also. 

I want to help you with the point of what the Constitutional Court said. We have today spoken so much of human dignity. The Constitutional Court actually derives this principle from the human  dignity. I cite with the permission of the president: 

It is accordingly not only not sensible when the state first takes from the citizen as tax a portion of his minimum livelihood, and afterwards returns the money to him in the form of support payments 

– as for example in the form of social assistance, housing money and many other things. It is besides a principle which this Debts Coalition manages for years: To take money away from people so as to refund to them a small portion. No, the Constitutional Court further states that, as a result of such proceedings, people who actually were in the condition to live independently were forced into the position of a supplicant to state offices. That reveals precisely your policy, my dear friends of the Debts Ampel. 

Yet let us come to the sobering numbers. Here, even the CDU has slumbered; the press here assembled has slumbered. The scandal of the Bürgergeld [citizens’ wage] increase on Januuary 1 of 12.1 percent, namely from 502 euros to 563 euros, occurred already on 1 January 2023. You of course then increased the basic allowance by merely 5.4 percent, while with the Bürgergeld introduction you just raised the old social assistance contribution from 449 euros to 502 euros; that is 11.8 percent. Reckoned as a basis percentage, you increased the Bürgergeld in not 15 months by around 25 percent. 

            Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn (Greens): That is falsified. That’s not right!                                 That is wrong!

And in regards the basic allowance, you have not managed an increase of 12 percent. That reveals you for what you are. To that I say: Phooey, that’s shameful, what you are doing! 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Na, na, na! Slow down!

 For nights, so to say, I checked that with the calculator and it certainly wasn’t difficult. You now hopefully have noted what we here demand – and Herr Lindner now partially, quite timidly – is only a drop on the hot stone. 

So as to support the same with facts, dear taxpayers up there: 

            (The speaker holds up a diagram)

From one euro – this is from the Taxpayers Union – remains 47.5 euros cents. 

            Vice-president Aydan Özoğuz: Herr member, in that regard, we have…

Print this!

             (The microphone is disconnected) 

            Herr member, I am speaking with you. 

            (Member Kay Gottschalk (AfD) continues to speak) 

            Herr member, is it then so difficult to pause for a second? 

But of course! 

I am simply attempting to bring to your attention that we here have an understanding to display no drawings and pictures. 

This is no picture. This is a graphic. 

            It was a graphic. Yet please refrain therefrom. 

Good. I do so in the future. Thank you for the reference. My party since 2019 has here brought in multiple motions and draft laws and therein demanded increasing the basic allowance, or to introduce the tax schedule on wheels [Tarif auf Rädern] which is even in some of the elections programs of parties which have been present here. You have refused all of this with threadbare reasonings and prefer to increase the Bürgergeld in the last 13 months by 25 percent. 

Your learning curve – it can, I believe, be stated – actually approaches asymptomatically the zero line. I hope that the voters at the next elections will correspondingly prepare a bill and make the X by the party which is really committed to the people who are working. 

On our motion [Drucksache 20/10975] is the program name: “Observe the Wage Difference Rule [Lohnabstandsgebot] – Relieve Wage-earners and Mittelstand”, and the basic allowance in fact clearly increase – I believe I’ve made clear why it must be – to 14,000 euros. It needs be said: Herr Lindner has a bad conscience, you not. He undertook a small project and wanted tax relief in the future for foreign employees in the first three years. At least he recognized: For real skilled labor, how I would define it, Germany is quite unattractive. Yet this also applies for the home employees, ladies and gentlemen of the FDP. Perhaps be honest for once! 

Herr Fuerst supports the whole, in which is stated in his study – I cite with permission of the President: "Who works full-time not always has more therefrom”, especially the people who earn between 4,000 euros and 5,500 euros and live in large cities; since then basic supplements and other supplements come to nothing. He calculated: When a labor force under this government changes from part-time to full-time, then it has 32 euros more. 

You thus see: Only one party here in the German Bundestag is really committed for the people. We stand for that working people do not meanwhile become supplicants of a socialist state, ladies and gentlemen. 

I am grateful for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

Jörg Urban, April 17, 2024, Inflated Government in Saxony

AfD Kompakt, April 17, 2024. 

Already in the present legislative period, CDU, Greens and SPD have created thousands of new positions, often so as to take care of their own party personnel with lucrative posts. A renewed growth of the ministries we decisively reject. The bureaucracy is not allowed to be ever again inflated. We instead need to deconstruct it.

 

A shrinking population and the digitalization need to have as a consequence a leaner administration. We are of the opinion that the number of ministries also is to be reduced. The Kultus and Science ministries, for example, could be combined.

 

According to the government’s positions development report, alone the State Chancellery of Minister-president Kretschmer has created 296 new positions within the last five years. Similarly highly inflated under the regime of the Greens were the Justice and Environment ministries. There must finally be an end to this self-service mentality.

 

 

[trans: tem]

Christine Anderson, March 20, 2024, Democracy Promotion Act

EU Parliament, Written Question to EU Commission E-000861/2024. 

Germany is in the process of bringing in a ‘Democracy Promotion Act’ designed to establish additional tools for promoting democracy. There are considerable concerns, however, as regards the act’s constitutionality and whether or not it runs counter to the EU’s core values. The criticism centres around potential government overreach and the creation of structures that threaten to curtail the freedom and independence of civil society in breach of the principles of freedom, democracy and the rule of law enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). 

1. What is the Commission’s assessment of the compatibility of Germany’s Democracy Promotion Act with the EU Treaties, particularly in view of the reservations raised by the Bundestag’s parliamentary research service concerning its potential unconstitutionality and violations of the EU’s core values laid down in Article 2 TEU? 

2. Does it consider there to be a risk that the Democracy Promotion Act would quieten or silence opposition voices and critical civil society representatives? How does this square with the principles of freedom of expression and democratic pluralism enshrined in the EU Treaties? 

Jürgen Braun, February 21, 2024, Navalny, Russia and Germany

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/153, pp. 19512-19513. 

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

The core of every democracy is the opposition, not the government. There are governments in China, North Korea, Iran; however, there is opposition only in democracies. 

            Norbert Röttgen (CSDU/CSU): In Russia also! 

Make a note! 

Russia has been deprived of its most important oppositionist. On Alexei Navalny, millions of cultured Russians in Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Novosibirsk had placed their hopes. They wanted a fatherland that would be a part of that common European house of which Michail Gorbaschev spoke and for which Navalny fought. 

For this fight, he first needed to pay with his health, then with his freedom and finally with his life. The convictions he tangibly represented thereby played a subordinate role; for thoughts are not crimes. When anyone is unjustly confined or is persecuted, one should also then stand up for him when one does not share his convictions – in the case of Navalny as also in the case of Assange. 

Nevertheless, a look today at Navalny’s tangible positions is worthwhile, especially since the old parties ably ignore these positions. Alexei Navalny was a patriot – according to green-left standards, even a nationalist. He fought against a prevailing corruption and the erosion of the state of law. While for ethnic Russians an infrastructure is scarcely available, party bosses enrich themselves without limit. And the political competition is either not permitted for election, or is similarly banned. Yet Navalny also fought against excess foreign influence. He never forgot that the murderers of the oppositionists Politkovskaya and Nemzov were the Moslem handymen of the regime. He criticized illegal immigration and the spread of Islam on Russian territory. He criticized the accompanying criminality and religious radicalization. He also wanted no building of mosques in Moscow, since he was a patriot. The sympathy of the Ampel parties and of the Union at the death of Navalny thus appears more than questionable; since against anyone like him, they would have immediately introduced a party expulsion proceeding on account of so-called hostility to Islam or foreigners, and in no way would have celebrated him as a hero. 

Let us recall in remembrance: For what was Navalny officially condemned? For so-called “extremism” and the propagation of “narcissistic ideology”. Does that perhaps remind you of something, dear colleagues? 

Agniesczka Brugger (Greens): To compare yourself with Alexei Navalny! That is an impudence! 

With a cunning similar to Putin’s, you proceed against the only opposition in this country. 

            Frank Schwabe (SPD): Unterirdisch!

Minister Faeser even openly discusses an AfD ban and sics the domestic secret service on us. 

Omid Nouripour (Greens): There is no secret service in Germany! There is only an intelligence service! 

That no longer has the least thing to do with legality. The Internet Enforcement Act of the preceding government even finds official applause in Russia and China – thus, internet censors. For years there in Russia, opposition gatherings were forbidden, as were demonstrations against Navalny’s imprisonment, and in fact under the pretext of Corona. And that we also know from the best Germany ever. 

            Frank Schwabe (SPD): Mein Gott! 

            Derya Türk-Nachbaur (SPD): Shabby! Sick!

And not least: The state media in Germany increasingly attempts to generate a climate of non-contradiction [Widerspruchlosigkeit], a political unity brew. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Such stupidity! Such rubbish! 

            Stephan Brandner AfD): Completely right!

In the face of the farmers’ protests against the Greens, the journalist Knut Bauer just last week raged on the compulsory financed state radio that one dared to disturb the event of a – I cite – “government party”. This same mentality in the GEZ media is similarly found in the Russian state media. 

Agniesczka Brugger (Greens): Your AfD-mimimi has nothing to do with the debate’s subject. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Just listen for once! That is the truth!

And there, it is held to be criminal when the government is criticized. 

            Julia Klöckner (CDU/CS): Here, no one is imprisoned! 

And there, judicial positions are politically appointed. And there, movements of private citizens’ finances are controlled. Frau Faeser has again done so as before. Minister Faeser thus wants Russian conditions in Germany. 

            Renata Alt (FDP): Shame on you! 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Such stupidity! 

            Frank Schwabe (SPD): Yet it is your friends who sit in Moscow!

There are governments everywhere, even in dictatorships. The decisive difference between dictatorships and democracies is not in the existence of a government, but in that of an opposition, of a free and unrestricted acting opposition. 

            Till Steffen (Greens): What are you afraid of? 

            Frank Schwabe (SPD): Yet you drive to Moscow for Herr Putin! 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Putin’s sychophant!

 Now after the death of a courageous oppositionist, let us in the future the more take to heart to let the citizens freely vote and to promote free political competition, instead of wanting to ban opposition parties. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Excellent! 

 

[trans: tem]

Alexander Gauland, February 22, 2024, Russia, Munich and Realpolitik

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/154, p. 19630. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

“War is a mere continuation of politics with other means” [„Der Krieg ist eine blosse Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln“]. Everyone knows this sentence of Clausewitz. In traditional international law, a war therefore ends with a political result, a conclusion of peace. If however one party to a war excludes the other from the civilized world with a judgement of unworthiness [Unwerturteil], a conclusion of peace becomes impossible. 

Since 1648, as the peace treaty of Münster and Osnabrück ended the ideological war between protestants and catholics, the rule applies that all subject to international law are alike in the sense of a like ability to speak. Even in the times of the Cold War, there were talks between both sides. The expression that one is not allowed to let the line of communication to rupture,  belonged until recently to the standard vocabulary of German foreign policy. 

            Kurt Abraham (CDU/CSU): Who then has broken the line? 

Why, ladies and gentlemen, does this no longer apply to Russia?

            Kurt Abraham (CDU/CSU): Because the Russians have broken the line! 

It was a political failure that Russian representatives were uninvited at the Munich Security Conference, a conference the motto of which is “Peace through Dialogue“ – not through weapons deliveries. 

Realpolitik, ladies and gentlemen, is the art of the possible. The possible is often not to be had without painful compromise. Values-led foreign policy on the other hand, as we lately manage it, does not know the lesser evil. When values-led foreign policy leads to that communication and negotiations stop, or are simply just not undertaken, it needs to be replaced by Realpolitik. And when the values-led foreign policy leads to that the war will then be continued when the war aims are not achieved, it needs to be replaced by Realpolitik. 

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the central distinction between Realpolitik and that which we meanwhile have come to know as “values-led foreign policy“. 

Marianne Schieder (SPD): It is a lie when you assert that there were no talks. You know that! 

Values societies feel themselves obligated to fight against unworthiness [Unwert]. With a representative of unworthiness, values societies conduct no negotiations. The opponent of war becomes an absolute enemy. His interests are criminal. 

            Marcus Faber (FDP): That is called war crimes! 

The enemy must be annihilated. That unfortunately leads, with a known consistency, to that the war escalates. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): That is your vocabulary, not ours!

Ladies and gentlemen, Putin conducts a war which can be held to be unjust and wrong, 

            Agnes-Marie Strack-Zimmermann (FDP): “can be held”! 

or needs be. So as to end it, however, nothing is served by assuming his criteria; but on the contrary, by again recalling Münster and Osnabrück and by overcoming the Western inability of speech [Sprachlosigkeit]. Yet, ladies and gentlemen, for that is required a Metternich at the Vienna Congress or a Kissinger in Peking, instead of a presenter of war. It’s too bad that no one in Munich wanted to undertake that role. Therefore, we will also have no peace if we so continue. 

I am grateful. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Alice Weidel, January 31, 2024, Scholz Government

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/150, pp. 19128-19130. 

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

Both of the preceding speakers have impressively shown that in them is lacking the earnestness for the true importance and problems of this country’s citizens. It is burning in Germany, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): You’ve certainly set it afire!

and this government of overcharged miscasts and obstinate ideologues is the arsonist. This country’s exploited achievers are going into the streets: 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): Do you actually pay taxes in Germany?

Farmers, tradesmen, those of the Mittelstand, hotel keepers, merchants, those in transport, they continue to protest because they can do no more – silenced by the media. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Who do better work than you can imagine!

Three-quarters of Germans stand behind the Mittelstand protesters, three-quarters want an end to this government. 

You cut a corridor of devastation through this country. 

            Saskia Esken (SPD): You should be an author of children’s books!

– The children’s books author sits there, Frau Esken. – Yet instead of correcting, you heighten an unprecedented campaign of libel, as is here impressively displayed against the Mittelstand protest and against the opposition force upon which ever more citizens place their hope, frankly according to the motto: “If the citizen becomes disagreeable, designate him as extreme right”. 

Your auxiliary Stasi, “Correctiv”, one of the many non-governmental organizations which is provisioned by your government with ample tax money, has delivered to you the matter for that with unbelievable lies, libel and the most wicked calumny. 

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): With evidence, Frau Weidel.

The chief of “Correctiv” now lies, they had never used the word “deportation”. So far has it come: Tax-financed denunciations against a competing party! 

You are not at all ashamed 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): You are not ashamed!

to pervert the right to demonstrate, a right of freedom of the citizens opposed to the state and not the reverse, instead of listening to people who carry their emergency into the public, you yourselves demonstrate against the opposition. And you find nothing in that regard when at such demonstrations are quite openly placed on display calls for murder against opposition politicians. “Kill the AfDers” are there, and you applaud. The Federal President designates AfD voters as rats and the FDP lead candidate, AfD voters as blow-flies. Shame on you! Shame on you from top to bottom! 

With your unspeakable tax-financed libel and cries for murder campaign, you divide this country only so as to cling to your own power. 

The repair of the repair of a miscarried and inflated budget draft is a document of your arrogance and your incompetence. You speak of savings, yet you impose the costs solely on the citizens. The businessmen’s morale is grounded. The Ampel is the greatest risk to Germany as a business venue. 

Mittelstand and businesses one by one throw in the towel and take to flight. The list of firms which eliminate or displace tens of thousands of positions to foreign countries becomes daily longer. Resonant names are therein: From BASF, Bayer and Bosch, through Mercedes Continental and Miele, to SAP and ZF. De-industrialization Minister Habeck, who is known to always find love of country to be “nauseating”, now demands patriotism of the businessmen – and thereby to go bankrupt. That is the concept of this government. 

Germany is stuck deep in a recession. It is the sole industrial country to shrink, and for that neither Putin nor the world nor any conjured up world climate catastrophe bears the responsibility. This incompetent government solely bears the responsibility for this disaster in our country, and indeed with its destructive policy of artificial energy scarcity and energy of increased expense, the incessant turning of the tax screws, the ban policy, the expropriation, the money squandering, while you tell the people fairy tales of a rich country. Rich in Germany is only the overfed, over-reaching state, but not the taxpayers. 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): Where do you pay taxes, Frau Weidel?

Hundreds of thousands of Germans receive in these days their heating cost bill, and often do not know how they shall pay it. Normal earners, pensioners, families, those of the Mittelstand, independents, year for year need to restrict themselves more so as still be able to make ends meet. You however certainly do not think of restricting yourselves. You grant yourselves new helicopters and motor pools. Your cabinet members expend untold sums for hairstyling and photographs. The Foreign Minister flies with a grand entourage on embarrassing missions worldwide, while the average earner does not know what at all he still can do. And you hold fast to your snob Chancellor’s Office for, believe it or not, almost 800 million euros. The giganto-maniac expansion construction alone costs almost as much as the yearly special sacrifice which you want to exact from the farmers. 

You have inflated the officials’ apparatus in just two years by around 11,500 positions. Nice for your favorites, bad for the taxpayer for whom all the fun costs eight billion euros. 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): Yet you pay no taxes!

Where other governments reconsider and recoil their international engagements, you intrude everywhere with German tax money. 

Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): Yet you pay no taxes here, Frau Weidel. You still pay taxes in Switzerland!

You threaten the livelihoods of your own farmers so as to save scarcely a billion euros; yet for senseless agriculture projects in the world, you expend additional hundreds of millions of euros. The much cited bike paths in Peru are only one of hundreds of superfluous development aid proposals which cost the taxpayer to the sum of 33 billions euros – for nothing, only for your NGO favorites. 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): You are no taxpayer in Germany!

You squander this money, without consideration, for eco-refrigerators in Colombia, feminist foreign policy in South Africa, for the Taliban in Afghanistan and for Hamas terrorists in Gaza. 

            Bettina Hagedorn (SPD): That is a lie!

Even to India go billions, even though India flies to the moon while, with us, infrastructure falls apart, the schools spoil and the students in part are no longer able to read, write and figure correctly. 

Against the laws of physics and logic, you further drive forward the planned economy and subventions monster of the energy transition. In energy policy, Germany is the world’s wrong-way driver. The costs explode in all dimensions. They are the principal reason for the budget crisis. They sum up to almost a trillion euros. That is a one with how many zeros, Herr Habeck? – He does not know. Those are no investments in the future, that is the most expensive destruction of a functioning infrastructure which the world has ever seen! 

You further flood the country with illegal immigrants. Everyone can come, none need go. You naturalize in an accord new voters, obtain a pseudo-legality for illegals through the residence opportunity law. Your deportation acceleration law is a deportation prevention law when the taxpayers must pay for a lawyer for rejected asylum applicants so as to continue to bring process against the overdue departure. 

            Wiebke Esdar (SPD): That is called the state of law!

With this policy, you drive the local governments to despair, explode the social system, intensify the housing emergency and undermine the domestic security. Yet, before all, you take from the Germans their Heimat. 

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): Yet you do not reside in Germany.

Over 1,000 women every year become victims of sexual violence by an immigrant, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Has your co-worker written the speech?

7,000 since the 2015 welcome putsch by the CDU Chancellor. Yet of that, you are silent; of that also, the media is silent. Under the swindle label of “Bürgergeld”, you have created a migration magnet the costs of which are long since out of control. The next budget gap already stands at the door. 

You leave the citizens in the lurch where the state would be urgently needed. What has become of the compensation for the many of those harmed by the vaccine of your Covid vaccination? What actually has become of it? What at all has become of the reappraisal of this entire disaster? 

Again and again I have here presented what is required to bring this country to the front rank. Again: Closing and control of borders, sending back illegal immigrants, following up rejected and criminal asylum applicants and anyone who has no right of residency – that is the enforcement of law and statute after years of the rule of injustice; you want to criminalize deportations; that we have seen in your campaign – a stop of energy transition, a restriction of state spending and of course an elimination of Bürgergeld for foreign citizens who have never paid into the social accounts; benefits in kind instead of money benefits is the watchword. 

Yet rational arguments clearly no longer suffice for you. You cannot well govern Germany, and you do not want to. You are ruining it. And I say to you, why: Because you your own country, because Germany, you hate.                

            Sven-Christian Kindler (Greens): You do not live in Germany!

This government hates Germany. At least accept the possibility of a democratic change of power, and make the way free for new elections! 

I am grateful. 

 

[trans: tem]

Rüdiger Lucassen, January 19, 2024, Populism and Cruise Missiles

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/148, pp. 18939-18940. 

Frau President. Frau Defense Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The CDU/CSU this week carves out motions in which it demands, free of charge, “more weapons for the Ukraine”: Day before yesterday Taurus cruise missiles, today one million artillery shells. What comes next? Atomic weapons?

             Marcus Faber (FDP): That is just rubbish!

Some of my colleagues name this CDU/CSU motion “populistic”. I find this not apt. The populist listens to what the people want and then implements it. Basically, the populist, as a politician, is an authentic employee of the people. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): O Gott!

Yet what the CDU here demands, the majority of Germans do not want. 

            Henning Otte (CDU/CSU): And you are a pacifist?

I know: Direct democracy is to the super democrats of this house a horror. But imagine for once a referendum as in Switzerland, and indeed on the question: Should Germany deliver to the Ukraine cruise missiles and one million artillery shells? My prognosis: You would receive not ten percent for this nonsense. 

Nein, ladies and gentlemen of the Union, with this motion, you do not want to make foreign policy – you want only to irritate the government. 

            Markus Grübel (CDU/CSU): Nein, we represent German interests!

And that as opposition is of course your good right, and it, ja, also works out well. For almost two years, the FDP’s lead candidate for the European Parliament, Frau Strack-Zimmermann, passes by no microphone without demanding more weapons for the Ukraine. Yet the day before yesterday she needed to submit to party discipline and vote against the delivery of Taurus cruise missiles. It is plainly so with the FDP’s convictions: At four percent in the polls and in a government which at anytime can fly apart, for a Strack-Zimmermann also is the shirt closer than the trousers. 

Politically, the CDU/CSU motion put forward is for two reasons nonsense. In the motion text is quite correctly stated the Bundeswehr’s stock of munitions is at a dangerously low level. Yet then the CDU demands under point 2, “to comply with…the Ukrainian request…for munitions… of all calibres…from the Bundeswehr’s stock to the greatest extent possible.” Here, colleague Otte apparently does not know his own motion. The CDU thus knows that the Bundeswehr is not defense-capable – yet despite this, it wants to further disarm. That surely has features of treason [Das hat schon Züge von Landesverrat]. 

            Henning Otte (CDU/CSU): You just had to say that!

And second: The war for the Ukraine will not be decided on the battlefield. Everyone knows that. It would meanwhile thus be a German responsibility to start a diplomatic great offensive from the Bundestag, 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Oh ja!

instead of here calculating munitions needs. Were you statesmen, you would, immediately and with regard to the impending U.S. elections, begin such diplomacy and not waste additional time with such senseless motions. 

Many thanks. 

            Joe Weingarten (SPD): That is again the speech of the Russian press office! 

            Götz Frömming (AfD, turned to the CDU/CSU): Show window motions! 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Beatrix von Storch, November 9, 2023, Islamism and Democracy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/134, p. 16794. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Today, on the 9^th of November, we need to state: Jewish life in the Federal Republic was never so threatened as today. A new Judenhass could be taken into Europe from the Near East because the leftist migration lobby opened wide the door. 

“How far will the European societies go so as to offer a place to a quickly growing Moslem minority which is opposed to social and cultural integration?” 

Walter Laqueur put this question ten years ago. The answer reads: According to those who understand Islam, until total surrender. 

At the Palestinian demonstrations we see these days Islamists and leftists united. This anti-semitism, which threatens and wants to wipe out real Jewish life and the existence of Israel, we find not only among the German working population. We find it in the mosques, in the Islamic assemblies and associations, in the leftist universities and in the Kultur operation infected by the BDS movement. 

This political axis reaches from the Hamas to Fridays for Future, from the Hezbollah to the Antifa, and from the PFLP to the Black Lives Matter movement. The consequences of this decades-long infiltration: Mass prayers at the Brandenburg Gate, the Neptune Fountain at the Rote Rathaus occupied, and in Essen, the caliphate proclaimed. 

And these idiots of Queers for Palestine and Gays for Gaza loudly applaud. Excuse me, how moronic can one actually be? In a Hamas state, no rainbow flags hang in front of the ministries. There, homosexuals hang from the construction cranes. 

Except to these deluded ones, it is obvious to everyone – cite: “Multiculti has failed, absolutely failed”. You know that is a citation from Frau Merkel from the year 2010. When Frau Merkel five years later opened the borders, she knew exactly what she was doing. And then she came to us with hollow phrases like “We can do it” [Wir schaffen das] or “Show a friendly face”; or, with a cold ignorance: It’s all the same to me whether I am guilty of the influx of refugees. Now they are here.   

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, now they are here. Hundreds of thousands of men – young, aggressive and dominant and – what you here never say, and to which there is always a protest – Moslem, filled with hatred of Jews, of unbelievers, and the West. And what does Interior Minister Faeser do in regards these hordes celebrating thousands of dead Jews? She invites the Islamic assemblies to an Islam conference so as to make a theme of what? Islamophobia. Inconceivable! 

Post-Merkel Germany no longer shows a friendly face, but a hateful grimace hostile to Jews. And for this performance, Steinmaier and Söder and Merkel are decorated with orders; it cannot be imagined. And now, where the AfD drives from success to success, the CDU comes around the corner with our motions: Robust border defense, maximum limits, deportations, deprivation of citizenship. If you want the people to accept these things from you, then you should not exclude Hans-Georg Maaßen from the party, but Angela Merkel. 

From the constitutional scholar Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde stems the thesis which is central to our FdGO [basic constitutional order]. It reads: 

“The free, secularized state lives on presuppositions which [the state] itself cannot guarantee’.

Since Islam in most of its expositions is not prepared to recognize the liberal, secular state – thus Böckenförde – the Politik needs to take care that Moslems remain in the minority. Those whom we see marching in our streets are never to be allowed to have the say here because they, with our democracy, can introduce Sharia. Democracy in itself is no common value, but democracy requires common values so it can continue to endure. Those who are demonstrating in our streets are those who presently endanger Jewish life, endanger the free, democratic, basic order and endanger the future of Germany. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Marc Jongen, September 6, 2023, Culture by Decree

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/118, pp. 14571-14572. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Who comes forward as Germany’s “rupture squad” [Abbruchkommando] – I very gladly overtake your term, Herr Scholz, for it perfectly fits this Federal government – needs obviously to make a high expenditure on propaganda. 

At the so-called green culture conference, Culture State Minister Claudia Roth swore in the culture branch to “climate defense and sustainability”, and indeed not only to what concerns energy consumption and the like, but – as we have heard – it will also be called upon for “aesthetic discussion with the climate crisis”, for the “sensitization of the public” in regards to “man-made climate change”. Gender and diversity guidelines in film promotion have already been announced. It is frightening with what sang-froid art and culture are being instrumentalized by this government. That has nothing to do with freedom of art, Frau Roth. That is decreed state art [verordnete Staatskunst]. Yet the lack of success of the woke Netflix series or the politically correct German films very clearly shows what the public thinks of such educative and instructional art; namely, simply nothing, ladies and gentlemen. 

Quite important themes for this Federal government: Sexual harassment and violence. No, not on Germany’s streets at night, but in the culture and media branches. The culture council shall now prepare a relations code, initially for voluntary personal commitment. Yet Frau Roth already threatens: Should this no “thorough effect show, we will go to the next step and make our requirements mandatory for all”. End citation. Say it: Who before state feminism is not a well-behaved little man receives no more funding. 

Ladies and gentlemen, one need not be a fan of Till Lindemann, yet the Rammstein affair has nevertheless shown that the denunciation and indignation industry in this country long since runs wild [freidrehen], according to the motto, “Just throw dirt, something will stick”. This Unkultur you systematically promote, and with the reporting person defense law – Orwellian title – whereby any citizen can be slandered with impunity by specifically created reporting offices. That is the way to a totalitarian state, ladies and gentlemen. 

The anti-racism commissioner, Frau Alabali-Radovan, naturally here does not want to come up short and demands more complaint offices for victims of racism where then can be happily denounced he who expresses wrong views on mass migration and thereby proves himself  a “structural racist”. What then do you actually say to the Zeche Zollern Museum in Dortmund, Frau Alabali, where whites on Saturdays are not allowed to enter the colonialism exhibition; evidently so that their historical guilt based on their being white will be remembered? That is the racism which needs disturb us today in Germany. And it does not proceed from the majority society, but from an aggressive ideology into which this Federal government has long since lapsed. 

What else do we we see in this Culture budget? Growth for the Prussian Cultural Foundation – yes, that is good – yet a threefold increase of means to around 6 million euros for the deep red socio-cultural centers, of which the association chief has disparaged the idea of a “deutsche Kultur” as “nationalistic”. And zero euros for the memorial for the victims of communist tyranny. You again put off its construction, Frau Roth. That, you should here also honestly admit. 

And still a word for the Federal government’s eastern commissioner, Carsten Schneider. When you tell the press that the strength of the AfD in eastern Germany is a danger for economy and society, 

            Wiebke Esdar (SPD): He’s right there!

you thereby prove only one thing, namely your complete de-coupling from the reality. From a government which drives industry out of the country and permanently defames the citizens as “racists” and “extremists”, the eastern Germans quite clearly need not let themselves be arrogantly tutored, and they no longer do so: 35 percent for the AfD in Saxony and 7 percent for the SPD speaks a clear Sprache. You perhaps should ponder who on your summer vacation was underway as a wrong-way driver. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Stefan Keuter, September 6, 2023, Foreign Policy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/118, pp. 14594-14595. 

Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear guests in the gallery. 

The party is over. This drunkenness, this intoxication of the left-green money squandering is over. The accounts are empty. We are in the middle of a recession let loose by means of an utterly failed energy transition, the cutting off of Russian gas, the de-industrialization of our homeland and completely nonsensical heating insulation provisions which will bring the construction industry almost completely to ruin. The concerns emigrate to foreign countries, the tax revenues shrink. Here, climate and gender nonsense and a feminist and values-guided foreign policy are certainly of no moment. 

We trace the compulsory savings in this budget: Language promotion of German minorities in eastern Europe, arms control, German cultural work, financial support of the Goethe Institute – here, the red pencil will be applied. Where more money will be expended, it is for the care and feeding of your own, Frau Baerbock; the personnel costs increase and your administrative costs. For that, you spend money. 

This country has brought forward foreign ministers of the likes of a Willy Brandt and a Hans-Dietrich Genscher. For these, the achievement counted; for you, Frau Baerbock, the narrative obviously suffices, and that often badly told. As for example in your biography – correct me – which has arrived at its ninth version. Know, Frau Baerbock, that dissimilar to you, I indeed am not come from international law. Yet I have actually lived in Great Britain and am to some degree competent in the language of that place. I say to you: Please save on the tax-financed make-up artists, and preferably invest in English instruction. Otherwise, we will soon have “more beef” with our neighbors, which we all do not want, if you understand what I mean. 

I am grateful to the Russians in that they have not taken seriously your declaration of war, “We are in war with Russia”. We of course are not. This is not our war. 

And now once for all for those taking notes: In the Bundestag election campaign of 1957, Chancellor Adenauer attacked the SPD with the words: “The policy which the social-democratic leadership wants makes Germany into a Russian satellite.” And today: We are defenseless and dependent. Angela Merkel, zu Guttenberg, Steinmeier, Gabriel, Schwesig and many others from your ranks have driven this country into dependencies and for more than 16 long years brought it to economic ruin. 

Apart from a Bohemian corporal, no one has ever brought so much misfortune upon Germany like this former Federal Chancellor. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Now, that’s enough!

From 2016 to 2020, there were a total of around 2,000 fatal crimes in Germany in which at least one immigrant was questioned as a suspect, to say nothing at all of the appalling thousands of those wounded and raped. Not even the SED had so many people killed at the Wall, the successor party of which today sits here among us and projects itself as flawless democrats. 

In a few weeks we will celebrate the 33^rd anniversary of German unity. 33 years later, Germany in a Europe of upheaval has developed itself from a refuge of stability into the sick man of Europe, indeed into a problem child. For a relatively long period of time the re-unified Germany, as once the old Federal Republic, found its place in Europe in harmony with its neighbors and to the satisfaction of its partners from Lisbon to Warsaw. For Paris and Warsaw, we as a neighbor stood quite high. This was unique in our long history, ladies and gentlemen. Here, steadily decisive were our credibility and our reliability. 

            Michael Brand (CSD/CSU-Fulda): Not yours!

What in more than 60 years Germany acquired in trust with our neighbors was our most valuable foreign policy good. 

What were the bases for that? I say it to you: First, the German anchoring in Europe; second, the partnership tie to Russia; and third, the maintenance of the historic bridge across the Atlantic. And today? In Europe, we are isolated. For Paris, we are the problem on the eastern border, and for Poland the problem on its western border – borders besides which your cabinet colleagues, who now already are gone again, do not want to defend. Konrad Adenauer’s tenet, whereby the best foreign policy is the protection of one’s own interests, is our incentive [Ansporn]. German interests, Frau Baerbock, you have never yet defended – quite the opposite. 

In conclusion, I want to here indicate that you routinely violate our right of parliamentary inquiry. We have in committee and in plenary session asked you in writing when you learned that your house issued an instruction to endorse falsified Afghan passports, and who was authorized to name persons from Afghanistan who were to be flown into Germany for a roundabout provision [Rundumversorgung]. You have prevented this. We have thereupon submitted a constitutional complaint. We remain on the ball. 

Frau Baerbock, in conclusion, I say to you: With this anti-democratic state of affairs, you would been thrown out of the polis of Pericles,           

            Vice-president Katrin Göring-Eckardt: Herr colleague, your speaking time                            is past.

the homeland of democracy. 

            Vice-president Katrin Göring-Eckardt: Herr colleague.

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Peter Boehringer, August 1, 2023, Constitution Defense

AfD Kompakt, August 1, 2023. 

It is not yet four weeks that we of the AfD national committee needed to warn the President of the BfV [Federal Office for the Defense of the Constitution] of fully unfair election recommendations, neither appropriate nor permitted to his office. At the beginning of July, he already publicly insinuated, “Not alone to the Constitution Defense” does it “belong to reduce the polling results of the AfD”; and “I believe this is a circumstance [of the AfD] which German voters should also have in the back of the mind.” 

And the present, renewed, over-reaching, false statements, in no way substantiated by Haldenwang during the current nominations convention for the European election, are by us in no case acceptable. Haldenwang, with his babble of “extreme right conspiracy theories”, wants to have direct influence, quasi “live”, in an important intra-party process, and again express a warning to citizens against an AfD election. That is plainly not permitted according to Art 21(1) GG [Basic Law], Art 11 EMRK [European Convention on Human Rights] and §16(1) BverfSchG [Federal Constitution Defense Law]. 

That the German government attempts to manipulate, well beforehand, elections in Europe by means of its government defense authorities, is obviously unworthy of a democratic state of law. Haldenwang attempts to one-sidedly influence the sovereigns’ voting behavior. That a Geheimdienst [intelligence service] of this type meddles in the democratic determination process, would seem to be unique among democracies – and is of course illegal. Already in 1977, the Federal Constitutional Court quite unmistakably forbade precisely such conduct (BVerfG, Urt. V. 2.3.1977, Az 2 BvE 1/76). And also the founding legislation, BVerfSchG §16(1), quite clearly ordered: “The BfV is not to be an institution of political formation”. Neither the giving of election recommendations nor commentaries on current democratic processes is a duty of the Geheimdienstes. 

The accusations again raised by Haldenwang concerning so-called “extremist right conspiracy theories”  were already a part of the charges against the AfD of the Constitution Defense report of 2022. The President of the BfV was expressly questioned on this in the Interior Committee of the German Bundestag. And to repeated questions there, Haldenwang could neither explain what his legal definition of a “conspiracy narrative” generally is, nor which such narratives are then generally incompatible with the Constitution. Just as little could he explain which of these narratives are judicable or pose a danger to the FDGO [free, democratic basic order]; no more, permitted expressions of opinion… The long since confirmed suspicion that the BfV is operating primarily a partisan political defamation campaign opposed to the AfD has thereby become a certainty. Its President is not in a position to substantiate, genuinely fact-oriented, objectively comprehensible, his serious accusations. On account of the evidently purely political motivations of the Constitution Defense’s entire work against the AfD, “inter alia Faeser”, in our opinion all categorization and observation measures of the AfD are to be halted. 

 

[trans: tem]

Thomas Ehrhorn, July 6, 2023, War on One’s Own People

German Bundestag, July 6, 2023, Plenarprotokoll 20/115, pp. 14205-14206. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The draft law put forward deals primarily with the acceleration of the approval procedures for windpower installations and facilities for production of so-called green hydrogen. So as to forestall the same: The speeches on green hydrogen, this alleged wonder technology of the future, which in reality is a stillbirth, is an additional green chimera. Yet this is marginal. 

How shall permitting procedures now be thus accelerated? The answer reads: a) While almost all possibilities of protest and influence are taken from the public, b) while the States’ power of decision is undermined, c) while examinations of environmental compatibility are simply abolished, d) so that in the future protection of species and agriculture no more play a role. But anyway – the main thing is, Germany saves the world climate! 

How absurd this supposition in fact is, the following figures show: Germany, which has a two percent portion of worldwide CO₂ emissions, has since 1990 cut back some one-third of its emissions. The rest of the world, which is responsible for 98 percent of CO₂ output, has in the same time increased its CO₂ emissions by two-thirds. In other words: What we in Germany do or allow is absolutely irrelevant for the world climate. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): That is an absurd theory!

The ideologically motivated and artificially generated climate hysteria thus alone serves as a justification for the planned radical change in our society, the radical change into an authoritarian socialist planned economy 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Uijuijui! 

Jan Niclas Gesenhues (Greens): Conspiracy theory! Again a false turn on the internet, or what? 

in which the state prescribes to the people how they are to live, how they are to eat, with what they are to heat. It serves as a justification for the rainbow coalition’s war against our industry, against the automobile, against our private property, a war which meanwhile has become a war of those who govern against one’s own people. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): That is the wrong word!

And I say to you: The people there outside, they know this and they are fed up with it. 

            Axel Echeverria (SPD): Yes, with you!

Since the only sustainability goal which you are in a position to attain is to drive this country straight into the wall and to annihilate our sustained prosperity. Thus Professor Dr. Knut Löschke, 

            Carsten Träger (SPD): How is he called?

member of the college council of the University of Leipzig and member of the board of trustees of the Max Planck Institute, speaks to the citizens from the deepest soul 

            Petra Sitte (Linke): He is for long no more a member. I have taken care of that!

when he says – I cite with permission of the President: 

I have enough of it…I have a nose full of permanent and ever more religious climate talk, of energy transition fantasies, of electro-auto worship, through horror stories of world downfall scenarios…to world catastrophes. 

I can no more bear the people who daily scream this in microphones and cameras or publish it in newspapers. I suffer first-hand how natural science is made a whore of politics. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Eijeijei!

Ladies and gentlemen of the CDU/CSU, I can thus give to you just the good advice: Send the firewall fetishists and BlackRock orders-takers as quickly as possible into the wasteland. Become again a party which is ready, in common with the AfD, to turn things upside down 

Daniel Rinkert (SPD): Do you then want to change the Federal Emissions Protection Law? What are your proposals? Of that, nothing is heard!

and to make reason-oriented policy for Germany. If you do not do that, you will, quicker than you suppose, dwindle into meaninglessness. 

Thank you. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

Karsten Hilse, June 15, 2023, Green Dictatorship

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/109, p. 13187.

Valued Praesidium. Ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen.

Again and again, destructive draft laws are put forward by the Ampel – driven by the green climate sects – and against every reason rushed through under disregard of all rules of this sovereign house, the main thing being it serves the climate ideology of the green communists.

It is a law which affects all households, all firms, all landlords, all renters, all homeowners, all local governments – thus practically everyone. According to the will of the greens of all the parties, by 2045 they shall be forced to heat climate neutral. In conformity with the experiences of the Corona dictatorship, every citizen is to be impressed under a climate yoke. Forsa chief Güllner is led to this statement, cite:

"Earlier SPD voters have the impression that their party bows down before a green dictatorship."

In concrete terms:

"When a small, elite minority…enforces its values by means of instructions and bans upon the society of a great majority of those thinking otherwise, that can indeed be evaluated as a dictatorship."

He is right.

This compulsion, these bans of course affect all of us. Correspondingly great are the outcry, the resistance and the comprehensible rage.

The perpetrators [Macher] naturally notice this rage. And despite that, they bring in this law today, talking drivel from their pompous “guard rails” for the pamphlet named the “Building Energy Law”, that Germany by 2045 should be climate neutral. The asserted consensus is however a flat lie. According to a Spiegel poll from March 30, 2023, climate neutrality is meanwhile left behind by half of Germany. 80 percent of people in the country reject your so-called heating hammer. And against this 80 percent, you make your destructive policy.

Yet what is really bad is that the other old parties extend a hand to you for that. From the special democrats and the green communists is meanwhile expected nothing other. That however the coward democrats play along with that is actually tragic.

Despite the mini-changes, for which the coward democrats celebrate themselves, it is and remains a destructive law, annihilating prosperity and workplaces, as is otherwise possible only in a war. Many people meanwhile designate your policy as a “war against one’s own people”. Anyone who participates in this war will someday need to be held responsible before the people.

The only party which stands against this collective suicide is the AfD. Consequently, our approval numbers are rising. That is good for Germany. Bad for Germany is that with each day this government further manages its work of destruction

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Enough now with the shamelessness!

the heaps of rubble which we as a future governing party will have to clear away will become ever greater. We will do it, rely on it. I am besides of the opinion: He who votes Green, votes for war.

Many thanks.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Shamelessness!

            Jan Korte (Linke): Thorough Nazi speech!

 

[trans: tem]