76. Of course living, as I unfortunately have done, in a society which is more characterized by the 'shit' of 'sodd*** pricks' than by anything else, it is not surprising that I often hear people talk of getting 'pissed off', since it is evident that, in their 'prick'-oriented democratic way, they pertain or relate more to 'shit' than to 'piss' and find that the latter, when it transpires, doubtless in some thwarted way, is uncharacteristic of 'where they're at' and something to be deprecated as an undesirable or unrepresentative experience. Consequently by talking of getting 'pissed off' by something, they reveal their actual disposition as 'sodd*** pricks' whose elemental mean - and perverse ideal - is 'shit'.

77. On the other hand, someone who spoke of getting 'browned off' - notwithstanding the race touchiness which might impulsively though laughably jump on such an expression as racist - would reveal that he or, more likely, she pertained or related more to 'piss' than to 'shit' and was liable to find the latter, when it transpired, uncharacteristic of their mean and therefore worthy of deprecation as an unrepresentative experience or situation. Consequently by talking of getting 'browned off' by something, they reveal, as 'fuck*** cunts', a disposition whose elemental mean - and straight reality - is 'piss'.

78. So much for the lower-class distinction between 'cunts' and 'pricks', the former of whom are more likely to be bureaucratic, the latter ... democratic, with sinful and punishing norms which not only fight shy of each other but pertain to separate diagonal axes with phenomenal implications for a contrary approach to collectivism - co-operative in the case of 'cunts', competitive in the case of 'pricks'.

79. Be that as it may, the noumenal, or upper-class, parallels to such a distinction would of course involve 'jerks' and 'bums', and we may believe that anyone whose favoured deprecation involved reference to getting 'bummed out' and/or 'gassed off' would be in the former category and therefore significant of a disposition, as a 'frigg*** jerk', towards 'puss', whereas his metaphysical antithesis, ever likely to get 'pussed off' or 'jerked off' by metachemical actualities, would betray a disposition towards 'gas' in relation to criteria appertaining to 'snogg*** bums'.

80. So much, then, for the upper-class distinction between 'jerks' and 'bums', the former of whom are more likely to be autocratic, the latter ... theocratic, with criminal and graceful norms which not only fight shy of each other but pertain to separate diagonal axes with noumenal implications for a contrary approach to individualism - competitive in the case of 'jerks', co-operative in the case of 'bums'.

81. Of course, in all the above instances I have dealt with the more representatively hegemonic positions - state hegemonic in the case of 'jerks' and 'pricks', church hegemonic in the case of 'cunts' and 'bums'. I have not alluded to the subordinate church affiliations of 'snogg*** jerks' and 'fuck*** pricks' in respect of the autocratic-democratic axis, nor, indeed, to the subordinate state affiliations of 'sodd*** cunts' and 'frigg*** bums' in respect of the bureaucratic-theocratic axis, as to do so would have further complicated the overall picture in terms of pseudo-grace and pseudo-sin on the one hand, and pseudo-punishment and pseudo-crime on the other hand.

82. Nevertheless I have little doubt that people whose principal element, as autocrats/aristocrats, is 'pus', or fire, are unlikely to be pro-'gas' even when they are 'snogg*** jerks', but simply significant of a paradoxical approach to 'pus' which is less competitive than co-operative or, rather, pseudo-cooperative in terms of pseudo-grace.

83. Contrariwise, people whose principal element, as theocrats/technocrats, is 'gas', or air, are unlikely to be pro-'puss' even when they are 'frigg*** bums', but simply significant of a paradoxical approach to 'gas' which is less co-operative than pseudo-competitive in terms of pseudo-crime.

84. The people of both subordinate categories would continue, one can logically infer, to get 'gassed off' or 'pussed off', as the case might be; for anything genuinely metaphysical can only be as abhorrent to persons in the one category as anything genuinely metachemical to those in the other.

85. Similarly, I have little doubt that people whose principal element, as bureaucrats/meritocrats, is 'piss', or water, are unlikely to be pro-'shit' even when they are 'sodd*** cunts', but simply significant of a paradoxical approach to 'piss' which is less co-operative than pseudo-competitive in terms of pseudo-punishment.

86. Contrariwise, people whose principal element, as democrats/plutocrats, is 'shit', or vegetation (earth), are unlikely to be pro-'piss' even when they are 'fuck*** pricks', but simply significant of a paradoxical approach to 'shit' which is less competitive than pseudo-cooperative in terms of pseudo-sin.

87. The people of both subordinate categories would continue, one can logically infer, to get 'browned off' or 'pissed off', as the case might be; for anything genuinely physical can only be as abhorrent to persons in the one category as anything genuinely chemical to those in the other.

88. As we have argued, state-hegemonic autocrats will be 'frigg*** jerks' for whom the 'pus' of metachemical freedom of the will conforms to criminal 'cowpuss', in contrast to the church-subordinate aristocrats who, as 'snogg*** jerks', will be those for whom the 'pus' of metachemical binding of soul conforms to pseudo-graceful 'bullpus' - the former vicious and the latter pseudo-saved.

89. Likewise, state-hegemonic democrats will be 'sodd*** pricks' for whom the 'shit' of physical freedom of the ego conforms to punishing 'bullshit', in contrast to the church-subordinate plutocrats who, as 'fuck*** pricks', will be those for whom the 'shit' of physical binding of spirit conforms to pseudo-sinful 'cowshit' - the former moral and the latter pseudo-cursed.

90. Contrariwise, church-hegemonic bureaucrats will be 'fuck*** cunts' for whom the 'piss' of chemical freedom of spirit conforms to sinful 'cowpiss', in contrast to the state-subordinate meritocrats who, as 'sodd*** cunts', will be those for whom the 'piss' of chemical binding of ego conforms to pseudo-punishing 'bullpiss' - the former cursed and the latter pseudo-moral.

91. Similarly, church-hegemonic theocrats will be 'snogg*** bums' for whom the 'gas' of metaphysical freedom of soul conforms to graceful 'bullgas', in contrast to the state-subordinate technocrats who, as 'frigg*** bums', will be those for whom the 'gas' of metaphysical binding of will conforms to pseudo-criminal 'cowgas' - the former saved and the latter pseudo-vicious.

92. When we take an overview of the noumenal options of metachemistry and metaphysics, we find that 'jerks' and 'bums' are principally characterized, in their different ways, by crime and grace, the former in terms of genuine crime and pseudo-grace, the latter in terms of genuine grace and pseudo-crime, depending whether hegemonic or subordinate factors are being assessed.

93. When, on the other hand, we take such a view of the phenomenal options of chemistry and physics, we find that 'cunts' and 'pricks' are principally characterized, in their different ways, by sin and punishment, the former in terms of genuine sin and pseudo-punishment, the latter in terms of genuine punishment and pseudo-sin, depending, once again, on whether hegemonic or subordinate factors are being assessed.

94. Thus while the upper-class positions are chiefly characterized by crime and grace, their lower-class counterparts will be characterized by sin and punishment, with the autocratic-democratic axis descending diagonally from the sensuality of crime to the sensibility of punishment, and the bureaucratic-theocratic axis ascending diagonally from the sensuality of sin to the sensibility of grace.

95. Therefore fear of autocratic crime on the part of the democratic punishing would not be incompatible with disdain for plutocratic pseudo-sin on the part of the aristocratic pseudo-graceful, any more than would hope of theocratic grace on the part of the bureaucratic sinful be incompatible with disdain for meritocratic pseudo-punishment on the part of the technocratic pseudo-criminal.

96. Yet no more than there can be crime without pseudo-grace in metachemical sensuality ... can there be grace without pseudo-crime in metaphysical sensibility.

97. And no more than there can be sin without pseudo-punishment in chemical sensuality ... can there be punishment without pseudo-sin in physical sensibility.

98. For wherever there is a hegemonic state there must be a subordinate church and, conversely, wherever a hegemonic church obtains it is inevitable that the state will be subordinate, a situation which is preferable to its opposite in view of the extent to which concern with the self, whether negatively or positively, is more conducive to life, as to co-operative values, than concern, by contrast, with the not-self, whether positively or negatively, in 'pro' or 'anti' terms.

99. For whereas being autocratically pro-notself makes for criminality in the case of free soma and evil in the case of bound psyche, being democratically anti-notself simply makes for punishingness in the case of free psyche and modesty (or goodness) in the case of bound soma, neither of which are conducive to life but, rather, to different forms of death - the absolute death of eternal perdition in the case of metachemistry and the relative death of life-in-death in the case of physics, the respective fates of 'jerks' and 'pricks', whose elemental affiliations to fire and vegetation ensure that the latter will always go in fear of the former in heliotrope-like fatality of the earth for Hell.

100. Now whereas being bureaucratically anti-self makes for sinfulness in the case of free soma and folly in the case of bound psyche, being theocratically pro-self simply makes for gracefulness in the case of free psyche and wisdom in the case of bound soma, neither of which are symptomatic of death but, rather, of different forms of life - the relative life of death-in-life in the case of chemistry and the absolute life of eternal bliss in the case of metaphysics, the respective fates of 'cunts' and 'bums', whose elemental affiliations to water and air ensure that the former will always go in hope of the latter in judgemental resurrection of purgatory to Heaven.