One of the Ordinary Kindly Ones

András Csilléry, Presbyterian parliamentarian representative, President of Fővárosi Keresztény Községi Párt (the capital’s Christian Communal Party) of the Egyesült Keresztény Pártok (United Christian Parties), heavily decorated  World War I army doctor, one of the founders of the Hungarian Public Health Institution, celebrated professor of stomatology, and the founding President of the Magyar Orvosok Nemzeti Egyesülete (Hungarian Medical Doctors’ National Association), votes „nay” to the Anti-Jewish Law of 1938.  

Earlier, during the discussion of the proposal on May 10, 1938, Csilléry submits a bill that reads (Gergely 2013):

I propose that the House of Representatives should declare and articulate that there is no Jewish denomination, only Jewish race. Based on that, Jews should be employed in 5,1%, which is the proportionate representation of the appropriate number of Jews within the general population, and they should be hired in intellectual jobs, such as in commercial and industrial companies as well as in all chambers in the same number.

At the same time, the Hungarian House of Representatives fails to sign antisemitism into law based on racial funds, which consequently results in Csilléry’s refusal to vote for the First Anti-Jewish Law.

In these very days the Hungarian poet, György Faludy addresses Csilléry in a poem (Faludy 1938):

Say, you black bat of pogroms,

Wouldn’t be nice to come to?

Rotting hatred is boiling deep in your soul,

And moss will grow above you tomorrow.

It is late to strive for greatness now

But it is never too late to be kind .

The Primordial Kindly Ones

Greek Mythology is filled with „triple-goddesses”, or three-charactered triptych , which intervene in mortals’ lives and shape their faith as three-member units. One of these classical female triads is named Erinys as a group, and named individually as Alecto  or "unnameable", Tisiphone  or "vengeful destruction", and Megaera  or "grudging". Erinys, the goddesses of untamed fury and perpetual vengeance are anciently old and terrifyingly ugly: their skin is black, their breath smells foul, and their eyes discharge venom. They were born to avenge incest—by being conceived from incest. Their mother, Gaia, conceived them by the very blood drop of their father, Uranus, when his son, the Titan Cronus , castrated him, encouraged by Gaia, and threw his genitalia into the sea. The Erinys emerged from the drops of blood (Kerényi 1997).

In the myth of Orestes, the Erinys pursue their sinners in a determined and merciless way in the name of the ancient law that forbids ancestral bloodshed. They hold Agamemnon, who sacrificed his daughter and the boy who killed Clytaimnestra, equally responsible. They do not need the moral legitimacy of „Good versus Evil”, conscience, or feeling of guilt. They cast redemption on the offenders of traditions and family hierarchy spontaneously and without pathos. Blood sheds on blood: endless and heroic flee awaits all victims of the Erinys who try to escape the tireless spirits of vengeance following their trail.

The drama writers of the Axial Age make the story of Orestes polemic, and, by that, manipulate the audience of dramatic plays so that they would act based on the laws and values of their communities. Phoibos Apollo and Pallas Athena, the new divine residents of Olympus, intervene in the battle between the divine protectors of ancient traditions and the incest-committing mortals. While the faith of Orestes forms in the mythical text following archetypes, the dramatic script with two differing divine plans—vengeance and law—collides. Both of these plans are similar in their strict consideration of the one and only form of redemption, which is created and justified by them.

Hegel’s Esthetics introduces the concept of collision for the classical tragedies, in which the confronting tragic heroes feel moral justification for their actions even if these actions constitute the most brutal murders(Andrejka 2010).  Both Clytaimnestra, by killing her husband who sacrificed their daughter, and Orestes, who slaughtered his stepfather and killed his mom, explain in great detail their truth as they honestly and committedly claim that their actions were justified. The slowly fading ancient god entities, along with the new gods of the Olympus, have the same attitude: each one of them is being committed to the punishment that is reached by their own verdict.

The dramatic message, the pathos, brings causality into the myth. The latter demonstrates endless story telling that is ever-changing and told in newer and newer versions. Hence it is, in its entirety, a complete text. The stories told in the form of tragedies, on the other hand, had their beginnings and endings. Their endings offered a final verdict serving as a much needed moral message for the audience.  

The Erinys needed to be stopped before the law could strike the son who killed his mother. Their endless, insane tantrums needed to be tamed and they had to be turned benevolent and gracious. The process of spontaneous revenge needed to make space for well-constructed lawmaking.

The actor playing the Furies presented a horrifying and disturbing appearance based on Aischylus’ instructions and mythical descriptions. The translator Gábor Devecseri notes,

“The Revenge goddesses appeared in such horrific masks in the tragedy titled The Eumenyses  that the audience erupted in loud screams” (Euripidés 1989). The terror of the Athenians remained with them outside of the theater so they raised a sacred temple for the Erinys at the rock of Ares, where they regularly performed sacrifices asking for forgiveness and benevolence. At such times, they remembered the Erinys as old and helpful goddesses and they called them Eumenides, or The Kindly Ones. The horrifying goddesses became “Respectable. Gracious ones, the benefactors of our area...” (Aischylos 1962),

who accepted the most horrendous criminals in their sacred alleys and provided shelter for them.

The problem

Based on the story presented above, we would like to reveal the hidden logic of those persons who were active in promoting anti-Semitism in Hungary between 1920 and 1944. The term ‘the Kindly Ones’serves as a metaphor, and is borrowed from the title of the novel written by Jonathan Littell in 2006. Littell’s book is an imaginary autobiography of Maximilan Aue, a former high ranking officer in the SS.

We believe that Littell’s fictional hero, Maximilen Aue, can serve as a guide forour journey into the maze of the anti-Semitic mind. We are in agreement with Littell who claims that the ancient Greeks’ notions of morality is closer to the nature of deeds committed during the Holocaust than the usual Judeo-Christian approach, which is centered around the notion of sin. In contrast, the Ancient Greeks considered the act itself as more significant than the person who had committed it. For example, Orestes, who killed his mother Clytaimnestra, was acquitted by Athena.

Aue, in the novel, tells the story of his life in the Nazi period. The author uniquely combines the life story of the individual SS officer with the history of Nazi Germany. By doing so, Littell was able to reveal the universally moral aspects of the socially constructed reality on the one hand while exposing identity issues on the other. The confessions of Aue make him a personality of his own and gives him singularity of character. The confessions, however, are not so much about his deeds against the Jews in the wake of the Nazi paradigm but about those transgressions which have paved his way to the act of matricide (Bíró 2010). Littell casts no doubt that the deed, not the person, must be judged. Aue’s guilt cannot be understood by the concept of sin, intentional or nonintentional.

The myth of the Eumenides can help us to understand the nature of the perverse morality behind the brutalities of the European genocide of the 20 th  century. The concept of Us provides moral justification for the brutal acts committed against Them.

The Key Concepts

The following subsections will introduce the terminology that is central to answering our research question.

Fight and identity

Human beings, while categorizing themselves into X or Y groups, construct identity and otherness simultaneously. Both constructions can be doubted and challenged. The duality of identity and otherness is contingent upon the same system of uncertainty, where negation (otherness) is more important than affirmation of self-identity (Heidegger 1949).

Human identity, which is threatened continuously from nothingness, can be considered a destructive and constructive force at the same time. Identity loves and incorporates everything that belongs to its own sphere of influence, and it hates everything that belongs to others’ spheres of influence. Identity is by nature an extensive striving to destruct or expropriate the sphere of influence dominated by otherness. Identity is born from the fight between Us and Them.

Ethnocentric love

From the perspective of the fighting partners, the cause of the fight has always been the love for the in-group. Primarily, love is directed towards the members of the ethnic in-group. Ethnocentric love is particular about leaving no room for the love of strangers. Ethnocentric love that aims at destructing otherness is justified by the desire to grow and enrich the life of the in-group, which is considered the only life worth protecting.

Christian love

Human groups have lived in war and peace for a long time without a universal perspective claiming to unite the human kind. Christianity has promised a universal equality of all people by abolishing the boundaries between human groups that has been imposed by particular ethnic categories. The Muslim religion has the same claim but it played a minor role in the Western world up until the 20 th  century.

As a result of the emergence of this universal perspective, the fight between Us and Them has become the battle between Evil and Good by elevating the ground of the battle into metaphysics. The destruction of the Other has become a moral obligation, to be shared by the one that is to be destroyed in the name of the absolute Good by burning, torturing, or putting to the sword.  Christian love has singled out and persecuted the Evil in women and the Jews. The cause, however, has been imagined to be good and has aimed at converting the Jews to Christian faith, and to persuade women to give up debauchery.

Political love

As a consequence of the Enlightenment period, the battle between Good and Evil is moved from heaven to earth.  The parties in modern society have fought with each other. Each of the fighters identify themselves with virtue and believe that the other one is the representative of vice. The fight between the true believers of virtue has not yet ceased. In the name of political love the parties have not stopped to destroy the believers of their political adversaries.

Antisemitic love

Actors motivated by ethnocentric, Christian, and political varieties of love are all good-willed but act using different logic. The uniqueness of antisemitic love is that the cause of the antisemite unites the aspects of ethnocentric, Christian, and political affections. The mixture of the three affections result in the development of an extremely strong pattern of social, affective, and cognitive elements in those persons who have grown up in the spirit of antisemitism by recognizing only Jews and non-Jews in their environments. Each variety of love forms a powerful motive to exclude the other from the symbolic and real space. By bringing the three varieties of love together, the desire to exclude becomes even more intense and pervasive. The antisemite fanatic becomes obsessed and is willing to carry out the program of antisemitism.

Antisemites feel the desire to identify a good cause that has no alternative, one that will be achieved by making the evil disappear, with the evil is identified as being the Jews. In order to fulfill the good cause, the Jews should be concentrated and finally annihilated.

The cause imagined to be good by fanatic anti-Semites is not subject to any doubt, conscience, or guilt. Compared to ethnocentric, Christian, and political varieties, the good cause of the antisemite is total. A chilling example is the secret speech given by Reichsführer-SS, Heinrich Himmler. On October 4, 1943 in Posen (Poznan), Himmler openly spoke about the ongoing extermination of the Jewish people and justified it by the love felt for the German people. He stated: “All in all, however, we can say that we have carried out this most difficult of tasks in a spirit of love for our people. And we have suffered no harm to our inner being, our soul, our character...”

An empirical test of the nature of the anti-Semite love

In 2013, an empirical sociological investigation was carried out on a representative sample of the Hungarian adult population. The sample consisted of 1,000 persons. The aim of the investigation was to reveal patterns of anti-Semitism in relation to the affection felt by the respondents to the Hungarian nation.

Antisemitism was measured by five blocks of questions. In the first block, questions were concerned with the degree of social distance between the respondents and the category of “Jews”.  Social distance was measured by the willingness to be involved in three types of relationship with Jews (kinship, neighborhood, and work).

The second block consisted of two questions. First, we asked for the opinion of the respondent concerning the possibility of a Hungarian Premier of Jewish descent. The second question asked the respondents what they believe the majority would think of a Hungarian Premier of Jewish descent.

The third block asked respondents to estimate thesize of the Jewish population in contemporary Hungary. In the fourth block of questions, we measured the attitudes and attributions concerning the Hungarian Holocaust.Finally, we presented the points of the 1944 program of the Hungarian Fascist Party (Arrow Cross) and asked respondents to express their agreement or disagreement with the program. One such point was a“Jew-Free Hungary”.

Results

Table 1  shows the results of the measurement of social distance in the case of two minority groups in Hungary, Jew and Gypsy. As we can see in the table, the group called “Jewish” elicited a smaller social distance than the group named “Gypsy”.

Table 1 : Social distance

(Percent of respondents in agreement)

	Partner	Neighbor	Fellow worker
Jewish	41	66	80
Gypsy	25	59	73

The political role of Jews can be considered as one of the most sensitive political problems of contemporary Hungarian society. The consequences of World War I have been perceived by the Hungarians as tragic. The wounds inflicted by the Treaty of Trianon remain open. The cognitive dissonance caused by Hungary’s defeat and the consequences (loss of territory, loss of population) have been reduced by an anti-Semitic interpretation blaming the radical politicians of Jewish descent for the losses. This interpretation continues to endure. According to this narrative, the defeat and resulting peace treaty are attributed to the Jewish leaders of the Bourgeois Revolution in 1918 and the Communist Revolution in 1919 (Pastor 2012).

Antisemitic sentiments intensified after 1945 when, as a result of defeat in World War II, the population perceived the leadership of the new system that was imposedon Hungary as Jewish. Stalin was keen on selecting new leaders who were not seen as ethnic Hungarians (with the exception of Imre Nagy). Due to this historical context, the second question was formulated as: “Can you imagine that there will be a Premier of Jewish descent in Hungary in this decade?” Forty-four percent of those responding gave affirmative response to this question. Table 2 shows the responses to the whole set of categories included in this block of questions.

Table 2 : "Can you imagine that there will be a Premier belonging to one of the following groups?”

(Percent of affirmative responses)

Female	35
Younger than 35 years	45
Hungarian of Transylvanian origin	44
Jew	43
Gypsy	24
Lesbian	19
Gay	14

The likelihood of a Premier of Jewish descent falls in the middle percentage range. It is worth taking a look at Table 3,  which shows results to the question:“What do you think about the attitude of the majority?”

Table 3 : “What do you think about the attitude of the majority?”

(Percent of affirmative responses)

Female	42
Younger than 35 years	34
Hungarian of Transylvanian origin	30
Jew	27
Gypsy	17
Lesbian	10
Gay	10

Table 3  clearly shows that, according to the respondents, the majority is less tolerant than themselves. The lower percentage of affirmative responses in every category is conspicuous. Forty-three percent of the respondents would be ready to accept a Premier of Jewish descent but only 27% of them would think that the majority would accept him/her. This accounts for a 16% difference.  In the case of a female Premier, we see a larger differenceof 23%, whilethe difference in all other categories is less.

Table 4  shows the results to the question:“What is the size of thepopulation in Hungary now which can be considered Jewish?”Nineteen percent of the respondents did not respond to this question. The average estimated percentage of the population considered as Jewish by the respondents was quite high (13%).

Table 4 : "What is the size of the population in Hungary now which can be considered Jewish?”

(Number of respondents)

Underestimation (less than 100,000)	1
Accurate estimation (between 100,000 and 200,000)	3
Overestimation (between 200,000 and 500,000)	22
Extreme overestimation (more than 500,000)	55
No response	19

Table 5  shows the results to the question in which the respondents were asked about their attitude concerning the Hungarian Holocaust in 1944. The respondents had to select three events from a list of historical events that they rated as “most tragic”. The table shows that the Hungarian Holocaust is not in the list of the top two national tragedies. Rather, the top two national tragedies were the Treaty of Trianon and the 1956 Revolution.

Table 5 : Hungarian tragedies

(Percent of respondents naming the given tragedy)

Treaty of Trianon	68
The 1956 Revolution	48
Destruction of the 2 nd  Hungarian Army at the Don   River	37
Hungarian Holocaust	37
Arrow Cross coup d’etat in 1944	23
Defeat of the 1848/49 revolution	25
Battle of Mohács in 1526	26
Soviet occupation in 1945	14
Tanácsköztársaság (The Hungarian Republic of Councils)	9

As we can see in the table, over 37% of the respondents considered the Hungarian Holocaust as one of the top three tragedies of Hungarian history, tied with the destruction of the 2 nd  Hungarian Army at the Don River.All respondents, regardless of how they ranked these tragedies, were asked about the responsibility of the deportation of the Hungarian Jews in 1944.   Table 6  shows these results.

Table 6:  Responsibility of the agents for the Hungarian Holocaust

(Percent of respondents attributing responsibility to the given agent)

Hitler and his government	92
SS and the Gestapo	85
The government of Hungary in 1944	54
Gendarmerie and the Hungarian public administration	49
Regent Miklós Horthy	48
Stalin and his government	31
Rich Jews	24
Christian churches	27
German people	27
Churchill and his government	23
Roosevelt and his government	22
Jewish Council	21
The Pope	18
Jewish people	9
Hungarian people	9

According to the overwhelming majority of respondents, the responsibility for the Hungarian Holocaust can be attributed to German agents. Every second respondent attributes responsibility to Hungarian agents such as the government, the Regent, the gendarmerie, or the public servants. A minority of the respondents tend to blame the Jews themselves or the leaders of the Allied Powers for the deportation and mass murder of the Hungarian Jews in the summer of 1944.

Table 7 : Holocaust as a Hungarian tragedy and attribution of responsibility for the Holocaust (Percent of responses)

	Holocaust as a Hungarian tragedy
	Mentioned		Not mentioned
	Responsible	Not responsible	Responsible
Hitler and his government	96	2	90
SS and the Gestapo	92	6	85
Jewish people	11	84	8
Jewish Council	24	66	20
Rich Jews	25	65	24
The government of Hungary in 1944	58	35	53
Gendarmerie and the public administration	54	38	48
Regent Miklós Horthy	53	36	46
Stalin and his government	32	55	32
German people	32	63	25
Churchill and his government	26	61	22
Christian churches	24	64	20
Roosevelt and his government	23	64	23
The Pope	20	68	17
Hungarian people	10	85	8

Table 7  shows that there is a relationship between respondentsattributing responsibility of the individual agents and the attitude toward the historical significance of the Hungarian Holocaust. Those who consider the Hungarian Holocaust as one of the most tragic events of the history of Hungary have consistently been more willing to attribute responsibility to German and Hungarian agents for the events.

Last but not least, Table 8 shows the rates at which respondents in 2013 agree with the points of the Arrow Cross Party published in 1944. As we can see in the table there is no clear majority (over 50%) that agrees with any of the 13 points. There are some typical socialist points,such as the demand of limiting the monthly salaries, nationalization of the major private companies, or establishing a classless national society. The point about a Hungary “free of Jews,” which had been realized in 1944 almost in its entirety, was only acceptable to 15% of the respondents. Racist and eugenic points were unanimously rejected.

Table 8 : Agreement with the points of the Arrow Cross Party Program

(Percent in agreement)

Limits on the monthly salaries	47
Nationalization of major private companies	21
Classless society	19
Hungary free of Jews	15
Planned economy	11
Sterilization of homosexuals	7
Singles must live in community homes	3
Replacement of malfunctioning fathers with new ones	3
Marriage ban on men and women incapable of procreating	3
Forced divorce of couples incapable of procreating	2

Types and syndromes

The responses given to the questions related to the category of “Jew” were clustered into three groups. Table 9  shows the cognitive composition of the three groups.

Table 9 : Cognitive composition of the three groups according to their responses to questions related to the category of “Jew”

	Non -antisemites	Covert antisemites	Overt antisemites
Social distance (principal component)	0.399	0.052	-0.200
Jewish political role taking (3 point scale)	1.34	0.59	0.68
Evaluation of the Holocaust (principal component)	0.197	-0.018	-0.070
Estimation of the number of Jews in Hungary (scale)	33.3	4.12	13.7
Support of Hungary free of Jews (dummy)	0.15	0.11	0.20

The data from Table 9  help us to understand the nature of the three groups. Members of the group that identified as non antisemite do not distance themselves from the Jews, they have no objection to have a Hungarian Premier of Jewish descent, and they consider the Hungarian Holocaust as one of the most important tragedies of Hungarian history. Members of this group do not overestimate the number of the Jewish population in contemporary Hungary, and they tend to disagree with the idea of a Hungary free of Jews.

Covert anti-Semites distance themselves to some degree from the Jews and they do not think the emergence of a Hungarian Premier of Jewish descent would be feasible. Members of this group have not selected the Hungarian Holocaust as one of the most tragic historical events in Hungary, and they substantially overestimate the number of Jews in the country. They do not, however, share the idea of a Hungary free of Jews.

The measures characteristic to anti-Semitism not surprisingly scored high in the group of overt antisemites. The estimation of the size of the group identified as Jews was only slightly above the real number. This corresponds with the considerable distance that the overt antisemites keep with Jews as a minority group, that they do not consider the Holocaust to be a tragic Hungarian historical event, and that many of them share the idea of a Hungary free of Jews.

Table 10 : Non-antisemites, covert antisemites, and overt antisemites in Hungary

                                               Non-antisemites   Covert antisemites  Overt antisemites

                                                n=200                             n=324                           n=457

                                                  20 %                              34 %                               46 %

As Table 10  demonstrates, none of the three groups form a majority in contemporary Hungarian society. Overt anti-Semites form the largest group, and non anti-Semites are in an absolute minority. One third of the population can be considered as covert anti-Semite.

The nature of the antisemitic love

According to ourhypothesis, antisemitic love can be seen as a means of love for the nation to whom the antisemitic person belongs. The construction of our questionnaire makes it possible to control this hypothesis.  Following the method developed by Dekker and Malova, we have measured six dimensions of the stock of knowledge of the Hungarian national identity (Dekker and Malova 1995, Csepeli 1992). Table 10  shows the scores of the national attachment in all dimensions.

Table 10 : Dimensions of the stock of knowledge of the Hungarian national identity

National sentiment
I feel myself Hungarian		4.72
Hungary is my homeland		4.56
National feeling
I like my Hungarian mother tongue		4.61
I love Hungary		4.43
It is good to be Hungarian		4.28
Generally I like the Hungarian people		4.34
National pride
I am proud of Hungary		4.03
I am proud of being Hungarian		4.37
I am proud of the achievements of the Hungarians		3.90
National preference
I prefer to be with Hungarians		3.62
I would like to live most of my lifetime in Hungary		4.32
National superiority
Generally I consider Hungarians superior over other nationalities		4.04
Generally I consider Hungarians more excellent than other nationalities		2.88
Hungary is the best country where one can live		3.21
Nationalism
I feel the common roots of descent and culture that bond me with Hungarians		4.25
I feel that all Hungarians belong to one big family and I am one of them		3.97
In my opinion all Hungarians should live in Hungary		3.24
Hungarians are not supposed to mingle with members of other nations		2.88
It would be better if non-Hungarians left Hungary		2.75

Table 11  shows the average scores of the six dimensions of national attachment among the non-antisemites, covert antisemites, and overt antisemites.

Table 11 : Dimensions of national attachment and antisemitism

	Non anti-Semites	Covert anti-Semites	Overt anti-Semites
National sentiment+	4.69	4.57	4.67
The nation feeling	4.45	4.37	4.43
National pride	4.09	4.08	4.12
National preference +	3.82	4.03	3.99
National superiority +	3.19	3.41	3.45
Nationalism ++	3.17	3.37	3.54

Table 11  clearly shows the difference in the average scores of the six dimensions of national attachment  between the non anti-Semites, covert anti-Semites, and overt anti-Semites. ^[1] Spontaneous national sentiment was found strongest among the non anti-Semites.National preference was found most intense among the covert anti-Semites. Conspicuously enough, the emotions stemming from national superiority and nationalismwere most pronounced among the overt anti-Semites.

Based on the scores of the individual dimensions of the national stock of knowledge, a single scale of „national love” was created. Table 12  shows the values of this scale among the non, covert, and overt ant-Semites.

Table 12 : National love and antisemitism

Non-antisemites	3.91
Covert antisemites	3.98
Overt antisemites	4.05

ONE-WAY ANOVA:  F-test : 3.252, p: 0.039

It can be seen in the table that there is no significant difference between the covert and overt anti-Semite groups.  There is also no significant difference between the non antisemites and the covert antisemites.  There is, however, a significant difference between the non antisemites and the overt antisemites. Overt antisemites can be characterized by the highest scores of National Love.

Conclusion

This research sought to explore the moral justification of genocide in 20 th  century Europe through the understanding of the Primordial Kindly Ones of Greek mythology, and through Littell’s metaphor of the Kindly Ones. The results of our investigation into the attitudes towards Jews and national identity seem to corrobate the hypothesis that there is a strong relationship between anti-Semitism and love for the national in-group. Anti-Semitic love, consequently, is an undifferentiated affection directed toward the national in-group that has nothing to do with the love of individuals.Rather, it is a passionate love for the imagined nation seen darkly in the glass of national ideology.

---

Literature

Aischylus: The Eumenides. (Trans: G. Theodoridis, 2007).

http://www.poetryintranslation.com/PITBR/Greek/Eumenides.htm

Anderson, B. 1983. Imagined Communities.London:Verso

Andrejka, Z. 2010. Apollón és Diké nyomában. PhD-dissertation.DE. (In the wake of Apollon and Dyke)

http://ganymedes.lib.unideb.hu:8080/dea/bitstream/2437/97183/5/ertekezes.pdf

Bíró, J. 2010. Jóakarók. Kritika , 7-8.

Csepeli, Gy. 1996. In the captivity of narratives: the political socialization of populist writers in Hungary. In Held, J. (ed.) Populism in Eastern Europe. Racism, Nationalism, and Society. East European Monographs, Boulder. Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York. 129-144.

Csepeli, Gy. 1997. National Identity in Contemporary Hungary.  Social Science Monographs, Boulder, Colorado. ARP, Inc.Highland Lakes, NJ. Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York.

Dekker, H., Malova, D. 1995. The concept of nationalism. In Cross, M (ed.) Nationalism, ethnic conflict and conceptions of citizenship and democracy in Western and Easterm Europe. Volume I. Theories and concepts. Utrecht: ERCOMER, pp. 15-56

Dekker, H., Malova, D. Hagendoorn, L. 2003. Nationalism and its Explanations. Political Psychology,  vol..24.no.2. pp. 345-376

Euripides, Orestes. translated by E.P. Coleridge classics.mit.edu/Euripides/orestes.html

Gergely, J., 2013. A keresztény pártok és a zsidókérdés . (Christian Parties and the „Jewish Question”)

http://hdke.hu/files/csatolmanyok/04_GergelyJeno_Akereszteny_partok_esazsidokerdes.pdf

Faludy, Gy., 1938. Csilléry Andrásnak (to András Csilléry)

http://dia.pool.pim.hu/html/muvek/FALUDY/faludy00002/faludy00025/faludy00025.html

Faludy, Gy., 1985. 2013. My Happy Days in Hell.   Canada: Totem Press

Heidegger, M.1949. http://www.archive.org/details/HeideggerLetterOnhumanism1949

Kerényi, K. 1997.   Görög mitológia (Ford.: Kerényi Grácia). Szukits Könyvkiadó, Szeged

Littell, J. 2009.  The Kindly Ones . Translated by Charlotte MandellChatto

Pastor, P. 2012. Inventing Historical Myths-Deborah S. Cornelius. Hungary in World War II. Caught in the Cauldron. AHEA E-Journal . Vol. 5. (Review Article)

---