ULTRANOTES FROM BEYOND
(The United
Kingdom/Republic of
Aphoristic Philosophy
Copyright © 2012 John O'Loughlin
______________
1. To contrast the metachemical
unclearness of evil with the chemical clearness of good, as one would contrast
fire with water - the former noumenal and the latter
phenomenal, as with regard to space-time materialism and to volume-mass realism
on the objective, or female, side of life.
2. To contrast the physical unholiness
of folly with the metaphysical holiness of wisdom, as one would contrast
vegetation with air - the former phenomenal and the latter noumenal,
as with regard to mass-volume naturalism and to time-space idealism on the
subjective, or male, side of life.
3. That
which is unclear, being evil, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as noumenal
particles and wavicles of an objective disposition.
4. That
which is clear, being good, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as phenomenal particles
and wavicles of an objective disposition.
5. That
which is unholy, being foolish, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to form or content as phenomenal particles
and wavicles of a subjective disposition.
6. That
which is holy, being wise, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether
it is conceived in relation to form or content as noumenal
particles and wavicles of a subjective disposition.
7. Since
power is perfect on the noumenal planes of space-time
materialism and imperfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass realism, one
should distinguish the primary vice of noumenal power
in metachemical unclearness from the secondary vice
of phenomenal power in chemical clearness - the former beautiful and the latter
strong.
8. Since
glory is imperfect on the noumenal planes of
space-time materialism and perfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass
realism, one should distinguish the secondary virtue of noumenal
glory in metachemical unclearness from the primary
virtue of phenomenal glory in chemical clearness - the former loving and the
latter proud.
9. Since
form is perfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and
imperfect on the noumenal planes of time-space
idealism, one should distinguish the primary vice of phenomenal form in
physical unholiness from the secondary vice of noumenal form in metaphysical holiness - the former
knowledgeable and the latter truthful.
10. Since
content is imperfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and
perfect on the noumenal planes of time-space idealism,
one should distinguish the secondary virtue of phenomenal content in physical unholiness from the primary virtue of noumenal
content in metaphysical holiness - the former pleasurable and the latter
joyful.
11. Unholiness is no more evil, and thus a metachemical
attribute, through materialism, of the Devil/Hell, than clearness is wise, and
thus a metaphysical attribute, through idealism, of God/Heaven.
12. Unholiness is simply foolish, and thus a physical
attribute, through naturalism, of man/earth, while clearness is simply good,
and thus a chemical attribute, through realism, of woman/purgatory.
13. The
'unholy man' may be a fool, but he certainly isn't evil, since unholiness is the next best thing to holiness, as
vegetation to air or physics to metaphysics.
14. The
'clear woman' may be good, but she certainly isn't wise, since clearness is the
next worst thing to unclearness, as water to fire or chemistry to metachemistry.
15. The
'unclear woman' stands at an evil, and thus absolutely antithetical remove,
from the 'holy man', as the noumenal objectivity of
space-time materialism from the noumenal subjectivity
of time-space idealism.
16. The
'clear woman' stands at a good, and thus relatively
antithetical remove, from the 'unholy man', as the phenomenal objectivity of
volume-mass realism from the phenomenal subjectivity of mass-volume naturalism.
17. That
which is natural may be unholy ... in its vegetative phenomenality,
but it can never be evil, like the fiery noumenality
of materialism.
18. That
which is real may be good ... in its watery phenomenality,
but it can never be wise, like the airy noumenality
of idealism.
19. 'The
fool', or foolish man, is closer to the wise man than are either 'the good' or
'the evil', the good woman or the evil woman, and consequently counts for more
with him - as was, in fact, the case with Christ, Who preferred sinners to
scribes and pharisees.
20. Men,
too, can be good or evil, and thus 'bent' away from what is either phenomenally
masculine (lower to upper) or noumenally masculine (submasculine to supermasculine),
sinful or graceful, in one degree or another of punishment and/or crime.
21. Men
that are 'bent' may well be just or cruel, depending on the order of their bentness, but they can never be stupid or kind - at any
rate, not so long as they remain 'bent'.
22. To
be a bent man is to effectively function as a woman, and thus be objectively
ranged against subjectivity either from the viewpoint of metachemical
evil or of chemical good, materialism or realism.
23. It
is not inconceivable that the term 'gentleman', as especially applied in
England to those categories of men who are conspicuously of 'the good' and/or
'the great' (this latter equivalent to 'the evil', or powerful) is synonymous
with being 'bent', and thus less of a man than someone who effectively
functions as a woman ... in due objective fashion.
24. A
society with an abundance of 'gentlemen', in the aforementioned sense, can only
be one in which heathenistic values take precedence
over Christian values, the secular over the ecclesiastical, as objectivity
'rides high', in due female fashion, at the expense of subjectivity.
25. In such a society, the Kingdom (noumenal)
and/or the State (phenomenal) will be genuine, while the Church (phenomenal)
and/or the Centre (noumenal) will be 'pseudo', and
thus deferentially subordinate to the prevailing secularity, with its emphasis
on freedom.
26. A
society in which the secular institutions are free and the religious
institutions 'pseudo' ... is a free society, or one which is primarily
characterized by free will rather than by natural determinism.
27. Free
societies are much more likely to be 'once born' and heathenistic
than 're-born' and Christian, given the female hegemony of objectivity which
'rides high' at the expense of subjectivity, tongue at the expense of phallus
in the phenomenal context of watery (chemical) realism, eyes at the expense of
ears in the noumenal context of fiery (metachemical) materialism.
28. In
Britain, however, 're-born' metachemistry
is combined, via the 'Blood Royal', with 'once-born' chemistry, the monarchy
with the parliamentary, and truly genuine, mode of democracy.
29. America,
on the other hand, is more characterized, through the '
30. By
rights, a pseudo-democracy in a pseudo-State should be deferential, through
republicanism, to the genuine Church, the Roman Catholic Church, but the
American paradox is such that, rooted in Puritan-based colonial rebellion
against Anglican-based British rule, the pseudo-State of democratic republicanism
defers back to the metachemical hegemony of the eyes,
symbolized by the 'Liberty Belle', and thus to what is in effect a
pseudo-Kingdom rooted in a presidential executive having, amongst other things,
ultimate control of the armed forces.
31. Whatever
the respective paradoxes of Britain and America, both countries, being
objective, espouse freedom, not least of all in relation to 'freedom of speech'
and a 'free press'.
32. In theory, this may seem desirable, but, in practice, what
it means is freedom for the objective, and hence female side of life, to affirm
secular and fundamentally immoral values at the expense of everything religious
and moral.
33. The
parliamentary democracy affirms 'freedom of speech' as its inalienable feminine
right in a context where the tongue is free, and free to lord or, rather, lady
it over the phallus (cynosure of the flesh), in due verbal fashion.
34. The
presidential Kingdom affirms 'freedom of the press' as its inalienable superfeminine right in a context where the eyes are free,
and hence free to lord or, rather, lady it over the ears, in due photographic
fashion.
35. Whether
the freedom is chemical or metachemical, watery or
fiery, emotional or instinctual, the net result will be the entrenchment of
free will at the expense of natural determinism, of female objectivity at the
expense of male subjectivity, and the consequent domination of society by heathenistic values.
36. Whether
'Britannia' rules the waves, the watery context of chemical realism, or the
'Liberty Belle' rules the stars, the fiery context of metachemical
materialism, the only consequence for males is the subversion of nature by
civilization in the one case, and of culture by barbarism in the other, as
germane to the dominion of female objectivity.
37. Frankly,
Christ is no more the 'man-god' of the British than the Holy Ghost is the
'Spirit-Heaven' of the Americans. The
former people are dominated by a heathenistic form of
Mary, viz. the parliamentary 'Britannia', while the latter people are dominated
by the superheathenistic form or, rather, power of
the Creator, viz. the presidential '
38. Things
have accordingly regressed from the purgatorial glory of 'Britannia' to the
diabolical power of the 'Liberty Belle', as, on the positive side, from supreme
water to supreme fire, the tongue to the eyes, pride to beauty, and, on the
negative side, from primal water to primal fire, the moon to the stellar
cosmos, humility (if not humiliation) to ugliness, and in neither case is there
much scope for authentic commitments, uninfluenced by the prevailing norms, to
the earthy form, necessarily crucified, of Christ or to the heavenly content,
necessarily beatified, of the Holy Ghost.
39. For
form and content (in both phenomenal and noumenal
terms) can only be twisted and corrupted, if not effectively eliminated, when
power and glory hold sway in due objective fashion.
40. As a rule, religions do not transplant; they simply become
corrupted by countervailing pressures which typify the lands and climes to
which they were brought.
41. America
may call itself Christian, but, in actuality, it is a Superheathen
society both characterized and dominated by the '
42. No
genuine Christian would identify with stars or anything cosmic, but would have
turned away from both fire and water in response to a Christ-motivated
vegetative aspiration towards air.
43. The
fact that most Christians remain 'bogged down' in vegetation to the detriment,
if not exclusion, of air ... does not invalidate the proposition that vegetation
leads to air rather than to either water or fire.
44. In
fact, any attempt to reconcile vegetation to either water or fire, if not both
water and fire, is anti-Christian and effectively heathenistic
in a Protestant if not Oriental way.
45. What
prevents the Christian from becoming Superchristian,
and thus properly spiritual through the metaphysical element of air, is his
Biblical adherence to Creatoresque primitivity, which constrains him from 'going the whole
religious hog', as it were, in due meditative vein.
46. Thus
Christianity is itself corrupted by delusory adherence to Creatoresque
primitivity, which keeps things theistically
subservient to the Cosmos and thereby bedevils attempts to further natural
determinism at the expense of free will, the sort of free will which the Cosmos
most blatantly exemplifies!
47. Had
Christianity been a perfect religion instead of a manifestly imperfect one,
centred not in joy but in knowledge, not in the grace of noumenal
content but in the sin of phenomenal form, the 'modern age' of rampant Superheathenism would probably never have materialized.
48. Christian
ambivalence, owing as much if not more to the Biblical divisions between Old
and New Testaments as to the paradoxical teachings of Jesus Christ, has always made
it possible for (some) people to pursue free will at the expense of natural
determinism.
49. So
much so, that Christianity was fated to overcome itself and to languish, as it
now does, in the shadows not only of Protestant-based Heathenism but of Orient-based
Superheathenism - a Superheathenism
characterized by the metachemical reign of the
'Liberty Belle'.
50. Some
would regard her and equivalent symbols as the 'Queen of Heaven', but there is
no, nor ever could be any, 'Queen of Heaven', only a 'Queen of Hell', of which
the stellar cosmos is epitome.
51. The
'Goddess of
52. Hence
it is not even collective freedom such as 'Britannia' could be said to
illustrate in relation to 'House of Commons' democracy, but individual freedom
in relation to 'White House' autocracy, the presidential executive of an
elected autocrat.
53. Since freedom is rooted in power and glory, whether these be
individual (and metachemical) or collective (and
chemical), it has everything to do with evil and good, and nothing to do with
folly and wisdom.
54. Only
that which is rooted or, rather, centred (in due subjective vein) in form and
content ... has anything to do with folly and wisdom, whether in relation to
the collectivity of the physical or to the
individuality of the metaphysical.
55. Such
an actuality is the opposite of freedom, since it appertains not to free will
but to natural determinism, not to the female (and objective) side of life but
to its male (and subjective) side, and has reference, in consequence, to
binding.
56. And
just as freedom can be collectivistic or individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, so binding can be collectivistic or
individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, according to
whether it pertains to vegetation or to air, the Church or the (coming) Centre
of 'Kingdom Come'.
57. When
people revolt against binding, as they have done in the anti-Christian past,
they do so in the name of freedom, and achieve liberation from the Old Order
(of binding) via revolution, which is the violent methodology serving a free
and hence disordered end.
58. Liberation
from binding is a female-oriented actuality which leads, via revolutionary
upheaval, to state freedom, the republican state and/or kingdom that is
independent of the Christian Church and immorally ranged, under the
light-shedding objective guidance of the 'Liberty Belle' or equivalent symbols
of freedom, against Christian morality and just about anything moral.
59. It
is this free state and/or kingdom which is responsible, in its disordered
newness, for the 'false progress' of Heathen-to-Superheathen
modernity, and which upholds the dominion, in
consequence, of free will at the expense of natural determinism, of female
liberation at the expense of male salvation.
60. Freedom
is characterized, as already noted, not by form and content(ment)
but by power and glory, and is therefore a choice and/or struggle between evil
and good, fire and water, barbarity and civility, the id (unego)
and the soul (unconscious) for objective control of men's lives.
61. People
- and men in particular - can be delivered from freedom to binding, albeit to a
new order of binding which will be Superchristian
where the Old Order was Christian, and such deliverance is achievable via
evolution, which is the peaceful methodology serving a bound and very
structured end.
62. If
one is damned to freedom by revolution, then one is saved to binding by
evolution, and such an evolution as I have in mind will necessitate recourse to
democratic procedures, in order that the peoples of, in particular initially,
Ireland, Scotland, and Wales ... may opt for religious sovereignty, and thus
the right to religious self-determination in relation to the triadic Beyond of
the Centre, which would be served and maintained by a pseudo-kingdom, the airy
kingdom of a Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) in 'Kingdom
Come'.
63. Only
Social Transcendentalism, the ideological philosophy of 'Kingdom Come', and
hence of the genuine Centre, can provide the basis whereby the People may seek
deliverance from worldly freedoms to the otherworldly bindings of the Centre,
and thereupon embrace a structure in which form and content are uppermost in
their lives, as they enter into the evolutionary salvation of the triadic
Beyond in which folly and wisdom, vegetation and air, nature and culture, the
ego and the mind would take hierarchical precedence over what was left to the
female side of life in the watery goodness - and soul - of civilization.
64. For
civilization must be 'pegged down' if nature is to rise up as an adequate
support for culture, the airy flower rising from the vegetative stem of
something rooted in watery goodness.
65. Thus,
in ascending order, would mass, volume, and space be reconciled to Eternity,
the context of the genuine Centre which is beyond the domination of time, or
'Father Time', although served and maintained from a basis of transmuted time
via the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come'.
66. For every 'plant' requires a sun to help it grow, and the
pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come' would be the 'sun' that helps the 'plant' of
the triadic Beyond to grow throughout Eternity.
67. Such
a supernatural 'plant' would eventually grow beyond the earth to the
space-centre contexts of a definitive Heaven, where it would exist at an absolutely
antithetical remove from the stellar cosmos and all that pertained to stars in
general.
68. But
by then 'man' would have been superseded, via a cyborg-like
transition, by post-human life forms which were destined to take the
evolutionary journey to its most bound end.
69. When
we think in terms of the planes of space, time, volume, and mass, the first two
noumenal and the latter two phenomenal, it seems
appropriate (contrary to my customary procedures of late) to equate space with
transcendentalism, time with fundamentalism, volume with nonconformism,
and mass with humanism, irrespective of whether in relation to the Beginning or
the End, the sensual or the sensible manifestations, of the planes in question.
70. Hence to distinguish the materialist transcendentalism, in metachemistry, of spatial space from the idealist
transcendentalism, in metaphysics, of spaced space - the former the sensual and
the latter the sensible manifestation of the supernoumenal
plane of space.
71. Hence to distinguish the idealist fundamentalism, in
metaphysics, of sequential time from the materialist fundamentalism, in metachemistry, of repetitive time - the former the sensual
and the latter the sensible manifestation of the subnoumenal
plane of time.
72. Hence to distinguish the realist nonconformism,
in chemistry, of volumetric volume from the naturalist nonconformism,
in physics, of voluminous volume - the former the sensual and the latter the
sensible manifestation of the upper-phenomenal plane of volume.
73. Hence to distinguish the naturalist humanism, in physics, of
massive mass from the realist humanism, in chemistry, of massed mass - the
former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the
lower-phenomenal plane of mass.
74. Since we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of
a diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from space to
time, one could characterize space-time objectivity in terms of a regression
from materialist transcendentalism to materialist fundamentalism on the photon-photino axis of fiery metachemistry.
75. Since we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of
a diagonal ascent, in metaphysics, from time to space, one could characterize
time-space subjectivity in terms of a progression from idealist fundamentalism
to idealist transcendentalism on the proton-protino
axis of airy metaphysics.
76. Since
we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of a diagonal descent, in
chemistry, from volume to mass, one could characterize volume-mass objectivity
in terms of a regression from realist nonconformism
to realist humanism on the electron-electrino (if
conventional) and/or positron-positrino (if radical)
axis of watery chemistry.
77. Since
we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of a diagonal ascent, in
physics, from mass to volume, one could characterize mass-volume subjectivity
in terms of a progression from naturalist humanism to naturalist nonconformism on the neutron-neutrino (if conventional)
and/or deuteron-deuterino (if radical) axis of
vegetative physics.
78. One
could also turn each of the aforementioned connections around and speak of a
diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from
transcendentalist materialism, the materialism of space, to fundamentalist
materialism, the materialism of time, while speaking, conversely, of a diagonal
ascent, in metaphysics, from fundamentalist idealism, the idealism of time, to
transcendentalist idealism, the idealism of space.
79. Similarly,
one could speak of a diagonal descent, in chemistry, from nonconformist realism,
the realism of volume, to humanist realism, the realism of mass, while
speaking, conversely, of a diagonal ascent, in physics, from humanist
naturalism, the naturalism of mass, to nonconformist naturalism, the naturalism
of volume.
80. The emphasis in the latter two aphorisms would, I believe,
be more scientific and/or political than economic and/or religious, since
unlike transcendentalism, fundamentalism, nonconformism,
and humanism, the terms materialism, idealism, realism, and naturalism have
more applicability to the relationship between self and not-self, psychology
and physiology, than to that between selfless and unself,
therapy and psyche.
81. In
fact, I originally derived the concepts of materialism, idealism, realism, and
naturalism from the respective elements of fire, air, water, and vegetation
(earth), holding to the view that the elements proceeded, in due chronological
order of devolutionary and/or evolutionary development, from fire to air via
water and vegetation, and that materialism accordingly corresponded to fire as
the most basic/least advanced element, realism corresponded to water as the
more (relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced element,
naturalism corresponded to vegetation as the less (relative to least)
basic/more (relative to most) advanced element, and idealism corresponded to
air as the least basic/most advanced element.
82. In
subatomic terms, this meant that the most basic/least advanced subdivision of
an element, viz. elemental particle, corresponded to materialism; that the more
(relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision, viz.
molecular particle, corresponded to realism; that the less (relative to least)
basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision, viz. molecular wavicle, corresponded to naturalism; and that the least
basic/most advanced subdivision, viz. elemental wavicle,
corresponded to idealism.
83. Where
an exact correspondence existed between the most basic/least advanced
subdivision of an element and/or elementino and fire,
then one had the materialist per se of photons (in sensuality) and/or photinos
(in sensibility); where an exact correspondence existed between the more
(relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision of an
element and/or elementino and water, then one had the
realist per se of electrons and/or electrinos
(if conventional) or positrons and/or positrinos (if
radical); where an exact correspondence existed between the less (relative to
least) basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and vegetation, then one had the naturalist per
se of neutrons and/or neutrinos (if conventional) or deuterons and/or deuterinos (if radical); and where an exact correspondence
existed between the least basic/most advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and air, then one had the idealist per se
of protons (in sensuality) and/or protinos (in
sensibility).
84. Hence
each element had a subatomic correspondence which enabled us to describe it
either in terms of materialism (if having an elemental particle per se), realism (if having a molecular
particle per se), naturalism (if having a molecular wavicle
per se), or idealism (if having an elemental wavicle
per se).
85. I
therefore came to the conclusion that fire was the metachemical
element of materialism, water the chemical element of realism, vegetation the
physical element of naturalism, and air the metaphysical element of idealism.
86. It
also became clear to me that both fire and water, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in
elemental and molecular terms, to the particle aspect of their respective
elements, were objective, and thus of a female disposition, whereas both
vegetation and air, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in
molecular and elemental terms, to the wavicle aspect
of their respective elements, were subjective, and thus of a male disposition.
87. Hence
not only were photons and electrons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) objective, and hence of a female disposition
in their negative charge; they had a per se correspondence to fire and water.
88. Hence
not only were neutrons and protons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) subjective, and hence of a male disposition in
their positive charge; they had a per se correspondence to vegetation and air.
89. Of
course, it is always tempting to regard water as subjective and vegetation as
objective, but I don't believe that something relatively subjective could stem,
like water, from the absolutely objective element of fire. Nor, by a converse token, can I believe that
something relatively objective could be the next best thing, like vegetation,
to the absolutely subjective element of air.
90. That which, as vegetation, is elementally contiguous with noumenal subjectivity could only be phenomenally
subjective, while, conversely, that which, as water, is elementally
contiguous with noumenal objectivity could only be phenomenally
objective.
91. Yet
we find ourselves with the logical paradox that the two particle-based elements
as defined by me, viz. fire and water, differ in relation to the position of
the perfect attribute on the basis of a particle/wavicle
distinction - power being perfect in fire but imperfect in water, glory being
perfect in water but imperfect in fire.
92. Likewise,
the two wavicle-centred elements as defined by me,
viz. vegetation and air, differ in relation to the position of the perfect
attribute on the basis of a particle/wavicle
distinction - form being perfect in vegetation but imperfect in air, content
being perfect in air but imperfect in vegetation.
93. Thus
if water is objective, and hence particle-based, while vegetation is
subjective, and hence wavicle-centred, how can the
one have a wavicle-biased perfection in glory (pride)
and the other a particle-biased perfection in form (knowledge)?
94. It
seems to me that the question begs an equally paradoxical answer, in that there
is more gender interaction on the phenomenal planes of mass and volume than on
the noumenal planes of time and space, in consequence
of which vegetation is bent, through the countervailing objective influence of
water, towards an objective fulcrum, so to speak, in form, whereas water is
bent, through the countervailing subjective influence of vegetation, towards a
subjective fulcrum, as it were, in glory.
95. Yet
neither of these fulcrums or focal-points of perfection would be particularly
stable, in view of the countervailing dispositions of the elements in question,
so their respective perfections are always going to be exposed to abandonment
for the more complete, and intrinsically element-conditioned, perfections of
power in the case of fire and of content(ment) in the
case of air, the genders tending farther apart on the noumenal
planes of time and space in relation to particle- and wavicle-biased
orders of perfection that owe more to the respective particle-based and wavicle-centred orientations of their respective elements
than ever they do to any phenomenal-like molecular interrelativity,
and hence collectivistic interaction.
96. Short
of dismantling my philosophy in favour of a subjective theory for water and an
objective theory for vegetation, this is the only explanation I have for the
seemingly paradoxical fact that, in the cases of water and vegetation, the
fulcrum of perfection does not exactly coincide with the subatomic structural
origins of the elements in question.
97. However
that may be, I am convinced that nothing that was of a contrary gender
disposition, as it were, to the noumenal elements of
fire and air could exist in a devolutionary and/or evolutionary relationship of
elemental contiguity with them.
98. So
I return to my original position that water stems from fire as a phenomenal
order of objectivity from a noumenal order, whilst,
conversely, air stems from vegetation as a noumenal
order of subjectivity from a phenomenal order.
99. There
is accordingly, in general terms, a devolutionary regression from the unclear
to the clear, as from fire to water, on the one hand, but an evolutionary
progression from the unholy to the holy, as from vegetation to air, on the
other hand.
100. Yet,
in actuality, fire and water are both typified, in their objective dispositions
towards power and glory, by unclearness and clearness, since unclearness stands
to clearness on any objective plane as particle to wavicle,
vice to virtue, barbarity to civility, and hence in more general terms as will
to spirit.
101. With
fire, however, the emphasis of perfection will be on power rather than glory,
and thus on unclearness as opposed to clearness, barbarity as opposed to
civility, vice as opposed to virtue, whereas with water, by contrast, the
emphasis of perfection will be on glory rather than power, and thus on
clearness as opposed to unclearness, civility as opposed to barbarity, virtue
as opposed to vice.
102. Conversely,
vegetation and air are both typified, in their respective subjective
dispositions towards form and content, by unholiness
and holiness, since unholiness stands to holiness on
any subjective plane as particle to wavicle, vice to
virtue, nature to culture, and hence in more general terms as will to spirit.
103. With
vegetation, however, the emphasis of perfection will be on form rather than
content, and thus on unholiness as opposed to
holiness, nature as opposed to culture, vice as opposed to virtue, whereas with
air, by contrast, the emphasis of perfection will be on content(ment) rather than form, and thus on holiness as opposed to unholiness, culture as opposed to nature, virtue as opposed
to vice.
104. One
should, however, distinguish what is applicable to the self and to the unself as psychological and psychical postulates from what
applies to the not-self and to selflessness as physiological and ontological (therapeutic)
postulates, since it does not necessarily follow that unholiness
and holiness, for example, should be applied in either context.
105. In
fact, I happen to believe that, in subjective contexts, unholiness
and holiness are more applicable to the self, viz. ego, and to the unself, viz. mind, whereas nature and culture are more
applicable to the not-self and to selflessness, say ears and airwaves or lungs
and breath (in metaphysical idealism), since it is important to distinguish the
psychological and psychical attributes on the one hand, that of the self and
the unself, from the physiological and ontological
attributes on the other hand, that of the not-self and selflessness.
106. Hence
one should contrast the unholiness of stupidity (sin)
in relation to the self and the holiness of kindness (grace) in relation to the
unself with the naturalness of form (subjective will)
in relation to the not-self and the culture of content (subjective spirit) in
relation to selflessness ... where both the phenomenal (vegetative) and the noumenal (airy) manifestations of male subjectivity are
concerned.
107. Conversely,
I happen to believe that, in objective contexts, unclearness and clearness are
more applicable to the self, viz. id, and to the unself,
viz. soul, whereas barbarity and civility will be more applicable to the
not-self and to selflessness, say eyes and sight-light or heart and blood (in metachemical materialism), since it is important to
distinguish the psychological and psychical attributes on the one hand, that of
the self and the unself, from the physiological and
ontological attributes on the other hand, that of the not-self and
selflessness.
108. Hence
one should contrast the unclearness of cupidity (crime) in relation to the self
and the clearness of cruelty (punishment) in relation to the unself with the barbarity of power (objective will) in
relation to the not-self and the civility of glory (objective spirit) in
relation to selflessness ... where both the noumenal
(fiery) and the phenomenal (watery) manifestations of female objectivity are
concerned.
109. Thus
not only are cupidity and cruelty the objective equivalents of stupidity and
kindness in relation to the self and to the unself,
but power and glory are the objective equivalents of form and content in
relation to the not-self and to selflessness.
110. If
cupidity is unclear (criminally unjust) and cruelty clear (punishingly
just) in relation to objective orders of the self (id) and the unself (soul), then stupidity is unholy (sinfully
imprudent) and kindness holy (gracefully prudent) in relation to subjective
orders of the self (ego) and the unself (mind).
111. Likewise,
if power is barbarous (viciously evil) and glory civilized (virtuously good) in
relation to objective orders of the not-self and selflessness, then form is
natural (viciously foolish) and content cultural (virtuously wise) in relation
to subjective orders of the not-self and selflessness.
112. To contrast, within the space-time axis of objective self/unself, the cupidity of beauty in metachemical
unclearness with the cruelty of love in metachemical
clearness - the former perfectly unjust (noumenally
criminal) and the latter imperfectly just (noumenally
punishing).
113. To
contrast, within the space-time axis of objective not-self/selflessness, the
power of the eyes and/or the heart in metachemical
barbarity with the glory of sight-light and/or blood in metachemical
civility - the former perfectly evil (noumenally
vicious) and the latter imperfectly good (noumenally
virtuous).
114. To contrast, within the volume-mass axis of objective self/unself, the cupidity of strength in chemical unclearness
with the cruelty of pride in chemical clearness - the former imperfectly unjust
(phenomenally criminal) and the latter perfectly just (phenomenally punishing).
115. To contrast, within the volume-mass axis of objective
not-self/selflessness, the power of the tongue and/or the womb in chemical
barbarity with the glory of speech and/or conception in chemical civility - the
former imperfectly evil (phenomenally vicious) and the latter perfectly good
(phenomenally virtuous).
116. To contrast, within the mass-volume axis of subjective self/unself, the stupidity of knowledge in physical unholiness with the kindness of pleasure in physical
holiness - the former perfectly imprudent (phenomenally sinful) and the latter
imperfectly prudent (phenomenally graceful).
117. To contrast, within the mass-volume axis of subjective
not-self/selflessness, the form of the phallus and/or the brain in physical
nature with the content of orgasm and/or cogitation in physical culture - the
former perfectly foolish (phenomenally vicious) and the latter imperfectly wise
(phenomenally virtuous).
118. To contrast, within the time-space axis of subjective self/unself, the stupidity of truth in metaphysical unholiness with the kindness of joy in metaphysical
holiness - the former imperfectly imprudent (noumenally
sinful) and the latter perfectly prudent (noumenally
graceful).
119. To contrast, within the time-space axis of subjective
not-self/selflessness, the form of the ears and/or the lungs in metaphysical
nature with the content of the airwaves and/or the breath in metaphysical
culture - the former imperfectly foolish (noumenally
vicious) and the latter perfectly wise (noumenally
virtuous).
120. What
applies to the positive attributes of metachemical,
chemical, physical, and metaphysical supremacy ... applies no less to their
negative counterparts in relation to primacy.
121. Hence
to contrast ugliness with hatred on the one hand, and
the stellar cosmos with Venus on the other hand ... in relation to metachemical primacy.
122. Hence
to contrast weakness with humility on the one hand,
and the moon with the oceanic aspect of the earth on the other hand ... in
relation to chemical primacy.
123. Hence
to contrast ignorance with pain on the one hand, and
the terrestrial aspect of the earth with Mars on the other hand ... in relation
to physical primacy.
124. Hence
to contrast falsity with woe on the one hand, and the
sun with Saturn on the other hand ... in relation to metaphysical primacy.
125. Whereas
supremacy has reference to elements and elementinos,
primacy has reference, by contrast, to what I shall call anti-elements and
anti-elementinos, their negative counterparts.
126. All
elements and elementinos can, with this theory, be
either negative or positive, since my usage of such terms is applicable to
definitions of either primacy or supremacy, not to the more conventional notion
of subatomic charges.
127. The latter concept I have always used as defining the nature
of an element and/or elementino, i.e. whether it
should be regarded as objective (if subatomically
negative) or subjective (if subatomically positive).
128. Hence
I have had no hesitation in equating negatively-charged subatomic elements
like, for example, photons and electrons with objectivity, and hence
femaleness, reserving to positively-charged subatomic elements like, for
example, protons and (in relative terms) neutrons ... an equation with
subjectivity, and hence maleness.
129. And
yet, besides being negative or positive in this conventional subatomic way,
elements and elementinos can, I believe, be primal or
supreme, affiliated to negative contexts like, in primal terms, ugliness and
hatred or, conversely, to positive contexts like, in supreme terms, beauty and
love.
130. Thus
for me it is the same type of element and/or elementino
in a different guise which makes for either primal negativity or supreme positivity in relation to a given elemental axis, be it metachemical (as above), chemical, physical, or
metaphysical.
131. The
applicability of any given subatomic element and/or elementino
to a specific axis is, however, conditional upon its 'gender charge', so to
speak, in relation to objective (if negative) or subjective (if positive)
dispositions.
132. Hence
the applicability of negatively-charged photons/photinos
and/or antiphotons/antiphotinos to the metachemical axis of space-time objectivity and/or
anti-objectivity.
133. Hence
the applicability of negatively-charged electrons/electrinos
and/or anti-electrons/anti-electrinos to the chemical
axis of volume-mass objectivity and/or anti-objectivity.
134. Hence
the applicability of (in relative terms) positively-charged neutrons/neutrinos
and/or antineutrons/antineutrinos to the physical axis of mass-volume
subjectivity and/or antisubjectivity.
135. Hence
the applicability of positively-charged protons/protinos
and/or antiprotons/antiprotinos to the metaphysical
axis of time-space subjectivity and/or antisubjectivity.
136. Anti-elements/anti-elementinos differ from elements/elementinos
as primal objectivity or subjectivity, as the case may be, from supreme
objectivity or subjectivity, whether in terms, necessarily noumenal,
of cosmic from universal or, more phenomenally, of geologic from personal.
137. The
objective axes of space-time and volume-mass, being female, will have a greater
capacity for primal negativity than for supreme positivity,
whereas the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space will have a
correspondingly greater capacity for supreme positivity
than for primal negativity.
138. In
fact, primacy will be primary on the objective axes but secondary on the
subjective ones, whereas supremacy will be primary on the subjective axes but
secondary on the objective ones.
139. Thus
the objective axes of space-time and volume-mass are more characterized by
anti-elements/anti-elementinos than by elements/elementinos, even though the latter will still apply.
140. Thus
the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space are more characterized by
elements/elementinos than by anti-elements/anti-elementinos, even though the latter will still apply.
141. Just
as it takes less to make a woman angry than to make a man angry, so it takes
more to make a woman glad than to make a man glad.
142. For men and women have different charges, men generally
positive in their subjectivity, and women no less generally negative in their
objectivity (though of course neither gender is exclusively one thing or the
other).
143. It
is for this reason that there is more appearance and quantity, corresponding to
fiery materialism and to watery realism, about women, but more quality and
essence, corresponding to vegetative naturalism and to airy idealism, about
men.
144. Where a woman talks, a man thinks, for
talking is quantitative and thinking qualitative. Yet
there is also what may be called a female approach to thinking, viz. reading,
and a male approach to talking, viz. writing - the former apparent and the
latter essential.
145. Thus
the genders could be said to be utilizing intellect on a noumenal
basis when they read and/or write - the quasi-noumenality,
more particularly, of materialistic thinking on the one hand, that of reading,
and of idealistic speaking on the other hand, that of writing.
146. It
could also be claimed that the genders draw further apart from each other
through reading and writing, for they are no longer in the phenomenal contexts of
quantity and quality, corresponding to watery tongue and to vegetative brain,
but are in the noumenal contexts of appearance and
essence, corresponding to fiery eyes and to airy lungs.
147. Not
only is there a quickening of breath with writing, but ink is, in some sense,
the oxygen of writing, quickly drying on the air as it is applied to the
lung-like parchment of writing-paper from a vegetative source, viz. the pen.
148. In
similar fashion, the genders draw together to mate but draw further apart in respect
of the female commitment to children and the male commitment, by contrast, to
career.
149. If
talking and thinking are characteristic of the genders as they impact upon each
other from either a feminine or a masculine standpoint, then reading and writing
are no less characteristic of their maternal and vocational responsibilities as
they go about their respective duties of rearing children and pursuing a
career.
150. Certainly
mothers spend a lot of time reading to their children, since the latter respond
to the materialistic context of reading and are themselves increasingly prone,
in later childhood, to read books, etc.
151. There
are few careers that don't involve some degree of pen-pushing, as they say, and
writing is crucial to people, more usually male, who have a career to pursue,
be it in business or the Arts.
152. Of
course, these days, things are less 'cut and dried' than formerly, but that is
only a sign, somewhat paradoxically, of the Heathen/Superheathen,
Anglo-American times, and not necessarily a manifestation of better things.
153. One
could argue that there are many careers, these days, that are, in any case,
fundamentally childish, and which call, in consequence of their materialistic
bias, for female rather than male contributions.
154. With such careers, women are either 'liberated' from
'domestic servitude', as maternal responsibility is called, or choose to
combine maternal and professional responsibilities, as the case may be.
155. In such fashion, women also become 'liberated' from marriage
through divorce and/or a refusal to contemplate marriage in the first place,
deeming it a bourgeois anachronism.
156. There
is obviously a distinction between women who combine marital with professional
duties and those, on the other hand, who refuse to entertain anything that
would interfere with their careers.
157. If
the latter eventually have children, they are more likely to have them outside
of marriage and to bring them up on as 'free' a basis as possible, scorning the
just punishment, in parental chastisement (of offspring), as a bourgeois
anachronism.
158. Consequently
the children - and girls in particular - of such unmarried mothers are likely
to grow up freer than would otherwise be the case, and thus take for granted so
many immoral and fundamentally barbarous proclivities germane to Superheathen modernity.
159. Their
mothers, not having married, are more likely to be freer and openly
promiscuous, in consequence, than would otherwise be the case, with greater scope
for all manner of deceits and abuses, not to mention increased exposure to
sexually-transmitted diseases.
160. Such
Americanized women are patently less civilized than barbarous, sheltering under
the Superheathen patronage of the 'Liberty Belle' and
all that is scornful of traditional values, whether heathenistically
civilized or, worse again from their point of view, naturalistically Christian.
161. For just as heathenistic
civilization expresses a Protestant revolt against Catholic nature, so superheathenistic barbarism is expressive of an
American-style cosmic-based revolt against heathenistic
civilization, which continues, as in
162. Culturally,
the distinction between civilized tradition (effectively bourgeois) and
barbarous modernity (effectively proletarian) would take the forms, for
example, of books vis-à-vis films, or of classical music vis-à-vis Jazz, or of
painting vis-à-vis light art.
163. Whatever
the exact case, a distinction indubitably exists not only in terms of, say,
Britain and Ireland over Heathen and Christian alternatives, but in terms of
Britain and America where Heathen and Superheathen
alternatives are concerned, the former civilized (in the narrowly feminine, and
hence watery, context of sensual realism) and the latter barbarous (in the
fundamentally superfeminine, and hence fiery, context
of sensual materialism).
164. Hence
the thrust of Superheathen modernity comes not from
Britain, still less from Ireland, but from the United States of America, which
is the prime upholder of barbarous freedom not only at the expense of civilized
freedom, the British and, in particular, English tradition, but in opposition
to anything demonstrably identifiable with cultural binding.
165. For America cares little for and knows even less about
genuine culture, given its profligate predilection towards cultural barbarity
under the Superheathen patronage of the '
166. In
fact America cares even less about genuine culture than Britain, the home,
traditionally, of cultural civility under the Heathen patronage of 'Britannia'.
167. Even
the cultural nature of Catholic Ireland is less than truly cultural, but still
closer to genuine culture, for all its sinful shortcomings, than either the
cultural civility, manifesting not least of all in garrulous plays, or the
cultural barbarity, manifesting more often than not in violent films, of both
Britain and America.
168. Cultural
nature chiefly manifests in sculpture, as of the Virgin Mary and Christ,
whereas cultural culture, or the cultural per se, takes the form, more usually, of music, particularly, I
would argue, of folk music and that which, through traditional sources, avails
of piping, not least of all in terms of uilleann
pipes.
169. Music
will always be the cultural art form par excellence, but there is a vast difference between the
cultural culture of folk music at one end of the musical spectrum, so to speak,
and the barbarous culture of Jazz at its other end - the former effectively Superchristian and the latter Superheathen.
170. In
between - and lower down - one could distinguish the phenomenal modes of music
from their noumenal counterparts on the basis of a
feminine/masculine dichotomy between the civilized culture of Pop and the
natural culture of Classical - the former effectively Heathen and the latter
Christian.
171. Overall,
this is effectively to distinguish the airiness of Folk from the fieriness of
Jazz, while likewise distinguishing the vegetativeness
of Classical from the wateriness of Pop, pretty much as, in religious terms,
one would distinguish transcendentalism from fundamentalism on the one hand,
and nonconformism from humanism on the other hand.
172. Thus
not only do the brass-oriented fieriness of Jazz and the vocals-oriented
wateriness of Pop stand, as objective types of music, on the same side of the
gender fence, but they stand as a sort of Anglo-American testimony to musical
freedom in respectively Superheathen and Heathen
terms.
173. Conversely,
not only do the strings-oriented vegetativeness of
Classical and the pipes-oriented airiness of Folk stand, as subjective types of
music, on the same side of the gender fence, but they stand as a sort of
Euro-Gaelic testimony to musical binding in respectively Christian and Superchristian terms.
174. Hence
to contrast the barbarous fieriness and civilized wateriness of Jazz and Pop
with the natural vegetativeness and cultural airiness
of Classical and Folk, as one would contrast metachemical
materialism and chemical realism with physical naturalism and metaphysical
idealism.
175. Obviously
the terms 'Jazz', 'Pop', 'Classical', and 'Folk' have reference to general
categories that embrace a number of related subdivisions, including the Blues,
Rock, Romantic, and Trad.
176. Yet
such subdivisions are still characterized by adherence to the elemental bias of
the general category, and should not be regarded as constituting an independent
elemental category in the manner of each of the principal musical divisions -
viz. fire in the case of Jazz, water in the case of Pop, vegetation in the case
of Classical, and air in the case of Folk.
177. It
may be that some subdivisions of a given type of music are rather more
negative, overall, than positive, and thus stand to the principal category in
the manner of primal to supreme, as in the cases, for example, of Blues to Jazz
or even of Romantic to Classical.
178. Such
subdivisions would constitute modes of antimusic,
whether in relation to the objective contexts of Jazz and Pop, or,
alternatively, to the subjective contexts of Classical and Folk.
179. For
antimusic will have less to do, overall, with love,
pride, pleasure, or joy, than with hatred, humility, pain, or woe, as befitting
its negative, and hence primal, disposition.
180. Whatever
the exact case, musical freedom stands objectively aloof, in both negative and
positive contexts, from musical binding, as that which most typifies the Superheathen/Heathen (un)nature of the age and its
instinctual and emotional opposition, in consequence, to intellectual and
spiritual orientations, such that more accord with Christian and Superchristian criteria.
181. The
free musician does not care to read music (from scores) or learn by rote a
traditional tune, but relies heavily upon memory for the basic structure of his
compositions, which are then enlarged upon through improvisation.
182. Thus
improvisation is crucial to the concept of musical freedom, whether the
improvisation be instinctively conditioned, as more usually in the case of
Jazz, or emotionally conditioned, as in the case more usually of Pop, where
vocal and/or bodily freedom (depending on the context) is arguably more
important than instrumental freedom.
183. Anything
'bound', as with regard to the reliance of classical music upon printed scores
or of folk music upon inherited tradition, is anathema to the free musician,
who disdainfully turns his back upon what he regards as either bourgeois or
obsolete, if not both bourgeois and obsolete.
184. But
Christian and Superchristian types of music persist,
even in Britain and America, where they defy the freedom of female objectivity
in loyalty to binding to male subjectivity.
185. Neither
nature or culture, physics or metaphysics, naturalism or idealism, nor
vegetation or air ... can be excluded from life, even though, in some
countries, notably Britain and America, they have been marginalized by the
prevailing elements of water and fire, realism and materialism, chemistry and metachemistry, civility and barbarity.
186. If,
eventually, both Classical and (especially) Folk overhaul Pop and Jazz, as a progressive
return is made to binding, it will not be on traditional terms but in a new and
transmuted guise such that reflects environmental and technological progress.
187. Such
a male-centred overhaul of Pop and Jazz would be properly commensurate with a Superchristian age, an age when not Classical but Folk, or
some derivative thereof, was the prevailing type of music, to the detriment, if
not effective exclusion, of Jazz.
188. For
things are not going to revert to Christianity, nor even to Heathenism, when
they are patently Superheathen, and thus
Americanized, but can only progress, within noumenal
parameters, to a subjective antithesis to Superheathen
modernity in the guise of Superchristian futurity.
189. Thus
life will pass, slowly but surely, from one noumenal
extreme to another, dragging the phenomenal realms (of what is now recognizably
the Heathen/Christian world of realism and naturalism) after it, as metaphysics
replaces metachemistry as the true exemplar of
evolutionary progress and, in a very literal sense, moral leadership.
190. For
Superheathenism doesn't so much lead the world as
rule it, as from a cosmic-oriented basis in metachemical
materialism, and such a 'once-born' situation is commensurate not with binding
but with freedom, the rule of noumenal objectivity
and, to a lesser extent, phenomenal objectivity from what are patently female
positions.
191. Just
as 'Britannia' superseded a Christianity fallen into Marian decadence, so the
'Liberty Belle' will one day be superseded by a Superchristian
retort which will offer the world what it has so far lacked - namely, true
leadership.
192. Freedom
may be at the 'cutting edge' of revolution, but it is not, and never could be,
in the vanguard of evolution. For
evolution requires not freedom but binding, binding, above all, to an ultimate
order such that advances religion to a new and altogether more genuine level of
spirituality.
193. Just
as there is something reactive about revolution, so evolution is active, active
in the sense of furthering moral progress at the expense of the immorality of
freedom.
194. One
cannot repeat too often that whereas revolutions are designed, in their violent
methodologies, to liberate people from an old order of binding, evolutionary
progress is concerned with the deliverance of people from the disorder of
freedom, so that they may be returned to a new order of binding, superior to
anything that went before.
195. Just
as one is damned (as a woman) to freedom by revolutionary liberation, so one is
saved (as a man) from freedom to binding by evolutionary deliverance, as moral
action replaces immoral reaction as the principal mode of conduct.
196. Freedom
is a woman and binding a man, and though neither freedom nor binding can be
totally hegemonic, not even on the noumenal planes of
space and time (where absolutism of one kind or another is the elemental norm),
societies can be known and judged according to whether freedom or binding is
their principal characteristic.
197. Phenomenal
societies, whether Heathen or Christian, will generally favour and achieve, in
their molecular relativity, an imbalanced compromise between freedom and
binding, woman and man, whereas their noumenal
counterparts, of which America is a contemporary Superheathen
example, will be much more disposed to emphasize freedom or binding, in keeping with their more absolutist dispositions.
198. Hence
freedom or binding, rather than freedom and binding, is the rule for noumenal
societies, which are less disposed to volume and mass than to time and space -
at least officially and according to how they shape up culturally.
199. For
all societies have to embrace some degree of pluralism, and the Social
Transcendentalism to which I subscribe would not be above that in its
commitment, through the advancement of religious sovereignty in the People, to
the triadic Beyond of the deistic Centre.
200. Thus
there can be no question of freedom being entirely excluded from the religious
pluralism of the triadic Beyond, but, rather, constrained
and maintained at a sensibly phenomenal level (water), wherein it will act as a
foundation for both the phenomenal binding through vegetation and the noumenal binding through air of the higher tiers of the
Beyond in question.
201. For, ultimately, you cannot turn (gender-change exceptions
to the rule notwithstanding) women into men or men into women. You can only constrain the freedom of the one
and enhance the binding of the other, in keeping with the objective/subjective
distinction between humanism on the one hand, and nonconformism
and transcendentalism on the other, the former watery, and the latter
respectively vegetative and airy.
202. Hence the noumenal
binding of transcendentalism is not for everyone but only for those who, as
supermen, prove themselves capable of it, in due cultural vein.
203. The
triadic Beyond will still uphold some kind of civility and some kind of nature
'down below', on the phenomenal tiers of its overall structure, thereby
allowing for the inevitable mass and volume shortfalls from space which would,
I believe, typify persons of, in particular, Puritan and Anglican
denominational backgrounds, in the event of their approaching the development
of religious sovereignty, as must be expected, from a phenomenal standpoint.
204. For
the triadic Beyond is disposed to accommodate people from both Protestant and
Catholic traditions, the former on the phenomenal tiers and the latter on the noumenal one at the top, although, in practice, all tiers
would be subsectioned in order to allow for both
gender segregation and 'quasi' manifestations, within the prevailing element
characterizing any given tier, of the other types of religious praxis.
205. Hence
quasi-nonconformism and quasi-transcendentalism
within the humanist tier at the bottom; quasi-humanism and
quasi-transcendentalism within the nonconformist tier in the middle; and
quasi-humanism and quasi-nonconformism within the
transcendentalist tier at the top.
206. Some
might argue that men who are into chemical substances for purposes of
self-realization should simply be put-in with the women in the bottom
subsection of each tier - either that or each subsection may have to be further
subdivided to allow for continuing gender segregation?
207. Hence,
they would argue, rather than confining intellectually- or spiritually-inclined
women to the emotional, and hence chemical, subsection of each tier,
subdivisions of the physical and the metaphysical subsections would allow them
to be intellectual or spiritual independently of their male counterparts.
208. Frankly,
I don't believe that one should allow for intellectual or spiritual commitments
from women in the triadic Beyond, since that would liberalize it to a degree
whereby unsegregated intellectuality and spirituality
would be the next thing on the female agenda, with disastrously amoral
consequences for all concerned!
209. Once
you start de-structuring an ultimate order, things will quickly fall apart and
degenerate from the bound to the free, thereby becoming the opposite of what
they were intended to be.
210. It
is better that the women be confined to the bottom subsection of each tier,
wherein chemical realism, naturalism, or idealism would be the norm, and that
any intellectual or spiritual predilections some of them may have, whether
through delusions of grandeur or in consequence of bourgeois conditioning,
should take place, if at all, within the subsection in question, not in further
subdivisions of the masculine or supermasculine
subsections!
211. Likewise,
men with a drug habit that is commensurate with either water, vegetation, or
air ... should be encouraged, in the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come'
(hopefully a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) to 'kick the
habit' through exposure to intellectual alternatives rather than have it
re-enforced through confinement in the bottom subsection of each tier, where
they would be vulnerable, in any case, to female seduction.
212. Although
it might seem fitting, if rather cynically so, to oblige male drug-users to
share the same subsection of any given tier with women, in practice I fear that
they would simply 'bog down' in chemical freedom to the detriment, if not
exclusion, of physical and/or metaphysical binding.
213. Thus
just as I do not believe in lowering men to a female level, so I cannot bring
myself to believe in raising women to a male one. Such liberalizing tendencies strike me as
promiscuous and likely to lead, as they have down in bourgeois civilization, to
a break-down of structure and a correlative escalation of freedom - the immoral
enemy of everything bound.
214. Women
may well be capable of intellectual and/or spiritual achievements and
commitments, but not, as a rule, to anything like the same extent as men,
since, quite apart from physiological conditioning factors, such subjective
pursuits run contrary to their objective grain as women, and can only be
of secondary relevance to them in consequence.
215. Although
both sexes are subject to biological conditioning, such biological conditioning
as women are subject to on the female side of life makes for free will, whereas
such biological conditioning as men are subject to on the male side of life
makes, by contrast, for natural determinism.
216. Such
consequences of biological conditioning also of course 'cut it both ways', but
not, as a rule, to anything like the same extent with each gender.
217. For
the objective disposition of women will owe its origins to a vacuous
precondition (as in stellar and/or lunar primacy), such that is predominantly
behind their 'free' mode of biological conditioning, whereas the subjective
disposition of men will owe its origins to a plenumous
precondition (as in terrestrial and/or solar primacy), such that is
preponderantly behind their 'bound' mode of biological conditioning.
218. Aldous Huxley was always quoting the poet Fulke Greville's line about being
'born under one law, [but] to another bound', and although 'one law' obviously has
to do with freedom and 'another law' with binding, it is evident that men are
more disposed than women, as a rule, to the law of binding, particularly with
regard to sensibility.
219. Such,
at any rate, would have been the case when Christian criteria were paramount,
and men deferred to culture via nature rather than, as in heathenistic
and superheathenistic societies, to either civility
or barbarity pre-eminently, as has become increasingly the case since
approximately the seventeenth century.
220. In
'free societies' like those of Britain (watery phenomenal) and America (fiery noumenal), it can hardly be said of most men that they are
'born under one law, [but] to another bound', particularly in view of the
paucity of natural determinism that characterizes the championship of freedom
both in relation to the twin objectivities of speech and the press.
221. Both
the phenomenal and the noumenal kinds of freedom are
'born under one law', the law of feminine civility on the one hand, and the law
of superfeminine barbarity on the other hand, and in
neither case is there much respect for binding, or subjectively-conditioned
constraints upon either freedom of speech or freedom of the camera-besotted
press deriving, by contrast, from adherence to natural and/or cultural binding.
222. Even
traditional institutions and manifestations of binding via natural determinism
are - where they still exist - ridden roughshod over by the 'free spirits' of
Heathen/Superheathen modernity, who do not recognize
any law save that to which they were 'once born', compliments of either
'Britannia' or the 'Liberty Belle'.
223. For
only the liberties of the tongue and the eyes mean anything to them - the one
to dominate the flesh (with its phallic fulcrum) and exclude, as far as possible,
the brain; the other to dominate the ears and exclude, as far as possible, the
lungs.
224. Both
the womb and the heart, on the other hand, are grudgingly tolerated as
objective modes of sensibility that owe more to free will than ever they do to
natural determinism, bearing in mind their female
standings.
225. For
natural determinism is a subjective thing, and neither the womb nor the heart
are preponderantly subjective, only the brain and the lungs in sensibility and,
to a lesser extent, the phallus and the ears in sensuality, neither of which
exist independently of the tongue and the eyes, but are bound to their sensual
dominion.
226. Thus
the phallus is obliged to defer to the tongue, and the ears ... to the eyes,
just as men must defer to women wherever freedom is the ruling law, the
'once-born' law of Heathen/Superheathen modernity.
227. In such circumstances it could be argued that men are
enslaved by women, since they are bound to them and obliged to defer to their objective
hegemony, manifesting freedom.
228. How
different from the 're-born' Christian and/or Superchristian
types of society in which men have been delivered from such an enslavement to
the salvation of either the brain (if phenomenal) or the lungs (if noumenal), and women are accordingly 'pegged down' to the
subordinate objectivities and constrained freedoms of the womb (if phenomenal)
and/or the heart (if noumenal) in what amounts to a
quasi-Christian and/or quasi-Superchristian
deference, via sensibility, to the subjective hegemony of moral law, the law
not of free will but of natural determinism.
229. Then
it can be maintained, with no uncertainty, that men are 'born under one law,
[but] to another bound', and women are accordingly obliged to defer to the
'bound law' to which men, more usually as Christians, moralistically subscribe
in their self-respecting subjectivity.
230. When,
on the other hand, men are deferring to freedom, whether directly as 'free
spirits' or indirectly as compromised bound ones, such a 're-born' situation
can hardly be said to apply, in consequence of which they are less Christian
than effectively Heathen and/or Superheathen, as the
case may be.
231. This
is certainly the case for most Britons and Americans, who exist in societies
dominated by objective factors in which, due to 'once-born' criteria, the
female side of life 'pulls rank' on its male side, the latter sensually
subordinate to it on due pseudo-Christian (if Anglican British) and/or Subchristian (if Judaic American) terms.
232. Now
just as pseudo-Christianity was expressive of an Anglican revolt against
Christianity, meaning Roman Catholicism, so pseudo-Christianity became the
victim, in due course, of a parliament-inspired anti-Christian revolt by
Puritans and Dissenters as the 'free churches', closer in elemental terms to
water and fire than to vegetation, gravitated, following civil unrest, to a
hegemonic position over the Established Church, shackled, as it was, to the
monarch.
233. Thus
even the pseudo-Christian Church is compromised by freedom to the extent that,
in England, it is subjected to the figureheadship of
the reigning monarch, that sensible objectivity, duly constrained, of the
'Blood Royal', which precludes vegetative binding to Christ, since pseudo-Christianity
is effectively no less sensual in its bodily vegetativeness,
a sinful vegetativeness without confessional
contrition, than its anti-Christian antagonists are sensual with regard to a
watery and/or fiery tongue.
234. Be
that as it may, the anti-Christian or 'free churches' became victims, in the
American context, of a Subchristian revolt, which is
arguably closer to the Judaic model of fiery airiness in its musicality, since
more germane to the ears than to the tongue, and such a context, being
fundamentally subjective, is more bound than free.
235. However,
American society is no less illustrative of a triangular situation than British
society, the only difference being that its triangle is pyramidal rather than
inverted, for no sooner is Subchristianity
established as the male retort to anti-Christian precedent than it finds itself
beset by the twin freedoms of anti-Subchristian
Heathenism, the light-based Superheathen freedom of
sensual transcendentalism on the one hand, and the blood-based Subheathen freedom (analogous in some respects to the
'Blood Royal') of sensible fundamentalism - the former expressing an
affiliation to the eyes and the latter an affiliation to the heart.
236. But
it is the Superheathen freedom of the light which is
'top dog' in America, and consequently the Subheathen
freedom of the blood is of secondary importance, on the female side of life, to
that which rules a metachemical roost, to the
detriment, more especially, of the metaphysical 'fall guy', whose Subchristian subjectivity, in submasculinity,
is deferentially bound to the anti-Subchristian
hegemony of the Superheathen freedom in question.
237. Needless
to say, such freedom is symbolized, in America, by the 'Liberty Belle', since
that is what correlates with the superfeminine, and
hence the Superheathen transcendentalism of the
ruling law, the law of maximum freedom for the female side of life in what
amounts to the hegemony of sensual materialism over sensual idealism.
238. Such
a hegemony has a Biblical parallel, none too surprisingly, in the rule of
Jehovah over Satan, the stellar 'First Mover' over the solar 'Fallen Angel',
and we need not doubt that uncritical adherence to the Old Testament, the
Testament par excellence of
American society, will fuel the flames of self-righteous bigotry in relation to
it.
239. For
the adherent of Superheathen objectivity is no less
likely to feel smugly superior, in his 'once-born' law of sensual freedom, to
the adherent of Subchristian (Judaic) subjectivity,
who is bound to that law, than the adherent of Heathen objectivity will feel
smugly superior to the pseudo-Christian subjectivity which characterizes the
deferential binding to his freedom, the 'free church' freedom of a watery
departure from vegetative sin which governs a parliamentary roost.
240. In both cases, the female side of life, able with the subfeminine factors, both genuine and pseudo, to draw upon
the full complement of relevant objective options, is free to dominate its male
side, with secular implications, in respect of crime and punishment, for all
concerned.
241. One
cannot, I repeat cannot be properly Christian (or sensibly
nonconformist), much less Superchristian (and
sensibly transcendentalist) in either of these circumstances, which is why both
Britain and America - despite people of Christian, or Catholic, resolve - are
respectively Heathen and Superheathen countries, the
one dedicated, through watery dominion, to freedom of speech, the other no-less
dedicated, through fiery dominion, to freedom of the (camera-wielding) press.
242. Even
Christians, or people of a Roman Catholic persuasion, who live in societies
with a heathen and/or superheathen majority, are
compromised by the prevailing laws of freedom and vulnerable, in consequence, to
proclivities of a realistic and/or materialistic (un)nature which are anything
but Christian.
243. Even
Christians who happen to live in countries, like Eire, which are overwhelmingly
Roman Catholic will be exposed to the ever-present threat of Heathen and/or Superheathen criteria, as and when they succumb, via the
media, to Anglo-American influences.
244. Every
day that passes, the Christian side of life loses more ground to the
un-Christian, or heathenistic, side of it; for the
Christian Church can only stand still and mark time, tied, as it is, to the
primitive theocracy of the Old Testament, whereas the un-Christian State and/or
Kingdom is all the time advancing its immoral agendas in regard to the
maximization of freedom under the rule of 'once-born' law.
245. That
is why the Superchristian pseudo-Kingdom must come
democratically to pass, under the benevolent auspices of Social
Transcendentalism, in order to advance the preponderantly moral agenda of the
Centre with regard to the maximization of binding, within the triadic Beyond,
under the rule of 're-born' law.
246. Such
a Superchristian pseudo-Kingdom I have not hesitated
to identify, particularly in relation to my projected Centrist idealism of a
Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), with 'Kingdom Come', and I
am convinced that it is the only solution to the problem of moral decline for
Christians (not to mention many pseudo-Christians and anti-Christians)
vis-à-vis the rampant immoral threats and dangers of secular freedom.
247. Only
thus will the Gael become the 'saviour of idealism' (Connolly) in modern life,
and for him a more joyful future lies in wait which will deliver him from the
moral dilemma posed by the inability of Christianity to resist the secular
encroachments upon religious binding which characterize the times.
248. Even
Jews can be delivered from their deferentially 'once-born' binding to Superheathen freedom if they renounce the God-over-Devil
delusion of the Old Testament and elect to 'turn their back' upon all Creator-worship,
in order to achieve a 're-born' binding to the inner metaphysical self/unself via the inner metaphysical not-self and selflessness
within the Centrist parameters of Social Transcendentalism.
249. For
only a Superchristian binding can deliver them, or a
significant proportion of their number, from official deference towards the Superheathen tyranny of stellar freedom within the
pyramidal triangle, where Satan languishes under Jehovah's shadow, as David
under Saul and/or Moses, or ears under eyes.
250. One
can be delivered from ears to lungs, as from solar to Saturnalian
in cosmic backdrop to this metaphysical mode of universality, but it will take
a renunciation of deferential acquiescence in the hegemony of illusion, if
sensible truth is to be achieved and upheld to a joyful end.
251. As for the Gaels, who of course are my principal concern, I
have no doubt that the womb and the brain will play just as much, if not more,
of a role in 'Kingdom Come' as the lungs, where the overall triadic structure
of the Centre is concerned.
252. In
fact, such a structure is unavoidable anyway whatever one's religious
background, since idealism requires the support of both naturalism and realism
if it is not to become merely a 'castle in the air' or 'pie in the sky',
without proper foundation.
253. And
neither would the triadic Beyond of a new water (and purgatory), a new
vegetation (and earth), and a new airiness (and Heaven), be supportable without
reference to the new fieriness (and Hell) of a pseudo-Kingdom, which would be
empowered to administer to it, and ensure that it was both protected and
advanced throughout all Eternity.
254. Paradoxically,
the pseudo-Kingdom would be a sort of classless institution pandering to the first-,
second-, and third-class citizens of the Centre, since the overall structure of
the triadic Beyond would be such as to suggest that bottom-tier people would be
third-class citizens in their humanist adherence to watery realism; that
middle-tier people would be second-class citizens in their nonconformist
adherence to vegetative naturalism; and that top-tier people would be
first-class citizens in their transcendentalist adherence to airy idealism.
255. Hence
it is the administrative aside (of the pseudo-Kingdom) that would be classless
vis-à-vis the three-tier class structure of the Centre, in which people were
effectively lower, middle, and upper class according to their overall position
in the element-conditioned hierarchy of the triadic Beyond, both the lower and
middle categories being phenomenal and the upper category alone noumenal, as befitting its idealistic nature in what would
amount to the most perfect binding of joyful content(ment).
256. Thus,
within the Gaelic context, people of Puritan, Anglican, and Catholic
denominational background would find, under the unifying adoption of Social
Transcendentalism, a tier of the Centre, duly subsectioned,
that would mirror, in suitably modified terms, their respective elemental
biases, be it for water, vegetation, or air.
257. Thus
would the watery 'first' be 'last' (bottom), the watery-vegetative 'last' be
'first' (middle), and the vegetative-airy excluded (from the heathenistic triangle of so-called Protestant solidarity)
be elevated (top), as people passed from the Heathen/Christian world of
State/Church dialectical relativity to the triadic Beyond via the
pseudo-Kingdom of 'Kingdom Come', a Gaelic federation, to repeat, of Ireland,
Scotland, and Wales.
258. Anglicans
may, as a rule, be pseudo-Christian in their deferential binding to heathenistic freedom (within the inverted triangle of
so-called Protestant solidarity), but they could not be described as
anti-Christian, after the watery manner of Puritans.
259. For
they are still, if only just, on the male side of the gender fence, the side,
more specifically, of vegetative binding to masculine subjectivity, as
symbolized by the Crucified Christ, and are consequently quite distinct, even
in England, from 'the free'.
260. Anglicans
may be constrained by monarchic allegiance (where applicable) from embracing
the airy-vegetativeness of Roman Catholic binding,
but they are not overly disposed to the watery disposition of the 'free
churches' in what amounts to an anti-Christian standing of objective aloofness
from the vegetative earth.
261. Such
an objective aloofness, avowedly feminine, finds its political embodiment in
parliament, that champion of 'free speech', which is accordingly affiliated to
the free churches in defence, by and large, of anti-Christian (secular) values.
262. Hence
the tongue 'pulls rank' over the flesh, as water over vegetation, in the
'once-born' context of parliamentary freedom, and the flesh, duly constrained
in England by allegiance to the 'Blood Royal', is obliged to defer to the
hegemony of heathenistic freedom.
263. Yet
the focus of anti-Christianity and, indeed, of the Antichrist remains on the
'free churches', whose ministers are the living embodiment of that which is
ranged, in watery objectivity, against the vegetative earth.
264. There
is, and has long been, more freedom for women to become ministers in the 'free
churches' than - at any rate, until comparatively recently - in the Anglican or
Established one, which (fact) is not altogether surprising in view of their
feminine bias towards watery objectivity, as, for instance, in the importance
attached to baptism by Baptists.
265. When
such a bias becomes passionate, as in Dissenter-type churches, we are, to all
intents and purposes, more in the realm of the 'burning Cross' than of the
'scales-of-justice Cross', which effectively characterizes Puritan abstraction,
the abstraction born of freedom from bodily vegetativeness.
266. Hence
there is more of a Labour parallel, I would argue, than a Conservative one to
the fiery-water of passionate objectivity, while down below, at the base of the
inverted triangle, one may detect a Liberal parallel to the watery-vegetation
that is the object, more usually, of dispassionate verbal attention from 'on
high', viz. the Conservatives.
267. Thus
do the 'red' and the 'blue' line up against the 'yellowish brown', if not
'brownish yellow', of the parliamentary 'fall guy', just as, outside of
parliament, the Dissenter and Puritan churches line up, in their respective
approaches to phenomenal freedom, against the Anglican Church, in what amounts
to an anti-Christian/pseudo-Christian gender-conditioned dichotomy between free
and bound (established) interests.
268. Just
as there are what certain blunt-speaking sections of the British people would
call two kinds of 'cunt' over one type of 'prick' in
the phenomenal context of realistic civilization, with its inverted triangle,
so there are what their American counterparts would probably call two kinds of
'motherfucker' over one type of 'sonofabitch' in the noumenal context of materialistic barbarism, with its
pyramidal triangle.
269. At
least one can detect a dichotomy, in the latter kind of triangle, between the superfeminine-to-subfeminine axis of space-time materialism
and the submasculine idealist who gets to play 'fall
guy', in sequential time, for those self-righteous individuals whose noumenally objective status sets them apart from the
objects of their gender-based and even Bible-conditioned contempt.
270. Not
only do those earmarked for 'sonofabitch' denigration
get to play the noumenal equivalent of 'pricks', but
they are readily identifiable as 'assholes' (bums) to the denigratory
'jerks' who dominate them from 'on high', like motherfuck***
avengers of the 'Liberty Belle'.
271. Be
that as it may, we need not doubt that, politically considered, there is a sort
of Republican/Democrat distinction between the noumenally
objective and their subjective scapegoats, some of whom will appear to the
former as 'reds under the bed' or otherwise subversive of the political status
quo, though they would be the last to recognize the superfeminine
'beam' in their own eye when condemning the submasculine
'mote' in the eye of their political antagonist.
272. In
fact, so self-righteously convinced are they of their ideological superiority
to the submasculine 'fall guy', that they will not
hesitate to attribute all manner of Satanic practices to him which show that
where they are 'God fearing' in their loyalty to Jehovah, he is a 'God-denying'
atheistic 'sonofabitch' who cannot be trusted with
the running of a 'free society'.
273. Certainly
not to the extent, I would wager, of sending laser cannons into space and
maintaining the need for a 'star-wars' type scenario to keep America free from
communist subversion and any other external threats to its much-vaunted
liberty.
274. No
doubt, communism isn't really the solution to the 'Liberty Belle' but only
another symptom of the overall problem of Superheathen
modernity, wherein the submasculine seeks to displace
the superfeminine and/or subfeminine
and rule (if rather more bindingly so) in her stead.
275. Either
way, a 'once-born' situation is the Superheathen
result, and if this is closer, in religious terms, to Judaism than to either
Hinduism or Mohammedanism, it is still far from being even remotely
Buddhist. It will not have entirely
escaped the superfeminine tyrant but simply have
exposed her for what she is, and stigmatized as fascist anything that pertains
to her libertarian will.
276. 'Rebirth'
from sensuality to sensibility is not achieved simply by replacing one
'once-born' system with another, neither in parts of the world where it sort of
works on a communistic basis nor in those parts, like America, where there are
too many stars in the night sky.
277. 'Rebirth'
requires a 'change of heart', a moral resolve on the part of people to 'change
their ways' and 'turn their back' on the past, whatever that 'once-born' past
may happen to have been. It is not
something that can be enforced, neither militarily nor ideologically through
propaganda.
278. Neither
does 'rebirth' follow from a revolution, except perhaps where there is need of
a counter-revolution to get things back on an evolutionary track in relation to
the desire for a new order of binding that will displace the disorder of
freedom to which the 'once born' once subscribed, before becoming disillusioned
with it.
279. People
who find themselves in a predominantly free and objective society may well have
to undergo some kind of counter-revolution to re-establish a desire for
binding, but those who are habituated to a bound society will already be in a
subjective position, and have only to step it up, voluntarily, to achieve their
heavenly ends.
280. It
is of course possible to be exposed to binding, if not actually bound, against
one's (free) will, and this we call being enslaved, as and when persons with an
objective disposition are encouraged to live with binding in relation to a
moralistic society.
281. It is
also possible to be exposed to freedom, if not actually free, against one's
(bound) will, and this we call being dispossessed, as and when persons with a
subjective disposition are encouraged to live with freedom in relation to an
immoral society.
282. The
Enslaved and the Dispossessed will generally be exceptions to the rule however,
since the majority of people in any given type of society will normally be
either free or bound, according to either their democratically or theocratically expressed wishes.
283. Those
who were once free but subsequently find themselves living in a bound society
may well consider themselves enslaved to the Bound, whereas those who were once
bound but subsequently find themselves living in a free society may well
consider themselves dispossessed by the Free.
284. Either
way, there will be a gender antagonism between the Enslaved and the Bound on
the one hand, and between the Dispossessed and the Free on the other hand, an
antagonism which may or may not lead to freedom or to binding, depending on the
context, for the minorities concerned.
285. A
'just society' will seek to ameliorate, as far as possible, the plight of the
Dispossessed for the sake of the Free, whilst a 'wise society' will tolerate a
certain degree of freedom for the sake of the Bound.
286. No
society can be entirely free or entirely bound, given the gender basis for the
dichotomy between freedom and binding, free will and natural determinism, but
all societies will evince a bias towards one or the other, according to their
ethnic bent.
287. Thus
both Britain and America are 'free societies' to the extent that heathenistic criteria predominate with regard, in the one
case, to 'freedom of speech' and, in the other case, to 'freedom of the press',
but they also contain bound elements in relation to Christian sensibility, some
of whom may well feel themselves to be of the Dispossessed.
288. Thus
Ireland, to take but a single example of a Christian (Roman Catholic) country,
is by and large a 'bound society' to the extent that Christian criteria
preponderate with regard, for example, to 'binding to pregnancy' (as Marian
requirement) and 'binding to Christ' (through the Mass), but it also contains
free elements in relation to Heathen sensuality, some of whom may well feel
themselves to be of the Enslaved.
289. Being
enslaved in the above sense is not of course the same as being incarcerated,
and neither is being dispossessed the same as being unemployed or otherwise
incapacitated through redundancy, ill-health, accident, etc.
290. Anyone can be incarcerated, whether of an
objective or of a subjective disposition overall, just as anyone can be
unemployed and thus obliged, contrary to the imprisoned, to live with more
freedom than he/she would ordinarily want.
291. The main difference, it seems to me, between the
Incarcerated and the Unemployed is that whereas the former are obliged to live
in binding (chains) against their will, usually as punishment for crime, the
latter are obliged to live in freedom (want) against their will, as ungraceful
surplus to sinful requirement.
292. Those
who are obliged to live contrary to their will are thus by no means identical
with those who find themselves living in societies in which the majority of
people are illustrative of a contrary order of will, whether bound or free.
293. Considered
morally, binding may be more desirable than freedom, but morality is a
subjective consideration which will accordingly suit men more than women, as a
rule, and thereby necessitate, at its 're-born' best, some Christian-type
arrangement of society, contrary to Heathen practices.
294. For
any fool can be deferentially bound to freedom in the 'kingdom without', but
only that man who is 're-born' into subjective sensibility
will be delivered (from such self-defeating deference) via binding to Christ
and/or the Holy Spirit through his phenomenal self and/or noumenal
self, which will accordingly be enhanced.
295. In
the first instance, the perfect form of knowledge in vegetative sin; in the
second instance, the perfect content(ment) of joy in
airy grace - all the difference, in short, between the Church and the Centre of
'Kingdom Come', man and superman.
296. Sin
is the death-in-life (of the earth) and grace the Life
Eternal (of Heaven), the difference between the Crucified and the Resurrected,
the ego and the mind of phenomenal subjectivity and noumenal
subjectivity, with especial reference, in 'rebirth', to sensibility.
297. By
contrast, crime is the Death Eternal (of Hell) and punishment the life-in-death
(of purgatory), the difference between the Condemned and the Avenged, the id
and the soul of noumenal objectivity and phenomenal
objectivity, with especial reference, in 'once-born' contexts, to sensuality.
298. In
fact, one could broaden the scope of this perspective to distinguish, in
elemental terms, the fire of Eternal Death from the water of life-in-death on
the one hand, that of female objectivity, while likewise distinguishing the
vegetation of death-in-life from the air of Eternal Life on the other hand,
that of male subjectivity.
299. Thus
Eternal Death and life-in-death are metachemical and
chemical actualities that have reference to materialism and realism, both of
which are free proclivities, whereas death-in-life and Eternal Life are
physical and metaphysical actualities that have reference to naturalism and
idealism, both of which are bound proclivities.
300. Hence
freedom is commensurate with death, whether absolutely, in the noumenal objectivity of space-time materialism, or
relatively, in the phenomenal objectivity of volume-mass realism, both of which
are free of life, through fire and water, and are thus dead.
301. By
contrast, binding is commensurate with life, whether relatively, in the phenomenal
subjectivity of mass-volume naturalism, or absolutely, in the noumenal subjectivity of time-space idealism, both of which
are bound to life, through vegetation and air, and are thus alive.
302. Even
life-in-death, the punishing freedom of the phenomenally objective, is still
death, the living death of 'the good', whereas death-in-life, the sinful
binding of the phenomenally subjective, is still life, the deathly life of 'the
foolish', who are as far beneath Eternal Life, the noumenal
life of 'the wise' ... as their objective counterparts are beneath Eternal
Death, the noumenal death of 'the evil'.
303. Thus
both (England-dominated)
304. In
fact, one could cite 'Britannia' as symbolic of life-in-death, or command of water
(not only in terms of tongue-based freedom of speech, but also in terms of
navigable freedom of the seas, etc.), and the 'Liberty Belle' as symbolic of
Eternal Death, or command of fire (not just in terms of photographic freedom,
but also in regard to the conquest of space and siting
of laser and/or spy satellites, etc.).
305. In
neither country would there be all that much respect for life, neither
phenomenally, in relation to death-in-life, nor noumenally,
in relation to Eternal Life, since the one presupposes the Catholic Church
while the other presupposes, in its full-blown manifestation, the Social
Transcendentalist Centre of 'Kingdom Come', the pseudo-Kingdom of, initially, a
Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), as taught by me.
306. The
pyramidal triangle of American society (barbarity) is the structural
illustration of Eternal Death, just as the inverted triangle of British society
(civility) is the structural illustration of life-in-death.
307. America's
obsession with the death penalty is ample evidence of its predilection for
death, not least of all in terms of the way electrocuting, gassing, and
poisoning (via lethal injection) seem to fit into, or equate with, the
pyramidal triangle.
308. For
just as American sport would seem to range from 'gridiron', or American
so-called football, at the apex of the pyramidal triangle to baseball and
basketball along its base, so that we get a sort of eyes-over-ears-to-heart
parallel or, in negative terms, stellar-over-solar-to-Venusian
parallel, so the American modes of corporal punishment would seem to take up
equivalent positions, with electrocuting at the apex of the triangle in
question, and gassing and poisoning along its base.
309. Thus
there would seem to be a parallel between 'gridiron' and the electric chair,
baseball and the gas chamber, and basketball and lethal injection, at least in
terms of their respective applicabilities to the
pyramidal triangle.
310. Doubtless
fries, burgers and cola, corresponding to apex and base of the pyramidal
triangle, are the culinary parallels to the above, along, in all probability,
with synthesizers, brass and hand-percussion for the musical parallels to what
is, after all, a death-driven system having its apex in the spatial space of
the superfeminine, and its base in submasculine-to-subfeminine positions along the plane of
time, the one sequential and the other repetitive, as in regard, for example,
to ears and heart.
311. Be
that as it may,
312. It
is the mentality of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' which prevails
in
313. Were
America more elementally identifiable with water, like Britain, than with fire,
then it would probably not have the death penalty but only the punishing
justice of life-in-death, or incarceration, under the maternal governance of
'Britannia'. But America is, after all,
American, not British, and is thus subject, due to a combination of climatic
and historical factors, to fire more than to water or, at any rate, to a
culture which reflects a superfeminine hegemony in
the 'Liberty Belle', and is accordingly more disposed to identify with evil
than with good, with metachemical power than with
chemical glory.
314. Consequently
there is scope in
315. Contrasted
with the inflicting of retributive crime through execution or the punishment of
crime through incarceration is, of course, the forgiveness of sin through
verbal absolution (for confessional contrition) and the avoidance of sin
through spiritual involution, this latter alone being commensurate with grace,
and thus with that which accords with Eternal Life.
316. For
the sinner is fated to experience only the temporal life of death-in-life, the
bodily life of phenomenal subjectivity, whereas to experience Eternal Life one
must be of the 'Elect of Spirit' and thus be above sin in what amounts to
perfect grace, the joyful content(ment) of heavenly
being in noumenal subjectivity.
317. Hitherto
the Church has offered and protected the half-life of death-in-life, with its
sinful fulcrum, as much in evidence in cerebral 're-born' contexts as in fleshy
'once-born' ones, where it takes the form of intellectual as opposed to carnal
knowledge.
318. Sensible
knowledge is of course preferable to sensual knowledge, as Christ to Pan, or
the brain to the phallus, and it does signify the salvation of man from 'once
born' to 're-born', but only in vegetativeness, not
in relation to air!
319. For one is not saved to sensible God and the possibility
thereof of sensible Heaven until and unless, as superman, one is into the
spirit of the lungs through transcendental meditation, and this, as a rule, the
Church has been loath to encourage.
320. Why? Because the Church is phenomenal, not noumenal, and thus more of a vehicle for death-in-life than
for Eternal Life as such (not to mention the 'once-born' Eternal Life of
sensual God and Heaven in connection with the spirit of the ears which more
accords with subman than with either man or
superman).
321. The
Church is rooted in the Creator-based primitivity of
the Old Testament, and Christ is as far as things can go on the side of life,
the life not of Heaven but of man, the knowledgeable shortfall as death-in-life
from perfect content(ment),
the sinful form of intellectual knowledge as opposed to the graceful content of
spiritual feeling.
322. Hence
prayer, the religious form of cogitation, and the forgiveness of sin through
verbal absolution (on the part of priests) is as far
as things can go in Christ. For anything
further - and higher - there is need of a new order of religion, an order led
not by Christ, affiliated via the Jehovahesque
'Father' and the Marian 'Mother' to Eternal Death and to life-in-death
respectively, but by his Superchristian successor,
the effective Second Coming of Messianic 'god-kingship'.
323. For
a spiritual transcendence of the intellect there is need, in short, of Social
Transcendentalism and thus of 'Kingdom Come', with all that it implies in
regard to the triadic Beyond of the genuine Centre.
324. Social
Transcendentalism goes beyond Christianity to the extent that it upholds
genuine spirituality through meditative praxis, and is thus committed to a
graceful as opposed to a sinful fulcrum, a fulcrum of wisdom as against one of
folly.
325. One
can never be anything more than sensibly foolish in Christ, as and when one
prays in due nonconformist vein through the vegetative rebirth of cerebral
naturalism, whereas the sensibility that the Messianic architect of Social
Transcendentalism affirms has more to do with sensible wisdom, the meditating
wisdom, in short, of the superman.
326. And
the superman, being deistically committed to the spirit via the Lung-God of his
supernatural not-self, is atheistic with regard to all theistic gods, including
the Bible-documented Jehovah, so-called 'Creator of the Universe'.
327. It
is my belief that not only Jews but Christians can embrace Social
Transcendentalism, whether spiritually in meditation, intellectually in
cogitation, or emotionally in contemplation, since Social Transcendentalism
allows, as already noted, for a triadic Centre in which woman, man, and
superman co-exist in relation to the eternalized elements of water, vegetation,
and air.
328. And
such a triadic Centre, the focus of the practical implementation of religious
sovereignty, would be served by the transmuted fire of the pseudo-Kingdom ...
of 'Kingdom Come', whose ruling head would be the 'philosopher-king' and
Messianic deliverer ... of the People (from 'sins and/or punishments of the
world').
329. But
the People must be granted the opportunity to vote for religious sovereignty,
and thus elect to fob off 'sins and/or punishments of the world' upon the
Messianic deliverer, if there is to be both a pseudo-Kingdom, the focus of
Christ-like sacrifice of bearing such 'sins and/or punishments', and a
three-tier Centre in due post-worldly and, hence, otherworldly course.
330. This
electoral opportunity would be commensurate, so I believe, with Judgement, for
Judgement is not only about punishing or removing the guilty and/or irrelevant;
it is also, in my view, about people deciding whether or not to opt for
religious sovereignty and thus be saved from 'worldly sin and/or punishment' to
the otherworldly Beyond ... of 'Kingdom Come'.
331. And
that means, in particular, what I have elsewhere described as a Gaelic
federation, not just of Irish Gaels but, no less importantly, of Scotch and
Welsh Gaels, who would be democratically opting for deliverance, as much as
anything, from the netherworldly Behind ... of the
United Kingdom which, in the event of negative Judgement, might well become a
'Kingdom Gone', so to speak, to those who had opted out of it.
332. For
without Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, there would be no United Kingdom
but only England on the one hand, and the Gaelic federation of a united Ireland
together with Scotland and Wales on the other hand, the hand of Gaelic
nationhood in 'Kingdom Come'.
333. I
am most decidedly a Gaelic nationalist or, if you prefer, pan-nationalist, who
regards himself as thinking beyond Irish nationality in what amounts to a
cultural transcendence of natural criteria ... of country-as-nation.
334. For
the Gael has long been 'sold short' from his rightfully high estate as a
cultural being, and anything short of a Gaelic concept of nationhood, such that
transcends the naturalistic, and hence sinfully vegetative, parameters of
country-as-nation, will continue to deprive him of divine justice and
idealistic deliverance, in consequence, not only from Christian shortfalls from
airy grace, but from English-motivated constraints going back, originally,
behind nature to civilized (parliamentary) and barbarous (monarchic) concepts
of nation.
335. For
the English, on the other hand, a Gaelic rejection, come Judgement, of the
United Kingdom would provide the opportunity for a disestablished Church and the
possibility, therewith, of an accommodation with Rome in the interests of a
democratically-mandated English republicanism that would allow economics to
escape from under the secular shadow of both political and scientific freedoms,
as germane to Great Britain, and bask in the mundane glow of its own commitment
to enhanced vegetative binding.
336. Thus
would England achieve, via Catholic republicanism, the next best thing to the
religious binding, through Social Transcendentalism, of the federated Gaels, as
nature under culture, the phenomenal subjectivity of masculine vegetativeness under the noumenal
subjectivity (in general terms) of supermasculine
airiness.
337. Thus
a natural concept of nationhood for England would find itself juxtaposed with a
cultural concept of nationhood for the federated Gaels of the Social
Transcendentalist Centres, while civilized and barbarous concepts of
nationhood, owing more to State and Kingdom, would be democratically consigned,
following Judgement, to the 'rubbish heap' of heathenistic
history, along with political and scientific freedoms.
338. For
unless things return to binding of either a vegetative (for England) or an airy
(for the Gaels) order, freedom will continue to rule, in due objective, and
hence female-oriented, fashion, to the detriment of economics and religion.
339. There
has been enough power and glory and too little form and content(ment) on these islands since
340. Such
a male-oriented subjectivity will not speak of equality between men and women,
or of anything so illogical, but will accept and develop the inequalities which
exist between them in the name of both Christian (for
341. In truth, men are not better than women, any more than women
are better than men. You cannot compare
that which is opposite, like subjective and objective, but only contrast it.
342. Men
and women are dissimilar, since affiliated to opposite sides of the gender
fence, and should therefore be related to different criteria.
343. Since,
in general terms, perfect glory is (im)morally
preferable to perfect power, as water to fire, punishment to crime, or goodness
to evil, we can say that phenomenal woman is better than noumenal
woman, as proud emotionality than beautiful instinctuality.
344. Since,
in general terms, perfect content is morally preferable to perfect form, as air
to vegetation, grace to sin, or wisdom to folly, we can say that noumenal man is better than phenomenal man, as joyful
spirituality than knowledgeable intellectuality.
345. We
can also logically contend that noumenal woman is
worse than phenomenal woman, as beautiful instinctuality
than proud emotionality, and phenomenal man worse than noumenal
man, as knowledgeable intellectuality than joyful spirituality, since
comparisons for better or worse between one kind of objectivity and another or
one kind of subjectivity and another are logically sustainable.
346. What
we cannot do with any degree of logical justification is contend that
phenomenal man, say, is better than phenomenal woman or that noumenal man, closer to God in both sensuality and
sensibility, is better than noumenal woman, who is
closer to the Devil in both sensuality and sensibility, any more than we can
reverse this by contending that phenomenal woman is worse than phenomenal man or
noumenal woman worse than noumenal
man.
347. On
the contrary, phenomenal man is as dissimilar, in mass-volume naturalism, from
phenomenal woman ... as phenomenal woman, in volume-mass realism, from
phenomenal man, while noumenal man is as dissimilar,
in time-space idealism, from noumenal woman ... as noumenal woman, in space-time materialism, from noumenal man.
348. Vegetation
is not better than water, any more than water is better than vegetation. Neither, it seems to me, is air better than fire
or fire better than air. Vegetation and
water, no less than air and fire, are opposites, and opposite they will forever
remain.
349. Now
you may, as a phenomenal man, prefer vegetation to water and, as a noumenal man, prefer air to fire, but you cannot maintain,
with any logical justification, that vegetation is better than water and air
better than fire or, conversely, that water is worse than vegetation and fire
worse than air.
350. Similarly
you may, as a phenomenal woman, prefer water to vegetation and, as a noumenal woman, prefer fire to air, but you cannot
maintain, with any logical justification, that water is better than vegetation
and fire better than air or, conversely, that vegetation is worse than water
and air worse than fire.
351. One
can certainly argue that air is better than vegetation and vegetation worse
than air, while, on the objective side of the elemental divide, one should be
able to argue that water is better than fire and fire worse than water.
352. For whereas air corresponds to Eternal Life, vegetation only
corresponds to death-in-life, which is a sinful shortfall, through perfect
form, from the perfect content of grace, as folly from wisdom.
353. And
whereas water corresponds to life-in-death, fire only corresponds to Eternal
Death, which is a criminal aloofness, through perfect power, from the perfect
glory of punishment, as evil from goodness.
354. Thus
just as wisdom is morally better than folly and folly morally worse than
wisdom, so goodness is (im)morally
better than evil and evil (im)morally worse than
goodness.
355. You
may prefer, as a female, to wear a dress to a skirt, but it is (im)morally better to wear a skirt
than a dress and (im)morally worse to wear a dress
than a skirt.
356. You
may prefer, as a male, to wear trousers to a zippersuit,
but it is morally better to wear a zippersuit to
trousers and morally worse to wear trousers to a zippersuit.
357. While phenomenal objectivity is different
from phenomenal subjectivity, as skirt from trousers, it is better than noumenal objectivity, just as goodness is better than evil,
though only different from folly.
358. While noumenal subjectivity is
different from noumenal objectivity, as zippersuit from dress, it is better than phenomenal
subjectivity, just as wisdom is better than folly, though only different from
evil.
359. The subjective, whether noumenal
or phenomenal, may be preferable, from a male standpoint, to the objective, but
it is not better than the objective. It
is simply different.
360. Likewise
the objective, whether noumenal or phenomenal, may be
preferable, from a female point of view, to the subjective, but it is not
better than the subjective. It is simply
different.
361. Thus
the Church is not better than the State, any more than the State is worse than
the Church. They are simply as
different, in their subjective/objective distinctions, as phenomenal man and
woman.
362. Likewise
the Centre (of 'Kingdom Come') is or will not be better than the Kingdom, any more
than the Kingdom is or will be worse than the Centre. They are simply as different, in their
subjective/objective distinctions, as noumenal man
and woman.
363. Evolution
is not better than devolution, any more than devolution is worse than evolution:
it is simply different, since pertaining to that which is subjective - and male
- as opposed to objective - and female.
364. I
would hold the phenomenal devolution of the democratic State to be (im)morally better than, and hence
ethically preferable to, the noumenal devolution of
the autocratic Kingdom and, conversely, the noumenal
devolution of the autocratic Kingdom to be (im)morally
worse than the phenomenal devolution of the democratic State.
365. Similarly,
I would hold the noumenal evolution of the meritocratic Centre (of our projected triadic Beyond) to be
morally better than, and hence ethically preferable to, the phenomenal
evolution of the plutocratic (in Christ) Church and, conversely, the phenomenal
evolution of the plutocratic Church to be morally worse than the noumenal evolution of the meritocratic
Centre.
366. In
fact, it seems to me that things devolve in space-time materialism from
autocracy to aristocracy, and in volume-mass realism from democracy to
bureaucracy, as from, say, eyes to heart in relation to noumenal
objectivity, and from tongue to womb in relation to phenomenal objectivity.
367. Conversely,
it seems to me that things evolve in mass-volume naturalism from technocracy to
plutocracy, and in time-space idealism from theocracy to meritocracy, as from,
say, phallus to brain in relation to phenomenal subjectivity, and from ears to
lungs in relation to noumenal subjectivity.
368. Hence
to contrast the noumenal devolution in space-time
materialism of autocracy to aristocracy with the noumenal
evolution in time-space idealism of theocracy to meritocracy, as one would
contrast the evil of metachemical objectivity with
the wisdom of metaphysical subjectivity.
369. Hence
to contrast the phenomenal devolution in volume-mass realism of democracy to
bureaucracy with the phenomenal evolution in mass-volume naturalism of
technocracy to plutocracy, as one would contrast the goodness of chemical
objectivity with the folly of physical subjectivity.
370. If
autocracy, theocracy, democracy, and technocracy are all on the sensual side of
life as 'once-born' actualities, then it follows that bureaucracy, plutocracy,
aristocracy, and meritocracy will pertain to the sensible side of life as their
're-born' counterparts.
371. Hence
in a Christian-type 're-born' society, where there is more sensibility than
sensuality, there will be more bureaucracy, plutocracy, aristocracy, or
meritocracy, as the case may be, than autocracy, theocracy, democracy, or
technocracy.
372. Certainly
the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' would reflect the prevalence of
bureaucratic tendencies in its first tier, of plutocratic tendencies in its
second tier, and of meritocratic tendencies in its
top tier, the tier of transcendentalism per se, since new orders of bureaucracy
and plutocracy, together with the unprecedented championing of meritocracy as
an official norm, would characterize its respective commitments to a feminine
'new purgatory', a masculine 'new earth', and, above all, a supermasculine
'New Heaven'.
373. But
this would be because it was being served and administered from the standpoint
of a pseudo-Kingdom whose principal representatives would be of
pseudo-aristocratic disposition, in view of their pseudo-subfeminine
commitment to the hegemony of meritocratic spirituality
via Social Transcendentalism.
374. Hence
not only would meritocratic spirituality not exist
except in relation to the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', but it requires the
service and backing of a pseudo-Kingdom in order to materialize at all in an
official capacity, with plutocracy and bureaucracy duly subordinated to its
hegemonic standing in relation to the Centre as a whole.
375. Hence
a pseudo-aristocracy, the Social Transcendentalist aristocracy of the 'Sacred Heart'
of the Second Coming, are the prerequisites not only of the Centre but of the
pre-eminence of meritocratic spirituality in the
Centre's third tier, the tier emphasizing, in its top subsection, meditative
praxis.
376. Thus
would religion be saved from theocracy, the Satanic/Davidian
theocracy in relation to Judaism and the theocracy of the Father/St Joseph in
relation to Christianity, the former of which has languished under the shadow
of Jehovah/Mosaic autocracy and the latter of which under the shadow of the
Father/St Joseph in relation to merely bureaucratic (Marian) and plutocratic (Christic) ends, ends that were accountable to the Father/St
Joseph and duly subordinated to His will and reign as God.
377. For
Christ, remember, was only the 'Son of God', not the Father/St Joseph as such,
and thus someone who would not lead beyond the latter but keep one worshipfully
deferential to Him in due theocratic vein, and this despite his professed
commitment, via the vegetative brain, to the 'kingdom within', a kingdom at
plutocratic variance, seemingly, with the theocratic 'kingdom without' of the
Father/St Joseph.
378. But
as the sphere of 'God' is lowered, with Christianity, from autocratic to
theocratic planes, as from the cosmos/eyes to the sun/ears, so the sphere of
'the Devil' is lowered from theocratic to technocratic planes, with a
consequence that the vegetative earth/flesh, as symbolized by Pan, is demonized
and undermined the better to encourage a Christic
'rebirth' such that has its vegetative fulcrum in Mars/the brain.
379. Thus
'Pan' becomes 'Satan' and 'the earth' becomes 'hell', as does the flesh and
sex, for those who, as Christians, accept a theocratic God and a technocratic
Devil, the better to achieve, via a bureaucratic Mother, viz. the Virgin Mary,
plutocratic 'rebirth' in Christ.
380. Hence
nature and the earth, duly demonized, become fit prey for denigration and, in
due degenerative course, for exploitation from a plutocratic standpoint, the
standpoint of capitalist gain.
381. From
being the subject of Satanic taboo, the vegetative earth and its personal
corollary, the flesh, becomes the object, in the course of ongoing
secularization, of capitalist exploitation, as do those who are most
identifiable with it, due to their earthly and/or fleshy dispositions.
382. America
differs from Europe in respect of the fact that its sphere of 'God' is once
again autocratic, in due Old Testament vein, and its Devil accordingly
theocratic, as the starry cosmos pulls rank on the sun, and the eyes on the
ears in due Biblical, i.e. Jehovah-over-Satan and Moses-over-David, fashion.
383. In
such fashion, it releases the vegetative earth/flesh from the kind of
Christian-motivated repression that Europe tended to inflict upon it, but is
all the more repressive towards the theocratic realm of the sun/ears in
relation, for example, to anti-communist paranoia.
384. In
fact, America is always searching for 'Reds' under the 'white', or autocratic,
'bed' ... to denigrate, and never more so than under a Republican
administration, which remains closer to the superfeminine
light of the 'Liberty Belle' than to the submasculine
fire (metaphysical) of the Satanic/Davidian 'fall
guy'.
385. It
could be said, with some logical justification, that America is less Christian
than Judaic, but, in actuality, it is less Judaic than effectively Hinduesque in its greater aloofness from the theocratic
realm and un-Jewish paranoia with regard to the Satanic/Davidian
'beast'.
386. Perhaps
this is because America is effectively an Aryan, not a Semitic, continent, and
one, moreover, that is much more polytheistically
open to the Cosmos in consequence of its partly environmentally-conditioned
autocratic transcendentalism, as confirmed by the 'Stars and Stripes' of its
national flag.
387. Certainly
there is a tension within America between theocratic and autocratic interests,
whether one interprets this in terms of a Semitic/Aryan struggle or of a
Judaic/Hindu struggle or even, in political terms, of a Democratic/Republican
struggle between subjectivity and objectivity on the noumenal
planes of time and space.
388. Yet
if the European 'Old World' is characterized by adherence, traditionally, to
New Testament theocracy in the fundamentalist guise of the Father/St Joseph
(though the possibility of substituting Old Testament autocracy for New
Testament theocracy is always available and, to judge by history, readily
availed of), then it is not without ironic significance that the American 'New
World' is more characterized by adherence to Old Testament autocracy, in the
transcendentalist guise of Jehovah/Moses.
389. But
this Old Testament autocracy, given an Aryan twist, is more 'down' on the
Satanic/Davidian 'fall guy' than would be
commensurate, so I believe, with a Judaic disposition, in consequence of which
America retains an almost uniquely anti-communist paranoia, in the modern
world, that sets it polytheistically apart from
Israel, and gives to its relations with the submasculine
sphere an acerbity that most Jews would, I feel confident, be loathe to
entertain.
390. Which
is not to say that most Jews do not defer, in some degree, to Jehovah/Moses,
but simply that Judaism is anything but as deeply rooted in the Cosmos as
Hinduism and/or the American mongrel which derives some of its Aryan paranoia
from Christianity and some from its own star-spangled continent as such,
neither of which could be greatly congenial to a people who largely identify,
when true to themselves, with the Satanic/Davidian
'fall guy' of fundamentalist theocracy.
391. And
it is for this reason that there is the possibility, for Jews and suchlike
peoples with a submasculine bias, of a rejection not
only of their own fundamentalist theocracy but, more crucially, of
transcendentalist autocracy and an acceptance, via my teachings, of
transcendentalist meritocracy, in due process of electing for sensible
'rebirth' up the time-space axis of metaphysical idealism, the one that runs
contrary, in evolutionary terms, to the space-time axis of metachemical
materialism, of which the superfeminine, symbolized
by the 'Liberty Belle', is apex.
392. Time-space
subjectivity is of course the axis of what its vulgar denigrators would call
'bums' or 'assholes', while, conversely, space-time objectivity corresponds to
what others of an equally coarse disposition would call 'wankers'
or 'jerks'.
393. Transcendentalism,
correlating with the plane of space, is effectively commensurate with what the utilizers of verbal expletives would or could describe as 'snogging', whether in relation to 'jerks' in spatial-space
sensuality or to 'bums' in spaced-space sensibility, whereas fundamentalism,
correlating with the plane of time, is effectively commensurate with what utilizers of verbal expletives would describe as 'frigging',
whether in relation to 'bums' in sequential-time sensuality or to 'jerks' in
repetitive-time sensibility.
394. Hence
to contrast the descent (devolutionary salvation) in space-time objectivity of
'jerks' from 'spatial snogging' to 'repetitive
frigging' ... with the ascent (evolutionary salvation) in time-space
subjectivity of 'bums' from 'sequential frigging' to 'spaced snogging'.
395. Down
below, via the phenomenal planes of volume and mass, volume-mass objectivity is
of course the axis of what its vulgar denigrators would call 'cunts' or 'creeps', while, conversely, mass-volume
subjectivity corresponds to what others of an equally coarse disposition would
call 'pricks' or 'prats'.
396. Nonconformism, correlating with the plane of volume, is
effectively commensurate with what the utilizers of
verbal expletives would describe as 'sodding',
whether in relation to 'cunts' in volumetric-volume
sensuality or to 'pricks' in voluminous-volume sensibility, whereas humanism,
correlating with the plane of mass, is effectively commensurate with what utilizers of verbal expletives would describe as 'fucking',
whether in relation to 'pricks' in massive-mass sensuality or to 'cunts' in massed-mass sensibility.
397. Hence
to contrast the descent (devolutionary salvation) in volume-mass objectivity of
'cunts' from 'volumetric sodding'
to 'massed fucking' ... with the ascent (evolutionary salvation) in mass-volume
subjectivity of 'pricks' from 'massive fucking' to 'voluminous sodding'.
398. Thus
one may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in materialism, of 'big jerks' to
'little jerks' with the evolutionary salvation, in idealism, of 'little bums'
to 'big bums', as things descend from 'spatial snogging'
to 'repetitive frigging' in the one case, and ascend from 'sequential frigging'
to 'spaced snogging' in the other case.
399. Likewise,
one may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in realism, of 'big cunts' to 'little cunts' with the
evolutionary salvation, in naturalism, of 'little pricks' to 'big pricks', as
things descend from 'volumetric sodding' to 'massed
fucking' in the one case, and ascend from 'massive fucking' to 'voluminous sodding' in the other case.
400. Reverting
to conventional philosophical terminology, such as is more appropriate to my
own disposition, we may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in metachemical objectivity, of sensual transcendentalism to
sensible fundamentalism with the evolutionary salvation, in metaphysical
subjectivity, of sensual fundamentalism to sensible transcendentalism, as
things descend from spatial space to repetitive time in space-time materialism
and ascend from sequential time to spaced space in time-space idealism.
401. Likewise,
we may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in chemical objectivity, of
sensual nonconformism to sensible humanism with the
evolutionary salvation, in physical subjectivity, of sensual humanism to
sensible nonconformism, as things descend from
volumetric volume to massed mass in volume-mass realism and ascend from massive
mass to voluminous volume in mass-volume naturalism.
402. I
do not, myself, much approve of verbal expletives and monosyllabic denigrations
of the opposite gender, whether in phenomenal or in noumenal
terms, depending on the context, but such tendencies patently exist and are
very much a fact of contemporary life, rooted, as it all too often is, in
divergent aggression.
403. I
believe I alluded, earlier in this text, to the 'motherfucker'/'sonofabitch' dichotomy that tends to characterize the
American gender divide at the noumenal levels of
space and time to which America primarily relates as a cultural manifestation
of barbarous death, and such terms tend to prevail in parallel with the 'cunt'/'prick' ones more germane to the phenomenal
relativity of, for example, Britain, with its civilized death.
404. We
cannot be coy or evasive about such crude terms here, as book writers and
publishers generally are, but must strive to understand them in the light of a
post-filmic psychology which, with due comprehension, has the goal of their
sensible transcendence in mind.
405. For
that which, in book form, precedes film as a sort of bourgeois medium is not as
honest or open to the full-gamut of understanding as that which, in disc or
tape form, succeeds it, since 'the book', as a traditional medium of literary
presentation, is limited in time and scope to the phenomenal parameters of the
half-lies and half-truths, the fictions and facts, of the realistic/natualistic world.
406. In
short, books rarely if ever transcend the vegetative parameters of masculine
'bullshit', which is not only a phenomenal shortfall from 'bullgas'
or, at any rate, the 'sub-bullgas' to 'superbullgas' of time-space idealism, but a naturalistic
half-truth that fights shy, in effectively Christian vein, of the truth, as
upheld by the noumenally subjective submasculine and/or supermasculine
'Sons of God'.
407. The
generality of books can, in fact, be divided between 'bullshit' and 'cowshit', the former structurally if not always
thematically synonymous with a hardback parallel, and the latter structurally
if not always thematically synonymous with a softback
one, as, in effect, between Christian and Heathen, or Catholic and Protestant,
or naturalist and realist, or elliptical and rectangular, or masculine and
feminine, etc. etc., alternatives within the phenomenal parameters of 'the
world'.
408. Softbacks are divisible into those which are purely verbal,
and hence symbolically identifiable in due soft vegetative vein with 'cowshit', and those, by contrast, which contain either
monochromatic or polychromatic photographs, the former symbolically
illustrative of 'cowpiss' and the latter of 'cowpuss', as in watery and fiery parallels over a feminized
mode of vegetation.
409. In
contrast to this inverted triangle of a British or parliamentary/Protestant
norm, we may posit the non-triangular hierarchy of hardbacks in terms of a
distinction between those which are purely verbal, and hence symbolically
identifiable with 'bullshit' on account of their hard vegetative structure, and
those which contain either monochromatic or polychromatic photographs, the
former symbolically illustrative of 'bullpiss' and
the latter of 'bullgas', as in watery (below) and
airy (above) parallels either side of a properly masculine order of vegetation.
410. I
say 'airy' for the 'bullgas' of polychromatic
hardbacks, but in point of fact such a parallel is rather more fiery, if on
comparatively metaphysical terms, and hence effectively something falling back
on the Father/St Joseph rather than stretching beyond vegetation in genuinely
transcendental terms, and is thus specifically Catholic.
411. Roman
Catholics are always 'sold short' of sensible spirituality as the Holy Spirit
is twisted back, in fundamentalist vein, to the sensual spirituality of the
'once-born' Father/St Joseph, the Creator, etc., Who owes more to the Subchristian metaphysics of theocratic fundamentalism than
ever He does to the Superchristian metaphysics of meritocratic transcendentalism.
412. In such fashion, the sun and/or the ears become the Creatoresque focal-point, in due negative and/or positive
terms, of the Holy Spirit, which, subsumed into the Creator, has nothing to do
with the supermasculine spirituality of spaced space
and everything to do with the submasculine
spirituality of sequential time, as in music.
413. For
sensible spirituality, the spirituality of spaced space, is effectively 'beyond
the pale' of the Roman Catholic Church, and the most airiness, or non-fiery 'bullgas', the Faithful ever tend to get from it is the
censer-swinging perfume released into the atmosphere by officiating clerics,
more as a testimony, in its fiery base, to the theocratic subsuming of the Holy
Spirit into the metaphysical fire of the Father/St Joseph than to anything
truly transcendental.
414. Thus
reconciled to the theocratic 'sub-bullgas' of the
Father/St Joseph, the Faithful are in no position to achieve or aspire towards
metaphysical 'rebirth' in relation to meditative praxis, necessarily atheistic
vis-à-vis Creatoresque theocracy, via meritocratic transcendentalism.
415. For
meritocratic 'superbullgas'
is alone commensurate, so I contend, with sensible spirituality, and thus with
the meditative 'peace' that not only surpasses, or transcends, the vegetative
realm of intellectual cogitation, with its prayerful understanding through
nonconformist plutocracy, but which lies beyond, as salvation from, the
'once-born' airy realm of aural meditation (upon music) which appertains to
theocratic fundamentalism.
416. Thus
one is not saved to 're-born' metaphysics except
through the meritocratic transcendentalism of
respiratory meditation (upon the breath), which corresponds to the sensible
spirituality of the superman, the ultimate noumenal
man who is as far beyond the sensual spirituality, in 'once-born' vein, of the subman ... as the lungs are beyond the ears or, in negative
terms, Saturn lies beyond the sun.
417. Thus
there can be no Christian hypocrisy of linking the intellectual 'kingdom
within' of Christ, through vegetative 'rebirth', to the spiritual 'kingdom
without' of the Father via the Holy Ghost ... where Social Transcendentalism,
the ideological philosophy of 'Kingdom Come', is concerned, but only an
acknowledgement of the sensible truth of the spiritual 'kingdom within' of the supermasculine Superchrist, as it
is raised up, under Messianic auspices, over both intellectual and emotional
'kingdoms within' in completion of what I have termed the triadic Beyond of the
Centre.
418. The
only kingdom 'without' the triadic Beyond ... would be the pseudo-Kingdom of
'Kingdom Come', the Gaelic federation of, hopefully, Ireland, Scotland, and
Wales that, in its Social Transcendentalist Centrism, would develop the
administrative structure whereby, in due pluralistic totalitarian vein, the
triadic Beyond could be served and maintained in perpetuity, for all cultural
Eternity.
419. The
Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, is not of Eternity but only of the
world in its vegetative shortfall, through the voluminous volume of Christ,
from airy 'rebirth', and Christ for it leads not onwards and upwards to the
sensible spirit of meditative praxis, but backwards and upwards to the sensual
spirit of the Father/St Joseph in due plutocratic deference, via 'the (New
Testament) word', to the 'once-born' hegemony of theocracy.
420. Theocracy
may not be a lie, but it is far from being the ultimate truth. Rather, theocracy is the 'once-born' truth of
the 'kingdom without' that can too easily become identified with and
substituted by the 'once-born' lie, or illusion, of the autocratic Jehovah.
421. For the Father and Jehovah are all too interchangeable to a
people, like the Christian, who are accustomed to alternating between New and
Old Testaments, the factual half-truth of the one and, in this context, the
fictional half-lie of the other, as theocracy and autocracy are shuffled around
to suit the amoral requirements of the worldly moment.
422. Thus
does the Father and Satan change places as the latter is subordinated to the
lie of the 'First Mover' as God, and something effectively closer to the
'Liberty Belle' of stellar primacy takes over the reins of religion in due
autocratic fashion, science patently triumphant over religion, as sensual
illusion replaces the sensual truth.
423. Suffice
it to say that if the so-called Christian Bible is torn, in its relativity,
between the half-lie of the Old Testament and the half-truth of the New
Testament, then that which goes further back, in pre-Biblical fashion, is
commensurate with the whole lie, the Talmudic and/or cosmic lie of the ancient
scrolls and/or tablets of pre-Western times.
424. For
in the pre-book era of the ancient so-called civilizations, the illusion was
'writ large' in due tablet and/or scrolled form, and such a beautiful illusion
contrasts not only with the subsequent half-lie and half-truth of the Christian
world, torn between feminine and masculine, water and vegetation, strength and
knowledge, but with the truthful conclusion of that which surpasses the world
in due tape and/or disc presentation of the Superchristian
word, the 're-born' metaphysical truth, in short, of meritocratic
transcendentalism, as far removed from the metachemical
illusion of autocratic transcendentalism as it is (superhumanly) possible to
be.
425. If
the metachemical illusion, or whole lie, appertains,
in its pre-book presentations, to barbarism, and the delusional half-lie and confusional half-truth, so to speak, of Christian
relativity appertain to an amoral compromise between civilization and nature,
chemistry and physics, then what may be called the metaphysical conclusion, or
whole truth, appertains, by contrast, to culture in its post-book
presentations, the sort of presentations, as I say, that require disc and/or
tape formats in due antithetical disposition (Superchristian)
to the tablets and/or scrolls of Superheathen
antiquity.
426. For
discs (including the Internet) and tapes are to the present what tablets and
scrolls were to the past - noumenal presentations of
'the word' that transcend the phenomenal parameters of 'the book'.
427. The
bourgeois publishing industry, which specializes in 'the book', cannot do
justice to or embrace metaphysical truth, least of all in its meritocratic guise; for such an industry is rooted in the
so-called 'book of books' or 'holy book', the Bible, and cannot entertain
written material that rejects both the half-lie and the half-truth of Biblical
compromise in due atheistic vein, turning away from fictions and facts,
delusions and confusions, with the deistic will of metaphysical conclusion in
the whole truth.
428. In
point of fact, there is nothing particularly 'holy' about the Bible, which
stands compromised between the watery clearness, if you will, of the Old
Testament and the vegetative unholiness of the New
Testament, ample testimony to the fictions and facts of the half-lie and
half-truth, viz. strength and knowledge, which typify its amoral parameters.
429. Just
as the illusory whole lie correlates, through metachemical
evil, with fiery unclearness, so the delusory fiction of the half-lie
correlates, through chemical goodness, with the watery clear - the difference,
in sum, between the Eternal Death of barbarism, as of barbarity, and the
life-in-death of civilization, as of civility.
430. Just
as the 'confusionary' fact correlates, through
physical folly, with vegetative unholiness, so the 'conclusionary' whole truth correlates, through metaphysical
wisdom, with airy holiness - the difference, in sum, between the death-in-life
of nature and the Eternal Life of culture.
431. One
should distinguish the metachemical unclearness of
the barbarous lie from the chemical clearness of the civilized half-lie, and
these objective options (on the female side of life) from the subjective
options (on its male side) of the physical unholiness
of the natural half-truth and the metaphysical holiness of the cultural truth -
the truth, more specifically, of 'Kingdom Come', which should embrace a
federation, in culture, of the Gaels.
432. Thus
holiness resides not in the vegetativeness of the
physical word, still less in the wateriness of the chemical word or, least of
all, the fieriness of the metachemical word, but only
in the airiness of the metaphysical word, the word of words and truth of
truths.
433. The vegetative word of the half-truth is as far short, in
its knowledgeable facticity, of airy truth ... as sin
of grace, or folly of wisdom, or man of superman, or death-in-life of Eternal
Life.
434. One
must pass beyond knowledge to get to truth, but in more than a retrogressive
way such that leads, via theocracy, to sensual truth. Rather, one must abandon sensual truth for
sensible truth, opting to be saved from 'once-born' metaphysics to 're-born' metaphysics ... as one climbs the time-space
axis of noumenal subjectivity from theocratic
fundamentalism to meritocratic transcendentalism.
435. For
the Christian half-truth of factual knowledge in the physical word is an
end-in-itself as far as the 're-born' options go, not
a means to the sensible truth of metaphysical 'rebirth', but a phenomenal
dead-end that makes a god out of sensible man and a heaven out of the sensible
earth, castigating the sensual man and earth as devil (Satanized
Pan) and hell.
436. Such a half-truth is unholy even as it proclaims itself
holy, and ungodly even as it proclaims its loyalty to God. For it has nothing to
commend itself to a genuinely heavenly 'rebirth' in the joy of joys which
appertains to and characterizes sensible being.
437. Rather,
it is a sensible taking, which demonizes sensual taking the better to aspire,
via Christ, towards the sensual being of theocracy, rooted or, rather, centred
(subjectively) in the Father/St Joseph of fiery/auditory metaphysics.
438. But
this is precisely what one must be atheistic towards if one hopes to achieve
deliverance from sensual being to the sensible being of gaseous/respiratory
metaphysics, and thus climb away, in metaphysical salvation, from theocracy to
meritocracy, the religion not of the Creator (as of Christian modification in
relation to Judaic precedence) but of the ultimate creation, the superman, who
is the refutation of man and redeemer of subman.
439. For
one must be at least to some extent submasculine -
and hence Subchristian - to have any chance of
becoming, through conversion from metaphysical sensuality to metaphysical
sensibility, genuinely supermasculine, and hence Superchristian, the transcendentalist alternative to Subchristian fundamentalism and retort to Christian nonconformism.
440. Those
who achieve heavenly salvation from below, in sensible taking, will have
abandoned Christ for the Father, Christianity for Subchristianity,
while those who achieve heavenly salvation from above, in sensual being, will
have abandoned Jehovah for Satan, passing, in due course, from the realm of
metaphysical theocracy to the realm of metaphysical meritocracy, as from the
sun to Saturn or, in positive terms, the ears to the lungs, St Joseph or David
to the Second Coming or True World (Global) Messiah of Superchristianity,
which is also Social Transcendentalist.
441. Thus
both Jews and Christians will have to abandon their respective gods, viz.
Jehovah and Christ, if there is to be any possibility, for them, of heavenly
salvation in sensible being.
442. Whether
one calls the theocratic sphere of sequential time Subjudaic
or Subchristian (as I have been doing), its religious
significance lies less in itself, given its 'once-born' limitations, than as a
springboard to spiritual 'rebirth' in the spaced space of meritocratic
transcendentalism.
443. It
seems to me that most Christians and Jews do effectively relate more to
the theocratic realm of sequential time, these days, than to either the plutocratic
realm of voluminous volume or the autocratic realm of spatial space, given the
media-fuelled drift towards religious fundamentalism which characterizes the
age.
444. Christianity
is both historical and living proof of the fact that when you make an ideal
(god) out of what is in effect the penultimate level of sensibility, viz.
intellectual knowledge, such an ideal gets hitched to the ultimate level of
sensuality, viz. aural truth, which musically reigns over the physical word in
due 'once-born' terms.
445. Hence
the 'kingdom within' of the Son/Christ's word gets hitched to the 'kingdom
without' of the Father/St Joseph, which ultimately subordinates vegetative nonconformism to its fundamentalist will in the interests
of a theocratic hegemony, the sort of hegemony, paradoxically, which is
arguably more in evidence these days than ever before.
446. Yet
the half-truth of what properly pertains to Christianity still persists in
existing, and it characterizes the conservatism of the plutocratic bias of
vegetative nonconformism, even as it impinges upon
the physical word and the inability or reluctance of hard-line Christians to
come to terms with transcendentalist truth, the truth not of theocratic
sensuality but of meritocratic sensibility.
447. In fact,
so accustomed are such people to hyping-up the half-truth to the status of the
whole truth ... that they can be depended upon to react against and reject any
evidence of the latter which may come their way, fearful lest it expose their
Christian limitations.
448. For
they have substituted the half-truth of the man-god for the whole truth of the
superman as 'Son of God', and cannot be expected to endorse any such truth when
Christian relativity enjoins them, via the Bible, to also uphold the half-lie in
the interests of world-perpetuating amorality.
449. For
the world, remember, is torn between masculine and feminine elements,
vegetation and water, and demands, in consequence, the collusion of factual
confusion with fictional delusion, as in the juxtaposition of New and Old
Testaments in the so-called Christian Bible.
450. Thus,
in the interests of world-perpetuating amorality, the Christian bourgeoisie shy
away from sensible truth, like Dracula from the (Super)cross,
content, instead, to defer (where applicable) to sensual truth via the
'once-born' Father/St Joseph, while simultaneously upholding the phenomenal
compromise between the half-truth of the New Testament and the half-lie of the
Old Testament or, at any rate, of the Old Testament in relation to the New
Testament.
451. For
the Old Testament as Judaic Torah, or whatever would be independent of the New
Testament, is no half-lie but the whole lie of Jehovah as God and Satan as the
Devil, and such a lie extends monotheistically back
behind the sensual truth of the Father/St Joseph to the stellar cosmos, wherein
the 'First Mover' pulls rank over the 'Fallen Angel' in the interests, contrary
to appearances, of Hell-perpetuating immorality, the immorality that, in the
contemporary world, finds its symbolical analogue in the 'Liberty Belle' of metachemical Superheathenism.
452. Thus
while the Christian religion understates the sphere of God in relation to
Christ, the man-god, the Judaic religion overstates the sphere of God in
relation to Jehovah, the 'First Mover', neither of which have anything to do
with God even in the necessarily primitive and 'once-born' terms of sensual
truth to which we are alluding.
453. On
the contrary, they have to do with the sensible man and the sensual Devil, the
're-born' earth and the 'once-born' Hell, and it is an understanding of this
which should allow, if it hasn't already done so, the majority of Christians
and Jews to re-orientate their respective religious allegiances on the
theocratic sphere of sequential time, the better to achieve salvation, via the
Second Coming and/or True World Messiah, from such a fundamentalist allegiance
to the meritocratic sphere of spaced space, in due
transcendentalist course.
454. For
the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah goes beyond Christ, remember, in
his affirmation of the spiritual 'kingdom within' that can alone save from the
spiritual 'kingdom without' to which the majority of latter-day Jews and
Christians effectively, if not literally, subscribe, compliments of the fundamentalist
rule of 'Father Time'.
455. It
is as if Christians were increasingly abandoning classical music, with its
strings and woodwind, for Jazz-Classical in a Christian-to-Subchristian
regression from the ('re-born') Son to the ('once-born') Father, Christ to St
Joseph, while Jews were increasingly abandoning Jazz (including the Blues) for
Classical-Jazz in a Judaic-to-Subjudaic progression
from Jehovah to Satan, Moses to David.
456. Thus
while the Subchristian and the Subjudaic
are not exactly identical, they are the Christian and Jewish approaches to the
same thing, the metaphysical fundamentalism of sequential time, wherein the sun
and the ears are the negative and positive reference-points, respectively, of
religious devotion.
457. Instrumentally,
the bottom line or root requirement is brass of a bronze coloration for both
Jazz-Classical and Classical-Jazz, since such brass is what most corresponds to
the solar sphere of theocratic fundamentalism, with its subjective
extroversion, not least of all in relation to the saxophone, which contrasts
with the objective extroversion of silver instruments like, in particular, the
trumpet.
458. But
the Subchristian and the Subjudaic
can and, one day, must be saved from sequential time to spaced space, and thus
to a Superchristian/Superjudaic disposition such that
I equate with Social Transcendentalism and the supersession,
through meritocratic metaphysics, of sensual
spirituality by sensible spirituality, the spirituality not of music but of
meditation (even if some music, in the form of piping, were to persist, in the
background, as it were, to a more genuinely sensible resolve).
459. The
position of the Father in relation to the Son, as of St Joseph, one could
argue, in relation to Christ, is rather akin to constitutional monarchy
vis-à-vis parliament, except that whereas the Christian context is 're-born' and the Subchristian
one 'once born', the Heathen context, so to speak, is 'once born' and the Subheathen one (of the Blood Royal) 're-born', so that the
overall situations are antithetical.
460. This
explains the distinction, in the British Isles, between Catholics (as
Christians) and Protestants (as heathenistic
anti-Christians and/or pseudo-Christians), the former given to a 're-born' Church with a 'once-born' Father-figure, the
pope, beyond it in due theocratic vein, the latter given to a 'once-born' State
with a 're-born' Mother-figure, the monarch, behind it in due aristocratic
fashion.
461. Hence
whereas the Christian/Subchristian context affirms
the juxtaposition of brain and ears, of Mars and the sun, the Heathen/Subheathen context affirms the juxtaposition, by contrast,
of tongue and heart, of the moon and Venus.
462. In
both cases it is the phenomenal contexts of the Catholic Church and the
parliamentary State, of Christian and Heathen, which are paramount in their
respective sovereignties, while the Subchristian
Centre (of Roman Christendom), symbolized by the Vatican, and the Subheathen Kingdom (of the United Kingdom), symbolized by
Buckingham Palace, correspond to their respective figureheads (of pope and
monarch) and not literally to their leader or ruler, as the case may be, since
both alike are tangential asides to the prevailing norm, the plutocratic norm
of the Christian Church in 're-born' vegetation (brain) and the democratic norm
of the parliamentary State in 'once-born' water (tongue).
463. For
Christianity, remember, is only Christian by dint of adherence to Christ in due
vegetative sensibility, while Parliamentarianism is only Heathen, or
parliamentary, by dint of adherence to Antichrist in due watery sensuality, and
neither the Subchristian Father nor the Subheathen Mother can ever be truly hegemonic, in
consequence of the phenomenal status of both the Church and the State, which
necessarily marginalizes the noumenal status of both
the Centre and the Kingdom, pope and monarch, 'once-born' idealism (theocracy)
and 're-born' materialism (aristocracy).
464. Hence
the parliamentary/monarchic alignment of British and/or Gaelic Protestants is
the mirror image, in heathenistic reverse, of the
ecclesiastical/papal alignment of, in particular, Irish Catholics, who,
together with Scotch and Welsh Catholics, are the Gaelic people most suited, by
dint of their overlapping Subchristian commitments to
the Father/St Joseph, for salvation to the properly Superchristian
tier, in meritocratic metaphysics, of the triadic
Beyond.
465. With
their more objective (Puritan) and/or less subjective (Anglican) dispositions,
stemming from a parliamentary hegemony, towards the Subheathen
Mother-figure of the monarchy, the majority of British or, rather, Gaelic
Protestants would be more suited to the bottom and middle tiers of the triadic
Beyond, since those who were anti-Christian in Puritanism would, following a
vote for religious sovereignty, have the prospect of pro-Superchristian
humanism in a bureaucratic 'new purgatory', while those who were
pseudo-Christian in Anglicanism would, following a vote for religious
sovereignty, have the prospect of pro-Superchristian nonconformism in a plutocratic 'new earth', the tier
directly beneath the meritocratic 'New Heaven' of
those whose Christian-to-Subchristian orientation
entitled them, as Catholics, to Superchristian
transcendentalism, the top-tier ideal of the triadic Beyond.
466. The
Gaelic peoples would no longer cling to their respective traditions, since
neither the Church nor the State, respectively coupled to the 'once-born' papal
Centre and the 're-born' monarchic Kingdom, would have any place in 'Kingdom
Come', the Messianic pseudo-Kingdom ... of pseudo-aristocratic 'rebirth' that
would administer, via the 'Sacred Heart' of the Second Coming, to the 're-born'
Centre ... of the triadic Beyond, the Centre not of an infallible pope, but of
a religiously-sovereign People.
467. Catholics
and Protestants may still, at present, be divided in the aforementioned ways,
but they can be united in and through Social Transcendentalism, which will
leave both Christianity and Subchristianity, on the
one hand, and Heathenism and Subheathenism, on the
other hand, far behind, as it takes the respective peoples to the pseudo-Subheathen/Superchristian deliverance from their
antagonistic traditions via the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come' - hopefully a
Gaelic federation of Ireland together with Scotland and Wales - and very
genuine Centre of the triadic Beyond.
468. Thus
delivered ... through a majority mandate for religious sovereignty ... the
People will no longer be Catholic or Protestant, republican or parliamentary,
papal or monarchic, nationalist or loyalist, Irish or British, but Social
Transcendentalist in one degree, shape, form or another of Gaelic nationhood
... for all Eternity.
469. Social
Transcendentalism affirms the transcendentalism of the People become
religiously sovereign, the meritocratic
transcendentalism, in particular, of a Superchristian
antithesis, through sensible wisdom, to the Superheathen
evil of autocratic transcendentalism, the transcendentalism not of God/Heaven
but of the Devil/Hell, with its superfeminine roots
in the stellar cosmos.
470. Just
as the monarchy acts as a barrier, for British and/or Gaelic Protestants, to
the superfeminine evil of autocratic
transcendentalism by dint of its correspondence to the subfeminine
evil, or 're-born' materialism, of aristocratic
fundamentalism, so the papacy acts as a barrier, for Irish and/or Gaelic
Catholics, to the supermasculine wisdom of meritocratic transcendentalism by dint of its correspondence
to the submasculine wisdom, or 'once-born' idealism,
of theocratic fundamentalism.
471. British
Protestants are no more encouraged to identify with the 'Liberty Belle' of
'once-born' materialism ... than, say, Irish Catholics ... with the Supercross of 're-born' idealism,
since both the democratic State and the plutocratic Church are based on the
phenomenal plane of volume, and only have a tangential connection, in
consequence, with the noumenal plane of time, a
connection which in neither case extends into space.
472. While
for Irish Catholics the papacy (regrettably) precludes the sensible wisdom of meritocratic transcendentalism, and thus keeps religion
anchored, via the Father/St Joseph, to theocracy, the monarchy spares British
Protestants the sensual evil of autocratic transcendentalism, since religion
or, rather, science is thereby anchored, via the 'Blood Royal', to aristocracy.
473. The
only alternative to the latter is of course the 'once-born' or, rather, outer
science of the 'Liberty Belle', the American autocracy of spy satellites, laser
satellites, and other manifestations of a stellar primacy, and this, at any
rate, the British are officially spared by adherence to the monarchy.
474. Only
that which is superfeminine and Superheathen
is absolutely antithetical to the supermasculine and Superchristian bias of Social Transcendentalism, and thus
only that is absolutely 'beneath the pale' of what the latter can save and/or
advance in due course.
475. The scientific cannot be saved to religion, only the theocratically religious and, to a lesser extent (relative
to the lower tiers of the triadic Beyond) the democratically political and the technocratically economic - the former category
corresponding to Catholics and the latter categories to Puritans and Anglicans.
476. But this is, of course, with regard to Catholics, Puritans,
and Anglicans within each of the Gaelic countries, not to their English
counterparts, who would remain outside the Centrist framework of the federated
Gaels in what, I believe, could eventually become an English republic of
Catholic bias, as already discussed.
477. Just
as there would be those who, being unable to identify with the Gaels, would opt
to move to England from Ireland, Scotland, or Wales, so there would be people
in England who, strongly identifying with things Gaelic, opted to move to one
or another of the aforementioned countries in the event of a Gaelic federation,
or federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres, likely to come or actually
coming to pass. These would, however, be
the exceptions to the rule in each case, and certain exceptions would have to
be made for them.
478. Thus
would the Gaels be divided from 'British' elements and the English from Gaelic
elements, as things sorted themselves out in the best interests of the
respective peoples, either before or following Judgement.
479. For
Judgement is really, it seems to me, about the establishment of a Gaelic
federation premised upon Social Transcendentalist Centrism, corresponding to
'Kingdom Come', and thus the People's decision, conducted on the basis of a
sort of paradoxical but ultimate election, as to whether to vote for religious
sovereignty, and the rights this would imply, or whether, on the contrary, to
remain tied, in political sovereignty, to what I have elsewhere described as
'sins and/or punishments of the world'.
480. Politics
and economics may be able to deal with and resolve problems appertaining to the
worldly sphere of water and vegetation, but when the world is itself a problem,
with intransigent positions, then only religion can deliver the People from the
limitations and false hopes of politics and economics to the otherworldly
sphere of 'Kingdom Come', with its triadic Beyond, in which a 're-born' water
and vegetation would be subordinate to a 're-born' air, as humanism and nonconformism to transcendentalism.
481. Thus
will the sensibly cultural element be meritocratically
paramount not only over the sensibly natural element, air over vegetation, but
over the sensibly civilized element of water, as the supermasculine
takes it rightful place over both the masculine and the feminine in heavenly
transcendence of what had formerly appertained, in due phenomenal relativity,
to the world, but which were destined, in 'Kingdom Come', to become not so much
otherworldly as post-worldly, in their post-dialectical relationship to each
other under the lead of Heaven.
482. In
sexual terms, this means that, far from being amorally heterosexual like the
worldly, the post-worldly would effectively be lesbian and homosexual in their
rejection of the world and post-dialectical deference to that which, being
heavenly, transcends it, and for which the sexual analogue of plastic inflatables would not, I feel, be entirely inappropriate,
irrelevant though it would of course be to the actual context of religious
praxis.
483. Thus
that which was marginal, if not criminally marginalized, in the worldly context
would become more representatively reflective of the post-worldly one, as it took
its post-dialectical place under the non-dialectical leadership of the
otherworldly, or those who were entitled to the top tier of the triadic Beyond
(duly subsectioned) in view of their greater
susceptibility, via theocratic tradition, to idealism, and would thus be in the
vanguard of the development, following Judgement, of sensible spirituality at
the expense of sensual spirituality.
484. Such
persons would have been saved, via the Second Coming, from theocratic
fundamentalism to meritocratic transcendentalism, as,
if you will, from 'sub-bullgas' to 'superbullgas', the Father to the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and
would know the difference, in consequence, between the sensual spirituality of
the ears and the sensible spirituality of the lungs, auditory idealism and
respiratory idealism.
485. Thus
Judgement not only exposes the limitations of the Old Order, it offers the
possibility of its democratically-engineered replacement by a New Order which
transcends those limitations and allows people to officially have access to
that which is without limitations, and hence more sensibly infinite.
486. And
even those who, to judge by their heathenistic
traditions, would not want access to such 're-born' infinity ... will have the
benefit of new orders of purgatory and earth 'down below', in the lower tiers
of the triadic Beyond, which would deliver them from the dialectical frictions
and worldly limitations of their past.
487. Thus
will mass and volume, duly transmuted towards sensibility, be reconciled to
space, the post-dialectical to the non-dialectical, as the world is
democratically overcome and Heaven takes its pre-eminent place above
post-worldly orders of purgatory and earth.
488. But
this could not happen without the administrative service of a pseudo-Kingdom,
commensurate with 'Kingdom Come', such that will reconcile a transmuted time,
upheld by a pseudo-aristocracy and quasi-meritocracy, to the Eternity of the
Centre, with its three-tier overall structure.
489. For
this transmuted time would be no 'Father Time' but a sort of 'Mother Time',
whose timeless love for the Centre would guarantee its eternal evolution in the
Beyond.
490. For
it takes sensibility to serve sensibility, and only that sensibility which is
timeless in its 're-born' love can adequately serve
the eternal sensibilities of mass, volume, and space in the triadic Beyond.
491. I
have no doubt that the pseudo-Kingdom/quasi-Centre of 'Kingdom Come' will
provide adequate service to the triadic Beyond, and thus to the
Centre-proper. It will present not so
much the profane heart of fundamentalist materialism, more characteristic of
British monarchs and American 'First Ladies', as the sacred heart of
materialist fundamentalism ... to the realist humanism, naturalist nonconformism, and idealist transcendentalism of the
Centre-proper, in which emotional pride rooted in the womb, intellectual
pleasure centred in the brain, and spiritual joy centred in the lungs, will be
eternally sacrosanct.
492. Fundamentalist
materialism would be more germane, in metachemical
'rebirth', to particle sensibility than to wavicle
sensibility, to the scientific (if elemental) and political (if molecular)
aspect of metachemical administration than to
anything specifically economic (and molecular) or religious (and elemental).
493. In
this respect, there is always a particle/wavicle
distinction between the scientific and political aspect of things on the one
hand, that of elemental and molecular particles, and the economic and religious
aspect of things on the other hand, that of molecular and elemental wavicles.
494. With
this in mind, it may well be that the older religions, like Hinduism and
Judaism, are more based in the particle than biased towards the wavicle, given their cosmic origins and stellar
associations, whether polytheistically or monotheistically.
495. In
which case, one could distinguish the Judaic Satan/David from the Christian or,
more correctly, Subchristian Father/
496. Which
is not to exclude positivity from the one or
negativity from the other but, rather, to emphasize that, with its
Middle-Eastern background, there is probably more sun-conditioned negativity
about Judaism or, in this context, what I have elsewhere called Subjudaism ... than ear-conditioned positivity
(i.e. more Satan than David) and, conversely, more ear-conditioned positivity about Subchristianity,
with its more temperate European background, than sun-conditioned negativity
(i.e. more St Joseph than the Father).
497. Be
that as it may, we need not doubt that both Subjudaism
and Subchristianity are theocratic, if in different
ways - the former with a bias, within its particle basis, toward Satan, and the
latter with a bias, within its wavicle centre,
towards St Joseph, so that we have an emphasis upon the negativity of
fundamentalist idealism in the one case, and upon the positivity
of idealist fundamentalism in the other case.
498. Thus
there would, traditionally, be more falsity and woe than truth and joy in the Subjudaic kind of theocracy and, conversely, more truth and
joy than falsity and woe in the Subchristian kind of
theocracy, but only, in each case, in relation to 'once-born' metaphysics, and
hence to spiritual sensuality and/or sensual spirituality.
499. Whether
this would also apply, in the future, to the 're-born'
metaphysics of a Superjudaic/Superchristian dichotomy
between negative and positive alternatives in relation to meritocracy ...
remains to be seen; though I, for one, am prepared to believe that there will
be more overall positivity, in view of the likelihood
of a more uniform environment, due to a combination of technological and
cultural progress.
500. Negativity,
having cosmic associations on the noumenal planes (of
space and time) and geologic associations on the phenomenal planes (of mass and
volume), is of course synonymous with primacy, whereas positivity,
with its personal associations on the phenomenal planes and universal
associations on the noumenal planes, is synonymous
with supremacy.
501. Thus
there is a kind of primal/supreme distinction between that which, being negative,
is cosmic and/or geologic, and that which, being positive, is personal and/or
universal.
502. The
primal, like the supreme, can be either outer or inner, 'once born' or 're-born', of sensuality or of sensibility.
503. Hence
we have as logical an entitlement to think of sensible primacy in connection with 're-born' negativity ... as to think of sensual
supremacy in connection with 'once-born' positivity.
504. The
primal, whether sensual or sensible, is always inorganic, whereas the supreme,
whether sensual or sensible, will always be organic - the difference, in short,
between the particles and wavicles of cosmic and/or
geologic bodies, and the particles and wavicles of
personal and/or universal bodies.
505. We
may, in respect of their metaphysical essence, be able to attribute primal
being to the sun sensually and to the planet Saturn sensibly, but only the ears
and the lungs are entitled to attributions of supreme being, the former
sensually and the latter sensibly.
506. Hence
supreme being has nothing whatsoever to do with anything cosmic, much less
geologic, but only with that which is metaphysically universal, and hence noumenally subjective in either sensual or sensible
positive terms.
507. That
which is metaphysically cosmic in noumenally
subjective terms has to do with primal being, which is always negative in both
sensual and sensible contexts.
508. Our
own overall atomicity is torn between the negativity of cosmic and/or geologic
primacy and the positivity of personal and/or
universal supremacy, if with an intrinsic bias, in view of our organic
constitutions, towards the latter.
509. Which
isn't to claim that there are not times and even historical periods when the
negativity of cosmic and/or geologic primacy is uppermost, and we recognize in
them the hegemony of science and/or politics.
510. Such
times and historical periods tend to owe more to the objective and particle
aspect of things than to their subjective and wavicle
aspect, and are accordingly more free than bound, not to mention, in general
terms, more female than male.
511. I
have no doubt that the twentieth century was, by and large, an age in which the
emphasis was on primacy, and more usually in sensual than in sensible terms, in
keeping with the 'once-born' hegemony of primal water and primal fire in due
geologic (lunar) and cosmic (stellar) terms, as especially germane to
Anglo-American influence.
512. Which
is not to say that there was no place for supreme water and supreme fire in due
personal (verbal) and universal (optical) terms. But supremacy can only be subordinate to
primacy in relation to politics and science, and never more so than in their
outer, or 'once born', modes.
513. In politics, the relationship of supremacy to primacy is
rather like less (relative to least) strength and pride vis-à-vis more
(relative to most) weakness and humility, whilst in science it is rather like
least beauty and love vis-à-vis most ugliness and hatred.
514. Such
would also be the case in inner, or 're-born', modes of science and politics,
except that sensibility is more characterized by the lead of economics and/or
religion than by the rule of either one or other of the aforementioned
objective disciplines.
515. This
is because the greater refinement of sensibility engenders an enhanced wavicle capacity in relation to a smaller particle
precondition in the elementino, or inner element.
516. If
primacy has the advantage over supremacy in outer or sensual contexts, then
supremacy has the capacity to subordinate primacy to itself in inner or
sensible contexts, and most especially in connection with its subjective
manifestations, with particular reference to supreme being.
517. Thus the more supremacy, in sensibility, the
less primacy, with a consequence that one can transcend negativity to an extent
that would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine in relation to
sensuality.
518. One
can conceive of a situation developing, in the future, wherein the urge to
sensible supremacy is so pronounced ... that people would acquiesce in the use
of science to reduce the threat of primacy, including the development and siting, in space, of special 'blocking' or 'filtering'
devices to impede, if not divert, the influx of cosmic energies.
519. Thus
would our capacity for supremacy be enhanced in proportion to the extent to
which sources of primacy in the cosmos and/or Solar System (including the earth
itself) were artificially impeded.
520. Yet
this could not happen to any appreciable extent without the simultaneous
transmutation of mankind, via social and genetic engineering, towards a
post-human phase of evolution, during the process of which man was most
decidedly 'overcome', to coin a Nietzschean
turn-of-phrase.
521. For
man should not be regarded, in overly humanistic vein, as an end-in-himself,
the be-all-and-end-all of evolutionary development, but as a life form in
continuous process of evolution who will, one day, overcome, or evolve beyond,
himself, and thus become more than human.
522. And
I don't just mean superman, in the sense of someone given to meditative praxis
in the top tier of our projected triadic Beyond come 'the Kingdom', but
something which is as much beyond (posterior to) man, in chronological terms,
as apes and trees are and/or were before (anterior to) him, with the
possibility, finally, of evolution to a position, set in space centres, which
is antithetical not merely to animals and vegetation but to the starry bodies
in general, a position corresponding to the Omega Point of consummate Eternity.
523. Such
a definitive position of evolutionary development may be a very long way off at
present, but we can set ourselves on route for it, so to speak, through
adoption of an ultimate religion such that, in its Superchristian/Superjudaic
implications, would be truly open to the Beyond, and thus to the concept of
unlimited evolution towards consummate transcendence.
524. The
religion I have in mind stems from the ideological philosophy of Social Transcendentalism,
with its meritocratic deism, and it sets no bounds to
the scope of evolutionary development other than those that would be
commensurate, on the peaks of Eternity, with definitive transcendence.
525. If
man is indeed something that should be overcome, as Nietzsche believed, then it
will not be simply in terms of the superman, as a higher type of man, germane
to Superchristianity, but, more importantly, of the
transmutation of mankind in general, via a cyborg-like
transition, towards that which is more than human, and not only in antithetical
relation to apes, trees, and starry bodies, but also in relation to the
evolutionary transmutations of the triadic Beyond, as it progresses through
Eternity on simultaneously humanist, nonconformist, and transcendentalist
terms.
526. Thus
will the three-tier structure of the Centre-proper be subject to evolutionary
transformations as, in general terms, woman, man, and superman are gradually
transmuted, via a cyborg transition, along parallel
lines by the technological, biological, and ontological administrators of the
pseudo-Kingdom of 'Kingdom Come', whether in relation to a Gaelic federation
(as described elsewhere) or, more likely by then, the entire population of a
world which had slowly but surely evolved, via the ideological philosophy of
Social Transcendentalism, towards millennial redemption.
527. One
could therefore distinguish the successive evolutionary transmutations of the
bottom tier from those of the middle tier of the triadic Beyond in terms of supergivings, supra-givings, and
ultra-givings from supertakings,
supra-takings, and ultra-takings, and both of these feminine and masculine
orders of successive transmutation from the superbeings,
supra-beings, and ultra-beings of its top, or supermasculine,
tier.
528. Thus
one would have a 'super' antithesis to apes, a 'supra' antithesis to trees, and
an 'ultra' antithesis to minerals and/or starry bodies in all three tiers of
the Centre, coupled to corresponding transmutations in the administrative aside
(of the pseudo-Kingdom) from, say, superdoings and
supra-doings to ultra-doings in simultaneous relation to technological,
biological, and ontological concerns.
529. All
such transmutations of post-human life would be designed to refine upon each
tier's commitment to its own sphere of religious praxis, and thus bring
evolving life closer to the maximization of its emotional, intellectual, or
spiritual potential, as the case may be.
530. Thus
not only being, but giving and taking would also be subject to modified
enhancement by doing, itself subject to such enhancement, as a matter of
millennial course.
531. Eventually,
even giving and taking would become more being-like, though still distinct from
being-proper on their respective tiers of the triadic Beyond.
532. Although
we generalize between doing ... in relation to the noumenal
objectivity of metachemistry, giving ... in relation
to the phenomenal objectivity of chemistry, taking ... in relation to the
phenomenal subjectivity of physics, and being ... in relation to the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysics, since doing is
apparent, giving quantitative, taking qualitative, and being essential, we must
also allow for the fact that all contexts are, in actuality, combinations of
doing, giving, taking, and being in relation to the presiding element, be it
fire, water, vegetation, or air.
533. More
specifically, one should distinguish between the expressive taking and being of
the metachemical self and unself
in relation to the expressive doing and giving of the metachemical
not-self and its selfless complement.
534. Similarly,
one should distinguish between the compressive taking and being of the chemical
self and unself in relation to the compressive doing
and giving of the chemical not-self and its selfless complement.
535. Likewise,
one should distinguish between the depressive taking and being of the physical
self and unself in relation to the depressive doing
and giving of the physical not-self and its selfless complement.
536. Finally,
one should distinguish between the impressive taking and being of the
metaphysical self and unself in relation to the
impressive doing and giving of the metaphysical not-self and its selfless
complement.
537. Thus
one should be distinguishing, in effect, between four orders of doing, giving,
taking, and being, only one of which will be in its per se manifestation in any
given element, while the rest will be 'bovaryizations'
of their respective wills.
538. For
while doing is a manifestation of expressive will in relation to the noumenal objectivity of metachemical
appearances, giving is a manifestation of compressive will in relation to the
phenomenal objectivity of chemical quantities, taking a manifestation of depressive
will in relation to the phenomenal subjectivity of physical qualities, and
being a manifestation of impressive will in relation to the noumenal
subjectivity of metaphysical essences.
539. Hence
whereas doing is only in its per se manifestation in metachemical
expression, it is 'once bovaryized' in chemical
compression, 'twice bovaryized' in physical
depression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in metaphysical
impression.
540. Hence
whereas giving is only in its per se manifestation in chemical
compression, it is 'once bovaryized' in metachemical expression, 'twice bovaryized'
in metaphysical impression, and 'thrice bovaryized'
in physical depression.
541. Hence
whereas taking is only in its per se manifestation in physical depression,
it is 'once bovaryized' in metaphysical impression,
'twice bovaryized' in metachemical
expression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in chemical
compression.
542. Hence
whereas being is only in its per se manifestation in metaphysical
impression, it is 'once bovaryized' in physical depression,
'twice bovaryized' in chemical compression, and
'thrice bovaryized' in metachemical
expression.
543. One
can therefore distinguish between the first-rate doing of metachemical
expression, the second-rate doing of chemical compression, the third-rate doing
of physical depression, and the fourth-rate doing of metaphysical impression.
544. Likewise,
one can distinguish between the first-rate giving of chemical compression, the
second-rate giving of metachemical expression, the
third-rate giving of metaphysical impression, and the fourth-rate giving of
physical depression.
545. Similarly,
one can distinguish between the first-rate taking of physical depression, the
second-rate taking of metaphysical impression, the third-rate taking of metachemical expression, and the fourth-rate taking of
chemical compression.
546. Finally,
one can distinguish between the first-rate being of metaphysical impression,
the second-rate being of physical depression, the third-rate being of chemical
compression, and the fourth-rate being of metachemical
expression.
547. Where
there is most doing, as in metachemistry, there will
be least being, less (relative to least) taking, and more (relative to most)
giving.
548. Where
there is most giving, as in chemistry, there will be least taking, less
(relative to least) being, and more (relative to most) doing.
549. Where
there is most taking, as in physics, there will be least giving, less (relative
to least) doing, and more (relative to most) being.
550. Where
there is most being, as in metaphysics, there will be least doing, less
(relative to least) giving, and more (relative to most) taking.
551. Hence
to contrast the most doing of the metachemical
not-self with the least being of the metachemical unself, the less (relative to least) taking of the metachemical self, and the more (relative to most) giving
of that which is metachemically selfless.
552. Hence
to contrast the most giving of that which is chemically selfless with the least
taking of the chemical self, the less (relative to least) being of the chemical
unself, and the more (relative to most) doing of the
chemical not-self.
553. Hence
to contrast the most taking of the physical self with the least giving of that
which is physically selfless, the less (relative to least) doing of the
physical not-self, and the more (relative to most) being of the physical unself.
554. Hence
to contrast the most being of the metaphysical unself
with the least doing of the metaphysical not-self, the less (relative to least)
giving of that which is metaphysically selfless, and the more (relative to
most) taking of the metaphysical self.
555. To contrast, in all elemental contexts, the taking of the
self with the doing of the not-self, and to further contrast the giving of that
which is selfless with the being of the unself.
556. The
self takes cognizance of the not-self, the not-self, in doing, engenders that
which is selfless, and selflessness, in giving, encourages the unself to be.
557. The self is always, in one degree or another, intellectual,
the not-self always instinctual, selflessness always spiritual, and the unself always emotional.
558. Hence
there is a progression, in each elemental context, from ego to soul via id and
spirit, as from taking to being via doing and giving.
559. In metachemistry, the beautiful
self achieves unselfish love for itself by taking cognizance of the eyes and/or
heart not-self and reacting against the selfless giving of optical and/or
cardiac spirit, sight and/or blood, via expressive doing.
560. In chemistry, the strong self achieves unselfish pride for
itself by taking cognizance of the tongue and/or womb not-self and reacting
against the selfless giving of verbal and/or uterine spirit, speech and/or offspring,
via compressive doing.
561. In physics, the knowledgeable self achieves unselfish
pleasure for itself by taking cognizance of the phallus and/or brain not-self
and reacting against the selfless taking of orgasmic and/or cerebral spirit,
sperm and/or thought, via depressive doing.
562. In metaphysics, the truthful self achieves unselfish joy for
itself by taking cognizance of the ears and/or lungs not-self and reacting
against the selfless giving of auditory and/or respiratory spirit, sound and/or
breath, via impressive doing.
563. Thus
whereas the metachemical self is beautiful and the metachemical unself loving, the
chemical self is strong and the chemical unself
proud.
564. Whereas
the physical self is knowledgeable and the physical unself
pleasurable, the metaphysical self is truthful and the metaphysical unself joyful.
565. Likewise,
whereas the metachemical not-self is devilish and
that which is metachemically selfless ... hellish,
the chemical not-self is feminine and that which is chemically selfless ...
purgatorial.
566. Whereas
the physical not-self is masculine and that which is physically selfless ...
earthly, the metaphysical not-self is godly and that which is metaphysically
selfless ... heavenly.
567. To contrast the unclear ego of beauty with the unclear id of
the Devil, and the unclear spirit of Hell with the unclear soul of love.
568. To contrast the clear ego of strength with the clear id of
woman, and the clear spirit of purgatory with the clear soul of pride.
569. To contrast the unholy ego of knowledge with the unholy id
of man, and the unholy spirit of earth with the unholy soul of pleasure.
570. To contrast the holy ego of truth with the holy id of God,
and the holy spirit of Heaven with the holy soul of joy.
571. That which is unclear contrasts with the
clear as expression with compression, or evil with good, or fire with water, or
crime with punishment.
572. That which is unholy contrasts with the holy
as depression with impression, or folly with wisdom, or vegetation with air, or
sin with grace.
573. The
not-self, with its correspondence to the id, is a means for the self,
corresponding to ego, towards the end ... of the unself,
corresponding to soul, via the selfless, with its correspondence to spirit.
574. One
begins with self and ends with unself, returning to
self in order to plunge anew into the not-self so that self may be transmuted
by the selfless and feel obliged to react, or rebound, from such a transmutation
in the interests of self-preservation, achieving, thereby, a deeper experience
of itself than would otherwise have been possible.
575. One
extreme engenders another, and so the self, duly transmuted by spirit, rebounds
from the spiritual extreme to the soulful extreme, before regaining its
egocentric equilibrium as a precondition of subsequent engagement of the
not-self and, through it, that which is selfless.
576. It
is as if, to revert to Christian usage, something akin to the Son is always
over both the Father and the Holy Spirit; though this would only literally
apply to the metaphysical context where, through airy impression, there is
indeed holiness, not to depressively physical, compressively chemical, or
expressively metachemical contexts, in which spirit
manifests in unholy, clear, or unclear terms, according to the elemental
prevalence, respectively, of vegetation, water, or fire.
577. Furthermore,
the Son is Himself divisible, in a manner of speaking, between an egocentric
mean and the spiritual and soulful extremes which flank this mean in relation
to selflessness, the one effectively superegocentric
and the other subegocentric.
578. For, in metaphysical as in all other elemental contexts, one
must distinguish between the self as conscious and the unself
as either superconscious or subconscious, depending
whether it is in its spiritual or its soulful manifestation.
579. Thus
in no sense is the self, corresponding to the Son, the Christ-like cynosure of
psyche, ever commensurate with either the not-self or the selfless,
corresponding, in Christian terms, to the Father and the Holy Spirit.
580. On
the contrary, the self is always distinct from both the not-self and that which
is selfless, just as the Son is always distinct from both the Father and the
Holy Spirit.
581. The
'Three-in-One' of the Son, as of the self, has reference to a division between
ego, superego, and subego, or conscious, superconscious, and subconscious, corresponding to self in
its ordinary mode and to the spiritualization and emotionalization
of the self in the extraordinary modes of what, for convenience's sake, I have
called the unself, as germane to its superconscious and subconscious extremes.
582. But
this self, duly divisible along the aforementioned lines, is ever distinct from
the not-self and that which is selfless, just as the Son, its religious
equivalence, remains distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit, even as He
is transported by the former and conditioned by the latter.
583. Yet
the Christian Son/self is in practice less metaphysical than physical, since
Christianity pertains, through prayer, to the cerebral sphere of vegetative
'rebirth', not to the pulmonary sphere of airy 'rebirth' wherein transcendental
meditation would be the mode of religious praxis, a mode as genuinely holy, in
its respiratory impressions through noumenal
subjectivity, as prayer is unholy in its cogitative depressions through
phenomenal subjectivity.
584. Of
course, Christianity falls back, as we have seen, on 'once-born' metaphysics,
corresponding to theocracy, but even there the self is distinct from both the
not-self and selflessness, and we are dealing, in aural sensuality, with that
which appertains to the 'kingdom without' and leaves much to be desired in
relation to a metaphysical 'rebirth' such that, affirming the ultimate 'kingdom
within', the noumenal 'kingdom' of respiratory
sensibility, would have Superchristian, and hence meritocratic, implications, in keeping with its transcendent
being.
585. Thus
while theocracy does indeed embrace, in its metaphysical sensuality, a 'holy
(order of) spirit', it is only in relation to the airwaves, not in relation to
the breath, for which, by contrast, the metaphysical sensibility of meritocracy
is required to bring religion to the ultimate 'kingdom within', in due Superchristian vein.
586. The
metaphysical sensuality of theocracy is really something to be saved from
rather than regarded as an end-in-itself, even though it lies beyond the
physical sensibility of 're-born' vegetativeness
through the cerebral word of Christ.
587. Thus
if spirit is only holy in metaphysics, whether in 'once-born' or in 're-born'
terms, it can only be unholy in physics, clear (on the opposite side of the gender
fence) in chemistry, and unclear in metachemistry, as
we abandon impression for depression, compression, and expression, or air for
vegetation, water, and fire.
588. Only
in metaphysical impression is spirit graceful, whereas in physical depression it
is sinful, in chemical compression ... punishing, and in metachemical
expression ... criminal, as we descend from wisdom to folly, before crossing
the gender divide to goodness and, behind it, the evil of crime.
589. But
spirit is only that which is pertinent to giving, whatever the elemental
context. There is also that which, as
mind, is pertinent to taking, not to mention that which, as id, is pertinent to
doing, and that which, as soul, is pertinent to being.
590. Giving,
and hence spirit, has its per se manifestation in politics; taking,
and hence mind, has its per se manifestation in economics; doing, and
hence the instinct, has its per se manifestation in science; and being,
and hence soul, has its per se manifestation in religion.
591. Hence we should distinguish the spirit of
politics as an expressive or, rather, compressive illustration of civilization
... from the mind of economics as a depressive illustration of nature.
592. In similar vein, we should distinguish the id of science as
an expressive illustration of barbarism ... from the soul of religion as an
impressive illustration of culture.
593. For
while civilization is compressive and nature depressive after the manner of
water and vegetation, of politics and economics within the phenomenal realms of
mass and volume, barbarism is expressive and culture impressive after the
manner of fire and air, of science and religion within the noumenal
realms of time and space.
594. There
may even be a sense in which, since science corresponds to the most basic
element and general first-mover of things, people and societies tend to
reflect, on a gender-conditioned basis, the reaction of religion against
science, of politics against religion, of economics against politics, and of
science against economics, preparatory to the resumption of a religious
reaction against science, and so on.
595. For societies, like the individuals of which they're
composed, are all the time changing, alternating between one element and
another, in a constant flux of interaction which is yet subject to structural
stability and constancy.
596. We
may not be able to eliminate any particular element from the overall equation,
but we can certainly change the ratios of elements around, in accordance with
the establishment of the most desirable type of society from any given
standpoint, be it immoral (and female) or moral (and male), objective or
subjective, barbarous/civil or natural/cultural.
597. Speaking
as a philosopher, I can only subscribe to the morally most desirable
arrangement of society, and that follows not from the collective to the
individual but from the individual to the collective, shaping society in the
image of what is best for the individual and, above all, for the best and
highest individuals who, in their wisdom, are the best that society has to
offer.
598. That
society in which the good and/or foolish collective defers to the wise
individual rather than the evil individual to the good and/or foolish
collective ... is the only one which will ever amount to anything morally
significant, for it is on the basis of its best individuals that a society
should be judged.
599. Thus
the best society will be that in which not woman and/or man but the superman is
paramount, and wise individualism has accordingly
supplanted good and/or foolish collectivism as the prevailing ideal.
600. Such
a society is commensurate, so I maintain, with 'Kingdom Come', and it is with
the intention of bringing such a society about that I have penned these lines
and brought to a close what is, I believe, a well-nigh definitive testament of
Social Transcendentalist will from one who regards himself, not without
sufficient reason, as the king of philosophers, and hence the proverbial
'philosopher-king' whose 'reign' should last for ever.
