26.
Obviously, Heaven can only be made the true end of life if society is of such a
character that an ascent from bureaucracy to theocracy is more typical of it
than a descent from autocracy to democracy, even when the theocracy and the
democracy are less than completely free of bureaucratic and autocratic
subversion or vitiation and are therefore characterized by worldly relativity
in ecclesiastic or parliamentary vein.
27.
The possibility of a free, or People's, democracy is no less the case for a
more sensibly-oriented type of physical society than the possibility of a free,
or People's, theocracy for its metaphysical counterpart, but such freedoms have
to be won, they will not be handed to one on a plate by the autocratic and/or
bureaucratic powers-that-be, and the former tends, in its elemental uniqueness,
to be exclusive of the latter, insofar as democratic freedom presupposes an
autocratic tradition and theocratic freedom a bureaucratic one - autocracy as
something against which a struggle has to be waged, bureaucracy more open, in
imagination, to the possibility of theocratic redemption come 'judgement',
provided godliness can be adequately proved!
28.
Therefore they spring, these alternative types of freedom, from different types
of society, and at the risk of over-simplifying or over-generalizing one could
maintain that while the autocratic-democratic axis is more characteristic of
Britain and, especially of England, the bureaucratic-theocratic axis is more
significant of Ireland, so that there is a sort of Anglo-Saxon/Celtic
distinction between the two types of society and their respective traditions, a
distinction which can be broadened to include Anglo-Saxons and Celts generally,
not least in the British Isles as a whole.
29. For the British Isles has long been the scene of a
struggle, traditionally characterized by Anglo-Saxon opposition to and even
domination of Celts, between the lowland mentality of democracy and the
highland mentality of theocracy, as between physics and metaphysics, form and
contentment, ego and soul, taking and being. Therefore it is only within
the so-called Celtic fringe, and especially in relation to Catholic Ireland,
that one could reasonably expect freedom struggles or ambitions to take a
theocratic rather than simply democratic turn, and for those of us who identify
with metaphysics more than physics in highland and even upper-class male vein,
then democracy could never be regarded as anything more than a means to a
higher end.
30.
Democracy to the metaphysical likes of us is not, I repeat not, an
end-in-itself, as it evidently is to those who primarily relate to physical
values in effectively lowland or lower-class male vein, but simply something to
exploit in the interests of a higher and purer theocracy than has existed in
the past, should the Movement for Social Theocracy or Social Transcendentalism,
as you please, succeed in convincing the electorates of relatively free
democracies, like the one which exists in the Irish Republic, that a vote for
religious sovereignty would be in their best interests, since the only way in which
they could gain the right to theocratic freedom from bureaucratic constraint
and/or subversion, and thereby move beyond worldly relativity to an
otherworldly absolutism commensurate with 'Kingdom Come'.
31.
It would also confirm, this paradoxical utilization of the democratic process,
that they were not inveterately or representatively a democratic people but
rather a people with the potential for a purer theocracy - in a word for
theocratic freedom - at the expense of such democratic freedom as they had
inherited, compliments of their struggle against English imperialism. For
if they are not properly democratic, since intrinsically more theocratic, then
they will surely accept the paradoxical utilization of democracy to a
theocratic end such that would deliver them from the bureaucratic subversion of
religion by 'Mother Church' and allow them to embrace theocratic freedom in
'Kingdom Come' - freedom, not least, from both autocratic and democratic
subversions of religion as well, such that further bedevil the endeavour to
extricate transcendentalism from the clutches of nonconformism
by complicating the overall picture in relation to fundamentalism and humanism
- the former arguably less politically subversive than scientifically
subversive, and the latter plainly economically subversive of what should - and
could - be a religious purism that permitted joy to unfold as the holy reward
for unfettered truth.
32.
Therefore much as one might like every people to come democratically to Social
Theocracy, only some peoples would be capable, at this point in time, of
actually doing so, and they would have to have had a Church-based tradition
such that would permit them to climb, via democratic paradox, from the
bureaucratic subversion of theocracy to theocratic freedom and thus to
metaphysical salvation, wherein God and Heaven are the cardinal elements and
the redemption of the former in the latter, as of truth in joy, is the
principal raison d'être - one having reference to that which, in its
soulful essence, lies beyond time in the eternity of timeless bliss.
33. A
people, on the other hand, with a powerful autocratic tradition, with an
entrenched aristocracy, cannot achieve theocratic liberation; for their
struggle, to the extent that there may be one, is against autocracy and
presupposes an extension of democracy at autocracy's expense. They have
to pit the here-and-now of temporal time against the weight of tradition which
bears down upon them and would impede further knowledgeable progress - and therefore
democratic freedom - in defence of its
power-based interests. They are a people with a colourful past, not a
people who yearn, in imagination, for a more contented future, but a people
who, if they are not careful, will revel in tradition even at the expense of
the achievements of the present and the knowledge which made it possible.
34.
Therefore such a people have to question their own motives in respect of
democracy, which is their principal ideal in terms of enhanced freedom from
somatic control of an autocratic nature. But if they are not
democratically free to the extent of a republican democracy in which psychic
freedom can have its physical (as opposed to metaphysical) way, then their
freedom will be somewhat compromised by autocratic criteria and subject to
worldly qualification, which obviously leaves something to be desired from a
democratic standpoint, even with a knowledge that what logically follows in
terms of Social Democracy is less otherworldly than post-worldly to an extent
which, if too totalitarian, can prove even more of an obstacle to theocratic
liberation than a worldly democracy, bearing in mind its repudiation of 'God
building' and more or less blue-collar orientation towards hard-line physics in
overly Marxist vein.
35.
Obviously, no society which goes so far down the road of democratic
totalitarianism is in a position to opt for religious sovereignty, and
therefore their theocratic redemption is well-nigh inconceivable ... all the
more so as they endeavour, from a Marxist-Leninist standpoint, to stamp-out
religious traditions as though religion were a closed issue, never to be
resurrected in a new or superior guise.
36.
Therefore democratic pluralism is crucial to any prospect of religious
sovereignty, for one has to be able to appeal to the electorate to vote for
such theocratic freedom in the first place, and this is only conceivable in the
absence of a controlling totalitarianism such that would preclude any challenge
to its rule from an alternative Movement the avowed aim of which was the
effective supersession of State and Church alike by the Centre in the event of
a majority mandate for religious sovereignty and the green light for the
development of 'Kingdom Come', as customarily outlined by me in terms of a
triadic Beyond and administrative aside - the former identifiable with Social
Transcendentalism and the latter, rather more political in view of its various
supportive responsibilities, with Social Theocracy, the ideological face of the
Movement for Social Transcendentalism, and thus the supersession of
conventional religion and its various subversions of theocracy.
37.
But again, in such a pluralistic democracy, one looks for evidence of a
bureaucratic-theocratic axis, and even where this may exist in respect of an
unrepresentative minority, if the overall axis is autocratic-democratic then it
is hard to see much prospect, short of a number of significant changes in
society, for a successful outcome to any paradoxical election, assuming such a
judgmental experiment could be brought to pass in the first place!
38.
No, such an election, which embraced the possibility of a vote for religious
sovereignty and the likelihood of a majority mandate, could only be expected to
take place and to succeed in societies which, while nominally democratic, were
basically bureaucratic and more disposed, through imagination, to theocratic
liberation in consequence of an age-old longing for Messianic intervention in
the interests of 'Kingdom Come', something difficult if not impossible to
conceive of in those societies whose sense of freedom, owing more to the State
than to the Church, is overwhelmingly democratic and therefore merely physical
in character.
39.
Thus not only Ireland but, hopefully, Scotland, the Isle of Man, and Wales
could come, in the ripeness of time, to an accommodation with Social Theocracy,
not least in respect of the possibility of a united Ireland achieved on the
basis of a Gaelic federation, germane to 'Kingdom Come', between the respective
countries, especially Ireland and Scotland, and the transcendence, in
consequence, of the British/Irish dichotomy which, under English domination,
has ruled and divided the Celts, Gaels, Highlanders, or whatever else you would
like to call those whose true loyalty, especially when properly male, is not to
man but to God, as to theocracy.
40.
One of the worst consequences of the division of the Celts along British/Irish
lines is that the former, when Scotch or Welsh, find it harder to come to terms
with their Celtic traditions and ancestry in view of the extents to which they
have been turned, through English imperial influence, from a
bureaucratic-theocratic axis under Catholicism to an autocratic-democratic axis
under Protestantism, with a consequence that they find their Celtic identities
compromised in respect of state-stemming fundamentalist and humanist
subversions of transcendentalism, as of theocracy, more typical of England and
the English than of anything representatively Celtic as such, and are more
inclined to side with England against the Irish when push-comes-to-shove in the
struggle for or against Celtic values and aspirations.
41.
Thus do they often behave like Anglo-Saxons, contrary to their Celtic ancestry;
for the only Celts who are broadly identifiable with the
bureaucratic-theocratic axis of a nonconformist subversion of transcendentalism
through 'Mother Church' are the Catholic Irish, who remain a case apart from
the autocratic-democratic axis typifying British and, in particular, English
civilization.
42.
Yet even these compromised Scotsmen and Welshmen, not to mention their Ulster
counterparts, are more often than not Celts and therefore persons who, in the
highland traditions of their ancestry, should be more willing to identify with
theocratic liberation from bureaucratic constraint than democratic liberation
from autocratic constraint, and thus with a mode of male liberation in
sensibility owing more to the Church than to the State, more to metaphysics
than to physics, more to highland values than to lowland values, more to soul
than to ego, and therefore more to God than to man.
43.
Alas! their fate under English domination
ill-qualifies them for an overly theocratic freedom in 'Kingdom Come', such as
would be accorded to Catholics who had opted for religious sovereignty.
But they cannot and should not be excluded, as Protestants, from the prospect
of salvation in the triadic Beyond to which I have dedicated a
not-inconsiderable proportion of my mature philosophy, even if, in the light of
their respective denominational affiliations, it would have to take a less than
properly or fully transcendentalist guise ... as in the case of the salvation
of Anglicans to the middle tier of the Beyond in question and the salvation of
Puritans and/or Presbyterians to its bottom tier, as described in a variety of
earlier texts.
44.
But where those properly affiliated, as Catholics, to the
bureaucratic-theocratic axis are concerned, then of course their highness in respect
of theocratic freedom is more than justified and is even confirmed, in cultural
terms, by the prevalence of sports such as Gaelic Football in Ireland which
sharply contrasts with the democratic lowness, as it were, of Association
Football as the English sport par excellence, a game which,
though incontestably subjective in its maleness, does not permit of any points
over the bar like its air-affirming Gaelic counterpart, and therefore stands as
ample testimony to the extent to which, unlike Ireland, Britain as a whole, but
England in particular, is characterized by a want of theocratic idealism and a
more or less inveterate bent for democratic freedom in respect of the
autocratic-democratic axis, the upper end of which, stretching back to feudal
times, is more characterized by Rugby, in objectively female vein, and thus to
a deference to fire which, like air, is also above the bar but in markedly
contrary terms!
45.
Thus the sensible contrast between Gaelic Football as an expression of an
as-yet incomplete degree of theocratic freedom from clerical subversion and
Association Football as the expression of an incomplete or, rather, limited
degree of democratic freedom within a parliamentary system, only goes to
confirm the distinction between Celtic highness and Anglo-Saxon lowness,
metaphysics and physics, religion and, for what of a better term, economics,
God/Heaven and man/the earth.
46. To say, on the evidence of this and other such
cultural differences, that the Celtic and Anglo-Saxon races were equal would,
to say the least, be somewhat disingenuous, if not downright ridiculous!
The Celts, particularly to judge by contemporary cultural circumstances in
their Irish manifestation, are a higher race than the English, many if not most
of whom are Anglo-Saxon, and therefore by no means
equal or equivalent.
47.
Of course, one hears a lot these days, not least in multiracial England
vis-à-vis blacks and coloureds, about racial equality and equality of
opportunity, but it is only a fool who would confound equality of opportunity
or of rights in certain fields, irrespective of race, with racial equality as
such, as though all races were equal, or exactly the same! There are more
differences in this world than those between Celts and Anglo-Saxons, and even
there the cultural differences are such that one could not reasonably fail to
notice or take heed of them, especially in light of the more sharply polarized
distinctions between Catholic Ireland and Protestant England, as between
contrary senses of freedom and their corresponding ideals.
48.
The only reason why the British Isles, in geographical terms an archipelago
which deserves a unitary culture and identity, is split between Ireland and
Britain (notwithstanding the more simple geographical matter of the Irish Sea),
as between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the one
hand and the Republic of Ireland on the other, is because of the religious
divide between Protestantism and Catholicism, which is superimposed upon,
though not exactly synonymous with, a racial division between Anglo-Saxons and
Celts such that attains to its most marked polarization in respect of England
and the Republic of Ireland.
49.
Ireland may not be entirely Celtic, any more than England is entirely Anglo-Saxon,
but nevertheless such a racial division, coming to a head in the cultural
differentiations alluded to above, cleaves the British Isles in two, making
them the focus of two different world struggles, the theocratic and the
democratic, with the one yet to be delivered, in Social Theocracy, from
bureaucratic constraints and the other falling well short, through its
autocratic traditions, of Social Democracy.
50. On a wider basis, this distinction between theocracy
and democracy is reflected in the world at large, with the West largely
symptomatic of democracy and the East of theocracy, irrespective of how short
of freedom. Therefore there is a sense in which Ireland, Catholic
Ireland, is something of an Eastern-like exception in the West, sandwiched in
between the Anglo-Saxon powers of Britain and America which are in the vanguard
of democracy, if not necessarily of complete democratic liberation from