18
The primary and secondary majoritarian
brightness and primary and secondary minoritarian
darkness will always be hegemonic over the pseudo-primary and pseudo-secondary
pseudo-majoritarian pseudo-darkness and
pseudo-primary and pseudo-secondary pseudo-minoritarian
pseudo-brightness, like metachemistry over
pseudo-metaphysics, chemistry over pseudo-physics, physics over
pseudo-chemistry, and metaphysics over pseudo-metachemistry.
Every primary and secondary majoritarian
brightness, whether somatically predominating or psychically preponderating,
has its own complementary primary and secondary minoritarian
darkness, whether psychically postdominating or
somatically postponderating, and this association of
free soma with bound psyche or of free psyche with bound soma, depending on the
atomic case, should not be confounded with the pseudo-primary and
pseudo-secondary pseudo-majoritarian pseudo-darkness
and the pseudo-primary and pseudo-secondary pseudo-minoritarian
pseudo-brightness over which it is triumphantly hegemonic, as atoms to
pseudo-atoms.
No atom or pseudo-atom is indivisible, neither
in terms of soma nor psyche, pseudo-soma nor pseudo-psyche. Atoms are always
comprised of brightness and darkness, pseudo-atoms of pseudo-darkness and
pseudo-brightness, whether to an absolute (3:1) or a relative (
* * * *
Atoms and pseudo-atoms attracting and reacting,
though more on an axial basis, like metachemical
atoms/pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-atoms vis-à-vis physical atoms/pseudo-chemical
pseudo-atoms in the state-hegemonic axial context, or metaphysical
atoms/pseudo-metachemical pseudo-atoms vis-à-vis
chemical atoms/pseudo-physical pseudo-atoms in the church-hegemonic one, which
are for ever in attractive/reactive polarity, like Nazism (with its militarist
bias) against Communism in the one case, and Fascism (with its
Catholic-defensive bias) against Socialism in the other.
In all cases, the attraction of the hegemonic
atoms towards each other is countered by the subordinate pseudo-atoms and,
conversely, the attraction of the pseudo-atoms towards each other is countered
by the hegemonic atoms.
1. Hence pseudo-chemistry will repel the metachemical attraction towards physics, while
pseudo-metaphysics repels the physical attraction
towards metachemistry.
2. Hence metachemistry
will repel the pseudo-chemical attraction towards pseudo-metaphysics, while
physics repels the pseudo-metaphysical attraction towards pseudo-chemistry.
3. Hence pseudo-physics will repel the
metaphysical attraction towards chemistry, while pseudo-metachemistry
repels the chemical attraction towards metaphysics.
4. Hence metaphysics will repel the
pseudo-physical attraction towards pseudo-metachemistry,
while chemistry repels the pseudo-metachemical
attraction towards pseudo-physics.
* * * *
With constant attraction of unlike poles and
reaction to like poles, neither the state-hegemonic nor the church-hegemonic
axis is fixed in a permanent stasis but, ever beholden to changing
circumstances, will be subject to fluctuations in terms of which
atoms/pseudo-atoms are most influential at any given time.
Where, in the Middle Ages, it could be argued
that metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry, even with a
truncated metaphysics favouring bound soma (the crucifixion paradigm), was
dominant over chemistry/pseudo-physics, since the Reformation and, more
particularly, the French Revolution, metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry
has been losing ground to chemistry/pseudo-physics, especially when the latter
is less Marian/Christian (or Christ Child-like) than republican socialist in
character.
Similarly, whenever absolute monarchy has been
replaced or superseded, one way or another, by constitutional monarchy, metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics has lost ground to
physics/pseudo-chemistry which, not least in relation to parliamentary
democracy, has tended to dominate its atomic/pseudo-atomic polarity from an
executive standpoint favouring the 'representatives of the people'.
How long either of these 'worldly' stages of
history and antithetical manifestations of people's power will last, and
continue to dominate their respective 'overworldly'
kinds of polarities, remains to be seen. But if there is to be a genuine
return, progressively, to what could be called 'overworldly'
dominance, then, notwithstanding the current predilection towards a degree of 'netherworldly' dominance – albeit to a significantly lesser
degree than in Nazi Germany during the era of the Third Reich – characteristic
not least of the United States of America in relation, for example, to its
executive presidential C&C, it should only be within the framework of
'Kingdom Come', as it were, and thus have especial relevance to the influential
dominance of metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry over
chemistry/pseudo-physics, and then only, following democratic endorsement, in
terms of a full complement of metaphysics, free psyche as well as bound soma,
that, completely independent of metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics,
would have both the technological wherewithal and moral entitlement to exact a
neutralized deference from pseudo-metachemistry, the
better to save the pseudo-physical to metaphysics and simultaneously have the
chemical counter-damned to pseudo-metachemistry with
intent to overcoming 'the world', at least in its lapsed Catholic/republican
socialist manifestation, and thus establishing a situation whereby metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics and
physics/pseudo-chemistry would become invalid as predatory exploiters of it,
and are accordingly unable to profit, let along function in somatic licence, as
before, with fairly predictable consequences.
Only thus, it seems to me, will the current
dominance of 'the world' – and most especially of the physical/pseudo-chemical
manifestation of it – be ended, as otherworldly/pseudo-netherworldly
criteria increasingly prevail under some degree of messianic auspices.
For unlike Heaven/pseudo-Hell, to use
paradoxically parallel terminology, 'the world' has no eternal sanction,
neither in its chemical/pseudo-physical manifestation nor, across the axial
divide, in its physical/pseudo-chemical manifestation ever polar to metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics. Only the God-in-Heaven of
metaphysics, and most especially of an ultimate because cyborg-oriented
kind of metaphysics, has any right, through soulful being, to eternity, a right
not even shared by the pseudo-Hell-in-the-pseudo-Devil of pseudo-metachemistry in what would be a pseudo-infinite
subordination, through neutralization, to the eternal sanction and sanctity of
the metaphysical hegemony.
* * * *
That which parallels the brightness as
pseudo-brightness is as pseudo-minoritarian to majoritarian in overall ratio terms, whereas what parallels
the darkness as pseudo-darkness is, by contrast, pseudo-majoritarian
to minoritarian in overall ratio terms.
Only in the atoms, or hegemonic gender
positions, can one speak of a bright/dark complementarity
in which the former is majoritarian and the latter minoritarian, whether noumenal or
phenomenal, absolute or relative.
In the pseudo-atoms, or subordinate
pseudo-gender positions, we shall find a pseudo-dark/pseudo-bright pseudo-complementarity, in which the former is pseudo-majoritarian and the latter pseudo-minoritarian,
whether pseudo-noumenal or pseudo-phenomenal,
pseudo-absolute or pseudo-relative.