‘Europe as a world-shaping power’

‘The Conservative Manifesto’

Wolfram Weimer set out the central elements of his world view a few years ago in a book entitled ‘Das konservative Manifest’.[1] In it he makes positive references to the classic values held by conservative and right-wing milieus: family, homeland, nation and tradition. He ascribes a fundamental role to Christianity and praises what he sees as traditional Prussian virtues (“diligence, loyalty, obedience, discipline”). Weimer complains that “the German left” wants to “throw the allegedly outdated ideals of Prussian education overboard and replace them with a new canon of values” such as “equality, emancipation and solidarity”. He argues that the left has enforced these values by establishing a “republic of virtue”, which is guilty of, for instance, regulating gambling and advocating quotas for women in certain fields. “Coming along with their quotas and bans,” writes Weimer, these “consumer and family protectors, equal opportunities officers and integration counsellors” all behave “like high priests of do-gooderism”. Weimer’s views have clear parallels with to the current policies of the Trump administration. There is a battle against social inclusion. Rejecting the principles of diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI), the right seeks to put an end to equality policies.

‘Europe’s debilitating sclerosis’

In his ‘Conservative Manifesto’ the next Minister of State for Culture and the Media defined Europe as the Christian “Occident”. Indeed, “the baptism certificate” is “the ticket to European civilisation”.[2] The “commitment to Christianity” represents “an important component of European identity.” It was, he writes, in this sense that the German Romantics once “defined the realm of European culture in contrast to the Islamic Orient”. Now, however, “Christianity ... has been relativised, pushed back and ultimately abandoned over several centuries.” Weimer argues that, “It is with this religious masochism that Europe is neutralising its cultural core strength.” Indeed, Europe has been “suffering from a debilitating sclerosis for a number of years.” It has actually “capitulated” – “sensing that there will hardly be a comeback for Europe as a world-shaping power.” Writing in Cicero, a magazine he once published, Weimer had already criticised a process of “cultural self-destruction” in the “countries of Central Europe”. Efforts were being made to “eradicate the old national instincts with the numerous kebab shops, the unrelenting immigration and the homage to Kanak-German.”[3] “Millions of unemployed Muslims live in parallel worlds in our major cities,” continued Weimer. The overall situation was described as “a Halloween of alienation”.

Europe’s expansionist power

For Weimer, the need to put an end to this state of affairs also flows from his view that Europe has “given up as an expansionist power” in global politics and is currently “no longer spatially” growing.[4] “The age of European expansion ... came to an end in 1945”, according to his Manifesto: “the spaces dominated by European capitals” were territorially “becoming smaller and smaller”. The last colony to break from a European power was Portuguese-controlled Macau, which returned to China in 1999, claims the next federal head of culture and media affairs. This is factually wrong. There are numerous other territories, particularly in the Caribbean, the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, still held by European states as de facto colonies (german-foreign-policy.com reported [5]). Regarding decolonisation in general, Weimer says “this landslide loss of power” was “not even regretted” in Europe. Europe had “collapsed territorially as a world power in just sixty years”. It had “lost what had previously been conquered over six-hundred years.” Today, “its own colonial history” is regrettably labelled merely “illegitimate expansion”, ignoring its “own civilizational achievement rooted in world conquest”.

‘Cultural protest’

The positions adopted by Weimer are well suited to serving as an ideological foundation for forces seeking staunch internal realignment of Europe and an aggressively expansionist global policy. His views are also compatible with thinking in the AfD. Weimer explains the success of the AfD as a “cultural protest”. “People no longer accept unbridled mass immigration of Muslim men.”[6] It is, he says, an issue that “has not been properly addressed by the centrist parties for far too long.” And he wants the next German government to make up for this failure. On 29 January, Friedrich Merz, soon to become Federal Chancellor, showed that he is prepared in principle to cooperate at least indirectly with the AfD in the fight against migration. He tabled a motion in the Bundestag that could only have majority backing in the parliament by receiving the votes of the AfD bloc.[7] Weimer did clearly speak out against the AfD several times before the Bundestag elections, but primarily to criticise the far-right party’s negative stance on NATO and the EU. These points in the AfD’s programme are in any case not irrevocable. Parts of the AfD have long been keen to move to a pro-NATO stance.[8] The party removed the demand to leave the EU from its most recent programme for the federal election.[9] With regard to abandoning the euro and returning to the deutschmark, which many in the AfD are still calling for, party leader Alice Weidel stated at the beginning of February that it was “far too late” for this step.[10]

The normalisation of the AfD

Quite apart from what the new Minister of State for Culture and Media – said to be a longstanding acquaintance of the next Federal Chancellor – thinks about the AfD, the discussions among political circles in Berlin are increasingly centring on options for gradually opening up to the AfD. The new chair of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, Jens Spahn, recently argued in favour of “dealing with the AfD as an opposition party ... in the same way as with any other opposition party” when it comes to appointments for committee posts in parliament. Spahn faced strong criticism for this, particularly from the SPD and the Greens. However, there were also reports that, internally, most members of the CDU and CSU approved of Spahn’s initiative.’[11] Although Spahn emphasised that his proposal was only meant to apply to the election of committee posts, it marks a further step towards acceptance of the AfD and its normalisation in the public eye. The next German Foreign Minister, Johann Wadephul, for example, has also taken a softer approach: “AfD candidates for the chairs of parliamentary committee” who “have not in the past drawn negative attention to themselves” should be electable, said Wadephul.[12] The AfD is, he  points out, the second largest grouping in the Bundestag, and “we have to recognise this reality”.

[1], [2] Wolfram Weimer: Das konservative Manifest. Zehn Gebote der neuen Bürgerlichkeit. Kulmbach 2018.

[3] Wolfram Weimer: Die Multi-Kulti-Lüge. Cicero, Dezember 2004.

[4] Wolfram Weimer: Das konservative Manifest. Zehn Gebote der neuen Bürgerlichkeit. Kulmbach 2018.

[5] See also: Colonies in the 21st century (I) and Kolonien im 21. Jahrhundert (IV).

[6] “Dann sind wir den Spuk los”: Wirtschafts-Insider warnt und macht Anti-AfD-Vorschlag. focus.de.

[7] See also: Far-right flying high.

[8] See also: Widersprüchliche Annäherung.

[9] Dietmar Neuerer: Der gefährliche Euro-Irrweg der AfD. handelsblatt.com 12.01.2025.

[10] “Für Austritt aus dem Euro viel zu spät”: tagesschau.de 03.02.2025.

[11] Wulf Schmiese: Warum Spahns Vorschlag kein Streit-Grund ist. zdf.de 16.04.2025.

[12] Alisha Mendgen: Nach Spahn-Forderung: Union ringt um Umgang mit AfD im Bundestag. rnd.de 14.04.2025.