This interview carried out by Alexander Junger and was initially revealed by Eagle Eye Discover on Could 12, 2025. It was edited for readability and is revealed right here at The Gateway Pundit with very form permission.
Christine Anderson is a Member of the European Parliament representing the right-wing, anti-globalist Different for Germany (AfD) get together, recognized for her outspoken criticism of EU paperwork, globalism, and what she views as creeping authoritarianism in Western democracies. Since coming into the European Parliament in 2019, she has turn out to be a distinguished voice throughout the AfD, often difficult mainstream narratives on immigration, civil liberties, and pandemic coverage.
On this wide-ranging interview, Different for Germany (AfD) Member of the European Parliament Christine Anderson presents a searing indictment of Germany’s political path, warning of an ominous drift towards authoritarianism. True to type, the outspoken AfD firebrand takes intention at outgoing Inside Minister Nancy Faeser, accusing her of systematically eroding civil liberties whereas deceptive the general public concerning the scale of unlawful migration. Anderson tackles a broad array of urgent points—together with unchecked authorities overreach, censorship, pandemic-era authoritarianism, and mounting threats to press freedom and free expression. She additional condemns the CDU’s collaboration with the unconventional left-wing globalist Social Democrats, defends the AfD’s rising in style assist amid efforts by an more and more discredited institution to marginalize it, and cautions in opposition to a broader EU-wide shift towards centralized, unaccountable governance.
Nancy Faeser, Germany’s outgoing federal inside minister—broadly seen as a far-left activist who, throughout her tenure, arguably did greater than any predecessor to undermine the nation’s safety and freedom—just lately claimed the ‘site visitors mild’ coalition has considerably curbed unlawful migration, pointing to slight will increase in deportations and fewer asylum claims. Many view her assertion as out of contact and dismissive of public concern. How do you interpret her remarks?
You’re completely proper. It’s actually unbelievable—the vary of insurance policies Faeser has pushed by way of is staggering. And now, there’s the newest scandal that broke simply yesterday: a journalist from Deutschland Kurier was convicted of defaming her. What occurred? He posted a meme exhibiting her holding an indication that learn, ‘I hate freedom of speech.’ She pressed costs, and the court docket sentenced him to seven months in jail, though it was suspended on probation. Nonetheless, that’s outrageous—it truly is.
Anyway, that’s only one extra instance—amongst many—we’ve seen over the previous a number of months, and even years. Take final 12 months, as an illustration: there was an enormous incident involving Robert Habeck, the Minister of Economics. Somebody had posted a meme that includes a silhouette of his head subsequent to a hair product model, with the caption ‘Schwab, COVID,’ which principally means ‘moron.’ Properly, the police confirmed up on the poster’s home at six within the morning, searched the place, and confiscated his telephone, pc—all the pieces. It’s really insane. So sure, I believe it’s honest to say that in Germany immediately, we’re now not residing in an actual democracy.
Past that, Faeser has focused the police, launched purges in opposition to alleged ‘right-wing extremists’ within the civil service, and pressured the press. How do you clarify her skill to pursue such a sweeping agenda with out vital political pushback?
Properly, you’re proper—and what the federal government’s doing is including insult to harm. Proper now in Germany, we’re seeing a mean of two brutal gang rapes each single day. These aren’t minor assaults—we’re speaking about ladies being viciously crushed, struggling damaged skulls, shattered jawbones—assaults that go away them barely clinging to life. And that doesn’t even embrace the rapes dedicated by particular person perpetrators.
On prime of that, we’re now dealing with random knife assaults on an hourly foundation. It’s not simply each day anymore—there are 13, 14, generally 15 such stabbings taking place all throughout Germany daily. But, if you happen to dare to talk out about this, you’re instantly labeled an Islamophobe or a right-wing extremist. The second you criticize what’s taking place, these labels get thrown at you.
Even worse, criticism of the federal government is now being handled as “delegitimization of the state.” Which means merely expressing dissent can land you on the radar of the home intelligence company, as if you’re making an attempt to overthrow the federal government. However in any true democracy, holding your leaders accountable—criticizing their actions—is not only a proper, it’s a duty. Silencing that criticism crosses a line into authoritarianism, and that’s precisely the place we’re heading.
I perceive there are definitely unhealthy actors within the outdated events—the SPD, the Greens, and the CDU—however certainly there are additionally some well-meaning people amongst them. They have to see the place the present trajectory of the German state leads. So why don’t they converse out? It might be in their very own curiosity—and much more so, of their kids’s. Is it a failure of braveness, or just a scarcity of self-reflection?
To me, that is the actual conundrum. In Germany, we’ve skilled totalitarianism firsthand—beneath the Nazis within the Nineteen Thirties and in East Germany beneath the GDR. So, if anybody ought to be capable of acknowledge the indicators of totalitarianism, it needs to be the German individuals. However sadly, they’re not seeing it. Now, they appear to assume it’s acceptable as a result of it’s being performed by the “good guys.” However that’s the crux of the problem: it’s by no means okay.
The hazard lies not within the insurance policies themselves or the intentions behind them, however within the strategies used to attain these objectives. For instance, ending world starvation is a noble aim—who wouldn’t need that? However the actual query is: how do you propose to attain it? The issue arises when the trail to that aim entails oppression or infringing on elementary rights. That’s the place we have to draw the road. Even the most effective intentions can go astray in the event that they’re carried out by way of authoritarian means. As Camus famously mentioned, “The welfare of the individuals is the alibi of tyrants.”
How do you view the present political state of affairs, notably in mild of the guarantees made by get together leaders and the continuing makes an attempt to destroy your get together by portray it as some form of neo-Nazi get together within the eyes of the German public?
The factor is, they tried their hardest to perform that aim, however they’re failing. Within the final election, we hit 20% for the primary time, and now we’re polling at 20-24%. We’re even with the Christian Democrats, who was the primary conservative get together in Germany. I personally voted for them from the time I turned 18 till 2005.
On this election, the get together chief mentioned all the proper issues, and other people trusted him, pondering he would convey change. Consequently, he acquired round 27-28% of the vote. However the very day after the election, he broke his primary promise, which was to shut the borders—one thing he had campaigned on.
He ran on the promise of the debt brake—no extra debt. He obtained elected and got here in first. However the day after the election, he mentioned, “Nobody ever promised to shut the borders.” Individuals had been left confused, pondering, “Wait, what?” The fixed labeling of my get together because the “evil enemy”—as if we wish to abolish democracy—is totally ludicrous. The individuals are beginning to notice that.
Right here’s the factor: after we had been based in March 2013, which was about 12 years in the past, all the pieces we warned about has turned out to be true. We weren’t fear-mongering or imagining issues. We laid out clear situations: if this occurs, that is the outcome. If that occurs, that is what is going to comply with. And it occurred. Now, individuals are starting to see it.
What they’ve been making an attempt to do is now not working. And on prime of that, the fixed labeling of my get together as Nazis—repeating it in almost each sentence—is just not solely deceptive but additionally an abominable trivialization of the horrific atrocities the Nazis inflicted on humanity. That’s what they’re doing.
The CDU, following the federal snap election the place it was victorious, has seen its assist drop precipitously. Pollsters have identified that no successful get together in Germany has ever skilled such a lack of belief between the election and the formation of the federal government. Some key figures throughout the CDU have brazenly voiced their opposition to Friedrich Merz’s plan to type a coalition with the left-liberal SPD, which is unprecedented. What do you make of all this?
The so-called “wannabe Chancellor”—I’ll discuss with him that means—really misplaced the general public’s belief even earlier than the federal government was shaped. This course of began proper after the election, when he claimed, “Nobody ever mentioned something about closing borders,” although closing borders was the highest problem he campaigned on. Consequently, he’s dropping assist from many citizens in Germany who, as soon as once more, thought, “This time we will belief this man and his get together.” They’re now utterly dissatisfied.
Moreover, many members of the Christian Democrats are livid. They keep in mind the winter election marketing campaign, when it was freezing chilly in Germany. Campaigners had been out on the streets, handing out leaflets and manning data cubicles in temperatures properly beneath freezing. They did this as a result of they believed in Friedrich Merz and hoped he would lastly convey significant coverage modifications to Germany. Now they really feel betrayed, realizing that wasn’t the case.
It’s comprehensible that they’re upset—and actually, they’ve each proper to be. It’s nearly unparalleled for a potential Chancellor to lose all credibility earlier than the coalition authorities is even shaped.
One of many regional leaders of the CDU advised Merz that get together members now not really feel adequately represented and are contemplating leaving the get together. Do you assume this can be a credible risk?
Sure, and they’re. Get together members are leaving in droves, and extra are prone to comply with. However the primary problem right here is straightforward: Merz is a idiot. He made it clear through the marketing campaign that he wouldn’t even think about speaking to the AfD, regardless of polls exhibiting that the 2 essential events can be the Christian Democrats and the AfD. By ruling out any negotiation with the AfD, he basically advised all the opposite events, “You possibly can blackmail me and I’ll have to provide in.” That appears to be the one promise he intends to maintain. What was he pondering? Actually, I do not know. It doesn’t appear to be there was a lot thought behind it in any respect.
How do you see this unfolding? By stating publicly that the CDU gained’t, beneath any circumstances, type a center-right coalition with the AfD, Merz and the CDU management have successfully boxed themselves in and given the Social Democrats an unbelievable quantity of leverage.
Sure, they’ve boxed themselves in. Merz has performed the identical, and it doesn’t even appear to be he realizes what he’s performed. Alice Weidel, one of many leaders of my get together, has been telling Merz all through the marketing campaign that “you could clarify to the individuals how you propose to implement your whole coverage modifications with the Social Democrats and the Greens. There’s merely no option to make that work. So, how do you propose on doing it?” In fact, he had no reply.
The individuals really feel completely betrayed. The underside line is that no matter Merz promised, he gained’t be capable of ship. Not solely will he fail to maintain his guarantees, however he’s additionally certain to implement regardless of the Social Democrats demand. It’s basically a state of affairs the place they’ll ask something of him, and he’ll should comply, or he gained’t stay Chancellor.
You talked about throughout out temporary dialogue earlier than the interview that you just’re listening to that the German authorities could also be contemplating abolishing the Freedom of Data Act. Are you able to inform us extra about that?
Sure, they’re really discussing abolishing the Freedom of Data Act in Germany. Are you able to imagine that? And sure, it’s much like the Freedom of Data Act within the U.S.—it’s a elementary democratic software that permits residents to request data from the federal government to make sure transparency and accountability.
What prompted this? Properly, simply earlier than the election, the Christian Democrats grew to become a goal of Antifa as a result of that they had launched a bit of laws to limit immigration—one thing they described as addressing what they see as an invasion. This occurred proper in the course of the marketing campaign. Consequently, they confronted widespread protests, vandalism, and intense backlash, particularly aimed toward Friedrich Merz and the CDU.
Within the midst of this, the Christian Democrats had the audacity to ask the federal government questions like: Who’re these NGOs? How are they funded? Merely asking these questions was handled like that they had opened the gates of hell. The backlash was fierce.
Now, throughout coalition negotiations, there are severe discussions about abolishing the Freedom of Data Act altogether. However that act is important—it’s a elementary proper. With out it, how can residents maintain their authorities accountable? If we’re now not allowed to ask, “Why was this performed? Who made this choice? What was the justification?” then transparency disappears.
A first-rate instance of why this issues occurred simply final 12 months. The Ministry of Well being claimed that the Robert Koch Institute—our equal of the CDC—was performing independently and that pandemic-related measures had been based mostly purely on science. However when residents gained entry to the assembly minutes by way of the Freedom of Data Act, it was revealed that the alternative was true. The federal government had already selected the restrictions after which pressured the Institute to again them with scientific justification.
If we lose entry to that form of data, how will the general public ever uncover when the federal government acts in unhealthy religion or serves pursuits apart from the general public good?
You have got mentioned that the COVID-19 so-called ‘vaccination marketing campaign’ will go down within the medical books as the largest medical scandal ever and the largest crime in opposition to mankind. How come?
Sure—simply take a look at the lengths they went to. This wasn’t restricted to 1 nation, or perhaps a handful; governments around the globe, notably in Western democracies, acted in full lockstep. And the rationale I emphasize Western democracies is necessary: I didn’t anticipate international locations like China or North Korea to uphold elementary rights or democratic rules—they’re already totalitarian regimes. However I did anticipate democratic nations to remain true to these rules. As a substitute, they aligned completely, utilizing the identical messaging, the identical methods, and the identical restrictions.
That’s precisely the place the assault needed to occur—on the democratic course of itself. Elections, checks and balances, citizen rights—all of it turns into a barrier if you’re making an attempt to centralize energy or construct a one-world governance construction. And so, these very rules needed to be undermined. And the extent to which they had been prepared to go to try this was staggering.
They used the identical slogans in every single place: “Keep at residence,” “Nobody is protected till everyone seems to be protected,” “The an infection stops with you,” “No jab, no job,” “Construct again higher.” It was as if each authorities and establishment was studying from the identical script.
And all of this was performed to advertise mRNA injections—one thing I don’t even name a vaccine, as a result of it doesn’t meet the standard definition. These injections had been neither protected nor efficient, and what’s worse is that they knew that.
They knew the reality earlier than they pushed it on the general public. The mRNA injections had been examined on monkeys, and even then, it was clear they didn’t forestall transmission. But, they promoted it to the general public as if it did—plain and easy.
Janine Small, a Vice President at Pfizer, testified earlier than the EU Parliament’s COVID committee and was immediately requested whether or not the mRNA injection had been examined for its skill to stop an infection and transmission. Her reply? No, we by no means even examined that. So it was a blatant lie from the beginning. And on the idea of that lie, individuals had been ostracized, stigmatized, and coerced. They had been threatened with dropping their jobs. The message was clear: When you don’t get the jab, you’re endangering others—you’re actually killing individuals.
That’s what we had been advised. Only for refusing the injection, we had been labeled murderers. That grew to become the justification for lockdowns and restrictions. Bear in mind the phrase “the pandemic of the unvaccinated”? There was no such factor. That narrative existed solely to place immense strain on individuals who selected to not take the mRNA injection. The intention was to isolate and power them into compliance.
And that’s precisely why I stand by my assertion: this can go down as the best crime ever dedicated in opposition to humanity—on a world scale.
What occurred throughout that point marked an enormous paradigm shift. Essentially the most harmful half is that the results are nonetheless with us. Basic rights have been reframed as privileges—one thing the federal government can grant or withhold relying on how we behave. That’s nonetheless the case. This isn’t over.
And actually, who is aware of what they’ll strive subsequent? That uncertainty is terrifying. For instance, in Germany, they modified the regulation associated to infectious illnesses—and people modifications are nonetheless in impact. They nonetheless have the authorized authority to lock us down once more.
And sure, they did study from COVID. At one level, we weren’t allowed to maneuver past a 15-kilometer radius from our properties. Belief me, they needed that radius to be even smaller—however the infrastructure didn’t exist but to implement it. So now, they’re constructing that infrastructure.
And that’s what these so-called “15-minute cities” are actually about. They’re not designed on your comfort or to enhance your high quality of life. They’re about management. They’re about with the ability to lock you down extra effectively subsequent time. It’s not about saving the planet. It’s not about public well being. The true function is whole management.
If I could add one thing right here, that is exactly why there’s a rising push to grant governing authority to the World Well being Group. The underlying purpose is to provide democratically elected politicians and governments believable deniability.
They realized one thing throughout COVID: as a lot as they needed to impose even harsher restrictions, they had been restricted—as a result of in a democracy, if a politician goes too far, they danger not being re-elected. So the workaround? Shift the authority to an unelected physique just like the WHO. That means, when harsh measures are imposed—lockdowns, vaccine mandates, or no matter else—they’ll say, “Hey, it wasn’t us. Our palms are tied. The WHO made the decision.”
That’s the one purpose for this push to provide the WHO such sweeping powers. It’s not about well being—it’s about management by way of delegation. And sure, it’s devious. It’s additionally undeniably intelligent. These individuals know precisely what they’re doing.
In current months, the European Union has taken a pointy authoritarian flip, elevating severe issues concerning the state of democracy throughout the bloc. Final fall, after Calin Georgescu unexpectedly gained Romania’s presidential election, the constitutional court docket annulled the outcome, and the election committee subsequently barred him from taking part within the re-run. Extra just lately, Marine Le Pen was banned from operating in France’s 2027 presidential election following a conviction for alleged misuse of EU funds. Do you see these developments as a part of a broader pattern towards political repression within the EU?
Romania is a very clear-cut instance. Calin Georgescu unexpectedly got here in first within the preliminary spherical of the presidential election, and his platform stood firmly in opposition to the EU, in opposition to the WHO, and in opposition to just about all the pieces the globalist elite are attempting to implement. And what occurred? They merely annulled the election. They accused him of being influenced by Russia or having acquired Russian funds—however supplied no proof. None. They simply shut it down.
This marks a harmful new part. Till now, the factor these establishments feared most was the democratic course of itself—free and honest elections. In a real democracy, the federal government fears the individuals. However when the individuals begin fearing the federal government, that’s now not democracy; that’s totalitarianism. And now it appears we’ve reached a degree the place, if the result of an election doesn’t go well with the institution, they’ll simply annul it. That’s the following frontier of management.
We’re seeing the identical sample emerge in France now as properly. In fact, corruption and the misuse of public funds ought to carry penalties—that goes with out saying. However declaring Marine Le Pen ineligible to run in subsequent 12 months’s presidential election feels extreme, a minimum of to me.
From what I’ve learn, whereas it’s not completely uncommon in France to problem such rulings in circumstances like this, what is unprecedented is making the decision provisional—successfully barring her from operating earlier than the complete authorized course of has concluded. That’s by no means occurred earlier than. Regardless that she nonetheless has authorized recourse, the choice to disqualify her within the meantime appears overtly political. It’s onerous to not see this as a politically motivated transfer.
What do you make of those “preparedness” or “survival” paperwork that governments of EU member states, together with the EU Fee itself I imagine, have been passing out to their individuals? The paperwork present individuals what kind of issues they might want to survive within the occasion of typical battle, nuclear battle, authorities collapse, and an prolonged energy blackout, amongst different issues. Is that this a tactic getting used to unfold worry?
It’s all fearmongering. Just some years in the past, individuals who ready for emergencies—preppers—had been ridiculed. You already know, those who stored further meals and water at residence in case of a snowstorm, an influence outage, or another disruption. They had been labeled conspiracy theorists, even mocked as paranoid.
However now, EU establishments themselves are advising residents to replenish on provides—meals, water, fundamental necessities. Immediately, what was as soon as thought of fringe conduct is now being introduced as accountable and regular.
To me, this shift suggests one thing deeper: they’re not simply encouraging preparedness for pure disasters. It appears to be like like they’re psychologically making ready the general public throughout EU member states for battle. And that’s extremely alarming.
You appear to have a very shut relationship with North America, maybe extra so than every other senior determine within the AfD. I perceive you spent six years residing in the USA, learning and dealing. Once you journey to the US or Canada as an AfD politician, what sorts of questions do individuals there ask you? What are their hopes, issues, or views on the subject of Germany and Europe?
Properly, they’re definitely taking note of what’s taking place in Germany—they usually’re deeply involved. Nevertheless it’s necessary to notice that what we’re experiencing right here isn’t distinctive to Germany; comparable patterns are unfolding throughout almost each Western democracy.
Once I final visited the USA, a few 12 months and a half in the past, I used to be invited to provide a sequence of talks. Actually, I used to be shocked—genuinely moved, even. To me, the U.S. has at all times stood because the land of the free, the land of the courageous, a spot of boundless alternative. So to be invited there to talk about freedom, democracy, and the rule of regulation—it was humbling. The truth that Individuals would wish to hear a German politician converse on these subjects felt surreal.
On the finish of every of my speeches, I supplied a easy request—not for cash, not for political favors, however simply this: please, return Donald Trump to the White Home. As a result of in my opinion, if we’re going to have any hope of reversing this coordinated assault on freedom, democracy, and the rule of regulation, we want a robust United States that leads by instance. And for that, I imagine Donald Trump’s management is important.
