#23: CHRISTINE ANDERSON ON EU CORRUPTION
An exclusive interview on alternative media + violence against right-wing politicians + the 2024 European elections + the Freedom Convoy + MORE!
Christine Anderson is a German Alternative für Deutschland Member of the European Parliament (MEP) and a member of the Identity and Democracy Group.
She has served as MEP since 2019 and has been a firebrand when it comes to political corruption, the Covid-19 pandemic and elitism within European institutions. In 2022, Anderson became recognized globally after speaking out in support of the Canadian Freedom Convoy and publicly lambasting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for cracking down on civil liberties against protesters.
As a mother of three she credits her involvement in politics as a way to preserve a country “worth loving and living in.”
Anderson recently released a documentary about her time in the European Parliament titled “Fighting for Freedom” which can be viewed on YouTube for free. Anderson will also be visiting Canada for a speaking tour later this month.
THE OUTER EDGE is excited to publish this exclusive interview with MEP Anderson which covers a swathe of topics including the dynamics of European politics, her bid to be re-elected in 2024 and the latest corruption scandal plaguing the EU.
To keep up to date with what MEP Anderson is doing make sure to follow her on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.
THE OUTER EDGE: Most Members of the European Parliament don’t regularly wade into international issues, but you have taken a different approach. You have been globally recognized as somebody willing to call out injustice, regardless of whether it is within the confines of the EU (the Canadian Freedom Convoy being one example). What has motivated you to take this route and why do you think some of your colleagues have refused to speak out in the same way?
CHRISTINE ANDERSON: My motivation springs from first principles; freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Any action I take, any decision I make, any speech I pronounce or cause I defend must stand on first principles or not at all. I think that these principles are predicated on values which are, or in any case ought to be, fairly self-evident: Freedom is not liberty unless it is granted without hindrances to all subjects of a body politic; democracy is not representative unless it accounts for the whole in its institutions; the rule of law is powerless at best, a malevolent farce at worst, unless it is formulated to act as guarantor of freedom and democracy.
We forget that many of our ancestors, barely a hundred and fifty odd years ago, were slaughtered on the streets of most European capitals by reason of their fight for these values which now underpin the fabric of our societies - and which, until recently, we almost entirely took for granted. They did it not for themselves, but for those coming after. Freedom, democracy and the rule of law are our sacred inheritance as Westerners, an inheritance which has to be ever defended, continuously consolidated and always reiterated. The people who want to erode and in a great number of cases altogether do without these tenets are ever at the gate, so consequently we also must be ever watchful. That is why I do what I do. That is the task that I have given myself in politics.
Now, as to other MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) not speaking up... well, the truth of it is that politics is a slippery game, a game of snakes and ladders. In this game, rocking the boat is often a wager which many are not willing to risk. All the same, many EU parliamentarians not only see it as their duty, but veritably enjoy going beyond their remit and read the riot act to other countries and governments when these stray from what they call “human rights” but which in fact means their own Marxist ideology. You will notice the glaring omissions in their execrations; majority Muslim countries and self-declared dictatorships are never criticised.
Playing the cultural scold to those they know are likely to feel ostracised and unfairly characterised by their criticism is a favoured pastime for most EU politicians: decrying the Freedom Trucker Convoy in Canada, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade in the US or expelling Hungary from the Europe-wide Erasmus+ university programme for not going along with extreme-left policies and adopting Marxist curricula, are but three examples. For many EU politicians, enforcing one narrative, one mode of thought, one government, is essential to any course of action.
Of course, such things as sovereignty, continued democratic assent and self-governance are for them hideous obstacles. Never mind that the Freedom Trucker Convoy was a manifestation of democracy in its purest form (such an unadulterated manifestation of collective will we thought was no longer possible in our overly institutionalised world); forget that the overturning of Roe vs. Wade was a sovereign judicial act of the US Supreme Court; ignore the fact that Hungarians are not birds ensnared by a net, but a people of independent will which they exert to assert their values in the face of a looming supranational Tower of Babel. No... for all these ideologues, the Grand March first envisioned by Mao Tse Tung must inexorably move onwards and trample all in its path. That being said, there are colleagues who bravely stand up for all things Good and Just. I am happy to not be alone and be able to join forces with them. We are currently the antithesis of the political Establishment, we need time to grow into the synthesis - great trees from acorns grow. The new needs time, and I am sure that as time goes by we’ll get more and more of a foothold.
THE OUTER EDGE: As an Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) MEP you are well aware of the physical attacks your colleagues have faced in Germany. Most recently, AfD Hamburg district deputy Marc-Manuel Kuntsmann was beaten bloody by two men while riding public transit, others including Frank Magnitz and Michael Meister have also been victims of politically motivated violence. Has the German government and media taken political violence against right-wing politicians seriously?
CHRISTINE ANDERSON: If you search for “violence against right-wing politicians Germany” on Google, the three first results are: “the danger of right-wing violence in Germany”, “the threat of far-right extremism in Germany”, “right-wing violence and hate crimes in Germany”. The sheer bias of this is so astonishingly unabashed that Orwell would love it were he still alive.
The German government, in cahoots with the media, does not only disregard violence against right-wing politicians (often cruel beyond belief) as a matter of lesser relevance. They in fact tacitly condone it in an exercise of indirect political repression. What makes the whole thing so diabolical is that the Establishment has hammered in the notion that right-wing thought is one of the mortal sins of our secular 21st century religion and, as such, those who profess right-wing thoughts become outlaws. Nobody really expects them to be treated with legal fairness. The thought behind it is that they brought it on themselves; heretics of sorts who through their own pretence at independent thought inevitably, and, to the captive opinion of the public, rightfully, incur the wrath of the overlord. “Well, he was right wing so he in fact deserves it” good riddance to bad rubbish sort of thing. They will never say it, but they all think it, and that is certainly the subtext with which it is in turn reported in the media, providing it makes its way to the media at all. Something which, regretfully for any decent human being with feelings of civility and compassion, is often moot.
Right-wingers, or right-minded people as I prefer to call them, are a nuisance for the government’s getting on with overturning normal ideas, normal culture, normal customs and normal habits. People like us are the modern equivalent of what in mediaeval England was called a ‘wolf´s head’, that is to say, anyone who had forgone being answerable to county or crown courts and was therefore strip of any legal guarantees. “Wolfshead!” was cried against him, for that a wolf is a beast hated of all folk; and from that time forward it was lawful for anyone to slay them like a wolf. Is this not sinisterly similar to crying out “racist!”, “fascist!” nowadays?
THE OUTER EDGE: You recently produced and released a documentary titled “Fighting for Freedom.” Additionally, you are very active on independent social media platforms including Telegram. With this in mind, do you see a growing role for alternative media outlets in European politics?
CHRISTINE ANDERSON: Yes, it reminds me of a rather amusing headline in Politico’s December issue written by Paul Dallison on the Qatar scandal, where Qatar has been influencing and funding the top echelons of the EU Parliament. Dallison mused whether it would really be so terrible if they, the Eurocrats, just dropped the pretence and henceforth prefaced themselves as “the European Parliament brought to you by the government of Qatar”. The wit of Mr. Dallison only went so far, as would be expected from Politico’s Slot News editor, for the rest of the article rather bizarrely managed to deride right-wing parliamentarians such as Janusz Korwin-Mikke (Poland), Nigel Farage (UK) and Jozsef Szajer (Hungary) and make it all about them rather than about the arch-socialist and corruption queen former EU-Parliament Vice President Eva Kailli, to whom most of the Qatari money was personally given to.
One might think it all a poor deflection strategy, but when the same is done all across the board of mainstream media outlets, whatever the platform, it really does have an effect on public perception of political issued. The left-wing bias, the left-wing dishonesty, sinks its hooks into people’s subconscious and successfully creates a climate of public opinion.
But propaganda (and make no mistake about it, that’s what it is, time to do away with euphemisms such as ‘fake news’) has its limits - even when it is exerted over the most accepting of people.
What I would say is this: turn off the television and turn on the internet. I don’t want to sound too X-Files when I say ‘the truth is out there’, but I can’t think of a better way to express it. Continually fostering our own platforms is the only way to circumvent the ‘one narrative’ policy prevailing in the West. Populism is cheap and mendacious, that is why the EU Commission and the EU Parliament have made of it their staple discourse. They reduce their speech to uninformative and goody-goody platitudes in glove with double speak, which, if scrutinised, are totally empty and leave people in the dark as to what are the actual laws and resolutions taking place, the effect of which is always in detriment of the citizen of Europe. That is populism, trying to excite the most superficial and cheap feelings of the mass and pre-emptively gaslighting them against the well reasoned arguments of their detractors, which in this case are the Right.
In this state of affairs, we take matters into our own hands. A private corporation can choose who they allow to speak on their privately owned platform? Very well then! We’ll create our own. News have become the audio-visual arm of global government? No sweat! We will report with honesty elsewhere. I wish that we will keep applying this logic further and further until the time comes when we ask ourselves: Our government has our worst interests at heart? Well then, we’ll just have to build a new one... The Freedom Convoy was the first spark of this, and that is why I am so happy about my upcoming tour of Canada, where I’ll be able to tell them how much they have inspired me and many like me face to face.
THE OUTER EDGE: Parliamentary elections are scheduled for next year. Do you intend to run again and do you potentially see more growth when it comes to populist and freedom-oriented candidates?
CHRISTINE ANDERSON: 2024 is going to be a big year for all us, established freedom parties are on the rise in all the polls, and even some new ones are projected to erupt into the EU Parliament for the first time. One of these is the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) party, whose leader, George Simion, I had the pleasure to welcome at the Parliament in Brussels last December.
Just to clarify a bit for those readers who may not be conversant with how political parties are arranged in the EU Parliament: each newly elected party at a national level sends the proportional amount of MEPs to Brussels. The party to which they belong must choose to which group or ‘faction’ they would like to belong to during the five year mandate. There are currently seven political groups, the EPP (the Christian Democrats), the S&D (Socialists)... and ours, the ID (Identity and Democracy group). We are a very young group, formed barely four years ago in May 2019, and as such, we are full of the burgeoning fearlessness of youth.
The ID group is currently the fifth largest grouping in the EU parliament. I am confident that after the 2024 election we will up that to the third or fourth. This will mean increased leverage and influencing power to get the backlash against the Establishment in full swing!
You will of course see me running for the 2024 election. I cannot give all these globalist acolytes nesting in the so-called heart of European democracy the satisfaction of seeing me go, can I? I have a reputation to uphold!
THE OUTER EDGE: Recently the European Parliament has been plunged into a corruption scandal following the arrest of a number of socialist MEP’s including vice-president Eva Kaili related to illegal influence activity by Qatar. Is corruption an endemic problem in the EU that is being covered up?
CHRISTINE ANDERSON: The phenomenon of corruption in EU institutions is irreversible because it derives from the structural make-up of the EU institutions themselves. When the Commission ombudsman and other compliance officers have conflicts of interest by virtue of being directly appointed by the individuals and bodies they are meant to scrutinise, the recipe for failure is assured.
The EU political elites have generally refrained from openly supporting the democratic forces which are the only ones which could resolve the EU’s total lack of transparency. When I and my MEP colleagues requested the contract signed by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen with Pfizer, we received a document with dozens of pages and entire sections redacted. Most telling of these redacted clauses being the ones dealing with adverse effects of the mRNA vaccines and incumbent liability of associated adverse effects caused by the vaccines.
These contracts are directly relevant to the entirety of the EU population, since it was with their money that vaccines were purchased and it was they who were the recipients of the vaccines, as well as the ones suffering from all the adverse effects.
It is hard to find historical equivalents to such an act of gross malfeasance on such an enormous scale.
Furthermore, the committees in which I participate, one for Covid, another for Women’s Rights, the Pegasus spyware scandal and one for Culture, are all entirely self-referential. Dominated by cliques, the chairman or woman blocks MEPs from probing and fulfilling the tasks these committees ought to. The result is that the dominating clique (almost always left-wing) tables proposals and resolutions which forward their agenda and which unlock eye-watering amounts of funding – all of which comes from the tax payers’ pocket.
So, you see, corruption at EU level is not just the covering up of money donations to individuals in office from entirely dubious sources, it goes deeper into the very infrastructure of how the democratic exercise is deliberately warped to serve an ideology which is directly opposed to Europe and to Europeans.