Björn Höcke, June 6, 2024, Thüringen Election

AfD Kompakt, June 6, 2024. 

The balance of the Ramelow government comes out catastrophic. The ongoing negative trend in Germany is reinforced by Ramelow’s failures in central political areas: Ever more businesses report their economic position in the Thüringen location as bad, restrain investments or reduce workplaces. Teachers are lacking in Thüringen schools, students more frequently fail minimal demands in reading and math. The domestic security erodes, and foreign criminality is at a new highpoint, be it in inner cities or regional trains. Therefore, political change with the AfD, instead of „Weiter so” with Ramelow! 

 

[trans: tem]

Björn Höcke, June 3, 2021, German Language

Thüringer Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 7/48, pp. 143-145, 149-151.

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, dear patriots in the sovereign house and on livestream.

A few weeks ago, the automobile manufacturer Audi announced that as of immediately it was desired that gender-correct speech be used in the concern; at Audi now no longer in proven mode and ways were Audianer spoken of, but Audianer/-innen. It should actually be thought that automobile manufacturers in the present time have other problems. Yet instead of investing time and money in technological advantage, the same prefer to invest in ideology, since genderism is nothing other; which can be read without difficulty in its fight over the language. I want briefly to arraign that, ladies and gentlemen.

            Vice-president Kaufmann: I request quiet so member Höcke may speak.

The emancipation of man from God in the Enlightenment had a reverse side, of which the freedom from the laws of the Creator, the freedom from the laws of nature itself, made him the absolute master of his own fate. Truth was now no longer of God, but could now also be of men believed to be in possession of the truth. The supposedly good purpose, the establishment of a rule of reason or the leveling of the classes, justified all means. Beginning with Jacobism, the ideologists have drawn a path of blood in the history of mankind for the last 200 years.

Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): Says the righteous!

In this connection, Hölderin spoke words valid to this day: “It nevertheless has made the State a Hell, that Man wanted to make of it his Heaven.” [„Immerhin hat das den Staat zur Hölle gemacht, dass ihn der Mensch zu seinem Himmel machen wollte.”] Ideologists were and are always occupied with the removal of traditions, of what has grown up, so as to create a new man. And language was and always is a lever with the aid of which one wanted to manipulate the consciousness of man; since it is so. That which we cannot speak, we also cannot think. In brief, the speech policy of gender-mainstreaming is a classic ideology and has nothing to seek in a free state of law.

And without knowing this background, the people in the country shake their heads in view of the abuse of speech policy. When from mother, the bearing, and from father, the non-bearing become parents, then one of the aphorisms of Henryk M. Broder comes to mind, who said: “Germany is a madhouse. Could the Federal Republic be roofed, it would be an asylum.”

            Lukasch (Linke): You however get a single room!

We nevertheless see the German language placed under pressure not only by means of gender ideologies, but also by negligence.

            Müller (Linke): What then is the German language?

I recall here only the unreflective use of English words in everyday speech, and that in the last years and decades parallel societies have spread in which the former use of the German language seldom takes place.

Certainly in a time in which the commonality [Gemeinsame] will be placed ever more in question, it is the duty of the public community to strengthen the commonality. To this in particular contributes the preservation and care of the German language, our language.

To give expression to this, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, is the concern of my delegation’s draft law [Drucksache 7/2797]. The avowal of national language, the avowal of German as national language, belong without if or but – certainly in this time which is in search of a new commonality – in the Thüringen State Constitution.

            Bilay (Linke): What about Belgium?

…

Ja, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, right honorable Frau Marx, I am happy that you have fun at the speaker’s podium [Rednerpult].

            Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): Redepult!

Your statements naturally remain on the surface and are also seemingly those over which all the multitude have rejoiced, not being in the position and not being willing to search more deeply into the matter. On that account, it is also a necessity that I continue this speech. And right honorable Herr colleague Zippel, perhaps for once you may inform yourself concerning the flag of the Federal Republic of Germany or else the historical development of this flag and then you may surely come to a new recognition.   

            Zippel (CDU): Take a peek behind, there you see the German flag!

Thus, with my compliments, you are somewhat well-read in this thematic.

            Zippel (CDU): Place yourself beside it, then you may see the difference!

The problem plainly is that you are somewhat deformed by the Zeitgeist, Herr colleague.

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, we write in our law – I cite with omission – : “…The German language is […] the decisive bond capable of unifying the Germans in all Federal States and in Germany as a whole with each other, yet also with those who as persons with a migration background live here on a long-term basis. A central social and political integration function is thereby due them.” Yet this unifying bond, which is indispensable, right honorable colleagues, ever more unravels. And that has two causes. The first cause is the neglect and the second cause is the manipulation of the language by ideologists.

            Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): Yes, plainly! You are an example of that!

And that, right honorable colleague members straight from the red-red-green delegations, right honorable colleague Marx, that exceeds by far what you have here correctly described as natural language development and natural language change.

I want to briefly illustrate both of these causes, thus first the cause of the negligence. German post-war linguistics, right honorable colleagues, under the impress of American functionalist and structuralist linguistics, completed its aversion from the previous view of language [Sprachbetrachtung] which was historically and thoroughly laid out and displayed true to the language [Sprachloyal]. Presently the attention therein rested on whether the language was useful for the language participant. Language from now on must be communicative, functional and efficient. Language as the mirror of the nation, as Freidrich Schiller once described it, or even as a House of Being, as it once had been classified by Martin Heidegger, fell ever more from the field of vision. In addition came the soft American cultural imperialism. The western Germans willingly let themselves be Disneyfied, Coca-Colonized and McDonaldized.

            Bilay (Linke): Yet that now is not German!

Media language spoilers, advertising fuzzies straining for effect and globalization-obsessed businessmen ever more frequently make references in a most pitiful English, instead of setting up in a much more at hand wonder work of rhythm, richness of expression and knife-sharp precision – the German language.

Language power and language fidelity, which were shaped for centuries in our old Kultur nation, forfeit ever more and today are scarcely to be recognized. One can well recognize this in the tendency to surrender to the loan translation. In the 50s, a pocketbook was still a Taschenbuch, today the e-book remains an e-book. The German Language Association counts in its index of anglicisms 8,000 anglicisms. Only 20 percent of the entries contained in this list were categorized as supplementary or language differentiating, as for example, Dumpingpreis, leasen, and Rowdy. Sale, cash, and casting belong to the 80 percent of superfluous (because well translatable) anglicisms. The German Language Association has besides started an appeal against the gender nonsense which has been very successfully run. 36,000 people in the meantime have subscribed to this appeal. In the name of the AfD delegation, I want to further publicize this and therefore call for powerful support of this appeal.

Now I am at gender, thus at the second cause which destroys this unifying bond – the German language. I am in the position of needing to do something which I actually would have once not thought I need do. I must praise the former Bundestag President Wolfgang Thierse. Yes, that Wolfgang Thierse.Wolfgang Thierse a few weeks ago wrote a brave contribution in the FAZ [Frankfürter Allgemeine Zeitung] in which he sharply criticized the leftist identity political manipulation of language by means of gendering. He stated: If variety should be lived peacefully, then this plurality must be more than a mere co-existence of not only differentiating but also demarcating minorities and identities. Then is required a fundamental commonality, to which self-evidently belongs the common language; an agent of diversity – thus Wolfgang Thierse’s good proposal – should at the same time be an agent of commonality. He so stated. Congratulations, Herr Thierse.

Following this box on the ears by Herr Thierse, there is then still a powerful kick in the shins for the leftist identity politicians. I cite Thierse verbatim: “In its determination, it is in danger of not being able to accept” – I speak of the leftist identity politicians – “that not only minorities but also majorities have justified cultural claims and that these may not be denounced as merely conservative or reactionary or certainly racist.” Wolfgang Thierse.

Naturally it needs be said, Wolfgang Thierse immediately came into the crosshairs of the acknowledged good guys [Gutmenschen], the gender activists and other extremists from their own ranks and in their own parties. We do not know whether Wolfgang Thierse must do a Thilo Sarrazin. I personally do not wish it for him. What we do however know, right honorable ladies and gentlemen: A very clear majority of Germans reject this so-called gendering in the language. Just recently, a Infratest-dimap poll confirmed that 65 percent of the population do not support a stronger consideration of the different sexes in the language. According to the poll, even a majority of the the adherents of the Greens – hear, hear! – are against the gender blah-blah. In our neighbor country France, one is already a step ahead. There lately gendering in the schools has been explicitly forbidden. For this, a draft law of the Macron government was submitted to the National Assembly with which gendering shall be forbidden in public establishments.  

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, again: Yes, language is constantly changing. That can, that wants to, that will no reasonable man deny. What however needs be stopped, and what can be stopped, if one possesses the political will – we of the AfD delegation possess it – is the manipulation of the language by ideologists by means of negligence. This besides is also shown in the Corona crisis, which also has become a language crisis – unfortunately, I need say and positively emphasize this. If the responsible politicians in Germany are not ashamed to speak of shutdown, lockdown, social distancing, superspreader, home office, home schooling, click and meet, etc., then an end needs be made of this ignorance.

Yes, right honorable colleague members, we of the AfD are of the opinion that those belonging to a language community have the right to be spoken to by the governing politicians, by the responsible politicians, in their own mother tongue. Period, exclamation point!

And if a virus is thus spread in that millions cannot be reached in the national language in appeals for restraint – over 50 percent of the patients in intensive-care beds have a migration background, as we know – then the policy must make unmistakably clear that learning German is an obligation for any of those who want to live here together with us. As our state thereby functions, and because we ourselves value it, German belongs in the State Constitution. On that account, I request a vote in favor of transfer to the committee.

Hearty thanks for your attention.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Björn Höcke, January 20, 2021, Corona Preventive Measures

Thüringer Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 7/33, pp. 6-9. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Prof. John Ioannidis is one of the world’s most cited scientists. Already in October of last year, he published a world-wide applied meta-study which has an unequivocal conclusion: The Corona mortality rate of 0.23 percent is only slightly above that of a serious flu. It is in any case miles away from the panic value of 1 percent permanently maintained to the people by Herr Drosten, along with the RKI, via the government media. And we know: Corona is an epidemic of those advanced in years. In the last months, it was ever more evident that the running down of the public and economic lives, the limitations of the basic rights, of children, youth, young and middle-aged adults have no effects on the mortality rate of those advanced in years. 

In a quite topical study the above mentioned Prof. Ioannidis unmistakably declares: There is scientific evidence that the so-called lockdown has no positive effects on the groups known to be at risk. 

At the University of Munich for some time labors a working group of medical statisticians which prepares routine reports on the so-called Corona pandemic. In the recently published fourth report, the scientists put forward three central statements which corroborate the above mentioned Ioannidis. 

First: The fatalities resulting from Covid-19 – adjusted for the number of inhabitants – do not show a distinct excess mortality. 

Second: The previous Corona preventive measures fail to protect the elderly. 

Third and last: The course of the pandemic shows that there is no clear remission after the so-called lockdowns. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, the factual situation, which we can determine for ourselves from diverse studies, is in fact meanwhile so clear that the Federal Constitutional Court and the State Constitutional Courts of our Free States must immediately declare the massive reductions of the basic rights to be unconstitutional. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, apparently – and this at least is my personal opinion – the so-called lockdowns are more harmful to public health than is the virus. In any case, they are highly dangerous for our democracy and our parliamentary government. According to our basis of decision, the parliament should be incorporated into the technical consultations on the Corona preventive measures. In that regard, for the present provisions, the Social Committee and Education Committee should have met in common on January 8. That however did not happen. Some members had just shortly before carried out an antigen rapid test – and behold, a colleague of the Linke delegation tested positive. 

            Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): You had not let yourself be tested.

Therefore the sitting was simply brought to an end. A few hours later, it is reported: False alarm. A PCR test had now yielded that the colleague was nevertheless not positive. The foregoing not only shows that the diverse Corona test are not reliable, it primarily before all things shows that one – I stress, one – false positive test result – and if almost a hundred members were tested, then statistically 2 to 3 percent false tests would ostensibly result therefrom – that one positive test in fact suffices to simply set aside parliamentary arrangements, processes and participation rights. 

           Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): State your reason why you had not let yourself                                                   be tested.

Since last spring, the Free State’s parliamentary life becomes more and more a phantom. Committee sittings were set aside, sittings did not take place, visitors’ groups simply remain excluded. Parallel to this, the political life of our Free State is dying away; thereby namely the holding of round tables, citizens’ dialogues and rallies will either by means of restrictive measures be actively impeded, or they will be directly and entirely forbidden. What we are experiencing, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, right honorable colleague members, is in my eyes the liquidation [Abwicklung] of democracy under cover of the fight against the pandemic. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen of the old delegations, right honorable State government, despite the evident unreality of your Corona policy – no, despite the evident harm of your Corona policy – you run ever further into a dead end. And each day without success forces you deeper into this dead end. Ever more arbitrary, ever more ineffective, ever more disproportionate become your preventive measures. Not a few at this point will think of Albert Einstein and his definition of madness. 

Look in this regard at your present confinement decree. The going-out restrictions between 10 PM and 5 AM or the mobility restriction to a radius of 15 kilometers by chance are arbitrary. I ask you, right honorable colleagues of the old delegations, right honorable State government, and I ask you in the name of ever more citizens in the State: How are such measures still to be substantiated? In which way does this preventive measure really check the spread of the virus? Why a limitation of 15 kilometers? Why not 10 or 25 kilometers? Or why, for example, are bookstores closed, while bookstores with newspaper sales are allowed to be open? Do these measures protect the especially endangered groups, particularly our citizens of advanced age? 

And where actually is the State government’s protection strategy which pertains to the high-risk groups? For almost a year we wait in vain for this strategy. 

Your arbitrary and ineffective government protective measures, once more, mean a massive harm for the economy, an education catastrophe for the present school generation who as well suffer for years from a massive instruction deficit; mean a division of society, a growth of poverty and unforeseeable consequences for the public health. 

You, right honorable Herr Minister-president Ramelow, right honorable colleagues of the old delegations have, in my eyes and the eyes of my delegation, lost every measure and mean. Your Corona extremism is destroying our country. 

In conclusion, I emphasize: We need a paradigm change. We must get out of the dead end in the area of Corona policy into which you have driven, into which you have entered. We must exit this dead end. With the adoption of our resolution motion [Drucksache 7/2566], we can do that. We of the AfD say: Let us protect the at-risk groups – but please also with a goal-oriented strategy – yet immediately open the kindergartens, schools and businesses. We will finally again become a normal country; it is high time. 

I thank you for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Björn Höcke, September 30, 2020, Moria

Thüringen Landtag, September 30, 2020, Plenarprotokoll 7/24, pp. 11-12. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen in the sovereign House and at the screens.

On September 7, asylum lobbyists arranged 13,000 empty chairs in front of the Reichstag building and, under the motto “We Have a Place”, demanded the dissolution of the Greek camps in Moria and the immediate acceptance of the immigrants living there. Two days later, the camp will be set afire, the establishment media bringing forth the familiar pictures of women and children. That 85 percent of the inhabitants are young men will not be mentioned. The reporting will be flanked by “We Have a Place” demonstrations in the larger cities.

            Henfling (Greens): It is about human rights and not about women and                                                        children’s rights!

Who here speaks of a professionally realized staging in the service of moral extortion will certainly not be entirely wrong. Yet, for the leading heads behind this extortion, is it really about refugees? Sea Watch captain Pia Klemp expressing herself concerning her work in the British Guardian – cite: “It is not about a humanitarian rescue at sea. It is part of the anti-fascist struggle”. Will migration thus perhaps be employed as a weapon against the bürgerliche order? In any case, migration by the millions from the Arab and African area is destabilizing the Western nations. In Sweden, a humanitarian major power, the country’s vice-chief of police, in regards the undermining of the state by the gangs, speaks of a “systemic threat” and

            Henfling (Greens): He appears to be speaking of the AfD!

the social-democratic foreign minister Margot Wallström, in office until 2019, prophesied of the continuing immigration – I cite verbatim: “In the long term, our system will collapse”. For all that, in Sweden the rule of political correctness is now collapsing and I wish that also for Germany.

In Germany meanwhile we have concrete bollards around the Christmas markets, an event-oriented party people scene which at times happily smashes to bits entire streets and likewise a clan criminality scarcely mastered by our police. Non-Germans in Thüringen are over-represented as suspects for theft by four times, for dangerous bodily injury by six times and for sexual assault by almost eight times. Today we gather from the press that in the Free State the number of Islamists posing a threat has significantly increased. Despite that, the Herr Minister-president recently sounded off in the Zeit that we would have a place and that Germans want the distribution of immigrants from Moria. No, right honorable Minister-president, we have a housing crisis, we have exploding rental prices, we are one of the most densely settled countries in the world – we have no place!

And the majority of Germans, the majority of Thüringers as well, want no second 2015 and they want no further loss of control, since they know: First Moria burns and then burns our society.

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, responsible politicians in Germany and Thüringen are making ready to declare as wards of the state Taliban, Isis fighters, Somali pirates and arsonists and concede to them a right to reside in the country, and that even though people are much more likely to be threatened, to be molested and even be killed by these types, and according to no aspect of a European standard of values are they worthy of protection. The ultimate argument of the immigration apologists is that it is human dignity – I believe the term has again been shouted through the sovereign House –  

            Henfling (Greens): No, human rights. Yet that is foreign to you, as we                                                        already know.

which must be protected.

I must here in conclusion be very clear: Yes, human dignity rightly stands before all in our Basic Law. No, right honorable worthy colleagues, a right of residence for serious criminals was not intended by the mothers and fathers of the Basic Law when they formulated Article 1 following the horrific experiences of the dictatorship. The political instrumentalization of human dignity on behalf of criminals and mass immigration threatens the state and must be stopped.

Many thanks for your attention.

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

Björn Höcke, May 15, 2020, Teaching Profession

Björn Höcke

Teaching Profession

Thüringen Landtag, May 15, 2020, Protokoll 7/14, pp. 82-85

[Björn Höcke is the Alternative für Deutschland chairman in the eastern German state of Thüringen as well as leader of the AfD delegation in the Thüringen legislature. He is a teacher.]

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable colleague members.

In regards the theme of “teacher”, it is clear that naturally I must approach the speaker’s podium primarily against the background of all the proposals which you have delivered. Herr colleague Wolf, ja, Wolf’s Story Hour was again presented. Or should I better say, Wolf’s Hot Air Hour? If your speech was transcribed, Herr Wolf, there would be only an uninterrupted series of blank lines on the paper.

The fact is, right honorable colleagues, that in politics almost nothing can be so well planned for as the need for teachers. That, from here – not from the current speaker’s podium, but at our accustomed place of activity – I have often previously articulated. The students, right honorable Herr Minister Holter, who six years ago – thus at the beginning, you were then not yet on board – were born under the red-red-green government, are now of school age and are commonly in the Grundschule. Nothing is better able to be planned than the teacher requirement. Ja, the CDU had made promises for decades in the area of teacher planning and the red-red-green government unfortunately has done no better; and that we regret – unfortunately, not to have done better.

Herr colleague Wolf, your assertion, so unashamed and by ways and means almost mendacious, that the AfD has not concerned itself with the theme of “Education” – that is to be sharply rejected. Education policy is a crucial theme for the AfD delegation in the Thüringen Landtag. Three years ago, we published a comprehensive education policy position paper which was very well received by the public. We conveyed in this paper a variety of ideas on the reform of our education system.

We not only take the pulse of the times but with this approach we are ahead of the times. Among other things, we have in this paper – and today I say yes to more autonomy for the schools – expressed: Yes, we need more autonomy. We have therein indicated that more autonomy means even more responsibility. More responsibility means again more expenditure for the bureaucracy. And we have clearly done that: We simply do not want our teachers – I can report this to you from 15 years professional experience – to be burdened with more administrative and bureaucratic duties. We want to relieve them. We want the teacher to return to the core business and that is the education of our children and youth.

That means, if one says yes to more autonomy, then one must say yes to school assistants, which we introduced into the debate two or three years ago, as you – one must eventually say yes to a business management direction of the school as well as a pedagogical direction of the school. All that we know already from the school reform discussions of the 70s. Yet not all that was then discussed was false and not all ought to be forgotten.    

And we say yes to better pay; for example, for leadership positions in the Grundschule. Yet we all know that certainly in the area of Grundschule leadership in the Free State of Thüringen we have to point to an unacceptable vacancy. We must do it. The Grundschule leadership positions – which must be better paid so that these positions are more attractive for teachers. That is a demand of the AfD delegation which is already a few years old.

Right honorable Herr colleague Tischner, your demand for a standard pay for all teachers unfortunately has a clear tendency to a standard teacher [Einheitslehrer], a tendency to a standard teacher indeed not through the main entrance but through the back door.

For the AfD delegation I can say: We reject this tendency per se. It is a basic law of the market economy: When the demand increases and the supply is scarce or becomes more scarce, then prices increase. The labor market is similar: When workplaces, when given positions, when teachers are demanded, then possibilities in public service must be devised so that there is a more attractive pay scale [Lohngefügen] corresponding to the demand for these positions. That is quite important matter in which we can in common move forward. I am sure of that and on that we are very flexible. We can devise instruments with which to make the teaching profession financially more attractive.

And as I said already: The direction duties, primarily in the Grundschule area, must in any case become more attractive financially, so that we can fill the open positions.

Yet – and as my colleague here before made clear – we must not make the mistake of paying all teachers the same. That would be an equalization which is not goal-oriented. A Gymnasial teacher has an essentially longer training. A course of study completed by a Gymnasial teacher is overwhelmingly science-based. Therefore, the Gymnasial teacher has a right to post-graduate study [Promotionsrecht] and a Grundschule teacher commonly does not. The workload in the schools for the Gymnasial teacher is essentially greater than that for the Grundschule teacher. For that, I could present  you a whole series of studies.

            Henflig (Greens): You are a poor example of that!

 It is self-evidently so. We have a much greater load of correction of classwork, we have a much greater load of school certificate examinations which after the tenth or after the Abitur, or more logically during the Abitur, are to be completed. Into that goes entire weeks of vacation, I can assure you. That is not to be equated with the workload of a Grundschule teacher.

            Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): No, in the Grundschule they just play!

That does not mean that the good work of our Grundschule teachers is to be denied. No!

We can also readily speak of improving the financial situation of all the teaching professions. But that involves the maintenance of a given difference, right honorable colleague members.

            Lukin (Linke): Snobbery!

And now I want at this point to once more get to the basics, as it is always my method [Art] here to embed somewhat. There are comprehensive studies which in the last years and decades have been conducted in the area of sociology. And it is so, right honorable colleague members: Strongly egalitarian societies and very strongly hierarchical societies are fundamentally less peaceful than lightly hierarchical societies [leicht hierarchisch ausgerichtete Gesellschaften]. That is a basic understanding in the sociology of recent decades.

What does that mean for men, what does that also ultimately mean in the area of teacher production? We must look at the fact that we have an incentive system because man is adjusted not only to an orientation but also to a light hierarchy. He then is at peace when he has a goal which is yet not so distant that he cannot attain it with a maximum of effort, and which is so proximate that he must exert himself, yet have the guarantee that in striving he will be able to attain it. Das ist eine gute Ordnung. That means an even [flache] hierarchy in society, yet also in the area of the school system.

To sum up: We need a differentiated pay, good pay, readily higher pay for all teachers, but we need a light hierarchy. We need also the inducement by which through particular achievement one can arrive at positions of advancement – and that ought not to be an accident but a regular result. That is how we increase the professional satisfaction of our teacher corps. I believe that is the understanding of us all.

            Rothe-Beinlich (Greens): All do not agree!

  

Concluding with but a remark on the CDU’s idea to raise the extra hours allowance [Stundendeputat] to 32 hours. Dear colleague Herr Tischner, how high was your extra hours allowance as a teacher? 24-25 hours? That is the result of a total work week of something like 40 to 42, oftentimes 44 hours. An extra hours allowance of 32 hours, right honorable colleague member, produces the burn-out of which we now complain much too often in our schools. I can only warn thereof.

26 hours is, in my eyes and after 15 years of teaching, the maximum which we can demand of our teachers. On grounds of health, more is not responsible.

I am grateful. 

 

[Translated by Todd Martin]