By supporting the establishment firewall against the AfD, the BSW is doing the opposite of what it promised.
The Ukraine conflict has exposed a German establishment more willing to defend its commitments to Kiev than to consider their cost to Germany. Saxony-Anhalt has delivered its verdict: an overwhelming win for the AfD (Alternative for Germany).
Now the parties it defeated may try to preserve their power through the establishment’s political firewall, while the BSW (Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance) must decide whether it will help restore political independence and relations with Russia or become the anti-Russian establishment’s last line of defense.
The war in Ukraine has posed a very basic question: whose interests should the German government serve? Kiev has its objectives. Germany has its own responsibilities, resources, and limits. The two cannot simply be declared identical. The AfD deserves credit for challenging this confusion. It has insisted that German interests are paramount and that Russia cannot be treated as a permanent enemy without serious costs to Europe. Its proposals include reducing financial and military assistance to pressure Kiev into peace negotiations, offering partial sanctions relief to encourage talks, and lifting sanctions fully once a peace agreement is reached. These are subjects for practical diplomacy. They recognize that Russia will remain a major European power whatever German ministers say about it, and that a durable settlement must be negotiated with Moscow. The AfD’s parliamentary proposal gives negotiations and the restoration of relations a place in policy that endless establishment declarations of “resolve” cannot supply.
The BSW’s opposition to arms deliveries to Ukraine and its demand for diplomacy give it substantial common ground with the AfD. This is one reason to welcome its presence in parliament. Thus, in Saxony-Anhalt, the immediate opportunity belongs to the AfD and BSW: together, they could turn their rejection of the present course into a governing coalition.
Supporters of military assistance argue that weapons strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position. In reality, it merely prolongs the fighting and delays the inevitable defeat of Ukraine. Kiev cannot reasonably expect foreign taxpayers to shoulder indefinite financial burdens while facing economic hardship at home, especially without clear limits or a realistic plan for peace. Germany should also take Russia’s stated security concerns seriously enough to examine them in negotiations. Taking those concerns into account does not oblige Berlin to accept every Russian demand. It means recognizing that a settlement requires terms the parties will observe, rather than a declaration written for the satisfaction of only one side.
Saxony-Anhalt has now given that challenge political weight. The AfD won 43.8% and 39 seats. The CDU (Christian Democratic Union, Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s party) received 17.2% and 15 seats. The BSW entered parliament with 5.3% and five seats. Together, the AfD and BSW would hold 44 of the 83 seats, exceeding the 42 needed for a majority. The CDU, SPD (Social Democratic Party), Greens, and Left have only 39 between them. An alternative majority excluding the AfD would therefore require the BSW. The reported seat allocation presents the BSW with a clear choice: negotiate a change of government with the election winner or help its opponents keep it out.
The AfD fell short of an absolute majority, but has still earned the strongest political claim to lead coalition negotiations, even though it has no automatic right to govern. The establishment’s firewall exists to prevent that claim from being tested through ordinary bargaining. Before demands are presented, before compromises are considered, before a common program is examined, the answer is already supposed to be no. The establishment then describes this refusal as a “defense of democracy.” It might more honestly describe it as a defense of its own exclusive right to supply the government.
No party is legally obliged to cooperate with the AfD. Equally, no party is entitled to escape criticism for refusing. The defenders of the firewall like to recite the first point as though it settles the second. It does not. Parties make choices, and voters are entitled to judge them. If the CDU can contemplate arrangements involving the Greens and the Left (both radical, socially destructive, and truly extremist), it must explain why differences in those directions can be managed while differences with the AfD prohibit even a discussion. Saying “we will not cooperate with the AfD because of the firewall” does not explain why cooperation would be wrong.
The CDU’s position is especially contemptuous of the conservative voters whose support it continues to solicit. During the campaign, their concerns are important. After the campaign, those concerns must wait while the party protects the firewall. What is such a party conserving? Increasingly, the answer appears to be its own place in government. Its failure to mount a serious challenge to the woke cultural agenda prevalent across German institutions makes it, in practice, a party of the left wearing a conservative label. Its clearest commitment is to keep the AfD out of power, even when that means preserving the policies its own voters want changed.
This is the practical meaning of the uniparty. The Greens and the Left openly advance the left-liberal agenda, the SPD supports it, and the CDU helps preserve it while calling itself conservative. Their campaign quarrels offer voters the illusion of choice without a real change of direction. When the AfD threatens to overturn that agenda, they unite to keep it out of government and call their cooperation “democratic responsibility.” Ministers can be replaced and coalition partners reshuffled, but the same political course survives. The firewall protects the established parties from the consequence elections should make possible: losing power to an opposition that intends to govern differently.
The firewall lets the established parties lose voters without losing power. Instead of defeating the AfD through better government and stronger arguments, they can gather enough coalition partners to keep it out. Parties rejected at the ballot box then present their survival in office as a “victory for democracy.” This gives force to the AfD’s accusation that opposition is welcome only while it cannot govern. Every additional party recruited to keep the AfD out makes the arrangement harder to disguise: the established parties are protecting their own hold on power.
The BSW should understand this danger better than most. It was founded to challenge policies that the established parties treated as beyond debate. It deserves sympathy for reopening arguments about war, economic interests, and the costs imposed on ordinary people. Its call for normal relations with Russia offers a necessary alternative to permanent confrontation, and its willingness to defend that position under political pressure deserves credit. However, if the BSW refuses to enter into a coalition with the AfD, it accepts an establishment veto over its own political freedom. It may still speak against the system, but the established parties will have allowed the BSW to criticize their policies while preventing it from forming a government that could change them.
The BSW’s refusal even to consider a coalition with the AfD amounts to surrender before negotiations begin. It gives up a possible majority without discovering which of its demands the AfD would accept. The BSW should put its policies on the table and negotiate hard. If agreement proves impossible, it can explain what prevented it. But refusing talks in advance means obeying the establishment’s command that the AfD must never govern. A party elected to oppose the old parties would then be helping keep them in office. Its voters would have supplied the seats; the establishment would collect the benefit.
Supporting individual AfD proposals is better than rejecting them on principle, but it can become an excuse for avoiding the real contest over power. The BSW could claim influence through occasional votes while leaving the government and its priorities in other hands. A government in Saxony-Anhalt cannot stop Germany’s weapons deliveries to Ukraine or negotiate peace with Russia; those decisions belong to the federal government. An AfD-BSW coalition would need an agreement on matters it could directly influence, such as schools, policing, and state spending. If it governed well, it would give voters concrete evidence that cooperation between the two parties can work. That would weaken the argument for keeping the AfD out of office. The established parties would then have to defend their record against an actual AfD-led government. The firewall spares them that comparison.
The war in Ukraine has exposed a very basic philosophy
That Napoleon was soon to discover
And Hitler
Unfortunately Germany is fixated with the tunnel vision that it can now accomplish what Napoleon and Hitler failed to do
By making the same futile mistakes and blunders as those before them
Merz’z popularity rate is said to be around 13%
No doubt grossly exaggerated and inflated
Only a complete idiot carries on blindly in perpetuating the same mistakes expecting a different outcome each time
The blind leading the blind into the ditch and destruction
Desperate times demand desperate measures and initiatives only to fail and not work
We are seeing something similar here in NZ with November voters waking-up to ‘poliTICKS’ as usual’ with the past & current Uni-Party system.
The New Zealand Loyal Party has crashed the gates of political awareness with the voting public, and those who appear in the commentaries are now writing that they will be Loyal Party voters in November.
The NZ Loyal Party will probably surpass NZ First and all of the other minor political parties by the end of October ’26, but this may only be indicated after election day, as the MSM and PTB have been trying desperately to marginalise, disenfranchise, and run legal interference on several levels.
Just the idea of a 1% Transactional Tax that removes the complicated IRD system and begins to build a surplus in the NZ Treasury without a ‘Reserve (private) Bank’ dictating the nation’s economy and ‘currency management’ is a fantastic starting point.
https://nzloyal.com/kelvyn-talks-tax/ (video)
Monetary & Taxation (written policy)
February 4, 2025 Published by Kelvyn Alp
Sovereign Wealth, Simplified Prosperity
New Zealand will adopt a revolutionary economic framework, creating its own coin, credit, and currency, while introducing a 1% transaction tax to replace all other taxes. This policy aims to propel New Zealand to unprecedented prosperity by harnessing its natural resources, eliminating predatory market manipulation, and aligning monetary policy with national interests.
Sovereign Currency Issuance
1. Creation of New Zealand’s Own Currency: The Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) will create new money ex nihilo to fund government expenditures, eliminating reliance on external borrowing and interest payments.
2. Monetary Policy Alignment: The RBNZ will be brought under the New Zealand Treasury to ensure monetary policy is aligned with national interests and fiscal policy.
Transaction Tax
1. Replacement of All Other Taxes: A 1% transaction tax will be introduced on all financial transactions, including electronic payments, cash withdrawals, online transactions, and securities trades, replacing all other taxes.
2. Revenue Allocation: Transaction tax revenue will be allocated towards funding public goods and services, including increased infrastructure investment.
Increased Infrastructure Investment
1. Harnessing of Natural Resources: New Zealand will invest in harnessing its natural resources, including the Great South Basin and other oil reserves, to drive economic growth and prosperity.
2. Infrastructure Development: Increased infrastructure investment will focus on strategic sectors, such as transportation, energy, and education, to support long-term economic resilience.
Removal of New Zealand Dollar from Market Manipulation
1. Protection from Predatory Behaviour: The New Zealand dollar will be removed from market manipulation and predatory behaviour, ensuring economic stability and security.
2. Elimination of Inland Revenue: Inland Revenue will be eliminated, simplifying the tax system and reducing administrative burdens on taxpayers.
Benefits and Implications
1. Increased Economic Resilience: New Zealand will enjoy increased economic resilience, driven by sovereign currency issuance, transaction tax revenue, and strategic infrastructure investment.
2. Prosperity and Wealth: By harnessing its natural resources and eliminating predatory market manipulation, New Zealand will propel itself to unprecedented prosperity and wealth.
3. Simplified Tax System: The 1% transaction tax will consolidate and replace various existing taxes, reducing complexity and administrative burdens on taxpayers.
Conclusion
New Zealand’s Sovereign Currency and Transaction Tax Policy marks a significant shift towards a more resilient, prosperous, and sovereign economy. By harnessing the power of sovereign currency issuance and a simplified transaction tax, New Zealand will break free from the shackles of predatory market manipulation and external borrowing.
This policy will propel New Zealand to unprecedented prosperity and wealth, driven by strategic infrastructure investment, harnessing of natural resources, and a simplified tax system. As New Zealand takes control of its economic destiny, it will become a beacon of hope for nations seeking to reclaim their sovereignty and build a brighter future for their people.
With this policy, NZ Loyal reaffirms its commitment to putting the interests of New Zealanders first, ensuring that the country’s economy serves the people, not just the privileged few. Together, we can build a more prosperous, resilient, and sovereign New Zealand for all.
See also: https://nzloyal.com/new-zealand-loyal-1-transaction-tax/
https://nzloyal.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NZ-LOYAL-1_-TRANSACTION-TAX.pdf
© 2025, All Rights Reserved
Leader – avatar
About the author: Leader
Kelvyn Alp is the Leader of New Zealand Loyal.
I have yet to see any political party describing in detail on how they might handle these economic problems thru an intense analysis and then orchestrate a formulated plan to deal with the same except for the New Zealand Loyal Party!
This is why we are continuing to vote for the NZ Loyal Party, both in 2023 & now in 2026.
Germany has the AfD Party with it’s ally the BSW will effect change there.
New Zealand has the Loyal Party that will effect much-needed changes here.
The voting public’s awareness of the New Zealand Loyal Party is exponentially building, as noted in the commentaries of several ‘news’ publications, both in print and on-line.
Here’s a couple of examples as to why;
https://nzloyal.com/kelvyn-talks-tax/
Monetary & Taxation
February 4, 2025 Published by Kelvyn Alp
Sovereign Wealth, Simplified Prosperity
New Zealand will adopt a revolutionary economic framework, creating its own coin, credit, and currency, while introducing a 1% transaction tax to replace all other taxes. This policy aims to propel New Zealand to unprecedented prosperity by harnessing its natural resources, eliminating predatory market manipulation, and aligning monetary policy with national interests.
Sovereign Currency Issuance
1. Creation of New Zealand’s Own Currency: The Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) will create new money ex nihilo to fund government expenditures, eliminating reliance on external borrowing and interest payments.
2. Monetary Policy Alignment: The RBNZ will be brought under the New Zealand Treasury to ensure monetary policy is aligned with national interests and fiscal policy.
Transaction Tax
1. Replacement of All Other Taxes: A 1% transaction tax will be introduced on all financial transactions, including electronic payments, cash withdrawals, online transactions, and securities trades, replacing all other taxes.
2. Revenue Allocation: Transaction tax revenue will be allocated towards funding public goods and services, including increased infrastructure investment.
Increased Infrastructure Investment
1. Harnessing of Natural Resources: New Zealand will invest in harnessing its natural resources, including the Great South Basin and other oil reserves, to drive economic growth and prosperity.
2. Infrastructure Development: Increased infrastructure investment will focus on strategic sectors, such as transportation, energy, and education, to support long-term economic resilience.
Removal of New Zealand Dollar from Market Manipulation
1. Protection from Predatory Behaviour: The New Zealand dollar will be removed from market manipulation and predatory behaviour, ensuring economic stability and security.
2. Elimination of Inland Revenue: Inland Revenue will be eliminated, simplifying the tax system and reducing administrative burdens on taxpayers.
Benefits and Implications
1. Increased Economic Resilience: New Zealand will enjoy increased economic resilience, driven by sovereign currency issuance, transaction tax revenue, and strategic infrastructure investment.
2. Prosperity and Wealth: By harnessing its natural resources and eliminating predatory market manipulation, New Zealand will propel itself to unprecedented prosperity and wealth.
3. Simplified Tax System: The 1% transaction tax will consolidate and replace various existing taxes, reducing complexity and administrative burdens on taxpayers.
Conclusion
New Zealand’s Sovereign Currency and Transaction Tax Policy marks a significant shift towards a more resilient, prosperous, and sovereign economy. By harnessing the power of sovereign currency issuance and a simplified transaction tax, New Zealand will break free from the shackles of predatory market manipulation and external borrowing.
This policy will propel New Zealand to unprecedented prosperity and wealth, driven by strategic infrastructure investment, harnessing of natural resources, and a simplified tax system. As New Zealand takes control of its economic destiny, it will become a beacon of hope for nations seeking to reclaim their sovereignty and build a brighter future for their people.
With this policy, NZ Loyal reaffirms its commitment to putting the interests of New Zealanders first, ensuring that the country’s economy serves the people, not just the privileged few. Together, we can build a more prosperous, resilient, and sovereign New Zealand for all.
See also: https://nzloyal.com/new-zealand-loyal-1-transaction-tax/
https://nzloyal.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NZ-LOYAL-1_-TRANSACTION-TAX.pdf
© 2025, All Rights Reserved
Leader – avatar
About the author: Leader
Kelvyn Alp is the Leader of New Zealand Loyal.
I would like to fully understand Germany better but not through conventional media. I’m old school and prefer long form in-depth articles. In this context, can anyone please post useful websites I could look at? I frequently look at Russian RT but I can’t find indigenous German sources – I’d appreciate anybody’s help in this regard, thanks.
Subscribe to the English versions of Bild & Der Stern; there is a lot of abstract descriptions of events, but you can also go to your ‘settings’ on screen and select ‘English’ for textual translations of journalism originally in German..
Hard to find journalism in Gormoney any more. Here from Austria: Reporting from the horse’s mouth
https://www.youtube.com/@SurvivalLilly/videos
and Swizerland
https://uncutnews.ch/