The Golden Rule by Norman Rockwell (oil on canvas). Fifteen years after WW2, The Saturday Evening Post relaxed its stance on the depictions of races other than white people. One of the first multiracial images to grace the cover of the Post was Rockwell’s The Golden Rule.
Is the Golden Rule a rational rule? — Is it not rather a menial rule — a coward rule — a best-policy rule? Why is it ‘right’ for one man to do unto others as he would have others do to him and, what is right? If ‘others’ are unable to injure him or ‘do good’ to him, why should he consider them at all? Why should he take any more notice of them than of so many worms? If they are endeavouring to injure him, and able to do it, why should he refrain from returning the compliment? Should he not combat them, does not that give them carte-blanche to injure and destroy him? May it not be ‘doing good’ to others, to war against them, to annihilate them? May it not also be ‘good’ for them to war against others? (Again, what is ‘good’?)
Is it reasonable to ask preying animals, to do unto others as they would be done by? — If they acted accordingly would they, could they survive? If some only accepted the Golden Rule as their guiding moral maxim, would they not become a prey to those who refused to abide thereby?
Upon what reasonable and abiding sanction does this ‘Rule’ rest? — Has it ever been in actual operation among men? — Can it ever be successfully practiced on earth — or anywhere else? — Did Jesus Christ practice it himself upon all occasions? — Did His apostles, his ‘sons of thunder’ practice it? — Did Peter the boaster do so, when he ‘denied Him’ for fear of arrest at the camp-fire? — Did Judas the financier, when he sold him for net cash? Also, how many of his modern lip-servants actually practice it in their daily business intercourse with each other? How Many?
These questions require no formal answering. They answer themselves in the asking. And here it must be remembered that the best test of a witness, is cross-examination. ‘Do unto others as you would have others do to you.’ No baser precept ever fell from the lips of a feeble Jew.
It is from alleged moralisms of this sort, and fabulous ‘principles’ that our mob orators, our communards, revivalists, anarchists, red-republicans, democrats, and other mob-worshippers in general derive the infernal inspiration that they are perpetually hissing forth. Even the subversive pyrotechnic watchwords of their mephisto-millennium, are to be found in the ‘holy gospels.’ Is it not written, ‘and God sendeth angels to destroy the people?’ — Behold! these men are the ‘angels’ that He sends: — politicians and reformers!
‘Love one another’ you say is the supreme law, but what power made it so? — Upon what rational authority does the Gospel of Love rest? — Is it even possible to practice, and what would result from its universal application to active affairs? Why should I not hate mine enemies, and hunt them down like the wild beasts that they are? Again I ask, why? If I ‘love’ them does that not place me at their mercy? Is it natural for enemies to ‘do good’ unto each other and, what is ‘good’? Can the torn and bloody victim ‘love’ the blood-splashed jaws that rend it limb from limb? Are we not all predatory animals by instinct? If humans ceased wholly from preying upon each other, could they continue to exist?
‘Love your enemies and do good to them that hate you and despitefully use you,’ is the despicable philosophy of the spaniel that rolls upon its back, when kicked. Obey it, O! reader, and you and all your posterity to the tenth generation shall be irretrievably and literally damned. They shall be hewers of wood, and carriers of water, degenerates, Gibeonites. But hate your enemies with a whole heart, and if a man smite you on one cheek, smash him down; smite him hip and thigh, for self-preservation is the highest law.
He who turns the ‘other cheek’ is a cowardly dog — a Christian dog.
Give blow for blow, scorn for scorn, doom for doom, with compound interest liberally added thereunto. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, aye four-fold, a hundredfold. Make yourself a Terror to your adversary and when he goeth his way, he will possess much additional wisdom to ruminate over. Thus shall you make yourself respected in all the walks of life, and your spirit — your immortal spirit — shall live, not in an intangible paradise, but in the brains and thews of your aggressive and unconquerable sons. After all, the true proof of manhood is a splendid progeny; and it is a scientific axiom that the timid animal transmits timidity to its descendents.
If men lived ‘like brothers’ and had no powerful enemies (neighbors) to contend with and surpass, they would rapidly lose all their best qualities; like certain oceanic birds that lose the use of their wings, because they do not have to fly from pursuing beasts of prey. If all men had treated each other with brotherly love since the beginning, what would have been the result now? If there had been no wars, no rivalry, no competition, no kingship, no slavery, no survival of the Toughest, no racial extermination, truly what a festering ‘hell fenced in’ this old globe would be?
_____________
[1] According to Wikipedia it was Arthur Desmond (1859-1929) who wrote under the pen name ‘Ragnar Redbeard’.
I add the translations from Karlheinz Deschner’s books on the criminal history of Christianity or Eduardo Velasco’s essays; or the quotations already written in English from David Irving’s books on Himmler, Brendan Simms’ on Hitler, Savitri Devi’s magnum opus, the mysterious author of Might is Right or Goodrich’s Summer 1945 when the muses don’t come to me. But this morning a muse visited me.
I’d like to comment on the recent contest organised by Counter-Currents on the so-called NAXALT, about which several essays were published.
First of all, that little riddle of liberals against the racial right is only understandable under the skies of Christian ethics. In the video I embedded the day before yesterday, Tom Holland tells the fascinating story of a theologian from the first centuries of Christianity who was already promoting migration to our lands for humanitarian reasons! In other words, if we pull out the root, Christian ethics, NAXALT doesn’t even appear on the horizon. We can already imagine the Chinese or the Israelis agonising over coloured migration arguing ‘Not All Xs Are Like That’. Such malware didn’t exist in the Aryan collective unconscious before the advent of Christianity.
Jared Taylor, brought up very Christianly by his parents, argues exactly that ‘Not All Jews Are Like That’ when confronted with the JQ. That typical stance among normies and even some racialist neo-normies was refuted when anti-Christian William Pierce published ‘Seeing the Forest’ in 1999. If some quarters of the right wing still refuse to see the forest, it is because of the Christian morality that has enslaved the Aryan collective unconscious for centuries.
Mixing metaphors, The West’s Darkest Hour represents a few steps closer to crossing the psychological Rubicon than the mid-stream stagnation in which the American racial right finds itself. That is why, ideally for me, a new breed of racists who have crossed the Rubicon should emerge that differs from today’s racialists. Ideally, young males would understand this site and become intellectual guerrillas, disseminating our ideas in the forums of the stagnant.
I will allow myself a few autobiographical paragraphs.
My bellicose attitude in the secular arena is a legacy of the Catholic bellicosity of my father and the Jesuit who baptised me: my father’s protector before his marriage (the Wikipedia photo of this Jesuit is taken precisely from my First Communion).
Portrait de Voltaire (Musée Carnavalet).
Voltaire’s bellicose attitude was instilled by his early teachers: Jesuits. Ironically, the names Ignatius of Loyola and François-Marie Arouet go together! Speaking a little immodestly, my style is like that of Voltaire. It has two main qualities: clarity and brevity. Unlike the pundits of the racialist webzines, I avoid circumlocutions and don’t get bogged down in long arguments. I just show the absurd in a couple of strokes. And if there is one thing that should be preached with Jesuit zeal and crystal clarity, it is that the scale of values of both ‘atheists’ (in fact, secular Christians) and Christians is the factor that prevents us from seeing the forest.
‘If you could write lucidly, simply, euphoniously and yet with liveness you would write like Voltaire’. —Somerset Maugham
In the comments section, the day before yesterday I complained that visitors don’t understand the value of studying the issue of child abuse and psychohistory, which studies its psychological consequences. I want to clarify the point.
Twenty years ago, in the Spanish newspaper El País, Alice Miller wrote something that made my mind fly to my mother’s behaviour (my translation): ‘Where does this repressed rage come from, this need to torment, humiliate, mock and mistreat defenceless human beings (prisoners and children alike)?’ Then Miller answers her question, it comes from poisonous pedagogy: ‘Children and adolescents can be beaten, humiliated and sometimes subjected to the clearest sadism without any legal consequences. Such treatment is tantamount to real torture. But it is not called that’.
Now grown up, this once-beaten girl, who buried her rage for years, begins to take it out on her children, repeating the cycle.
The confessions of Tyrone Patten-Walsh (Joseph Walsh was the name he used on this site), now serving a seven-year sentence for thoughtcrime in the UK, are paradigmatic in showing why we should know Miller’s work as well as psychohistory.
In a comment on The Unz Review that Walsh later deleted, because he posted it before his sentencing earlier this year and was still hoping to be declared non-guilty, he confessed:
I’ve already suffered immensely since I was 17 when I was incarcerated in a mental institute for ‘mental illness’. I’m used to suffering and I don’t expect mercy from life. Life shows little to no mercy to certain people. Consequently I have become merciless. In fact I’ve come to love the suffering and evil of this planet. As long as humans are suffering, justice is being done, that’s what I say. From my teenage years I’ve been obsessed with Satan, Hitler, Charles Manson, Evil, crime, serial killers, etc.
Walsh’s guilt-by-association looks more like a Hollywood Hitler than the historical Hitler! Remember that in my critical article ‘On commenters of The West’s Darkest Hour’ another Englishman was also a fan of Charles Manson. German National Socialists of the previous century wouldn’t even understand how some Anglo-Saxon racialists could be fans of Masson, Satanism or, openly, Evil as Walsh confesses. He adds:
If I go to prison I imagine I should feel right at home. It’s part of being a revolutionary, an outlaw. When I was younger the British state termed my thoughts and words ‘insane’, now my words and thoughts are ‘illegal’ haha. I’ve been termed bipolar, schizoaffective, autistic, Asperger, a terrorist, far right etc. by the usual psychological ‘experts’. I’m sure you can imagine my life’s story Dr Morgan. It’s the same story lived by thousands of other ‘dangerous males’ all across the West.
Yes: Walsh was a martyred teenager by the System. But he didn’t know how to process his abysmal pain. Although when I met him in London he said things that I thought were the most lucid I have ever heard about Aryan ethnosuicide, he followed a very different path from mine (I too had been martyred by my parents). Walsh’s comment to his pal Robert Morgan ends with these words:
I’ll finish with an amusing anecdote. Ten years ago Carolyn Yeager interviewed Tom Metzger and Metzger was talking about the Jews’ collective will to power. Carolyn asked Metzger “Where’s our will to power?” and Metzger paused for a split second then said “They’re all in prison”. Yeager was appalled by Terrible Tommy’s statement and said “Oh, come on”. I wouldn’t have expected her to understand but Metzger certainly did, lol. Thanks for your words of support anyway.
I would put it differently.
When Hitler was triumphing in Europe Carl Jung said that there were two collective unconsciouses: the Jewish collective unconscious and the Aryan collective unconscious. Unfortunately, the Aryan is prey to the former.
For those who are prey to the Judeo-Christian collective unconscious, the interview with Tom Holland that I embedded yesterday is a splendid opportunity to understand what’s going on in our little heads. Such an insight is opposite to Hollywood Nazis admiring Masson, Satan or idealising prison. Today’s prisons are hellish compared to Hitler’s incarceration after the Putsch, as we saw recently in that passage from Brendan Simms’ biography. The Landsberg prison was a five-star hotel compared to the prison Walsh and his friend Chris Gibbons, whom I also met, are now suffering.
Incidentally, recently the Greek man who told me he was going to commit suicide, also mentioned in ‘On commenters of The West’s Darkest Hour’, sent me an email confessing that he hadn’t done it! I suggested that he write his most painful memoirs, as I did in my autobiographical books, in pursuit of the only therapy that saved me. I don’t know if he will follow my advice but another commenter on this site, also committed like Walsh to a mental hospital for a while, has begun to write his memoirs.
More on how the most abusive parents undermine the mental health of the child can be found in my book Day of Wrath, the PDF of which is linked in the featured post.
On Friday I posted a 13-minute segment of a video under the title ‘Transvaluing Cross’ about a recent interview with Tom Holland. Now I’d like to embed the full interview, which lasts more than an hour:
At minute 11 Holland says something that explains secular Christianity:
‘If you are hostile to Christianity in the West, almost certainly you will be hostile to Christianity because of deeply Christian reasons’ (my emphasis).
Now that I’ve watched the full interview, I’ve noticed something that Holland fails to notice. When he talks about Roman sexuality during the Roman Empire he says that it was ruthless compared to our morality. But like any normie, Holland doesn’t know he’s talking about the decadent Roman Empire, not Republican Rome. Anyone who wants to learn about Aryan customs and habits when it comes to marriage should read what Tacitus said about the ancient Germans, or what Eduardo Velasco wrote about Spartan marriage.
Quite apart from that flaw, the interview is excellent for understanding the POV of this site, The West’s Darkest Hour. Holland explains admirably how Christian ethics transmuted into the civil rights preached by Martin Luther King, and the sexual ‘liberation’ that reigns today including the ‘rights’ of transgender people.
Nevertheless, ‘although progressives are deeply Christian’ says Holland, ‘for the first time in American history they are not acknowledging that’.
As much as I criticise Christianity, atheism is probably worse. At around the 1:06 mark [of this YouTube video], objectively Dan—who has a nose piercing, even though he is a man—says that he is ‘unironically antinatalist’.
Steve Shives appears to be another atheist antinatalist. He has no children, and got a vasectomy.
Pine Creek Doug, although he has two children, by IVF has expressed antinatalist sentiments.
Veneloid, Rachel Oates, Captain Cassidy, Rationality Rules all appear to be antinatalists, at least practically.
And so if you find the atheist movement distasteful—and I do— then, demographically, it probably won’t be around for much longer.
The reason why I personally reject antinatalism is because I do not positively affirm materialism.
Transgenderism is also, arguably, a form of antinatalism, as is homosexuality, and we know how frequent these pastimes are in atheism.
Richard Carrier also had a vasectomy and is childless, I think. He is ‘polyamorous’.
Matt Dilahunty is going out with a tranny, and has no children. Seth Andrews has no children. MGTOW seems to be an antinatalist cult that many atheists on the right subscribe to.
Such behaviour, in my view, is wholly consistent with atheism. The sun will eventually explode, its protons will eventually decay, and the universe will eventually be a uniform temperature. As Bertrand Russell says: this is a philosophy of unyielding despair. Russell though claims that the soul of the atheist will eventually adjust to such circumstances, and hope is then possible, again. Atheists claim that we quote Russell out of context when we quote him as saying that atheistic materialism is a philosophy of unyielding despair.
As I said before: I disbelieve in the gods of revealed religion and the gods of classical theism. However, there is still a wide gulf between this and atheistic materialism. And I think that if you are an atheistic materialist who believes in proton decay and eventual heat death, then you should be an antinatalist. You should not bring new sentient beings into what is ultimately a collapsing and dying system. The universe, as Bertrand Russell puts it, is fated, under atheistic materialism, to be a heap of ruins. As Benatar puts it: you are giving birth into quicksand, and this is immoral.
However, given the heap of ruins that, anon, the universe is fated to become—The Atheism of Astronomy calls this: ‘drift’—then why not neuter oneself and dedicate one’s life to orgy and fetishes?
The Atheism of Astronomy’s image of ‘drift’ is certainly a dreadful one. We are all slowly drifting into non existence. It is like there is a malevolent god, with a rubber eraser, rubbing us out, and thus erasing us.
Editor’s two cents:
That is why I don’t consider myself an atheist and why Hitler and Himmler also repudiated ‘atheism’. Instead, I respect the archetypes represented by the Aryan Gods, and there is a category on this site (genuine spirituality) which shows that it is possible to reject the god of the Jews and, at the same time, intuit a kind of panentheism in the universe.
Adolf Hitler’s leading emotion is obviously his ‘love beyond all measure’[1] for Germany and all that is German. ‘He lived in the German people; nothing counted for him, save they.’[2] These words, describing the future ruler’s feelings al-ready in early youth, are true at all stages of his life. And his main intellectual, or rather, spiritual, feature, is perhaps that inborn, baffling intuition of history in the broadest sense of the word — of history as our planet’s destiny, — which lifts him straight above all politicians, generals and actual kings, to the level of the great Seers, and gives his whole career that extraordinary, ‘dream-like’[3] character of which Hans Grimm so appropriately speaks. The originality of his genius lies in the fact that he lived his German patriotism from a cosmic point of view, giving both Germany and the history of our times their true significance in the light of not merely human but cosmic evolution.
I do not know whether Adolf Hitler would have been, at any period of his career, in a position to give a learned lecture about the cyclic conception of history according to ancient Wisdom. But I am absolutely sure that he felt, thought and acted, from beginning to end, in full consciousness of the eternal truth — both biological and metaphysical, — which this conception expresses. His writings — specially the general statements which he laid down in Chapter XI of the first part of Mein Kampf— his speeches before and after his rise to power, and more eloquently than anything, the great decisions of his life, prove that he did. The basic tenets and entire spirit of the National Socialist doctrine prove that he did. For what is the latter, if not a passionate denial of the wide-spread belief in the ‘dignity’ of ‘man’ as such (of any human creature of any race) and of the no less wide-spread and no less arbitrary idea of man’s ‘mastery’ over Nature, and of his illimited ‘progress’? The denial of these dogmas in favour of an aristocratic conception of the Universe and, in particular, of history, in the light of which the noble races (and, among them, in first rank, the Aryan, the noblest of all) are alone capable of bringing collectively into material fulfilment, the whole wealth of higher human possibilities? Their denial, also, in favour of the bold assertion that history is, — in fact, has always been, — a long process of more or less slow decay from original perfection to a final state of chaos out of which one rises once more not through regular, unbroken evolution, but abruptly, — i.e., through revolutionary methods — to the state of health, virtue and beauty, i.e., of earthly godhead, which marks the springtime (all the successive spring-times) of Creation?
Considered in its essence, it is, indeed, that, before anything else. More so: the fact that it is that governs, as we shall see, its attitude, — determines its position, — with regard to the various ‘questions’ of our times, from the all-important, worldwide Jewish problem (which is anything but ‘modern’) to those affairs which, at first sight, seem to concern Germany alone. (And there lies precisely the hidden but actual source of its unpopularity in this Dark Age.)
Years before he came to power; nay, years before he started his political career, — Adolf Hitler was vividly aware of that incompatibility between this Age, this world as we see it, and the healthy, glorious world of his dreams. And he sought the reality of the latter, when not in the historical Golden Age of our Time-cycle — so far behind us and so different from all we know that it is practically unthinkable, — at least in as remote a past as his imagination could reach: in the legendary Age before the dawn of recorded German history; the Age pictured in the old Germanic sagas. He did not study that age, as a student of archaeology would have. He lived in it through his own visionary’s intuition and through the magic of Richard Wagner’s music, which he loved. And far from being the mere product of an ephemeral youthful enthusiasm, that consciousness of the World of the Sagas was precisely that which, more decisively than anything else, ‘conditioned his historical and political views.’[4] It was the consciousness of the world ‘to which he felt he actually belonged.’ And ‘all through his life, he found nothing for which he could stand with such pious devotion as he did for that world, which the Sagas of the German heroes had opened to him.’[5]
The Rhinemaidens in the first Bayreuther Festspiele production in 1876.
In other words, it is the healthy, strong, beautiful Germans of the heroic Age who, in his eyes, represented real Germany; eternal Germany. Maybe they have, historically, lived only a few millenniums before the beginning of the present Dark Age (in what the Sanskrit authors call the Dwapara Yuga; the third of the four great Ages) maybe, already within this present Age of Gloom itself (I mean, in the very first part of it).
That is not the point. The point is that, faithful in fact to Tradition, Adolf Hitler believed in the existence of earthly perfection as a reality both of the future and of a very, very remote past. The point is that, whatever might have been the epoch in which they — or their historical prototypes — actually lived, the men and women of the hallowed ‘world of the Sagas’ signified, symbolised, for him, that earthly perfection, that humanity without a flaw for which he yearned with all the ardour of his heart and nearer and nearer to which one reaches to the extent one follows Time further and further upstream.
There is more. Strange as this statement may seem to the European, nay to the German reader himself, Adolf Hitler’s ‘immeasurable love’ for his people is something greater than usual patriotism. It is, no doubt, rooted in that natural feeling of blood — solidarity which binds most individuals — and certainly all Germans, — to their countrymen. But it is, at the same time, the immediate outcome of a staggering intuitive knowledge; the expression of actual insight into the nature, meaning and destiny of Germany as the privileged Nation among all those of the same blood: the most gifted; the most conscious; the most fit to rule; in one word, the most objectively valuable section of Aryan mankind. It is, in spite of what many may think, nay, in spite of the judgement passed upon it by such a prominent figure of the National Socialist regime as Konstantin Hierl,[6] anything but the German counterpart of the British chauvinist’s attitude rendered in the well-known motto: ‘My country, right or wrong!’
True, Adolf Hitler himself has written in Mein Kampf that, had he ‘been French,’ and had France’s greatness meant to him all that Germany’s in fact did, he ‘could not and would not have acted any differently from Clemenceau.’[7] But, if one is to consider him, and to try to interpret his historical career in the light of Ancient Wisdom, (and subsequently, in connection with the destiny of the whole world) one is forced to say: he could not have been French — nor English; nor even Scandinavian. He could not have been anything else but German, nay, anything else but a frontier German, doubly aware of the tragic injustice of man-made frontiers and of the natural unity of the Reich beyond and in spite of them-and of the natural unity of the Aryan race beyond and in spite of the boundaries of the Reich. More still: one is bound to admit that, far from exalting Germany merely because he was a German, it is, on the contrary, he who chose to be born a German because of the predestined — God-ordained — part that Germany has played and is more and more called to play on the side of the eternal Forces of Light and Life in their struggle against the Forces of disintegration, now, as the end of this Dark Age is drawing nigh; because, objectively speaking, the earthly salvation of the Aryan race — the regeneration of higher mankind — can only come from and through Germany: the one Aryan Nation in which the race is still sufficiently pure to be, under given circumstances, capable of total regeneration, while, at the same time it has, through the unbroken experience of danger, remained sufficiently awake to be fully awakened, and sufficiently warrior-like to carry on, to its end, the struggle against Dark Age conditions: the perennial Struggle ‘against Time,’ for integral Truth.
In other words, both the quality of her biological substance and the particular stamp which history has left upon her, have made Germany the one Nation capable of taking the lead of Western Aryandom (when not also of Aryandom as a whole) in the last life and death struggle — the struggle for the survival and rule of the best, who are the predestined founders of the next Golden Age; the last phase of the perennial Struggle ‘against Time,’ marking the end of the present Age of Gloom. And the inspired Man ‘against Time’ who was, at the beginning of that phase, to act on behalf of the Forces of Light and Life, was bound to be a German, nay, the very embodiment of eternal Germany. And Adolf Hitler was that Man. And he knew it in the depth of his heart. He was perfectly conscious of the fact that his policy, both at home and abroad, was the only real German policy, and therefore the only conceivable one in the interest of Aryan mankind as a whole and — consequently — of the whole realm of Lift the only conceivable one ‘in the interest of the Universe,’ to quote the words of the Book of books. For alone regenerate Aryan man can and will save what is, in spite of all, worth saving in this doomed world, and build a new earth — open a new Time-cycle — on the basis of principles eternally true. Adolf Hitler has repeatedly said so in his speeches. And repeatedly expressed in Mein Kampf the same fact, namely that he was acting ‘in the spirit of the almighty Creator’ and struggling ‘for the Lord’s own work’[8] i.e. for Truth upon this earth: earthly Perfection; and that his ‘new ideas’ are ‘in harmony with the primeaval meaning of things.’[9]
What August Kubizek relates of his life in Linz and Vienna from 1904 to 1908, shows how early the future ruler had acquired a clear conception of his ultimate aim — the ‘ideal State’ — and become aware of the spirit of the whole programme he was, one day, to set forth and to work out, with the help of enthusiastic millions of people; how early he knew what his policy would be (what, in fact, any policy in accordance with truth, i.e. with Nature, can only be): — at the same time national and socialistic; nay, socialistic because it was to be — is too be — national in the full sense of the word, first in the sense of racial; and national in that sense because that Godhead within us which is real Godhead, is nothing else but the latent glory of our race in its original perfection.
To urge the German and, beyond the pale of the Reich, the Aryan in general — the youngest race of our Time — cycle, destined to the lordship of the divine Beginning of the next cycle — to yearn for and to strive with all his enlightened might towards that perfection on all planes, and to bring it, here and now, collectively as well as individually, into being (to the extent this is exceptionally possible, already during the Dark Age); to urge him to be, now, against the prevailing spirit of general contamination and general decay — against the current of Time, — the witness and the herald of the coming Dawn, and that, on a national, or rather on a racial scale, such is and remains the actual goal of National Socialism, the Hitler faith, however astounding this may yet appear to most people, to-day, in Year 22[10] after ‘the first Seizure of power.[11] Important as they may have been after 1918 — or as they may be now after 1945, — the immediate political aims which could not and cannot be separated from the persecuted Weltanschauung are mere steps towards that one great positive, permanent goal.
_______________
[1]Kubizek, Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfreund, p. 292.
