{"id":363152,"date":"2025-01-23T17:20:18","date_gmt":"2025-01-23T16:20:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=363152"},"modified":"2025-01-23T17:20:20","modified_gmt":"2025-01-23T16:20:20","slug":"germanys-industry-is-being-destroyed-by-constitutional-tampering-and-judicial-trickery","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=363152","title":{"rendered":"Germany\u2019s Industry Is Being Destroyed by Constitutional Tampering and Judicial Trickery"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From NoTrickZone<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0P Gosselin<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

How did it get this far?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Fred F. Mueller (EIKE)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Germany, the good times and prosperity are on the brink \u2026 stuck economy is stuck in a multi-year recession\u2026 producers laying off staff by the hundreds of thousands\u2026costs for energy, food and rents are going through the roof \u2026 the outlook for the future is bleak<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even the online edition of the renowned newspaper FAZ (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) occasionally flags headlines such as \u201cWe are in a terminal multi-crisis\u201c at the top of its homepage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How did it get this far?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Who used which tricks, and will we ever get out of it?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 1<\/strong>: The industrial decline of Germany (and with it Europe) is becoming increasingly apparent (YouTube\u00a0screenshot\u00a0<\/a>1<\/sup>)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

If we look for the reasons for this misery, we quickly find a common denominator: Germany\u2019s prescribed \u201ctransformation to a CO2<\/sub>-free economy,\u201d which involves an extremely costly total restructuring of almost the entire infrastructure and industry. This begins with electricity generation and the grid and extends to the production of steel and aluminum as well as chemicals and automotive production. At the same time, nuclear power plants, which once reliably supplied up to 30% of Germany\u2019s electricity virtually free of CO2<\/sub>, have been shut down for purely ideological reasons. In addition, the wealth of expertise that our industry has built up over generations is being largely devalued, thus giving away our technological lead over other nations. This is all justified by the alleged \u201charmfulness to the climate\u201d of the CO2\u00a0<\/sub>released by burning coal, gas and petrol. Thanks to an incredibly massive propaganda campaign that has been running non-stop for decades over all the media, in politics and in schools, we are nudged to think that CO2\u00a0<\/sub>is warming the climate to such an extent that it is going to make the earth largely uninhabitable. In 2021 already, the highest German court took advantage of the smokescreen created by this media barrage to authoritatively settle the (actually scientific!) question of the harmfulness of CO2\u00a0<\/sub>for our climate,\u00a0Figure 2:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 2<\/strong>: From the ruling of the\u00a0Federal Constitutional Court of Germany in Karlsruhe<\/a>\u00a02\u00a0<\/sup>(BVG) of March 24, 2021 on the so-called Climate Protection Act<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The reasoning comprehensively set out in the BVG court\u2019s decision corresponds in principle one on one to the climate doctrines of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) of the United Nations, also parroted by state institutions such as the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) and advisory bodies such as the German Advisory Council on the Environment (SRU). Although there are numerous and some high-ranking (e.g. Nobel laureates) critics of these climate doctrines, the BVG high court did consult any expert opinions to the contrary and has therefore declared itself to be competent. Thus, an issue that is anything but scientifically undisputed has been \u201cclarified\u201d once and for all by pure lawyers.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 3: From the website of the\u00a0US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\u00a0<\/a>NOAA\u00a03)<\/sup><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Figure 3 shows the extent to which the BVG\u2019s ruling is at odds with scientific reality. NOAA is a reputable US authority that has been in existence for decades and whose findings can in no way be dismissed as unscientific. The BVG court\u2019s ruling therefore brings back unpleasant memories of medieval-style judgments against scientists such as Galileo Galilei.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back in the 17th century, he had shown that, contrary to established doctrine, that the earth was not flat, but a sphere that revolved around the sun and not the other way around. Today, people are no longer tortured for years in inquisition cellars for such dissenting scientific findings, but nevertheless mediatic character assassination and career setbacks as a \u201cclimate denier\u201d for such heretics are widely viewed as legitimate procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Violation of the fundamental right to freedom of science and teaching<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By elevating the IPCC theses to a legally unchallengeable dogma, the German Constitutional Court also violated the protection of freedom of science and teaching, <\/strong>Figure 4:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 4: The fathers of the Basic Law expressly stipulated the freedom of science, research and teaching in\u00a0Article 5\u00a0<\/a><\/em>(4).<\/em><\/sup><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

However, the judges in Karlsruhe are in good company with this violation. In particular, our just recently highly decorated former chancellor Merkel had few inhibitions about violating the protection of science from state interference when, in January 2018, she strongly condemned alleged diesel pollutant tests<\/a> which had been targeted by a media shitstorm against the Rheinisch-Westf\u00e4lische Universit\u00e4t Aachen 5) <\/sup>and called for an investigation. The same Angela Merkel also acted unconstitutionally in February 2020 on the occasion of the election of Thomas Kemmerich as Minister President of the Free State of Thuringia <\/a>6)<\/sup>. During a press conference in South Africa, she characterized the parliamentary decision as \u201cunforgivable\u201d and demanded \u201cthe result must be reversed\u201d. In Germany, such breaches of constitutional law, even at the highest level, seem now to be considered as peanuts attracting neither public interest nor any consequences. And our constitutional judges will probably only smile away any constitutional lawsuit targeting their verdicts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The trick with nature conservation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking back, we can see that the success of the green ideologues at the Federal Constitutional Court was the result of a clever strategy. The first step in 1994 \u2013 under then conservative chancellor Helmut Kohl \u2013 was the placement of a seemingly harmless Trojan horse in the German Basic Law, in the form of a completely innocuous-sounding additional Article 20a, Figure 5:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 5:\u00a0Article 20a\u00a0<\/a>7)\u00a0<\/sup>of the German Basic Law on the protection of the environment, nature and animals, introduced in 1994 and extended to include animal protection in 2002<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Even on careful reading, there is nothing in Article 20a of the Basic Law that would force Germany to destroy its industry and thus its prosperity in favor of the ideological construct of \u201cclimate protection\u201d, and that this should also be done at the instigation of non-German plaintiffs. Nevertheless, with its \u201cclimate ruling\u201d of March 24, 2021, the Federal Constitutional Court has ruled to enshrine precisely these demands once and for all for Germany.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The original Article 20 of the Basic Law complemented by Article 20a contains self-evident basic principles of democracy and state organization: the statement that the Federal Republic of Germany is a democratic and social constitutional state, and that all power emanates from the people, who exercise it through elections and votes. The bodies established correspond to the classic tripartite division into legislative (parliaments with two chambers), government and judiciary. It is also stipulated that the parliaments are bound by the constitution, while the government and judiciary are bound by law. Finally, the right of all Germans to resist anyone attempting to abolish this order was defined \u2013 probably intended at the time as a sedative for opponents of the emergency laws.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Destruction of the foundations of the state, step 2: The new Article 94 of the Basic Law<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In its climate ruling, the Constitutional Court went far beyond its remit \u2013 compliance with existing laws \u2013 and thus granted itself powers that only the legislature is entitled to <\/a>8)<\/sup>. It would actually have been the parliament\u2019s task to counter this violation of the constitution. Instead, today\u2019s green ideologues and their useful idiots in the old parties are pursuing the goal of stifling the slowly emerging resistance to the forced \u201etransformation\u201c of our economy by amending the constitution. In doing so, they are using the slander initiated and promoted by Chancellor Merkel against the most important opposing political force \u2013 the AfD party, who have been framed as \u201cNazis\u201d against whom a \u201cfirewall\u201d must be erected and maintained. The culmination of this project is the amendment to the Basic Law that has just now been hastily rushed through on December 28, 2024. This timing ensured that the grand coalition of climate doomsayers and warmongers could not be stopped by dissenters that might become much stronger after the snap elections slated for February 23, 2025. The amendment is allegedly intended to protect the constitutional court from the evil AfD and BSW parties. In reality, however, the constitution is being turned completely on its head.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Constitutional courts elevated to lawmakers<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We all had \u201ccivics\u201c in our school lessons. We were told that the rule of law includes the principle of the separation of powers. These powers are the legislative (parliaments), the executive (government) and the judicial (courts). This tripartite division is intended to prevent one of the three powers from rising above the others by arrogating additional powers to itself and thereby undermining the balance of power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Federal Constitutional Court\u2019s climate ruling discussed above already provided a textbook example of such an encroachment. Even in the current push to disempower the people, the core statement of the revised Article 94 of the Basic Law initially sounds quite harmless to the inexperienced reader, Figure 6:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 6<\/strong>: The decisive passage of the\u00a0new version of Article 94 of the Basic Law\u00a0<\/a>9)\u00a0<\/sup>seems completely harmless in principle when you read it. The law was rushed through in view of the upcoming snap elections, in which the AfD could gain substantially more votes. Timeline: Adoption in the Bundestag on December 19, 2024, in the Bundesrat on December 20, 2024, and promulgation in the Federal Law Gazette on December 27, 2024, automatically bringing it into force on December 28, 2024.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The explosive nature of this article is that it gives the judges of the Federal Constitutional Court legislative power, allowing them to patronize not only the government but also the parliament. Their decisions have direct legal force. In stark contrast, parliamentary legal initiatives have to be presented, justified and decided in lengthy and time-consuming manner to the parties, the media and the people. Instead of the tried and tested separation of powers, the constitutional judges now have the power to enact their own laws. All it takes is a conspiratorial group of just five out of eight constitutional judges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assessment by Prof. Werner M\u00fcller<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prof. Dr. Werner M\u00fcller, researcher at the Department of Economics at Mainz University of Applied Sciences until 2023,\u00a0criticizes the new law\u00a0<\/a>10)\u00a0<\/sup>in no uncertain terms. It is \u201ca flagrant violation of Article 79 of the Constitution, according to which amendments to the Basic Law which \u2026 affect the principles laid down in Articles 1 and 20 are inadmissible. These include the principle of popular sovereignty under Article 20 para. 2 sentence 1 (All state authority emanates from the people) and the separation of powers under Article 20 para. 3 of the Basic Law \u201c\u2026. He continues: \u201cThe law of December 28, 2024, now also officially disempowers parliament. According to the new Art. 94 para. 4 of the Basic Law, the constitutional judges, who are selected in back rooms according to their political reliability, can arbitrarily determine what the parliament may still be allowed to decide and are not subject to any democratic control. [Their] power is similar to that of the Guardian Council in the Islamic Republic of Iran. \u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 7<\/strong>: Headline of an\u00a0editorial in the online edition of the FAZ\u00a0<\/a>11)\u00a0<\/sup>Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung from January 3, 2025 (Translation: Apocalypse researcher: \u201cWe are in an end-of-the world multi-crisis\u201d By Melanie M\u00fchl Jan. 3, 2025. Can only radical change prevent the end of the world? An interview with researcher Robert Folger about dystopian scenarios, our apocalyptic tone in debates and the demotivating self-pity of the \u201clast generation\u201d (Image: screen printout, edited).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The consequences<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a roll-call vote in the Bundestag, 600 MPs voted in favor of this law, with only 69 against. Interestingly, 26 out of 28 Left Party MPs also voted in favor. Not too surprising given their communist roots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This change in the law was a dark day for Germany, as it cements the downward spiral into which we have fallen as a result of the disastrously damaging energy, climate and economic policies of the Greens (to the inclusion of our \u201cclimate chancellor\u201c Merkel, who is conservative only on the surface but deep green inside. Her legacy consisting of a catastrophically dilapidated infrastructure is now being compounded by the Ukraine conflict, which Germany continues to support with billions, even though it has long since been lost militarily, as even Springer\u2019s \u201cWelt\u201d has now had to admit <\/a>12)<\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The green \u201ctransformation\u201d will continue to ruin the industry, which is already under severe strain, or drive it abroad. To top it all off, the judiciary is now being handed over to the green forces on a silver platter. Who can protect Germany from green-influenced constitutional judges in the future? Two-thirds majorities are almost impossible to achieve on such highly controversial issues. On the other hand, smirking Green MPs will torpedo any legal resistance to the current course thanks to their secure blocking minority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Snake-oil selling profit hunters will praise their newest \u201cCO2-free\u201c technologies, while serious investors will go elsewhere. In three to five years at the latest, the CDU\/CSU and FDP MPs who have now voted by name for this amendment to the Basic Law will have to answer to their voters for the country\u2019s inexorable decline. Will then Mr. Lindner, Mr. Merz, Mr. Scholz or Mr. Buschmann still think their support for this green trap was a good idea?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sources:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n