Kla.TV: Dr. Haug, thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us today.
You are the author of the book Das Deutsche Reich 1871 bis heute. Until today?
Dr. Haug, there are various controversial discussions that the Federal Republic of Germany is not a state, has only
a Basic Law but no constitution, has no peace treaty, has no regulated state borders and is not sovereign.
Germans are even stateless.
As a counter-voice to the common narrative, please explain to the viewers briefly and clearly your view of what you believe the
continued existence of the German Reich is all about and what these controversially discussed issues have
to do with the continued existence of the German Reich - according to your understanding.
Matthes Haug: First of all, thank you very much for the invitation, Mr. Matten.
Yes, I wrote the book 1871 to the present day, because the German Empire was founded in 1871 in the Hall of Mirrors
at Versailles under Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm the First.
It was accredited, recognized by 46 states whose representatives were there and recognized it, the German Reich.
And this German Empire was never dissolved.
It could not be dissolved at all, because that would require laws that are also laid down in the Constitution of 1871,
regulations on how to dissolve a constitution, for example.
This constitution was never dissolved.
After all, there was the First World War and then only an armistice.
There was never a real peace treaty. The Treaty of Versailles was not a peace treaty.
So it was just an armistice. And so this German Reich continues to exist to this day.
Not to be confused with the Third Reich. It is often mixed up. The Third Reich and the German
Reich of 1871 have nothing to do with each other.
Rather, it goes back purely to this empire, which is still in existence today.
Kla.TV: In your opinion, what are the possibilities and consequences if the German Reich continues to exist today?
Are there particular opportunities for citizens in shaping the future?
MH: There are very big opportunities. And from a purely legal point of view, so it's
not my opinion, it's a matter of legal fact.
So from a purely legal point of view, the constitution of 1871 also applies.
Because this German Reich is still basically at war today. Only in a state of armistice.
And only this German Reich can sign a peace treaty again.
The Federal Republic didn't even exist yet.
Strictly speaking, it was only founded on January 3, 1950, after the last letter of approval to the British.
So you think it was founded in 1949.
I have researched all of this very carefully and have also presented it very precisely.
I'm only ever interested in facts and nothing else. I'm enough of a scientist.
And so the Federal Republic was only founded on January 3, 1950.
So you can't sign a peace treaty because the Federal Republic was never an opponent of the war.
And a peace treaty must necessarily follow a war.
And this requires legal representatives of the German Reich.
Kla.TV: And these legitimate representatives, they weren't even there at these peace negotiations.
There is such a thing as a 2 plus 4 contract. Has it all been for nothing, as they say?
MH: For the cat does not mean for the cat.
Well, that's a separate topic.
Peace treaty representatives were never present.
That would have been Kaiser Wilhelm the First or the Second.
The First was then replaced by Wilhelm II.
So that could have been a legitimate representative.
But then he went into exile, so he was no longer available here.
And the Weimar Republic was simply proclaimed contrary to the valid constitution of 1871, which is not
possible under international and constitutional law.
In other words, there was no legitimate representative of the German Empire of 1871.
These were arbitrary politicians and people who were not authorized to sign a peace treaty for the German Empire in 1871.
You then mentioned, let's make a short leap now, the Two Plus Four Treaty.
Strictly speaking, it is called the Four Plus Two Treaty. That's what the Allies call it.
So the four Allies, the Soviet Union, England, France and the USA and the FRG, the Federal Republic of Germany and the GDR.
They should have created a united Germany under this treaty. That would have been ratifiable.
A united Germany in this sense was never established.
Because the united Germany means the entire Germany of 1871.
This is the complete union.
After all, Germany was divided into three parts after the Second World War.
FRG, then GDR, Central Germany, to be precise. And East German areas administered by Poland.
And nothing has changed to this day.
The united Germany could therefore not be created by the FRG through just a single part, these three parts or several parts.
And so they always say yes, this four-plus-two treaty, two-plus-four treaty would be a quasi-peace treaty.
There are no quasi-peace treaties. It also says peace treaty.
And in the end, this treaty was never ratified by all the contracting parties.
Only through Russia. Which is very interesting.
This treaty was only ratified by Russia.
And Genscher, the then Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany, did not ratify it in accordance with the regulations.
You have to sign in full what he did in the main contract.
At the ratification, he only made a paraphe. No first name, nothing more.
And that, strictly speaking, contradicts the regulation.
And so this treaty was never legally ratified. That's what matters.
Kla.TV: Dr. Haug, if I have understood you correctly, the constitution of 1871 still exists today.
But what is the Basic Law then? What does it mean?
MH: Basic law is according to the HLKO. That is international law. That regulates the state of war and post-war.
Kla.TV: What does HLKO mean? MH: Hague Land Warfare Convention.
Does the occupier have to provide the occupied with a basic law?
To maintain order, discipline and calm. This is how it is defined.
That is why it is also called the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany. And not
Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany.
So this is an occupier's right. Short anecdote.
My father knew the so-called co-founder of the Basic Law, Carlo Schmidt.
He was an old gentleman in my father's fraternity.
And he was still a bit exuberant in festivities, chatting away from the sewing box.
And said, you know, we were still allowed to put periods and commas. The rest was actually predetermined.
The Allies naturally want to forge this Basic Law to suit their interests. That is also clear, of course.
So that's the statement directly from Carlo Schmidt about my father as a witness.
And Article 120 of the Basic Law still states that the federal government pays the
occupation costs. So in the current version of 2025.
This means that if we have to pay occupation costs, we are of course also occupied.
We do not have a constitution.
Because, let's say according to international law criteria, a proper state has a people,
state borders, state organs with a constitution.
Strictly speaking, the Federal Republic has not fulfilled any of the three elements. Neither is it a nation,
because all citizens are nationals of the German Reich.
Those who can prove this through the ancestral line.
So the Federal Republic itself does not have a valid citizenship law.
And state borders do not exist either. Because the state borders, the real state
borders, were formed by the German Reich in 1871.
And so the Federal Republic was established as an administrative construct, an economic area. By the occupier.
And the occupier does not have the right to impose a new state on top of it.
And so it remains the old German Reich of 1871 in terms of international law.
Kla.TV: So, if I have understood you correctly, the Federal Republic of Germany was only an administrative construct
set up by the victorious powers to maintain public order.
That brings me to the next question.
Because so-called fact-checkers often argue that the state and its authorities must be companies.
It is often said that the Federal Republic of Germany is a GmbH or something like that, a company. In order to be able to act.
So that there is no loss in terms of freedom and state sovereignty. So that there are no losses.
But how do you see it? Is the fact that we are basically just, let's say, a company, that we also have an ID
card, is that an indication of this administrative construct?
And that we are not actually a real state, i.e. that the Federal Republic of Germany is not a
real state at all, but only an administrative unit?
Is that an indication of this?
MH: That is very much an indication.
At that time, in 1990, during the so-called reunification, which did not take place, the Foreign Minister of America and the
Foreign Minister of Germany, i.e. of the Soviet Union, deleted the Basic Law, without replacement, the scope of
application, this Article 23, in which this was defined.
Every law needs a defined scope of application.
The GDR had a constitution. And it was cut off at one corner, like when you invalidate a passport.
In other words, from this point in time, July 18, 1990, when this took place, actually July 17, 1990, to July 18, 1990, the
Federal Republic of Germany and the GDR were declared invalid.
No one had sovereign powers any more.
From the cashier in each party onwards, no one had any sovereign authority, any authority to speak for the FRG or the GDR.
And this was withheld from the German population.
And so it was actually in a vacuum.
The FRG was no longer occupied in terms of personnel, as the Allied USA, of course, the first victorious
power in the West, had removed its sovereign powers here. So it was no longer occupied in this sense.
And Genscher and Kohl then registered BRD as a company in Delaware.
And Genscher deleted BRD from the UN Charter and wrote Germany into it.
Also as a company. Are registered as a company in Delaware.
You can look it up in the international company directory assistance. It's called UPIC. So you can look it up.
And it says President Steinmeier of the Federal Republic of Germany, company number, company address, so they are all
companies through the bank, because Kohl had to register them as a company, because the constitutional basis was withdrawn.
Kla.TV: Dr. Haug, to come back to this identity card.
So if this ID card is just like a company ID card from the company Germany, Germany Firma, what does it mean?
MH: There are international rules that in a prisoner status, in principle we are prisoners, so far we are
actually a prisoner status, perhaps with a bit more freedom than now in a prison, but we have that status.
And there are regulations that these people must be provided with a travel document. Identity card or travel document.
The identity card implies that we are staff. I used to work somewhere during the vacations, at Daimler
I used to work somewhere during the vacations, at Daimler or somewhere else, and you got an ID card from
Daimler because you were staff there for that time.
And this can be transferred in exactly the same way to the BRD trading company, which
then equips people with a corresponding ID card.
And that clearly implies that we are merely personnel.
Kla.TV: And therefore also stateless.
MH: And also stateless.
Kla.TV: So if, in principle, with the Federal Republic of Germany, we now only have a company and no real constitution, but
only an administrative order to maintain peace and public order, what opportunities does recourse to the actual German Reich, to
the actual constitution, which is still valid today, offer for the German people or for the
German citizen? Does it have any relevance at all?
Is this old, dusty paper or does it have something important to say to us today?
MH: There's something very important about that.
Of course, it is very important to achieve a state of war, including a state of peace,
through a peace treaty. That is a prerequisite.
Then, in terms of international law, we are once again a state, a recognized state. And accordingly, we will have state
rights again, which we do not have now in this case of the FRG.
We are indeed stateless, all Germans.
That may sound unbelievable, but it's true.
Then we will once again have state rights and sovereignty under international law.
And this constitution, because it is apparently old, from 1871, may be dusty or something, but it is not.
There were great achievements.
And there was also talk, for example, about the tax situation in the German Reich.
There was only 4% sales tax.
There was no income tax at all, only a small rate of income tax above a certain level.
In other words, let me give you an example, if there is only 4% sales tax, let's take gasoline prices.
If we are today at, I have a diesel, 1.70 approximately, then you can do the math, if you only have 4% sales tax,
then the gas prices are of course quite different again.
Today you have an 80-cent tax rate or something like that, with gasoline in particular, I have five times less or much less,
then I'm at 70 cents or something like that for the gas price.
So I think this is just one example of how it can be of great benefit to the German population.
And of course, you have to realize that there are also financial aspects involved.
For example, if you convert this into euros, a pensioner at that time had an average of 3,000 euros per month.
I think the average pensioner - some actually have more, but those are the exceptions - has nothing against it.
If people here are properly retired again without a large tax share, that is also a big problem here,
if you only look at the many bottle collectors etc..
So that has a lot of advantages.
We could talk about this for half an hour, about advantages, actually there are only advantages.
But I would just like to mention this one essential aspect.
Kla.TV: Now another question. So if the Federal Republic of Germany is basically just a
company, registered as a company, GmbH or what?
MH: It's not registered as a GmbH, simply as a company. Kla.TV: It is registered as a company.
And we only have a kind of house rules, a construct that simply organizes how we live together, but no constitution.
So what about the horrendous national debt that we are facing?
Do they actually have any relevance for us?
Isn't that a matter for the company and not for the residents, the actual citizens of Germany?
What about that? Does that have anything to do with it?
MH: That's a very good question. In the financial area again.
The national debt or these debts of the trading company are none of the German Reich's business.
They are simply not there. In principle, they are no longer there.
The German taxpayer has to pay between 10,000 and 15,000 euros a year (measured purely by the
interest rate) just for this horrendous interest rate.
I think that would do every household a lot of good.
And these debts are of course none of the German Reich's business, because the German Reich was rich and
can become rich again if things are properly regulated.
Kla.TV: Great. Now it's like this. US President Donald Trump and his administration are very well-disposed towards
the freedom and self-determination of European citizens.
Recently also at the Munich Security Conference.
Vance had also spoken very strongly in favour of media freedom and all these things and democratization and so on.
In your opinion, what steps would the Trump administration have to take so that Germany and the Germans can similarly
achieve this peace and peace treaty, so that they can regain their freedom and sovereignty and become a state again?
In other words, all these values that you have obviously lost in the course of history, as you have just explained.
What would Trump have to do?
MH: In concrete terms, the rightful representatives of the German Empire of 1871 should be elected democratically by the people.
Personally, I'm not a fan of political parties.
You can also hold personal elections so that you elect the person you want to be there.
And in any case, of course, you have to sit at the same table, the allies.
So all four Allies. France does not play a major role.
Of course, Russia and America play a key role.
And here, of course, there must also be concrete negotiations on how to return step by
step to the democratic German Empire of 1871.
This constitution of 1871, which was issued in April 1871, was democratically elected by the various
parties: Center, predecessor CDU, SPD already existed.
Then in East Germany they were also allowed to vote.
And this constitution was adopted with an enormous majority.
The emperor only represented the outside world, so to speak. Like a foreign minister.
He didn't have the big rights or anything.
That you think there will be a monarchy and then you are detached from an emperor.
This is a constituted monarchy.
But where the emperor is, as I said, the mouthpiece to the outside world.
And the rest is determined just as democratically.
In the Reichstag, as we have it today, by the way.
The Reichstag is not called the Reichstag in Berlin for nothing.
In other words, representatives of the Reichstag will then be able to use democratic processes to
draft amendments to laws, determine guidelines, etc.
So you don't need to be afraid that you're going back to the deepest Middle Ages or anything like that.
Even then, it was very democratically regulated.
Kla.TV: Yes, and so, if I understood correctly, President Donald Trump would have to make sure, if he is concerned about the
freedom of Europeans, that these representatives of the German Reich, for example, come
to the table and negotiate a peace treaty.
And what else would he have to do?
MH: Yes, of course, a key situation in Germany is that we are mainly occupied by the USA.
There are over 30 military bases here, large military bases.
The number of soldiers will soon be larger than the Bundeswehr.
So you can't say that we are not occupied.
We are effectively occupied. You can see that from the many military bases. Nothing has changed.
This is called the Military Act, which is still in force today. It's also in the Federal Law Gazette.
I have researched all this in detail. So I'm like a vole.
I spent days in legal libraries and found these sources.
It is also stated in the Federal Law Gazettes from 1994 that everything remains the same. We remain occupied.
So we are factually and legally occupied.
And Trump will not withdraw his troops here until we have a peace treaty.
That has to be settled. Nothing will happen before then.
There are many calls saying, yes, Americans, you can go home again so slowly.
That is not possible because we are in a militarily occupied area.
And nothing will happen until we have negotiated a peace treaty.
And then we can also regain our de facto sovereignty.
Kla.TV: So if I understood correctly, Donald Trump and his administration would first have to ensure that
the legal representatives negotiate a peace treaty.
Then he would have to take back the occupier status somehow. MH: End it. Kla.TV: End it.
And in practical terms, to enable Germany to function again in accordance with its constitution of 1871
with the state organs that were established at that time.
Did I understand that correctly? MH: You got it exactly right.
Trump's basic attitude. I have already contacted him once.
He got back to me straight away. I was amazed.
He got back to me after a few days. This was done by e-mail.
You could see between the lines that he was simply saying, okay you Germans, that's your business too.
I don't want to interfere and dictate too much.
He has enough to do in America, in the USA.
So it was written between the lines that it is essentially up to the Germans to get back there and regain their sovereignty.
But of course it is only possible in negotiations with, at the moment, Putin. And Trump.
Because those are still the legitimate laws.
Kla.TV: Okay. So Trump would also have to come to an agreement with Putin on the question of Germany.
There should also be a conversation. It should be a topic.
And the two of them, probably also with Great Britain and France, would then have to decide together, okay, you
can go back to the way you were, in accordance with the old, still existing constitution.
But the initiative, as I understand it correctly, would then have to come from the occupier, who would then make it possible.
MH: Both and. It's about approaching each other.
And someone has to take the first step, of course.
It was such a small, tiny step on my part that I contacted him at all.
And he knows exactly what's going on.
After all, he said in the last legislative period that he actually wanted to give Germany a peace treaty.
The fact that this is now down to him could have been done a long time ago.
But that's what he said, and I'm sure many people know it too.
And many probably didn't do anything with it because they thought we had something like a peace treaty.
He doesn't say that for nothing. They know exactly what's going on with Germany.
And Putin has said in this context that he would also like to conclude a peace treaty. With Germany.
He just doesn't know who to sign it with. Back then it was Merkel's turn.
And she is not the legal representative of the German Reich.
That's why he formulated it very precisely. You have to pay attention to that.
Kla.TV: But how could a US administration and the Russian Federation support me now, just so
that the right representatives come to the table?
MH: As I said, that is of course also a matter for the German people.
I have friends there who also have good contacts at the embassy in Russia.
And they said we can talk to Putin as equals. He is open.
If we send representatives, even if they are only temporary, he will not close the door.
We, the people at the embassy or us, I would say, have clearly communicated that. The doors are open.
It is up to us, and we will be received as equals, to take these steps in the same way, to approach each other.
This is slowly approaching for Germany.
Kla.TV: An interesting aspect, Dr. Haug.
Nice. And you can still read a lot about it, probably in your book.
MH: Everything in it, all the legal texts, the history, I researched it all painstakingly and cleanly.
I am not infallible. There are always things that someone knows something else about.
Great, I'm happy about that. I'm always making new editions.
This is the second edition, where I will expand and enrich the whole thing with additional insights.
But everything it contains has been thoroughly researched.
Kla.TV: Great. Dr. Haug, thank you very much for introducing us to these secrets of the German Reich.
Of course, we have only scratched the surface, but it was interesting to hear about it.
This means that the baton is now actually the responsibility of the Germans themselves.
And the occupying powers are open to supporting these things.
MH: In any case. In my experience.
Otherwise the feedback would not have come so quickly with Trump, for example, and with representatives of Russia.
Kla.TV: Great. MH: Thank you very much. Kla.TV: Yes, with pleasure. MH: I'll say at
this point that I was able to convey something.
Still very much on the surface. It may be that there will be follow-up interviews where
we go into a little more depth here and there.
Depending on the situation. Would be a good idea. Thank you very much.
Kla.TV: Great. Thank you for your willingness. MH: Thank you.