German Election Season Kicks Off

The German party Die Linke, which has gone quiet since Sahra Wagenknecht and her supporters left the party, urgently needs to remind voters that they still exist – after all, it’s election season. Now party leader Ines Schwerdtner has finally found a hot topic: the abolition of all noble titles in Germany. “Noble titles are not appropriate in 2025 and should be removed from passports and official documents,” Schwerdtner told German magazine Stern.

Such titles are “relics of a time when privileges and power depended on birth.” The far-left leader continued: “A modern democracy that is committed to equality for all does not need barons, counts and hereditary dukes.”

Schwerdtner is running in the federal election as the party’s direct candidate in the Berlin-Lichtenberg constituency, which was previously held by former Left Party leader Gesine Lötzsch. Her opponent from the AfD is deputy party leader Beatrix von Storch, who also has the telltale “von” in her name.

“Beatrix von Storch and the other blue-blooded know-it-alls should give up their titles,” demanded Schwerdtner. The privileges of the nobility were already abolished in the Weimar Republic – it is “only logical that we finally throw the noble titles into the dustbin of history.”

The leader of the Left Party recommended following the example of Austria: there, the use of titles of nobility has been prohibited since 1919.

“Anyone who wants a democracy on equal terms must put the nobility in its place and make it clear that even a Beatrix von Storch is not above us all,” Schwerdtner exclaims. Of course, neither Beatrix von Storch nor the AfD have ever demanded this.

Meanwhile, the Federal Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, Ferda Atman, is evidently also trying her best to draw attention with more nonsense. She is desperately looking for new areas of activity for her agency – and has found what she was looking for in the Federal Government’s latest report on aging. In her opinion, senior citizens are discriminated against there with “diminishing” formulations.

The statement “sweet grandma” is “secondary baby talk” about older people. This is “benevolent ageism” – that is, well-intentioned age discrimination. The same applies to “dubious compliments” such as those about the good looks of seniors.

Anti-discrimination watchdog Ataman is serious. She told the Bild newspaper: “Even if such terms do not constitute discrimination in the legal sense, people can find them disrespectful in individual cases.” The Ministry of Family and Senior Citizens also sees a need for action and she went on to inform the newspaper: “Effective action against ageism requires fundamental social awareness of the issue.”

According to the government report, such formulations mean that senior citizens are often viewed as “good-natured, friendly, but incompetent” in everyday life and are treated accordingly. This also includes “talking to senior citizens in a belittling manner” using child language or “entertainment options that resemble children’s birthday parties.”

The Federal Government’s Age Report Commission lists further examples of discrimination against senior citizens (which in most cases is neither recognized nor perceived by them) on 25 pages. For example, they are disadvantaged when applying for jobs or have fixed age limits for certain public offices (e.g. lay judges or mayors). Therefore, an “effective approach” against age discrimination and “a fundamental social awareness of the issue” should be called for.

Germany clearly has no other problems.

A similar democracy farce continues in Romania. In December, the country’s constitutional court annulled the first round of the presidential election in November, taking into account a suggestion from the EU Commission, which believed the election had been manipulated by the social media platform TikTok. However, there is still no reliable evidence of this.

The winner of the first round of voting was the right-wing candidate Călin Georgescu. He appealed against the decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) – but the latter unanimously rejected the case. The court argued that it simply did not have jurisdiction over the case.

Georgescu described the annulment of the election as a “formal coup d’état”. The Constitutional Court’s decision was unfounded and made without any solid evidence.

The Romanian government under President Klaus Iohannis, who has been in office illegally since the end of December, is simulating business as usual: it has scheduled new presidential elections. The first round of voting is to take place on May 4. If no candidate achieves a majority of more than 50 percent, there will be a run-off on May 18.

An explosive reminder: according to current polls, Georgescu is still ahead in the voters’ favor despite the accusations made against him. The EU Commission and its Romanian henchmen are already racking their brains about what they should do to keep Georgescu away from the presidency next time.