The One Beginning with Its Endgame

Friedrich Merz claims at the Munich Security Conference that in Germany one is free to express one’s opinion — unless it violates human dignity and the (German) Constitution („Grundgesetz“).

Freedom of speech ends here with us when this speech tursn against human dignity and the Constitution.

– Friedrich Merz (quoted from Video at @oida_grantler, 13.02.2026)

This statement is false. The Constitutional Court has very explicitly confirmed (and this in a time when its democratic reputation was more solid than today) that statements directed expressly against the Constitution and even against the constitutional order are protected by freedom of speech.

Citizens are fundamentally also free to question basic valuations of the constitution or to demand the change of fundamental principles.

– Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, 4.2.2010

Merz’s statements sound like a belated response to J.D. Vance’s speech the year before. (I had at the time translated and recited it on video in German.)

J.D. Vance’s admonishing speech is, one year later, as correct, important and current as it was a year ago — and Friedrich Merz’s „reply“ simply false.

Is he lying or reading off?

Either Mr. Merz is knowingly speaking untruth. Then we would have the case that the Chancellor is lying and in doing so possibly attacking the liberal democratic basic order.

Or the Chancellor is merely reading off what an assistant wrote for him. That the Chancellor lets such people work for him and then even stubbornly reads off this nonsense makes the citizen doubt the judgment and competence necessary for such an office in Mr. Merz.

Part of the absurdity of Merz’s latest failure is that his claim directed against the Constitution would not be legal in Germany according to that very claim.

Logically, every debate about a change to the Constitution is „directed against the Constitution.“ In Merz logic, not only was every change to the Constitution illegal, but also every demand for such a change.

And yet: What Friedrich Merz says there is thoroughly legal—and what is presumably so self-evident in Our-Democracy circles that Merz cannot recognize the problem. It does, however, disqualify Merz—morally and/or professionally—for his office — or any other position of responsibility in politics or administration.

Endgame of a dictatorship

These days I already diagnose Berlin and Brussels as planning a dictatorship (see for example „Dare More Dictatorship“). And Merz’s agitation openly directed against the German constitution seems to confirm this.

The panicked ineptitude of Merz’s statement and other flailing by the old parties strikes me more as the endgame of a dictatorship, a final convulsion. Ever more furious attacks on opposition and dissenters. And, above all: the no longer deniable loss of reality by the „elites.“

Yes, „Our Democracy“ is preparing to be the first among German dictatorships to begin with its endgame. („Our Democracy“ in German is „Unsere Demokratie“, a term used by the usual suspects in German politics, clinging to power by any means, suppressing opposition and dissent.)

Much smarter, very soon

On the question of what comes after „Our Democracy“ beginning with its collapse, I may recommend to you an essay from 2020. It is called: „A Chip in the Brain for Everyone“

No, not everyone will have a chip in the brain. But some of those whose thinking is thus augmented will be so superior to the rest of humanity that none of the political systems tried so far will be applicable to the new power structure.

I therefore recommend, again and further, what I recommended in 2020 in the last sentence—and since then it has become six years more urgent: We will have to become smarter, much smarter, very soon!