Peter Boehringer, March 21, 2024, Debt Brake

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/160, pp. 20611-20612. 

Frau President. 

For the umpteenth time the Linke wants to abolish the debt brake, this time disguised as a “reform”. Meant, however, is the cold abolition; Herr Görke was certainly at least honest. Since 2020, we clearly have a great coalition of all old parties for a boundless making of debt. In addition, we know that the tax money will not be sufficient for the government even in 2025. And the SPD’s speaker has confirmed that a great left-green debt coalition thoroughly sympathizes with this “reform”, or with the abolition idea. 

What does the Linke now concretely propose? In the future, a “transition phase” of precisely one year shall increase the possible excess indebtedness, which diametrically contradicts what the Federal Constitutional Court permitted just last November: Very clearly, a setting aside of the debt brake only for the year of a catastrophe itself. Any time exceeding a year was explicitly forbidden by the Federal Constitutional Court. That does not interest the leftist writers of the motion. 

In the motion’s second demand, the single hard guideline of Article 115, namely the structural deficit limit of 0.35 percent of GDP, shall be annulled. That however would be no “reform” of the debt brake, but a material alteration of the Basic Law’s wording, which may not proceed with a simple motion but only with a law to amend the Constitution with a two-thirds majority. The motion is thus also badly written. 

With the third demand, the besides already highly mathematical finding procedure for the debt brake’s business cycle component shall be still further complicated. Who for once takes a rudimentary look at the formulation [Formelwelt], and the arbitrary scope of valuation which will be used for this calculation, knows that a self-indebted government chronically short of money can thereby vastly exceed the permitted limit of indebtedness – even today. The aim of the Linke, to receive still “greater fiscal scope”, as it is in the motion, is thus absurd, since this scope today already is enormous. 

Clearly, the terms in Article 115 of the Basic Law are very spongy. There are therein named arbitrary expectations without clear deduction criteria, free of parameters as a result of unclear entities, certain cyclical norms, gaps in production, estimates of potential and cyclical settlement procedures, all without binding definitions. And the number in the end will determined by technocratic procedures and legal decrees. 

Dear Linke, you should here just simply love the already existing planned economy, instead of wanting to reform it. Precisely that of course already is your vulgarized Keynesian theoretical model of a world. Simply enjoy it as long as you are still permitted to sit here and play with a national economy. 

Many thanks. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Nothing missed there!

 

[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? 

Beatrix von Storch, March 21, 2024, Internet Censorship

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/160, pp. 20448-20449. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The DDG [Digital-Dienste-Gestez] implements the EU’s Digital Services Act: EU-wide internet censorship. The Ampel has decided that for this censorship the Federal Network Agency is responsible and coordinates it. No joke: The officials, who hitherto have regulated the transmission and competition in the gas and electricity network, are also responsible for on-line censorship, 

            Tabea Rössner (Greens): A lie! Impudent! 

instead of, for example, the Federal Justice Ministry. 

At the top stands Klaus Müller, former Green minister from Schleswig-Holstein, exactly so as his Green chief, Robert Habeck. Green clique! Yet before the law is at all in effect, Herr Müller openly threatened in January 2024 – cite: 

“When I catch anyone the second or third time…then I need to say with all distinctness: The Digital Services Act then has very sharp teeth.” 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): That’s right!

The threat is not a fabrication. Herr Müller or the coordinating office at the Federal Network Agency can impose penalty payments against on-line platforms which do not sufficiently censure. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Are you nervous on that account?

Six percent of the worldwide daily revenue, millions of U.S. dollars in penalties – without being imposed by a court. Ergo: The platforms will censor, and the Green coordinating office will therein no doubt give rise to what is to be censured. 

             Tabea Rössner (Greens): Such idiocy I’ve never heard!

For a brutal deletion practice by the platforms suffices this danger of penalties in the millions. 

Yet the coordinating office may do much more than what a judiciary or police in a state of law may do: Conduct investigations, gather evidence, hear witnesses, examine witnesses, inspect places of business without a court order, seize property up to three days without court authorization. And for support, the coordinating office is allowed to name civil law organizations for so-called trustworthy whistle-blowers [Hinweisgebern] whose indications of censorship [Zensurhinweise] are to be preferably implemented. We all know who that is. Stasi Kahane for laughing no longer sleeps. This army of leftist on-line denouncers shall cull and report disliked opinions, and the data of people of wrong opinion will then be passed on to the BKA [Federal Criminal Office]. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): So that you cannot thereby spread all your hatred!

This law paves the way to a digital police state. 

            Detlef Müller (SPD-Chemnitz): No smaller does it get now!

For that, the Ampel now massively arms the BKA. Money is there, but not for the fight against organized criminality, clans or terrorism, but so as to persecute expressions of opinion on the internet. The number of officials in the reporting office shall be increased more than ten times from today’s 39 to 430. And the BKA states on page 64 of the proposal, Herr colleague Mordhorst, 

            Maximilian Mordhorst (FDP): Preamble, Frau von Storch! That is not the text                        of the law! 

that the test cases [Prüffälle] will increase by more than a hundred times, from 6,000 to around 720,000. The overwhelming majority of test cases will affect blameless citizens who have been denounced by the left-green on-line Stasi. 

Who on Facebook insults Habeck’s heat pump is – Schwupp – a test case for the BKA. Hundreds of BKA officials need to occupy themselves with that. 

You use this proposal from Brussels for your ideological fight against all and anyone who is not left. The more its backing in the population dwindles, the more the Ampel employs surveillance, intimidation and repression – see the Democracy Promotion Act. 

            Renate Künst (Greens): You need to pay attention that the features do not slip!

This state has lost every measure, writes the NZZ [Neue Zürcher Zeitung]. With this coordinating  office, it creates a Green species of directed censor officials; and proudly writes, they are completely independent. That means, they are without any democratic control. This censorship monster belongs in no democracy. On that account, all democrats will today reject this attack on our free democratic basic order. 

Many thanks. 

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): What do you want then?

 

[trans: tem]

 

Gunnar Beck, March 11, 2024, Climate Excommunication

European Parliament, Strasbourg, P9 CRE-PROV(2024)03-11(1-242-0000). 

In 1633, the Inquisition excommunicated Galileo for helio-centrism – that is to say, for his renunciation of a Church dogma that the Sun circles around the Earth. Last month, ECB director Elderson threatened all co-workers with discharge who – cite – “deny the reality of solely man-made climate change, or that the climate change endangers the price stability.” 

Now, as a conservative, I rejoice over anyone who believes that earlier was much better. However, the ECB should preferably exchange its climate inquisitors for good economic historians, who know that not the climate change but the expansion of the money supply accelerates the inflation, just as Hans de Witte and Wallenstein managed it without limit in Galileo’s time. For its climate dogma and monetary policy are the greatest hocus-pocus in Europe since the geo-centric world view. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

Martin Hess, March 15, 2024, Leftist Terror and Free Opinion

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/158, pp. 20296-20297. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

In our country, leftist extremism has long since developed into leftist terrorism, and the Federal Interior Minister not only inactively looks on at this development, so dangerous for all our security, 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Such an idiocy!

no, as a result of her ideologically conditioned, utterly unavailing focus on the fight against rightists, she herself has become the fire accelerator of this development. That is unacceptable and can no longer be borne. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Such an idiocy! 

That we in our country urgently require a course correction in regards the terror and extremism struggle has not for the last time been indicated by the cases of an arrested RAF terrorist and the attack of the leftist-extremist “Vulkangruppe” on the critical infrastructure in our country. 

The RAF terrorist Klette, sought by arrest warrant, was not discovered as is to be expected in a state of law by police authorities, but by journalists who simply researched in publicly accessible sources and thereby came upon the track of this serious criminal. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): For once is free journalism desired! For once that is good! 

This enemy of the state by no means lived underground. She has, utterly unabashed, taken part in normal social life, given tutoring and was a dance teacher. And despite this, she was not to be found by our security authorities. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): What is it then with your co-workers?

And the Interior Minister has the audacity in all seriousness to then ascribe this success to her own ostensibly so successful security policy. Frau Faeser, – who unfortunately is again not here – how stupid do you actually deem the citizens of our country? 

The truth is this proceeding is an evidence of incapacity for our security organs 

            Dorothee Martin (SPD): No! You are an evidence of incapacity for Germany!

and shows the entire dysfunctionality of our state in this central security area. That must finally have an end. That is also evidenced by the state actions in relation to the leftist-terrorist “Vulkangruppe” which lately in Brandenburg committed an arson attack on an electricity pylon which, as a result of a widespread electricity blackout thereby produced, caused not only hundreds of millions of euros of damages in the Tesla works there, but before all also lead to a danger to the lives and health of patients in the clinics and doctors’ offices affected by the blackout. For days, supermarkets could not be supplied. 

Yet this was not the first attack of these violent criminals. Since 2011, these terrorists commit such attacks on our critical infrastructure. The last sitting of the Interior Committee clearly and distinctly showed that to this day not a single one of these perpetrators has been identified, to say nothing then of arrested. This is a security policy scandal. More blind in the left eye a state cannot be. 

Johannes Fechner (SPD): So, now for once on the rightist-extremists in your own ranks, your delegation co-workers! Say something on that!

It is all the more serious when it needs to be acknowledged that this state in a fight against rightists opposes all that is not of the left, and thereby no longer knows any red lines. That a school director in Germany removes a 16 year old student from a class in session and, without notification of the parents, has a warning talk conducted by the police 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Madness!

because she shared a Schlumpf video on social media, and defended the opinion that Germany for her is more than a place on a map, Germany for her is a Heimat, 

Lamya Kaddor (Greens): For you, that would be totally appropriate in regards an Islamist video! That is your double morality!

            Florian Müller (CDU/CSU): It doesn’t go for both! 

shows every convinced democrat that this fight against rightists has nothing but simply nothing to do with the defense of our democracy, but wants to bring about exactly the opposite, 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Such rubbish!

namely, the entire exclusion of every non-left opinion from the democratic discourse. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Nonsense!

These left-green-red political commissars are thereby politically active as gravediggers of our democracy, Herr Hartmann. And that they now attack even our children [sogar an unseren Kinder vergreifen], 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Please?

we may and will never let pass. 

In this country must cease that legitimate expressions of opinion are persecuted under the covering of an ostensible, constitution-relevant delegitimization of the state. 

            Sebastian Hartmann (SPD): Aha!

We require finally again a correct freedom of opinion. 

            Dorothee Martin (SPD): We have freedom of opinion! Yet it doesn’t suit you.

Our security organs need instead to finally concern themselves with factual security dangers and to that belongs primarily the so far neglected criminal leftist extremism and terrorism. This needs finally to be fought with all severity and consistency. 

And when the AfD is responsible for the government, 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): Never!

then we will implement precisely that. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): Never again! 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Then you can stop now! That will never happen!

The security of our citizens before all forms of extremism has highest priority for us. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): But not in your own ranks!           

            Sebastian Hartmann (SPD): Start with yourself! 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): Never again fascism!

And in contrast to the Interior Minister, that is no hollow phrase for us, but an obligation for active conduct. We will implement a clear zero-tolerance strategy with maximum robustness. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): But not for your own people!

We ban the leftist-extremist Rote Hilfe and the Antifa. We conclusively disconnect the leftist-extremist platform indymedia.org. We take care that all leftist-extremist occupied buildings in Germany be finally evacuated, 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): And you call yourselves democrats! Impudence!

and we forbid the financing of leftist-extremists and terrorists. Thus need all enemies of the state be dealt with if one wants to create security in Germany.           

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): And your own people?

The clear message of an AfD government to all leftist-extremists and terrorists goes: The times in which you could romp nearly without limit in our society are over. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Done for by acts of government!

This state strikes back immediately. We no longer let ourselves be terrorized by you. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Mariana Harder-Kühnel, March 20, 2024, Gender Speech

AfD Kompakt, March 20, 2024. 

Speech as a fundamental pillar of our society needs to be free of ideological ballast. The decision against the gender speech underlines Bavaria’s acknowledgement of these values. The AfD expressly welcomes this step, since it fulfills our demand of many years for a renunciation of a kind of language spoliation. 

We nevertheless may not stop here. The ruling in Bavaria needs to serve as a model which conforms to that of other Federal States. For that, the AfD is committed to that the clarity and comprehensibility of the German language are placed above ideological experiments. We demand of the Federal government to follow the Bavarian example and, in common with the other Federal States, to issue a nationwide, State-inclusive ban of gender speech. 

The AfD stands for a policy which places at mid-point the citizen and the conservation of our cultural identity. Bavaria’s decision is a step in the right direction, yet may be only the beginning. 

 

[trans: tem]