Germany's Saxony-Anhalt declares coronavirus emergency – in December 2025
Sleight of hand in Magdeburg – and the state parliament plays along
Photo: “The emergency continues.”
This sentence was uttered in the state parliament of Saxony-Anhalt. Not in 2021. Not in 2022. But a few weeks before the start of 2026. It was not about war, not about power outages, not about a new health threat. It was about the continuation of a coronavirus shadow budget, which still contains around two billion euros. Officially, it is called the “coronavirus special fund.” In reality, it is debt that could only be incurred under an emergency clause. In order to continue using the funds from the alleged “special fund,” an “exceptional emergency situation” must formally exist. So it was decided without further ado.
What sounds like a cabaret script is official state policy. The SPD, CDU, and FDP (yes, they still exist—at least in Magdeburg) voted in favor of it. It was necessary, they said, in order not to jeopardize important investments—such as in new technology for schools and universities, in the digitization of state administration, and in hospitals.
CDU finance politician Stefan Ruland attempted to square the circle and said – no, this is not satire – that the mislabeling was about the future of the state. “Overcoming such a crisis does not end with the last lockdown.” Resilience is part of crisis management, Ruland said. A fascinating display of creativity.
The AfD, the Greens, and the Left Party strongly criticized the decision. “No other state is going down this path,” said Olaf Meister, parliamentary secretary of the Green Party, according to Die Welt. The state government cannot be serious about declaring digitization as “pandemic damage” and thus justifying the expenditure.
Meister spoke of real-life satire. And he was still being kind. He could also have said “sleight of hand.”
And that brings us to the heart of the matter.
Because what is happening here is more than just a budgetary game. It is an example of the modern use of language, especially in politics: terms are gutted, reinterpreted, redefined. “Emergency” no longer means what used to be understood as an emergency. It has become a form of administration. A category that can be politically activated or deactivated like a light switch.
Debt is now called “special assets.” “Tolerance” now means prohibiting “wrong” opinions. “Diversity” means allowing yet another point of view. And ‘colorfulness’ stands for black-and-white thinking and political monochromy. Anyone who criticizes the wrong people is a “racist.” Anyone who points out abuses is a “Nazi.” And that is equated with being “right-wing.” The economy is hardly any better: when companies today worsen their terms and conditions and service and raise prices, they talk about “improvements.”
In the GDR, it was said that peace is the continuation of class struggle by other means. Today, one could say: Democracy is the continuation of the state of emergency by democratic means.
Because this practice is systematic. It is fatally reminiscent of the double-speak that was used in the past under socialism to declare the state of emergency the norm. Not to protect the people, but to ensure the ability of the apparatus to act—and to secure its privileges.
The fact that a coronavirus emergency will be declared in 2026, when no one except a few die-hards still wears masks, there is even less threat of hospitals becoming overwhelmed than in 2020, and not even Lauterbach is announcing new waves, would be a scandal in any functioning media system.
But we have learned that what looks like a scandal should be swallowed as a matter of national interest. Because it is declared to be such.
The media? They report. They hardly comment. Critical questions: none. Instead, we read that it's all about “resilience projects,” digitalization, climate protection, and new school toilets. Who could be against an emergency?
The answer: anyone who doesn't see democracy as a backdrop.
How language loses its meaning
We are experiencing a phase of political refeudalization. Terms such as “democracy,” “emergency,” “solidarity,” and “respect” are no longer means of communication, but instruments of power. Those who question them are morally devalued. Those who use them inflationarily are allowed to inflate budgets, exclude critics, and restrict rights.
In the GDR / DDR, everything was for the people—just not with the people. Today, everything is democratic—even if it actually bypasses democracy. The emergency is no longer measured by reality, but by what one wants to achieve politically.
People who think like this are needed
The real scandal is not that a state parliament passes such a resolution. The real scandal is that it works and that it gets away with it. That hardly anyone objects. That even critical voices become a footnote. And that no one asks whether it is perhaps an abuse of democratic instruments to create emergencies in order to secure the power to act.
In other words, when the state of emergency becomes the norm, democracy is no longer what it should be—a defense against the abuse of power—but an operating system for the executive branch.
Saxony-Anhalt is not an isolated case. It is a warning sign.
And we know from history that those who need an emergency will find one.
www.sott.net
reitschuster.de
Yes, it was pretty obvious that it was just vetted opinions based on belief in accepted authorities and not based on reality or any search for truth. A word search for the word "truth', showed that it came up once, where it looks like they are addressing themselves:
