Jörg Meuthen, March 5, 2021, Constitution Defense

AfD Kompakt, March 5, 2021

The Administrative Court in Cologne has today stopped with immediate effect the observation of the AfD – this decision is not only a victory for us but also for the state of law. Since the Administrative Court has shown that the illegal proceeding of the Constitution Defense against the largest opposition party can be stopped with legal means.

The Constitution Defense is to be tangibly rebuked for turning over highly confidential information to the media. Herr Haldenwang’s officials must now for a second time consider whether they want to continue to let themselves be politically instrumentalized against the largest opposition party in the German Bundestag. For us, it is certain: We will continue to exhaust all legal means so as to proceed against the BfV’s [Federal Office for the Defense of the Constitution] illegal dealings with the AfD. This day has proved that our prospects of success are thereby good.

 

[trans: tem]

 

Joachim Paul, February 25, 2021, Research and Development

AfD Kompakt, February 25, 2021

The year’s estimate delivers a determination of status which must raise serious concerns. The Corona crisis has in fact driven forward radical new technologies, yet which in Sleeping Beauty Germany – land of mobile phone dead zones, the copper cable and rattling fax machines – are a cold surprise.

Especially is Germany’s digital competitiveness in play. That out of a generally well installed research landscape, with a close network of establishments, proceed too few products “Made in Germany”, in the last consequence threatens thousands of on-site workplaces.

It is understandable that the businesses in times of Corona shun risks and refrain from investments – nevertheless, a change of mentality must in the mid-term result in more digital awareness and more readiness for risk. I thereby recall that many world-standard, successful products were prepared by means of German research or had been introduced for the first time in the German market. The subsequent commercialization nevertheless occurred in foreign countries. Social networks, for example: The successful German platforms “Wer kennt wen” and “StudiVZ” do not take the victory lap, but Facebook – a tech giant – today sets the pace; because firms are still too much analog-oriented and risk adverse and then do not catch sight of the market opportunities.

In regards the research budgets of China with 450 billion and the U.S.A. with 500 billion, and the fact that the Federal Republic expends only 3 percent of the BIP [gross domestic product] for research, Israel and Korea 5 and 4 percent respectively, a much stronger financial engagement must in the future follow – especially in regards well compatible, recruited personnel. The money must also flow to positions which offer long-term perspectives; thereby will be guaranteed that the state of science and research will be attended to long-term and passed on.  

Despite the primacy of market economy principles, the role of the state in regards the activities of innovation must in fact be newly defined – the founding of the “Agency for Springboard Innovations” in 2019 in Leipzig is therein to be welcomed as a first step. Considering the economic faults resulting from the Corona crisis, a debate on a stronger and more focused state engagement must follow.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

Roman Reusch, February 26, 2021, Direct Democracy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/213, pp. 26826-26827.

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.

Since the introduction of our Basic Law, our political system has taken on a development for which the Italians have a very pertinent designation, a pun: “Partitocrazia”. Which is translated: The rule of the parties. Which rests on three pillars.

First pillar: The limitation of powers, which we have laid down in the Basic Law. It is the principal duty of the government coalitions, come what may, to defend the government with tooth and nail. Parliamentary control therefore rests on the much too narrow shoulders of the opposition.

            Michael Grosse-Brömer (CDU/CSU): You are a bit clueless there!

Second pillar: The self-disempowerment of the parliament, conveyed by party and delegation discipline, which to oppose can have possibly unpleasant consequences for one’s subsequent career- and life-planning, and on which account, when in doubt, one prefers to walk softly.

Third pillar: The wretched business of the party book which has proliferated in all state organizations and today nor more stops short of the lower ranks. And this naturally serves the overcoming of competences and the separation of authorities [Gewalten] in the sense of the exercise of power [Macht].

This has led to a concentration of power in the hands of a few leading functionaries, which the renowned mothers and fathers of our constitution at Herrenchiemsee reliably wanted to prevent. A correction is required; an opposing power is to be built which in a democracy only the people, the sovereign, can present.

With our draft law [Drucksache 19/26906], we want to give to the people the means to exercise this power which it should have. The core of our draft is that the expressed will of the people must be the highest law.

            Michael Grosse-Brömer (CDU/CSU): In the Basic Law, “elections” are for that!

In regards instruments, we refer to proven procedures from the Swiss federal constitution.

            Anna Christmann (Greens): Not at all agreed!

For one, the obligatory referendum; for another, the facultative referendum. Obligatory, thus binding, popular votes are to be held for changes to the constitution, for changes to the people’s previous decisions, for cession of sovereignty, for entry into supra-national organizations. For the facultative, the people themselves shall receive the possibility, from their own ranks by means of a petition for referendum, to place before the people a vote on substantive issues and draft laws. Finally, the government shall maintain the possibility of realizing the people’s will by means of organization of a people’s inquiry. Brexit sends it respects, one or the other will say. With this instrument, much can be put in motion, as the example indicates. On the whole, the realization of the presentations would at a minimum distinctly reduce the power of the backrooms.

            Michael Grosse-Brömer (CDU/CSU): You must free yourself of AfD customs!

            Christoph de Vries (CDU/CSU): The backrooms, which with you are of the                            worst!

I now greatly rejoice over the speakers of delegations which themselves already have brought in initiatives for direct democracy; that is to therein refer to the dislocations with which they set forth why all of this is not at all needed.

Many thanks for the attention.

 

[trans: tem]