51.  Thus the real starting point of civilization conceived as the rejection and refutation of devility and animality, of barbarity and philistinism, of cosmic polyversality and mundane impersonality, is human personality and the development of humanity towards divinity in enhanced civility and culture, towards that universality which follows from the relative triumph of nurture over nature in logic and the possibility of a more absolutist approach to and realization of such a triumph as its beatific outcome.

 

52.  For Man is not and cannot be made the end of evolutionary progress!  Nothing is more guaranteed to revolt the superior human being, the godly male, than the doctrine that Man is and must remain the measure of all things, and that all things must accordingly bow to Man, as to the ego of psychic physics! 

 

53.  Certainly this is desirable in relation to what precedes Man as the epitome of humanity, namely worship of and subjection to either Nature or the Cosmos.  But as regards what succeeds him, what stands above him as the absolutely logical outcome of evolutionary progress, nothing could be more undesirable, from the standpoint of Truth, than that Man should strive to block, in his egocentric obsession with knowledge, the path to godliness and hold back the development of culture and civility to their full extents - something, alas, which the chief representatives of Man as a purely humanitarian phenomenon committed, through vegetative physics, to the world seem hell bent on doing, not least by invoking the assistance of Woman as an intermediary between the Devil and themselves!

 

54.  But the man who is foolish enough to give Woman an inch soon discovers that she has taken herself a mile closer to the Devil and to all that is most inimical to the progress of God, not least in terms of the Devil passing Herself or being passed off as God and thereby precluding any possibility of genuine godliness through that universality which, far from being an aspect of or identical with the Cosmos, is its complete antithesis, even unto the degree of a universal rejection of the tragic pluralism of cosmic polyversality.

 

55.  No, there are, it has to be said, men who are only too happy to resist the struggle towards God and who will sell out to the Devil via Woman if it suits their ungodly purposes to do so, granting the generality of women access to their traditional preserves in exchange for the right to exploit what is most superficially and criminally female in the netherworldly heights of cosmic polyversality! 

 

56.  Such men, whom some would choose to regard as Man per se, are less than keen on the globalization of civilization, of contemporary civilization; for they do not relate to the synthetic artificiality of contemporary post-modern civilization but, on the contrary, to the non-synthetic artificiality, rooted in analytical duality, in the dialectics of pluralism, of a civilization which some would regard as Western and some as Christian and some as Liberal and some as bourgeois but which, no matter how it is regarded, fights shy of globalization and its promise of cultural universality.

 

57.  For such a universality, were it to come properly to pass, would eclipse them, would invalidate, at a sweep, their pretensions to civility and culture in the non-synthetic artificiality of the civilization which, no matter how decadent or degenerate it may now be, still exists in the background or to the rear of contemporary civilization as both its progenitor and, in some contexts, actual master, manipulating what is most commercially expedient from a standpoint that nonetheless lays claim to the virtues and moralities of a bygone age, even in respect of Christian values.

 

58.  Without the non-synthetic artificiality of Western civilization as a largely Protestant-inspired secular and bourgeois manifestation of liberalism, there would have been no contemporary civilization, no People's civilization as a largely Socialist-inspired secular and proletarian manifestation of totalitarianism, and therefore People's civilization is the outcome, in its global ambitions, of what preceded it in the evolutionary development of Western civilization from a standpoint opposing and contrary to its devolutionary regression in Nature from the Cosmos and more Catholic, if not heathen, traditions.

 

59.  But this evolution of the phenomenon Man in the face of Marian and Creatoresque traditions, whilst it may have led Western civilization beyond both non-synthetic and synthetic naturalism to a non-synthetic artificiality the chief attribute of which is the human personality of the liberal individual as he strives for economic betterment in a capitalistic world, was achieved at a tremendously high price, namely the price of the sacrifice of soul to egocentric knowledge and thus the rejection of that which, no matter how imperfectly, still clung, if tangentially, to the older traditions rooted in will and spirit, though especially spirit, as a goal and ideal towards which the more devout of the faithful could aspire, no matter how paradoxically in a world which falsely placed a premium on spirit and, hence, on spirituality as the actual ideal of religion, making the rejection of will by spirit more important than the injection of ego by soul.

 

60.  Such a rejection of will by spirit took the religious form of the rejection of time by mass, but the injection of ego by soul, of volume by space, did not transpire to anything like the same extent in view of the monistic importance attaching to spirituality in Western religious tradition, making devolutionary regression from the alpha-most of noumena of more significance than evolutionary progression towards the omega-most of noumena, so that mass took precedence not only over time but effectively, if not officially, over volume and space as well, becoming the effective ne plus ultra of devotional commitment.

 

61.  Yet the evolutionary development of volume in the face of mass and its rejection of time did not lead to space, at least not sensibly, but rather to a false progress in which the sensual manifestations of, first, volume and, then, space, volume perceived volumetrically and space perceived spatially, became, under Protestant-inspired secular fatalities, the principal characteristics of Western civilization in its modern, or bourgeois liberal, manifestation, with a corresponding religious degeneration from the sensibilities of time and mass in relation to the New Testament to the sensualities of volume and space in relation to the Old Testament, not least when the American offshoot of the civilization in question is taken into account and the relation of volume to space is reversed in favour of space and a sort of Jehovahesque hegemony in cosmic primacy supersedes in importance the mundane primacy to which Nonconformism subscribes in its feminine association with volume conceived or, rather, perceived (from an empirically objective standpoint) volumetrically.

 

62.  Be that as it may, the development of contemporary civilization out of the degeneration into devolutionary regression of Western civilization in its liberal bourgeois secularity inevitably led to a rejection of space and volume in favour of time and mass, albeit not in the traditional Catholic or Medieval terms of sensibility, but as a sensual extrapolation from bourgeois precedent and, in some sense, a male revolt against what in the sensual manifestations of space and volume could only be described as a civilization characterized by female hegemonies, in Anglo-American fashion.

 

63.  This male revolt led, in the clash of Communism and Fascism, to world war and the struggle for a New Order, whether global or European in character, and duly resulted in the rejuvenation and restoration of the West under American domination, with the achievement, one could say, of a People's liberalism through corporate capitalism, which has since taken globalization one stage further than either the Communists or the Nazis would have envisaged, a stage beyond both science and politics into economics and the so-called global economy of post-modern contemporary civilization.

 

64.  But such a civilization is not and never was completely independent of Western civilization, neither in its traditional Catholic nor Protestant, medieval nor liberal, manifestations, and both synthetic naturalism and non-synthetic artificiality persist to the rear, as it were, of the synthetic artificiality of contemporary civilization, often in roles which suggest dominance rather than subservience, not least of all in the arts, where all modes of non-synthetic artificiality, from orchestrally-oriented classical music and painterly canvas art to figure sculpture and theatrical and book production play anything but modest roles in the cultural life of the age, no matter how irrelevant or even abhorrent such phenomena may be to a pop- or film-loving exemplar of what is truly contemporary in a civilization which, in its synthetic artificiality, is anything but bourgeois but, rather, based around the urban proletariat as the type par excellence of that 'humanity' which, in its global aspirations and potential for cultural universality, for what transcends mere personality, is nearer to God than is Man, being in effect the nearest thing to divinity which currently exists on the planet, eastern meditators notwithstanding!

 

65.  But then Eastern civilization is no less distinct from global civilization than Western civilization and cannot be accorded preferential respect as though, in a choice between the two, the Eastern, in whatever of its various permutations, was the one to adopt.  Global civilization transcends, and must necessarily continue to transcend, both Eastern and Western civilizations, as the urban proletariat transcend the bourgeoisie and aristocracy, not to mention peasantry and priesthood, of those societies which, in their rural foundations, fall short of a properly urban dimension and global aspiration.

 

66.  But People's civilization, much as it may exist in both the West and the East, and even under the control, in varying degrees, of civilizations which fight shy of synthetic artificiality and still cling to their bourgeois or other roots, has not emerged into contemporary globalization on the male hegemonic terms that its initial developments or developers may have envisaged for it but, since the victory in World War II of the Western powers, whether or not synthetically artificial, over the Axis powers and the subsequent collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe following the end of the so-called Cold War, rather under female hegemonies of both space and volume, sequential time under spatial space in the noumenal context of space/time, and massive mass under volumetric volume in the phenomenal context of volume/mass, with the sort of triangular consequences which have been described often enough in my works in the past not to warrant further exegesis here; though a reminder as to the desirability, primarily from a male standpoint, of a democratically-achieved salvation from their sensual integrities to the sensibilities of the non-triangular structures previously identified by me with 'Kingdom Come' ... may not be without further merit at this point.

    

67.  However, while globalization has indeed materialized at the partial expense of both Western and Eastern traditions, it was not achieved without the sacrifice, under Western pressures, of male freedom or, at any rate an aspiration towards male freedom, to female freedom, of psyche to soma, mind to matter, and the consequent eclipse of ideology by consumerism, whether with a materialist slant in the noumenal 'above' or with a realist slant in the phenomenal 'below', neither of which can be anything but dominatingly hegemonic over both idealism and naturalism, whatever adherents of the latter may like to think.

 

68.  For if anything characterizes liberalism, whether bourgeois or people's, non-synthetically artificial or synthetically artificial, traditional or contemporary, it is the fact of its domination by female elements and consequent incompatibility with that psychic freedom which the Church, when genuine, is pledged to uphold to the greater advantage of form and contentment, ego and soul, knowledge and truth (joy). 

 

69.  Therefore democracy, as an expression of political pluralism, of ideological relativity, within a liberal framework, a framework, incidentally, by no means commensurate with a political per se but effectively a 'bovaryization' of politics from the standpoint of an economic hegemony, reveals itself as the enemy of religion and opponent of evolutionary progress towards a more virtuous, not to say moral, society. 

 

70.  Democracy sees itself, in typically empirical vein, as an end in itself, not as a means to a higher or better end, but rather as the guarantor of a society in which Man is the measure of all things and all things must bow to his criteria.  Not, however, as in the Christian past, in relation to Christ, or the godly hype of Man and effective subversion of true godliness which, besides being metaphysical, appertains to the Father rather than to the Son, to psyche rather than to soma, but with naturalistic reference to a secular present in which, to all intents and purposes, female criteria are hegemonic on both realistic and materialistic terms over a largely somatic perception of Man.

 

71.  Thus is humanity compromised by both animality and devility, and no progress towards divinity is seriously envisaged, such aspirations being regarded as irrelevant to the world and to the protection of worldly interests, and therefore as something to reject from a standpoint rooted in consumerism. 

 

72.  If, in the Christian past, humanity had some aspiration, no matter how paradoxically under the animalistic or, more correctly, anti-animalistic reality of spiritual hype, towards divinity, nowadays no such aspiration can be attributed to a humanity or, better, antihumanity not merely acquiescent in but, in the interests of economic enrichment, besotted by animality and devility, as by political and scientific relativity, to the effective exclusion of religion.

 

73.  Obviously this is anything but a satisfactory situation!  For contemporary civilization, notwithstanding the parts still played by traditional civilization, has now attained to a concern, under economics, with vocational advancement and differentiation which, as the pluralistic essence of liberalism, has replaced what used, in more openly totalitarian contexts, to be concerns with either race or class, neither of which have much to commend them to a post-fascist and post-communist society characterized by a liberal pluralism in respect, primarily, to vocation and the arrogation of science and politics to its economic ends.

 

74.  For vocation is in some sense as important to a People's antihumanity characterized by liberal pluralism as race was to a People's devility characterized by fascist totalitarianism and class to a People's animality characterized by communist totalitarianism, neither of which could be taken all that seriously in a society which is post-ideological in its pluralistic concern with consumerism in the enterprise culture of the free market, a market not dependent on race or class but upon vocation, the basis of the ever-burgeoning plethora of artificial products.

 

75.  Obviously there are still racial and class distinctions to be found in the world, but they are not characteristic of contemporary civilization as an expression of the synthetic artificiality of an urban proletariat.  Rather, they are a legacy of Western and Eastern civilizations, both of which still play a controlling, if not dominating, role in the conduct of contemporary society which, for all its proletarian emphasis, is still subject to the bourgeoisie and other, even older, classes whose lifestyles or products are less synthetically artificial than non-synthetically artificial and even, in pre-bourgeois terms, synthetically or non-synthetically naturalistic.

 

76.  Be that as it may, People's civilization in its liberal mode is, without doubt, not a class- or even race-based civilization, but a vocational civilization that esteems career above everything else and makes a virtue out of 'getting-on in the world' and becoming ever more affluent and economically self-dependent, even unto the extent of acquiring, one way or another, the prestigious status of a millionaire, which is to the contemporary world what sainthood was to the medieval one, and thus a confirmation of vocational success and, in some sense, attainment of the goal that a society based around economics inevitably aspires towards. 

 

77.  For money, as the lifeblood of economics, is the ideal of this phase of People's civilization, and money, as we all know, 'speaks all languages', thereby further facilitating that globalization which is the touchstone of contemporary credibility.

 

78.  But money does not, of course, lead to the 'Kingdom of Heaven', to the 'kingdom within', still less to 'Kingdom Come' as the politically-based framework in which maximum encouragement can be granted to such a heavenly ideal, but is more of an obstacle to such an end, putting the welfare of the egocentric self above that of the psychocentric self, personality above universality, and even allowing form to be eclipsed by both power and glory as a superego-eccentrically fuelled concern with the not-self takes over, and materialistic or realistic matters come to take on more importance than anything idealistic or naturalistic, much less transcendentalist or humanist, given that the male not-self is not and never could be an end in itself but must always be subordinated to the female not-self which, in sensuality, the context of liberal pluralism par excellence, is ever hegemonic.

 

79.  For, despite its claims to humanism and advocacy of human rights, of humane treatment of children, animals, criminals, etc., liberal pluralism leads, soon enough, to the dominance of humanity or, rather, antihumanity by devility and animality, since a humane approach to animals and devils is a meaningless, not to say contradictory, procedure which is bound to rebound on its perpetrator as the devil or animal gets the upper hand from unconcern with any reciprocal humanity. 

 

80.  No devil or animal has been turned into a human through a humane approach, and few males whose humanity it would, on grounds of sensibility, be difficult to call into question would be of any avail in dealing with animals or devils as they deserve and, in fact, as females more usually deal with them when free to be 'true' to themselves.

 

81.  Clearly humanity can only go so far in dealing with animality and devility; though deal with them it assuredly must if it is not to be defeated and overrun by either, and obviously on less than humane terms.  For 'humaneness' is something that works between equals in humanity, and where such equality is lacking, there can be only the inhumane treatment of unequals, which is to say, of animals and devils, or all who are characterized by an evolutionary want of more wavicles/less particles in either more particles/less wavicles or, worse again, most particles/least wavicles, and therefore show themselves chemically or metachemically adrift of physics in relation to the negativities of somatic freedoms which, far from adding up to anything virtuous, fly in the face of virtue from criminally vicious standpoints in weakness and ugliness.

 

82.  Obviously, a humanity which is sensibly respectful of itself does not take kid gloves to animals and devils but treats them as they deserve, whether with effect to controlling them or, in the cases of persons who are simply environmentally or socially backward, reforming and improving them, so that they are saved from their effectively pre- and/or sub-human backgrounds and admitted to the ever-growing community of humans who really are humane to one another, and thus of humanity in the higher sense.

 

83.  But vocational humanity is not, in its sensual antihumanity, of the essence of global civilization, of that synthetically artificial civilization which has been identified with the People and deemed truly contemporary, any more than the class animality of socialism or the race devility of fascism was or ever could be, since any aspiration towards globalization implies a monistic respect for airy universality and thus for metaphysical universality, which can only properly emerge on the basis of ethnicity, and with respect not to humanity primarily, but to divinity, the order of evolutionary progress which is commensurate with universality as an expression of a religious ideal, as the religious ideal par excellence, in which there is only one God because there could only ever really be one God that is true and, in truth, germane to universality, not two, three, four, or more gods the majority of which were manifestly less than properly divine because other than sensibly metaphysical!

 

84.  No, the one true God the Father is sensibly metaphysical in respect of the ego that embraces, through transcendental meditation, the will to breathe of the Son of God in the lungs and identifies with the out-breath of the Holy Spirit of Heaven until it must recoil, in self-preservation, to self more profoundly and thereby achieve the redemption of metaphysical ego in Heaven the Holy Soul, the joyful justification of truth, the latter of which is ever of God the Father and thus not an end in itself but that which utilizes the means, in metaphysical not-self, to a soulful end in beatific joy.

 

85.  Therefore globalization only comes 'good', only achieves its true perfection on the basis of divinity, of a divinity which transcends, though does not entirely exclude, humanity, animality, and devility or, more correctly, humanity, anti-animality and antidevility, granted that sensibility has the effect of turning the female elements around so that they express, in paradoxical psychic emphasis, not the Mother but the Antidaughter, not free soma but free psyche, and therefore not the Devil in metachemistry or Woman in chemistry but the Antidevil and the Antiwoman respectively, with a greater emphasis, in free psyche, on the constrained will and spirit of bound soma than would otherwise be the case.

 

86.  For whereas free will has the effect, in sensuality, of 'freaking out' soul in terms of the id and free spirit of 'freaking out' ego in terms of the superego, in sensibility, by contrast, free will is 'reined in' by ego in terms of natwill and free spirit 'reined in' by soul in terms of subspirit, becoming bound to the prevailing psychic freedom which only stems from a male hegemony in which heat and light hold dominion over force and motion, primarily in terms of physics and metaphysics, secondarily in terms of chemistry and metachemistry.

 

87.  But in metaphysical sensibility heat is not, falsely, a sort of end in itself, as with humanity, the personality of whose vegetative pluralism necessarily falls short of the universality of airy monism, but is conceived as requiring to be redeemed in and by the light ... of the soul, as the brain stem of the ego-self is eclipsed by the spinal cord of the soul-self following the recoil of ego from the threat to selfhood posed by the out-breath of the not-self which has issued, in subspiritual vein, from the subwill of the lungs, metaphysical motion from metaphysical force, neither of which have anything to do with free will and free spirit, least of all in their female per se, or primary, manifestations, but are the bound orders of 'thrice-bovaryized' will and 'twice-bovaryized' spirit, fourth-rate will and third-rate spirit, which constitute a sort of secondary godliness and heavenliness, in metaphysical not-self, to the primary orders of God and Heaven which obtain in the metaphysical self and only in the metaphysical self, that combination of second-rate ego and first-rate soul, a 'once-bovaryized' ego and the per se order of soul, in the brain stem and spinal cord of what could be called the upper-class, or noumenal, male of metaphysical sensibility.

 

88.  Therefore divinity not only transcends humanity, as the soul transcends the ego, or God transcends Man, but it constitutes, in the sublime essence of its monistic transcendentalism, what is truly universal and capable of sustaining globalization on a genuinely universal basis, the only basis upon which it ultimately can be sustained, given the incompatibility of human personality with such an essential outcome, the product not of vegetation but of air. 

 

89.  For any male who meditates transcendentally is God the Father, and this one true God can only be sustained on the basis of commerce, through transcendental meditation, with the universal element, viz. the air, which, transmuted into breath, becomes the spiritual means for the redemption of ego in soul via the relevant order of will we have identified, correctly and definitively, with the Son of God, with what supersedes, in metaphysical not-self, the metaphysical self, and is accordingly secondary to a prime mover, viz. God the Father, as bound soma is secondary to free psyche.

 

90.  Yet this is so only of males, and especially of those males who, being divine in their noumenal absolutism, their capacity not only for time-space subjectivity but the transcendence of sequential time in spaced space, are capable of meditation and accordingly metaphysical, characterized by most wavicles/least particles, and therefore by a predilection for the soul at the expense not only of the spirit but, more particularly, of the will, which is also controlled by the ego, though to a lesser extent, we have argued, than 'down below' in the masculine male context, notably physics, of voluminous volume, where ego is the most prevalent factor, as befitting phenomenal relativity.

 

91.  Ultimately, true globalization presupposes universality, but universality can only be sustained on the basis of a uniform ethnicity, call it Social Transcendentalist, or Centrist, which acknowledges the significance of the metaphysical element, the air, in respect of universality and does so completely independently of that false, and traditional, identification with and subsuming of the concept 'universal' into the so-called Universe, meaning the Cosmos, as that which, in reality, is anything but universal but, rather, polyversal in the fiery pluralism of its starry appearances, and thus at the farthest environmental remove from divine oneness or the possibility of true essence, being the basis, in stellar primacy, not of metaphysical free psyche but of metachemical free soma, as primarily in respect to an element which corresponds to most particles/least wavicles and is therefore anything but divine.  It is, in short, the seat of the Devil, of that which is germane to original crime and accordingly the fount of free will.

 

92.  Such a reality, which I have tended in the past to call Devil the Mother, is fundamentally female, not male, and it is what characterizes all that is contrary to the precedence of soma by psyche, exemplifying, in sensuality, the precedence of psyche by soma and thus of wavicles by particles, of mind by matter, of light by force, of the Daughter by the Mother, of evil by crime, of immorality by vice.

 

93.  Thus from the metachemical setting of the 'freaking out' of light by force, of soul by will, which is called the id or unconscious soul, life proceeds, in phenomenal devolutionary vein, to the chemical setting of the 'freaking out' of heat by motion, of ego by spirit, which is called the superego or superconscious ego, and from there it requires a revolutionary transvaluation of values and rejection of free will and spirit somatically hegemonic over bound psyche, to achieve the 'reining in' of force by heat (not light!), of will by ego, in natwill or natural will, and the 'reining in' of motion by light (not heat!), of spirit by soul, in subspirit or subnatural spirit, for ego and soul to be free and psychically hegemonic over bound soma, thereby passing from the dark to the light, as from matter to mind, crime and/or sin to grace and/or punishment, devility and/or animality to humanity and/or divinity, unnature and/or supernature to conscious and/or subconscious, as the emphasis switches from free soma to free psyche, as from fire and/or water to vegetation and/or air, fact and/or illusion to fiction and/or truth.

 

94.  However, those who are too antihumanistic (I nearly said humanistic!), too given to liberal pluralism, will be unlikely to opt for centrist monism, as for the prospect of universality in a globalization which owes more to ethnicity than to vocation, more to air than to vegetation, more to divinity than to humanity, more to truth than to knowledge, more to God than to Man, more to essence than to quality, and in which contentment justly counts for more than form. 

 

95.  There is even about humanity, never mind the more sensual and secular antihumanity which smacks of antison (Antichrist), a paradoxical fatality to be attracted towards devility, in that both have a connection, albeit on different terms, with force, humanity in terms of the controlling of force from a standpoint based in heat, devility in terms of the controlling of light from a standpoint based in force, the extolling of heat, viz. ego, by the one contrasting with the extolling of force, viz. will, by the other.

 

96.  Contrariwise, there is about animality, never mind the more sensible and ecclesiastic anti-animality which may be accorded a Marian status, a paradoxical fatality to be attracted towards divinity in that both have a connection, albeit on different terms, with motion, animality in terms of the controlling of heat from a standpoint based in motion, divinity in terms of the controlling of motion from a standpoint based in light, the extolling of motion, viz. spirit, by the one contrasting with the extolling of light, viz. soul, by the other.

 

97.  Therefore while physical humanity exalts in ego, it does so with a certain sympathy towards will which, in metachemical devility, is free to exalt in itself at the expense, primarily (though not exclusively) of soul. 

 

98.  Contrariwise, while metaphysical divinity exalts in soul, it does so with a certain sympathy towards spirit which, in chemical animality, is free to exalt in itself at the expense, primarily (though not exclusively) of ego.

 

99.  There is, then, a connection with force that is common, in diametrically antithetical ways, to physics and metachemistry, humanity and devility, whilst a connection with motion is common, in diametrically antithetical ways, to metaphysics and chemistry, divinity and animality. 

 

100.   Devility thrives on free will and bound soul, while humanity thrives on free ego and bound will.  But the will, whether free or bound, is common to both.  By contrast, divinity thrives on free soul and bound spirit, while animality thrives on free spirit and bound ego.  But the spirit, whether bound or free, is common to both.