THE STRUGGLE FOR ULTIMATE
FREEDOM
Aphoristic Philosophy
Copyright © 2012 John
O'Loughlin
________________
1. To devolve objectively in metachemical free soma, the
freedom of metachemical not-self, from least to most via less (relative to
least) and more (relative to most) devolved, as from the Cosmos to the Cyborg
via Nature and Mankind.
2. To devolve objectively in chemical free soma, the freedom of
chemical not-self, from least to most via less (relative to least) and more
(relative to most) devolved, as from Nature to Mankind via the Cosmos and the
Cyborg.
3. Devolution
is always in relation to free soma, and is therefore primarily a female reality
and only secondarily - under female hegemonic pressure - male, so that it can
be thought of as receding from least to most via less and more objectively
devolved manifestations of either metachemistry or chemistry, noumenal or
phenomenal objectivity.
4. To evolve subjectively in physical free psyche, the freedom
of physical self, from least to most via less (relative to least) and more
(relative to most) evolved, as from Nature to Mankind via the Cyborg and the
Cosmos.
5. To evolve subjectively in metaphysical free psyche, the
freedom of metaphysical self, from least to most via less (relative to least)
and more (relative to most) evolved, as from the Cosmos to the Cyborg via
Mankind and Nature.
6. Evolution
is always in relation to free psyche, and is therefore primarily a male reality
and only secondarily - under male hegemonic pressure - female, so that it can
be thought of as proceeding from least to most via less (relative to least) and
more (relative to most) subjectively evolved manifestations of either physics
or metaphysics, phenomenal or noumenal subjectivity.
7. Life
does not devolve in metachemistry and chemistry or evolve in physics and
metaphysics apiece, but in environmental stages, according to whether cosmic,
natural, human, or cyborg criteria are paramount in any given Elemental
context.
8. Thus
whereas the least objectively devolved - and therefore per se - manifestation of metachemical
sensuality is to be found in the Cosmos, the least objectively devolved - and
therefore per se - manifestation of chemical sensuality is to be found
in Nature - the former absolutely somatic and the latter relatively somatic, as
between fire and water.
9. Thus
whereas the most subjectively evolved - and therefore per se - manifestation of physical
sensibility is to be found in Mankind, the most subjectively evolved - and
therefore per se - manifestation of metaphysical sensibility is to be
found in the Cyborg - the former relatively psychic and the latter absolutely
psychic, as between vegetation and air.
10. When
metachemical sensuality is least objectively devolved, as in the Cosmos,
chemical sensuality is less (relative to least) objectively devolved, and when,
conversely, chemical sensuality is least objectively devolved, as in Nature,
metachemical sensuality is less (relative to least) objectively devolved.
11. When
physical sensibility is most subjectively evolved, as in Mankind, metaphysical
sensibility is more (relative to most) subjectively evolved, and when,
conversely, metaphysical sensibility is most subjectively evolved, as in the
Cyborg, physical sensibility is more (relative to most) subjectively evolved.
12. When
metachemical sensuality is least objectively devolved, as in the Cosmos,
metaphysical sensibility is least subjectively evolved, and, conversely, when
metaphysical sensibility is most subjectively evolved, as in the Cyborg,
metachemical sensuality is most objectively devolved.
13. When
chemical sensuality is least objectively devolved, as in Nature, physical
sensibility is least subjectively evolved, and, conversely, when physical
sensibility is most subjectively evolved, as in Mankind, chemical sensuality is
most objectively devolved.
14. From
the least objectively devolved manifestation of metachemical sensuality in the
Cosmos to its most objectively devolved manifestation in the Cyborg via its
less (relative to least) and more (relative to most) objectively devolved
manifestations in Nature and Mankind.
15. From
the least objectively devolved manifestation of chemical sensuality in Nature
to its most objectively devolved manifestation in Mankind via its less
(relative to least) and more (relative to most) objectively devolved
manifestations in the Cosmos and the Cyborg.
16. From
the least subjectively evolved manifestation of physical sensibility in Nature
to its most subjectively evolved manifestation in Mankind via its less
(relative to least) and more (relative to most) subjectively evolved manifestations
in the Cosmos and the Cyborg.
17. From
the least subjectively evolved manifestation of metaphysical sensibility in the
Cosmos to its most subjectively evolved manifestation in the Cyborg via its
less (relative to least) and more (relative to most) subjectively evolved
manifestations in Nature and Mankind.
18. One
should contrast the polyversality of the metachemical with the universality of
the metaphysical, as one would contrast the Devil with God, or Devil the Mother
with God the Father - soma preceding and predominating over psyche to an
absolute degree of most particles/least wavicles with metachemical
polyversality, wherein we can metaphorically speak of 'mother' preceding
'daughter' in relation to devilishness, and psyche preceding and predominating
over soma to an absolute degree of most wavicles/least particles with
metaphysical universality, wherein we can metaphorically speak of 'father'
preceding 'son' in relation to godliness.
19. One
should contrast the impersonality of the chemical with the personality of the
physical, as one would contrast Woman with Man, or Woman the Mother with Man
the Father - soma preceding and predominating over psyche to a relative degree
of more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles with
chemical impersonality, wherein we can metaphorically speak of 'mother'
preceding 'daughter' in relation to womanliness, and psyche preceding and
predominating over soma to a relative degree of more (compared to most)
wavicles/less (compared to least) particles with physical personality, wherein
we can metaphorically speak of 'father' preceding 'son' in relation to
manliness.
20. Therefore
metachemical polyversality may be further described in relation to the Devil,
whether at least devolved (cosmic), less devolved (natural), more devolved
(human), or most devolved (cyborg) stages of objective noumenal life, in
contrast to metaphysical universality being further described in relation to
God, whether at least evolved (cosmic), less evolved (natural), more evolved
(human), or most evolved (cyborg) stages of subjective noumenal life.
21. Therefore
chemical impersonality may be further described in relation to Woman, whether
at least devolved (natural), less devolved (cosmic), more devolved (cyborg), or
most devolved (human) objective phenomenal stages of life, in contrast to
physical personality being further described in relation to Man, whether at
least evolved (natural), less evolved (cosmic), more evolved (cyborg), or most
evolved (human) subjective phenomenal stages of life.
22. Coupled
to the free soma of metachemical polyversality, which is of Devil the Mother in
one stage or another of somatic devolution from metachemical freedom according
as to whether metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical criteria are
more generally prevalent, is the bound psyche of metachemical polyversality,
which is of the Daughter of the Devil in one stage or another of psychic
counter-evolution against metaphysical freedom according as to whether
metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical criteria are more generally
prevalent.
23. Coupled
to the free psyche of metaphysical universality, which is of God the Father in
one stage or another of psychic evolution in metaphysical freedom according as
to whether metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical criteria are more
generally prevalent, is the bound soma of metaphysical universality, which is
of the Son of God in one stage or another of somatic counter-devolution against
metachemical freedom according as to whether metachemical, chemical, physical,
or metaphysical criteria are more generally prevalent.
24. Coupled
to the free soma of chemical impersonality, which is of Woman the Mother in one
stage or another of somatic devolution from chemical freedom according as to
whether chemical, metachemical, metaphysical or physical criteria are more
generally prevalent, is the bound psyche of chemical impersonality, which is of
the Daughter of Woman in one stage or another of psychic counter-evolution against
physical freedom according as to whether chemical, metachemical, metaphysical,
or physical criteria are more generally prevalent.
25. Coupled
to the free psyche of physical personality, which is of Man the Father in one
stage or another of psychic evolution in physical freedom according as to
whether chemical, metachemical, metaphysical, or physical criteria are more
generally prevalent, is the bound soma of physical personality, which is of the
Son of Man in one stage or another of somatic counter-devolution against
chemical freedom according as to whether chemical, metachemical, metaphysical,
or physical criteria are more generally prevalent.
26. Therefore
for every degree and type of objective devolution a corresponding degree and
type of objective counter-evolution, and for every degree and type of
subjective evolution a corresponding degree and type of subjective
counter-devolution.
27. With
females, objective devolution in free soma comes first and objective
counter-evolution in bound psyche second, as a consequence of the former,
whereas with males who have been subordinated to a female hegemony objectivized
counter-evolution in bound psyche comes first, in consequence of female
counter-evolutionary pressures, and objectivized devolution in free soma
second, as a consequence of the former.
28. With
males, subjective evolution in free psyche comes first and subjective
counter-devolution in bound soma second, as a consequence of the former,
whereas with females who have been subordinated to a male hegemony
subjectivized counter-devolution in bound soma comes first, in consequence of
male counter-devolutionary pressures, and subjectivized evolution in free
psyche second, as a consequence of the former.
29. Therefore
females can only have their way, in sensuality, at the expense of males and
males, by contrast, their way, in sensibility, at the expense of females, since
neither gender can be free on equal terms but only unequally, which is to say,
either in relation to soma in sensuality or in relation to psyche in
sensibility - the former options making for a distinction between primary and
secondary devolutionary realities in which metachemical and chemical freedom of
soma is criminal and metaphysical and physical freedom of soma sinful, the
latter options making for a distinction between primary and secondary
evolutionary idealities in which physical and metaphysical freedom of psyche is
graceful and chemical and metachemical freedom of psyche punishing.
30. Therefore
crime is no more somatically male than grace is psychically female. Crime is somatically female and grace
psychically male, with sin being secondarily somatic in relation to physical or
metaphysical realities and punishment secondarily psychic in relation to
chemical and metachemical idealities.
31. If
it is sinful for a male to be at cross-purposes with his gender actuality of
psyche preceding and predominating over soma in what amounts, under sensually
female hegemonic pressures, to a somatic emphasis towards which the
counter-evolutionary binding of psyche is foolishly acquiescent, like
Antifather to Antison in either of the male Elemental contexts, it is not -
gender-bender exceptions notwithstanding - criminal.
32. Conversely,
if it is punishing for a female to be at cross-purposes with her gender
actuality of soma preceding and predominating over psyche in what amounts,
under sensibly male hegemonic pressures, to a psychic emphasis towards which
the counter-devolutionary binding of soma is modestly acquiescent, like
Antimother to Antidaughter in either of the female Elemental contexts, it is
not - gender-bender exceptions notwithstanding - graceful.
33. Therefore,
strictly speaking, crime is as much the exception to the enforced male rule of
subordinate somatic freedom as ... grace to the enforced female rule of
subordinate psychic freedom, and when males are accused or overly identified
with crime and females with grace you can be certain that there is something
strangely paradoxical at work in what would appear to be a topsy-turvy and
back-to-front society, a society that is all-too-ready to criminalize males and
divinize females.
34. Such
a society is patently false and lying!
It is not one to encourage male freedom of psyche in evolutionary vein
but, on the contrary, to discourage male freedom of psyche in favour of female
freedom of soma in devolutionary vein, so that all that is worst in society and
lowest in civilization is more or less taken for granted, whilst all that is
best and highest there is ostracized or demonized as a threat to what is
mistakenly taken to be the only mode of freedom.
35. Males
who are brought-up and even caught-up in such a paradoxical society, wherein
the female effectively 'wears the pants' and gives herself 'divine airs', may
win all the battles against less objective - and hence vacuously aggressive -
types of society or civilization, but they have already lost the war because
they fight not for their own gender but against it, in the interests of the
opposite gender. They betray their own
sex even as they dominate and/or vanquish the more self-respecting males of an
alien nation with whom the female-dominated rulers of their country chose to
pick a fight in the name of female values one-sidedly identified with some
false, because devolutionary, concept of freedom which flies in the face of
true freedom and all that is evolutionary and ... psychically free, whether in
relation to the primary culture of grace or, where subordinate females are
concerned, to the secondary culture of punishment.
36. Thus
they would have us believe that, contrary to reason, freedom is rooted in
females and in the female values of barbarity and philistinism, of primary free
soma and bound psyche, which is equivalent to crime and evil, to an evil
acquiescence in the criminality of objectively free soma in either
metachemistry or chemistry, spatial space or volumetric volume, when, in
actuality, such freedom is merely heathenistic and symptomatic of societies
that acquiesce in female hegemonies in either inverted or perpendicular
triangular fashion - societies that reject Christianity from effectively
Protestant points of view, whether in terms of an Anglican rejection of Roman
Catholicism or, as one could alternatively argue, a Nonconformist rejection not
only of Anglicanism but, in a wider sense, of Eastern Orthodoxy.
37. For
Protestantism is effectively a protest against sensibility and the structuring
of society around male hegemonies in which, as far as the Catholic traditions
are concerned, vegetation reigns over water as brain over womb in
non-triangular vein, and freedom is accordingly interpreted in terms of psyche
rather than soma, with consequences for virtue in the case of free psyche and
morality in the case of its corollary of bound soma, analogous to the
Crucified.
38. Thus
societies which are predominantly Protestant, or derived in more secular vein
from a Protestant precondition, will always be suspect from a psychically free
standpoint; for they have reversed the status of vegetation and water - not to
mention, in noumenal contexts, of air and fire - to one in which water reigns
over vegetation, as tongue over phallus, in what amounts to a female hegemony
which, in the somatically free nature of such an objective hegemony, is the
antithesis of anything Christian. Thus
do they further freedom in relation to soma, to not-self, to crime and sin,
with the former dominating the latter as evil dominates folly in respect of
their immoral corollaries of bound psyche.
39. In
fact, such societies largely derive their sense of what it means to be free
from the notion of freedom from tyranny, whether such tyranny be autocratic or
theocratic, of the State or of the Church, and tend to be unaware of the extent
to which they become oppressive to psyche from a freely somatic point of view,
since male psyche that is bound under a hegemonic female rule of free soma
directly conditioning bound psyche sooner or later becomes depressive in
consequence of having been oppressed by free soma and suffers in woe or pain,
depending on the class or circumstantial element, the emotional travail of
having to remain subordinate not only to its own somatic freedom in illusion or
ignorance, according once again as either metaphysical or physical criteria are
paramount, but to the primary somatic freedoms of ugliness and/or weakness
which, in metachemical and chemical contexts, have criminally conditioned a
hateful and/or humbly immoral acquiescence in their objective reign.
40. Thus
the male psyche is oppressed by free soma to such an extent that it becomes,
first, restive and, then, depressive and finally, unless something drastic is
done to remedy the situation, pathologically insane, with a marked loss of
self-respect and self-confidence and an increased vulnerability before the
powers of somatic power and glory which continue to reign at its expense, not
least in both photographic and filmic contexts, with an ever-bolder plethora
and onslaught of criminal and sinful realities to which the bound psyche is either
evilly or foolishly drawn.
41. Small
wonder that, under the tyranny of this constant bombardment of sensual media,
of criminal and sinful products and productions, many males recoil in horror
into their selves and seek an alternative solution to the type of freedoms with
which they are expected to identify and to regard not merely as desirable but
as representative of freedom per se, as though there was only one kind of
freedom and that the kind which prevails
under the auspices of free females and hegemonic female criteria generally.
42. Some,
it is true, revert to traditional religious solutions to the dilemma
confronting them, returning to Christianity or to some equivalent faith which,
unlike Protestantism, had more to say to sensibility and thus to male hegemonic
values, including those associated, in more upper-class, or noumenal, vein with
either Islam or Buddhism, both of which could be regarded as constituting an
Eastern revolt against the earlier and more sensual religions of Hinduism and Judaism,
and thus paradoxically to stand as a sort of Eastern protest against religions
rooted in female hegemonies to the detriment of everything virtuous and moral,
whether in holiness and wisdom for males or in unclearness and goodness
(modesty) for females.
43. Of
course, there will be those who gravitate to either Western or Eastern forms of
heathenism, in which female criteria are hegemonic over male, but they are
hardly likely to find a long-term solution to the depressing dilemma of life for
sensitive males in a secular society when the religions towards which they have
gravitated are fundamentally more sensual than sensible and often the
precondition, in any case, of the realities which now confront them in the
exploitative world of popular culture.
44. No,
those who are genuinely depressed by the depravity of such a false culture will
more than likely - and do - resort to drugs as an antidote to the filmic or
photographic onslaughts of the secular present, seeking in some kind of synthetically
artificial inner light a reprieve from and alternative to the synthetically
artificial outer lights which tyrannize over them from cinemas and televisions
and magazines and newspapers and light shows and art galleries and shop windows
and advertising billboards and a thousand-and-one other outlets across the
land, against which they are powerless to intervene and demand if not an end
then, at the very least, a reduction and possibly even enhanced degree and type
of censorship.
45. But
these people, remember, are oppressed, and therefore they seek a reprieve or
escape from their oppression, no matter how temporary and intermittent, in
drugs, and not just in drugs that, like alcohol and tobacco, pander to the outer light and make it more
palatable, so to speak, but in drugs which are so powerful as to turn the
tables on the outer light from the standpoint of an inner light which
effectively eclipses the great heathen enemy of psychic freedom and binds them
more securely to their selves, even at the cost of personal health and freedom
and dignity and respect.
46. For
these drugs do not bring freedom in the way that a genuinely free psyche brings
freedom within a male hegemonic sensible context or society, whether in terms
of pleasure in knowledge or of joy from truth, but simply an alternative
binding to the psychic one with which they are afflicted by a society in the
grip of hostile powers - in short, a sort of somatic binding which, in its
chemical permutations, is arguably more relevant to females than to males,
especially when the end result is to stupefy the mind and to quieten both the
will and the spirit, making for an almost lackadaisical, lacklustre, and
lachrymose approach to life.
47. Therefore
such drug consumption is, in many respects, the flip-side of the coin of
outer-light bombardment with which contemporary society is afflicted, and to
take an anti-drug stance without considering the underlying causes of drug
abuse, including the not-inconsiderable part played by popular culture and the media,
and the domination of society, in relation to this, by certain racial or ethnic
groups which all-too-easily become identified with an outer-light approach to
civilization, is to be guilty of allowing the beam in one's eye to obscure the
vision of society which those who do not share one's persuasion are obliged to
take when that society insists upon their not having or being entitled to a
contrary vision at all, but simply being guilty of wilfully opposing the only
true light from a standpoint which, in running contrary to it, can only be
false.
48. Yet,
the opposite is nearer the truth, and it is precisely in the false concept of
freedom determined by somatic factors owing not a little to female hegemonies
in both metachemical and chemical contexts that opposition to such
superficiality and its depressing effect on the male psyche is justified,
especially since such an opposition is fuelled by a strong sense of oppression
of male values and ideals, of which the bound and objectively corrupted psyche is
chiefly symptomatic.
49. Ultimately
drugs are not of course the answer; for, as I intimated above, their chemical
nature is such as to suggest more applicability to females as a controlling or
subduing mechanism in certain circumstances than as a vehicle for psychic
expansion in enhanced subjectivity, notwithstanding the applicability of
hallucinogens to such a role within carefully prescribed bounds falling short
of post-visionary transcendentalism.
50. But
neither should drugs be considered independently from films or photographic
media generally, as though there was no connection between the tyrannical
bombardment of outer-light media on the one hand, and an equally drastic
rejection of such media which can take the form of drugs of a substance which
effectively set-up an inner-light alternative in the interests, no matter how
perversely achieved, of male self-respect.
51. Ultimately,
the solution to the drug problem is not in law enforcement of a brutally
oppressive nature which takes no account of the reasons people take drugs in
the first place, but a new type of society which places drugs in context and
uses them, where necessary, to further its own inner-light agenda, taking steps
to ensure that gender factors are taken into consideration and that every
encouragement is given to males, in particular, to develop an inner life
independently of chemical substances, not least in relation to the reduction
and censorship of the sorts of outer-light media which contributed to the
paradoxical employment of certain types of drugs by 'the oppressed' in the
first place.
52. Obviously,
such an alternative society, as I allude to above, has reference to 'Kingdom
Come' and to a new order of religion centred in religious sovereignty which
would have to have been voted for in a paradoxical election, or series of
elections, likely to result, in the event of a majority mandate, in the
overcoming of democracy, with its sensual 'sins and/or crimes of the world',
and its supersession by a new and ultimate theocracy which was intended to
replace all the old theocracies and concepts of God, most of which are patently
false, and to lead the People into a brighter future of inner self-realization
destined to culminate, many decades or centuries later, in nothing short of the
omega point of the most evolved manifestation of God and Heaven there could
ever be - a manifestation stemming from the urban proletariat as a
post-humankind species of humanity whose true destiny lay in the Cyborg and in
the 'overcoming of man' from the standpoint of an ultimate level and concept of
God.
53. For
the urban proletariat, the majority populations of the developed or developing
countries of the world, are the only humanity that, in their synthetic
artificiality, have the ability to take life beyond the world to the heavenly
Beyond in which not man but God will be 'king'; though only in relation to the
utmost degree and kind of metaphysical sensibility such that leaves even the
metaphysical sensibility of transcendental meditators behind as a humankind
approach to godliness and heavenliness necessarily falling short, in its
non-synthetic artificiality and maybe even naturalness, of the urban
proletariat and what they would be capable of, and should be entitled to, in
the event of 'Kingdom Come' and the development, on ever-more sensible terms,
of a cyborg alternative to mankind.
54. Therefore,
much as all peoples have inherited religious traditions to which they may or
may not subscribe, none of those traditions can play any part in the coming of
'the Kingdom'; for a vote for religious sovereignty would be a vote, as much as
anything, for independence from all such traditional faiths and their lesser or
false gods, as well as for deliverance from the worldly bogs of political
sovereignty in which the People now or increasingly exist, compliments of
democracy. For you cannot be sovereign
in worldly terms and in otherworldly, or godly, terms at the same time, but
must sacrifice the one to the other, in order to be able to move beyond the
sorts of religious tyrannies which even now exist in uneasy partnership with
political freedom.
55. Clearly,
political freedom is preferable to political tyranny, but it is not much use if
instead of permitting one to move towards religious freedom it acquiesces in
religious tyranny and keeps one - with particular reference to males - from
developing one's potential for self-realization and self-redemption in a new
and superior religion. The end of
history cannot be political freedom; for such freedom comes at a price, not
least to one's soul, and results in either somatic licence or a continuing
enslavement to traditional religious tyranny, if not a paradoxical combination,
to greater or lesser extents, of both.
56. As a
proletarian, one has an almost urban duty within the windy-city cosmopolitanism
of one's synthetically artificial environmental circumstances to keep
traditional religion at arm's length; for it is more often than not about the
subversion of universality than about its realization, and even the latter
falls short, in metaphysical sensibility, of a properly proletarian standing
and post-humankind affiliation when it takes the form of transcendental
meditation as a sort of more evolved rather than most evolved manifestation of
godliness and heavenliness, preferable, to be sure, to the less and least
evolved manifestations of truth and joy within the metaphysically sensible
aspects of Nature and the Cosmos, but anterior, I have contended, to the most
evolved manifestation of truth and joy that can only arise out of the urban
proletariat in conjunction with extensive cyborgization, as it were, during the
course of 'Kingdom Come' as the goal and destiny of evolving life, should the
proletariat vote for religious sovereignty come 'judgement', or the paradoxical
utilization of democracy, as of the electoral process, and thus officially
signal the dawn of a new era, the era not of mankind but of Godkind.
57. All
that remains to be seen, but one can be certain that we haven't witnessed the per se, or most evolved, manifestation of
God and Heaven as yet, not even where transcendental meditation is concerned,
but only either earlier stages of God and Heaven or subversions of both from
the various standpoints of man, woman, or the Devil, according as either
worldly or netherworldy criteria took precedence, for many peoples, over
otherworldly criteria, and economics, politics, or science accordingly ruled
the roost at the expense of religion.
58. Such
may have been the more feasible case in an age of feudal or clerical or liberal
dominance, when autocratic, bureaucratic, or democratic criteria - not to
mention their aristocratic, meritocratic, or plutocratic concomitants - were
paramount, but in a context characterized by windy-city cosmopolitanism,
ideological feasibility or credibility can only be theocratic in a new and
altogether superior way to anything approximating to God and Heaven in the
past, theocratic in relation to the most evolved manifestation of supreme taking
and supreme being of which it were possible to conceive, that requires a
synthetically artificial technocratic corollary stepped up beyond sensuality to
sensibility, and thus to inner values which bring the self to the self more
profoundly and completely than was ever the case in times past, times when
theocracy had to contend with democracy or bureaucracy or autocracy, and thus
correlatively technocracy with plutocracy or meritocracy or aristocracy, as the
case may be, and was vitiated and corrupted accordingly, becoming no more than
an adjunct to a democratic or a bureaucratic or an autocratic rule such that,
in the nature of such rules, was only too ready to acquiesce in the subversion
of religion along lines guaranteed to bolster the economic or political or
scientific interest, not least in terms of state power.
59. But
state power, as we have seen, is the enemy of self, of male self-respect, and
thus of that subjectivity which is either plutocratic or technocratic in its
association with either democratic freedom from state tyranny or theocratic
freedom from church tyranny, as from autocratic power in relation to an
aristocracy (nobles) or bureaucratic glory in relation to a meritocracy
(priests), neither of which can conduce towards that form or contentment which
is commensurate with the more subjective sorts of freedom, but only subvert and
thwart them, reducing them to a twisted subordination before the twin evils of
state power and church glory, autocratic and bureaucratic freedoms to which the
aristocracy and the meritocracy are perforce bound, as bound psyche before free
soma, like oaths of allegiance and scriptural dogmatism vis-à-vis monarchic
authoritarianism and papal infallibility.
60. But
for those of us who desire only liberation from female tyranny, from somatic
vice and psychic immorality, there can be only the plutocratic or technocratic
corollaries of democratic or theocratic freedom, the plutocrats no less bound,
as bound soma, to the psychic freedom of democracy than the technocrats to the
psychic freedom of theocracy; for democracy and theocracy are alike psychic
first movers in the male liberation struggle from autocratic and bureaucratic
tyranny, from those modes of somatic freedom, more naturally congenial to
females, which subvert form and contentment from the objective vantage-point of
power and glory, reducing religious concepts like God and Heaven likewise.
61. But
in truth God and Heaven have little or nothing to do with power and glory, will
and spirit, and everything to do with form and contentment, ego and soul,
which, in the context of metaphysical sensibility - the only context, remember,
in which God and Heaven properly exist, at whatever evolutionary stage -
utilizes the fourth-rate power of the Son of God and the third-rate glory of
the Holy Spirit of Heaven, in order that the second-rate form of God the Father
may achieve its redemption - and resurrection - in the first-rate contentment
of Heaven the Holy Soul, the joyful soul which requires a truthful premise in
the divine ego before theocracy can properly embark upon its technocratic
course of exploiting the truthful approach to beauty of the Son of God and the
joyful approach to love of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, the antidoing and
antigiving corollaries of divine taking and sublime being.
62. For
of course wherever there is taking and being, whether in physical sensibility
with the emphasis on taking, on ego, or in metaphysical sensibility with the
emphasis on being, on soul, there must needs be antidoing and antigiving,
whether with an emphasis on will, as in physical sensibility, or with an
emphasis on spirit, as in metaphysical sensibility.
63. Therefore
the taking and being of free psyche have to be contrasted with the antidoing
and antigiving of bound soma, as one would contrast God the Father and Heaven
the Holy Soul with the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven in metaphysical
sensibility, or Man the Father and Earth the Holy Soul with the Son of Man and
the Holy Spirit of the Earth in physical sensibility.... Which is equivalent to
contrasting truth and joy with a truthful approach to beauty and a joyful
approach to love in the former context, and knowledge and pleasure with a
knowledgeable approach to strength and a pleasurable approach to pride in the latter
context, both of which have knock-on effects on the subordinate female modes of
antidoing and antigiving in either beauty and love in metachemical sensibility
or strength and pride in chemical sensibility, the beautiful approach to truth
and loving approach to joy of the one and the strong approach to knowledge and
proud approach to pleasure of the other constituting secondary orders of taking
and being which punishingly complement, in objectively free psyche, the primary
orders of taking and being which have been identified, in subjectively male
vein, with either truth and joy or, down below in physical sensibility, with
knowledge and pleasure.
64. Therefore
the truth and joy of free psyche in sensibly metaphysical males are as distinct
from the beautiful approach to truth and the loving approach to joy of free
psyche in sensibly metachemical females ... as the truthful approach to beauty
and the joyful approach to love, in bound soma, of sensibly metaphysical males
from the beauty and love, in bound soma, of sensibly metachemical females, as,
in equivalent terms, God the Father and Heaven the Holy Soul are as distinct
from the Antidaughter of the Antidevil and the Unclear Soul of Antihell ... as
the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven from Antidevil the Antimother and
Antihell the Unclear Spirit, or primary and secondary noumenal taking and being
from primary and secondary noumenal antidoing and antigiving.
65. Likewise
the knowledge and pleasure of free psyche in sensibly physical males are as distinct
from the strong approach to knowledge and the proud approach to pleasure of
free psyche in sensibly chemical females ... as the knowledgeable approach to
strength and the pleasurable approach to pride, in bound soma, of sensibly
physical males from the strength and pride, in bound soma, of sensibly chemical
females, as, in equivalent terms, Man the Father and Earth the Holy Soul are as
distinct from the Antidaughter of Antiwoman and the Unclear Soul of
Antipurgatory ... as the Son of Man and the Holy Spirit of the Earth from
Antiwoman the Antimother and Antipurgatory the Unclear Spirit, or primary and
secondary phenomenal taking and being from primary and secondary phenomenal
antidoing and antigiving.
66. On
the other hand, wherever there is doing and giving, whether in metachemical
sensuality with the emphasis on doing, on will, or in chemical sensuality with
the emphasis on giving, on spirit, there must needs be antibeing and
antitaking, whether with an emphasis on soul, as in metachemical sensuality, or
with an emphasis on ego, as in chemical sensuality.
67. Therefore
the doing and giving of free soma has to be contrasted with the antitaking and
antibeing of bound psyche, as one would contrast Devil the Mother and Hell the
Clear Spirit with the Daughter of the Devil and the Clear Soul of Hell in
metachemical sensuality, or Woman the Mother and Purgatory the Clear Spirit
with the Daughter of Woman and the Clear Soul of Purgatory in chemical
sensuality.... Which is equivalent to contrasting ugliness and hate with an
ugly approach to illusion and a hateful approach to woe in the former context,
and weakness and humility with a weak approach to ignorance and a humble
approach to pain in the latter context, both of which have knock-on effects on
the subordinate male modes of antitaking and antibeing in either illusion and
woe in metaphysical sensuality or ignorance and pain in physical sensuality,
the illusory approach to ugliness and woeful approach to hatred of the one and
the ignorant approach to weakness and painful approach to humility of the other
constituting secondary orders of doing and giving which sinfully complement, in
subjectively free soma, the primary orders of doing and giving which have been
identified, in objectively female vein, with either ugliness and hatred or,
down below in chemical sensuality, with weakness and humility.
68. Therefore
the ugliness and hatred of free soma in sensually metachemical females are as
distinct from the illusory approach to ugliness and the woeful approach to hate
of free soma in sensually metaphysical males ... as the ugly approach to
illusion and the hateful approach to woe, in bound psyche, of sensually
metachemical females from the illusion and woe, in bound psyche, of sensually
metaphysical males, as, in equivalent terms, Devil the Mother and Hell the
Clear Spirit are as distinct from the Antison of Antigod and the Unholy Spirit
of Antiheaven ... as the Daughter of the Devil and the Clear Soul of Hell from
Antigod the Antifather and Antiheaven the Unholy Soul, or primary and secondary
noumenal doing and giving from primary and secondary noumenal antitaking and
antibeing.
69. Likewise
the weakness and humility of free soma in sensually chemical females are as
distinct from the ignorant approach to weakness and the painful approach to
humility of free soma in sensually physical males ... as the weak approach to
ignorance and the humble approach to pain, in bound psyche, of sensually
chemical females from the ignorance and pain, in bound psyche, of sensually
physical males, as, in equivalent terms, Woman the Mother and Purgatory the
Clear Spirit are as distinct from the Antison of Antiman and the Unholy Spirit
of Anti-earth ... as the Daughter of Woman and the Clear Soul of Purgatory from
Antiman the Antifather and Anti-earth the Unholy Soul, or primary and secondary
phenomenal doing and giving from primary and secondary phenomenal antitaking
and antibeing.
70. If
we attempt to list our findings and options from metachemistry and chemistry to
physics and metaphysics, ranging across the Elements from fire and water in
objective dominance to vegetation (earth) and air in subjectivity, we shall
find the following: the somatically free ugliness of Devil the Mother in
metachemical doing and the somatically free hatred of Hell the Clear Spirit in
metachemical giving vis-à-vis the psychically bound ugly approach to illusion
of the Daughter of the Devil in metachemical antitaking and the psychically
bound hateful approach to woe of the Clear Soul of Hell in metachemical
antibeing, all of which are objectively hegemonic over the psychically bound
illusion of Antigod the Antifather in metaphysical antitaking and the
psychically bound woe of Antiheaven the Unholy Soul in metaphysical antibeing
vis-à-vis the somatically free illusory approach to ugliness of the Antison of
Antigod in metaphysical doing and the somatically free woeful approach to
hatred of the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven in metaphysical giving.
71. Likewise
we shall find the somatically free weakness of Woman the Mother in chemical
doing and the somatically free humility of Purgatory the Clear Spirit in
chemical giving vis-à-vis the psychically bound weak approach to ignorance of
the Daughter of Woman in chemical antitaking and the psychically bound humble
approach to pain of the Clear Soul of Purgatory in chemical antibeing, all of
which are objectively hegemonic over the psychically bound ignorance of Antiman
the Antifather in physical antitaking and the psychically bound pain of
Anti-earth the Unholy Soul in physical antibeing vis-à-vis the somatically free
ignorant approach to weakness of the Antison of Antiman in physical doing and
the somatically free painful approach to humility of the Unholy Spirit of
Anti-earth in physical giving.
72. Crossing
the gender divide from sensuality to sensibility, we shall find the psychically
free knowledge of Man the Father in physical taking and the psychically free
pleasure of Earth the Holy Soul in physical being vis-à-vis the somatically
bound knowledgeable approach to strength of the Son of Man in physical
antidoing and the somatically bound pleasurable approach to pride of the Holy
Spirit of the Earth in physical antigiving, all of which are subjectively
hegemonic over the somatically bound strength of Antiwoman the Antimother in
chemical antidoing and the somatically bound pride of Antipurgatory the Unclear
Spirit in chemical antigiving vis-à-vis the psychically free strong approach to
knowledge of the Antidaughter of Antiwoman in chemical taking and the
psychically free proud approach to pleasure of the Unclear Soul of
Antipurgatory in chemical being.
73. Likewise
we shall find the psychically free truth of God the Father in metaphysical
taking and the psychically free joy of Heaven the Holy Soul in metaphysical
being vis-à-vis the somatically bound truthful approach to beauty of the Son of
God in metaphysical antidoing and the somatically bound joyful approach to love
of the Holy Spirit of Heaven in metaphysical antigiving, all of which are
subjectively hegemonic over the somatically bound beauty of Antidevil the
Antimother in metachemical antidoing and the somatically bound love of Antihell
the Unclear Spirit in metachemical antigiving vis-à-vis the psychically free
beautiful approach to truth of the Antidaughter of the Antidevil in
metachemical taking and the psychically free loving approach to joy of the
Unclear Soul of Antihell in metachemical being.
74. If
psyche and soma are not identical within the one gender, whether in sensuality
or in sensibility, how much less identical are psyche and soma across the
gender divide, where we have to distinguish not merely between, say, truth and
a truthful approach to beauty in the metaphysical taking and antidoing of God
the Father and the Son of God, nor, for that matter, between beauty and a
beautiful approach to truth in the metachemical antidoing and taking of
Antidevil the Antimother and the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, but between
truth in metaphysical taking and beauty in metachemical antidoing, as between a
truthful approach to beauty in metaphysical antidoing and a beautiful approach
to truth in metachemical taking.
75. Nor,
for that matter, to merely distinguish between joy and a joyful approach to
love in the metaphysical being and antigiving of Heaven the Holy Soul and the
Holy Spirit of Heaven, or, alternatively, between love and a loving approach to
joy in the metachemical antigiving and being of Antihell the Unclear Spirit and
the Unclear Soul of Antihell, but between joy in metaphysical being and love in
metachemical antigiving, as between a joyful approach to love in metaphysical
antigiving and a loving approach to joy in metachemical being.
76. Truth
and beauty are not even psychically commensurate, but free psychic and bound
somatic gender opposites within a context of sensibility typified by a
metaphysical hegemony over metachemistry.
And what applies to taking and antidoing applies no less to being and
antigiving, to joy and love, which are distinguished not merely in terms of ego
and will or, rather, antiwill but in terms of soul and antispirit, or that
which is the goal of metaphysical ego and that, by contrast, which issues from
metachemical antiwill.
77. Now
what applies to the above-mentioned contexts applies no less to the contexts in
which physics is subjectively hegemonic over chemistry, wherein we find a
virtuous/moral circle of knowledge and a knowledgeable approach to strength
conditioning strength and a strong approach to knowledge, coupled to pleasure
and a pleasurable approach to pride conditioning pride and a proud approach to
pleasure.
78. Not
to mention, back in sensuality, to the contexts, characterized by free soma and
bound psyche, in which chemistry is objectively hegemonic over physics, wherein
we find a vicious/immoral circle of weakness and a weak approach to ignorance
conditioning ignorance and an ignorant approach to weakness, coupled to
humility and a humble approach to pain conditioning pain and a painful approach
to humility.
79. As also to the contexts in which metachemistry is
objectively hegemonic over metaphysics, wherein we find a vicious/immoral
circle of ugliness and an ugly approach to illusion conditioning illusion and
an illusory approach to ugliness, coupled to hate and a hateful approach to woe
conditioning woe and a woeful approach to hatred.
80. Whether
in the virtuousness of free psyche or in the morality of bound soma, a
cultural/civil circle is established, on either phenomenal or noumenal, lower-
or upper-class, terms, which begins with a psychic lead within physics or
metaphysics and culminates in the intellectual or soulful redemption, to lesser
or greater extents, of that psyche.
81. But
in the viciousness of free soma and in the immorality of bound psyche, by
contrast, a barbarous/philistine circle is established, on either phenomenal or
noumenal, lower- or upper-class, terms, which begins with a somatic rule within
chemistry or metachemistry and culminates in the instinctual or spiritual
perdition, to lesser or greater extents, of that soma.
82. Yet
if truth and beauty are as distinct as free metaphysical psyche and bound
metachemical soma, then a parallel of sorts can be said to exist between truth
and a beautiful approach to truth, as between joy and a loving approach to joy,
which constitute primary and secondary manifestations of noumenal free psyche,
the upper-class equivalent to the primary and secondary manifestations of
phenomenal free psyche that are constituted by knowledge and a strong approach
to knowledge on the one hand, and by pleasure and a proud approach to pleasure
on the other hand.
83. Likewise
the true approach to beauty and beauty constitute, together with the joyful
approach to love and love, primary and secondary manifestations of noumenal bound
soma, with the knowledgeable approach to strength and strength, coupled to the
pleasurable approach to pride and pride, constituting their phenomenal
counterparts in what has been described as physical and chemical sensibility,
the lower-class parallels to the metaphysical and metachemical sensibility in
which not man and antiwoman but God and the Antidevil have their respective
thrones.
84. Be
that as it may, we can just as confidently argue that if ugliness and illusion
are as distinct as free metachemical soma and bound metaphysical psyche, then a
parallel of sorts can be said to exist between ugliness and an illusory
approach to ugliness, as between hate and a woeful approach to hate, which
constitute primary and secondary manifestations of noumenal free soma, the
upper-class equivalent to the primary and secondary manifestations of
phenomenal free soma that are constituted by weakness and an ignorant approach
to weakness on the one hand, and by humility and a painful approach to humility
on the other hand.
85. Likewise
the ugly approach to illusion and illusion constitute, together with the
hateful approach to woe and woe, primary and secondary manifestations of
noumenal bound psyche, with the weak approach to ignorance and ignorance,
coupled to the humble approach to pain and pain, constituting their phenomenal
counterparts in what has been described as chemical and physical sensuality,
the lower-class parallels to the metachemical and metaphysical sensuality in
which not the Devil and Antigod but woman and antiman have their respective
thrones.
86. Any
philosopher worthy of the name, however, will be primarily concerned with free
psyche and secondarily with bound soma, and thus with a sensible approach to
life which aims, whether in knowledge or truth, though preferably the latter,
at the establishment of a psychic monism which enables civilization to take a
stand in culture and civility, as it should do, rather than to be saddled with
undue amounts of philistinism and barbarity to the detriment of virtue and
morality, grace and wisdom or punishment and modesty, depending on gender.
87. The
philosopher who is genuinely truth-orientated will therefore be against any
form of somatic licence such that follows from female hegemonies in patently
heathenistic fashion, but, more importantly, he will be against barbarity and
philistinism in society, as in the individual, because of the extent to which
he is pro-psyche, and therefore committed to the evolution of culture and, as a
corollary of that, to the counter-devolution of civility, which is the bound
soma of a truthful approach to beauty which conditions beauty in the opposite
gender and causes a beautiful approach to truth to form the free psychic
complement of truth in what amounts to a secondary (punishing) rather than
primary (graceful) mode of noumenal virtue, the metachemical virtue of the
Antidaughter of the Antidevil vis-à-vis the metaphysical virtue of God the
Father, psychic emphasis (contrary to gender reality ... of soma preceding and
predominating over psyche) of course being punishing to females in view of its
paradoxical standing, and therefore something that requires to be reinforced
through male hegemonic pressures in order to persist as a complementary mode of
psychic monism, not least in terms of the part played by the truthful approach
to beauty in the Son of God which encourages the beauty of Antidevil the
Antimother in bound metachemical soma and thereby facilitates the readiness of
metachemically sensible females, or of females placed in a metachemically
sensible position, to acquiesce in the beautiful approach to truth, as in its
emotional corollary of the loving approach to joy, which is akin to an icing on
the cake of a complementary sensibility upon which the candle of truth 'burns'
from the male hegemonic vantage-point of God the Father, to provide the
necessary criteria and guidance for females to orientate their psychic freedom,
albeit as through a beautiful glass darkly and ever distinct from the truth as
such.
88. But
if psyche is primary to males and secondary to females and, conversely, soma
primary to females and secondary to males, we have still to distinguish soma
from psyche more generally in terms of primacy and supremacy, contending that
soma is primal and psyche supreme, so that contexts characterized by female
hegemonies in sensuality will be partial to primacy in free soma on both
primary and secondary, female and male, terms, which tends to result, as we
have argued, in the vicious/immoral circles of crime and evil on the one hand
and of sin and folly on the other, as between primary and secondary modes of
barbarity and philistinism, the former germane to the negative activity of free
soma, the latter to the acquiescent passivity of bound psyche, which is then quasi-primal
or, at best, pseudo-supreme (as in the case of male disillusionment with a
sinful and/or foolish predicament, such that was discussed in an earlier text).
89. On
the other hand, it must follow that contexts characterized by male hegemonies
in sensibility will be partial to supremacy in free psyche on both primary and
secondary, male and female, terms, which tends to result, as we have argued, in
the virtuous/moral circles of grace and wisdom on the one hand and of
punishment and modesty on the other, as between primary and secondary modes of
culture and civility, the former germane to the positive activity of free
psyche, the latter to the acquiescent passivity of bound soma, which is then
quasi-supreme or, at worst, pseudo-primal (as in the case of female
disillusionment with a modest and/or punishing predicament, such that was also
discussed in an earlier text).
90. And
of course what applies to the noumenal, or upper-class, contexts involving
truth and beauty or, in sensuality, ugliness and illusion, applies no less to
the phenomenal, or lower-class, contexts involving knowledge and strength or,
in sensuality, weakness and ignorance, with their emotional and spiritual
corollaries for better or worse.
91. But
if soma is primal and psyche supreme, the freedom of the one entailing vice and
the freedom of the other virtue, than it seems that what is most primal will
exist in relation to the context of metachemistry per se and be regressively more (relative to
most) primal in relation to the context of chemistry per se, less
(relative to least) primal in relation to the context of physics per se,
and least primal in relation to the context of metaphysics per se,
while, conversely, what is least supreme will exist in relation to the context
of metachemistry per se and be progressively less (relative to least)
supreme in relation to the context of chemistry per se, more (relative
to most) supreme in relation to the context of physics per se, and most
supreme in relation to the context of metaphysics per se.
92. Therefore
as primacy objectively devolves through the Elements from most primal to least
primal via more (relative to most) and less (relative to least) primal, it
conversely follows that supremacy will subjectively evolve through the Elements
from least supreme to most supreme via less (relative to least) and more
(relative to most) supreme, as in environmental stages from the fiery Cosmos to
the airy Cyborg via watery Nature and vegetative Humankind.
93. Therefore
it seems to me that contrary to speaking, as I was formerly inclined to do even
as recently as at the beginning of this text, of devolution from least devolved
to most devolved via less and more devolved, which is really a commonsensical
take on the concept of devolution, one should rather speak of devolution in
relation to most primacy in fiery metachemistry, more (relative to most)
primacy in watery chemistry, less (relative to least) primacy in vegetative
physics, and least primacy in airy metaphysics, bearing in mind that, like primacy,
devolution is to be associated with somatic freedom as that which is not
evolved and therefore freely psychic, and that there can therefore be no more
freely somatic context than one which, like the Cosmos, attests to the most
primal reality, the context in which Devil the Mother, with a stellar-plane
basis, is most freely somatic and accordingly most primal.
94. Consequently,
in achieving this re-evaluation of devolutionary estimates, we may compare the
most primal devolution of cosmic metachemistry with the more (relative to most)
primal devolution of natural metachemistry, and contrast each of these
objective realities to the less (relative to least) primal devolution of human
metachemistry and the least primal devolution of cyborg metachemistry within
subjectively compromised contexts, as noumenal primacy becomes regressively
less freely somatic as metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical
criteria predominate in successive environmental stages of devolutionary life.
95. Likewise
we may compare the most primal devolution of natural chemistry with the more
(relative to most) primal devolution of cosmic
chemistry, and contrast each of these objective realities to the less
(relative to least) primal devolution of cyborg chemistry and the least primal
devolution of human chemistry within subjectively compromised contexts, as phenomenal primacy becomes
regressively less freely somatic as chemical, metachemical, metaphysical, or
physical criteria predominate in alternative (rather than successive)
environmental stages of devolutionary life.
96. Conversely,
we may compare the least supreme evolution of natural physics with the less
(relative to least) supreme evolution of cosmic physics, and contrast each of
these objectively compromised idealities to the more (relative to most) supreme
evolution of cyborg physics and the most supreme evolution of human physics
within broadly subjective contexts, as phenomenal supremacy becomes
progressively more freely psychic as chemical, metachemical, metaphysical, and
physical criteria predominate in alternative (rather than successive)
environmental stages of evolutionary life.
97. Likewise
we may compare the least supreme evolution of cosmic metaphysics with the less (relative
to least) supreme evolution of natural metaphysics, and contrast each of these
objectively compromised idealities to the more (relative to most) supreme
evolution of human metaphysics and the most supreme evolution of cyborg
metaphysics within broadly subjective contexts, as noumenal supremacy becomes
progressively more freely psychic as metachemical, chemical, physical, and
metaphysical criteria predominate in successive (rather than alternative)
environmental stages of evolutionary life.
98. Whatever
the Elemental context, primacy may be said to devolve from most freely somatic
to least freely somatic via more (relative to most) and less (relative to
least) freely somatic ... as surely as supremacy can be said to evolve from
least freely psychic to most freely psychic via less (relative to least) and
more (relative to most) freely psychic, with an absolute antithesis therefore
deducible between the most noumenal somatic freedom in cosmic metachemical
primacy, the context of the will par excellence, and (to anticipate the future) the most
noumenal psychic freedom in cyborg metaphysical supremacy, the context of the
soul par excellence, along with a relative antithesis between the most
phenomenal somatic freedom in natural chemical primacy, the context of the
spirit par excellence, and the most phenomenal psychic freedom in human
physical supremacy, the context of the ego par excellence - the absolute
antithesis being between Devil the Mother at Her most primal level of
metachemical devolution and God the Father at His most supreme level of
metaphysical evolution, the relative one being between Woman the Mother at Her
most primal level of chemical devolution and Man the Father at His most supreme
level of physical evolution.
99. Therefore
just as doing devolves from most primal to least primal via more and less
primal in regressive stages of will, devolving from a metachemical per se to a metachemistry compromised by
chemistry, physics, or metaphysics, so being evolves from least supreme to most
supreme via less and more supreme in progressive stages of soul, evolving from
a metaphysics compromised by metachemistry, chemistry, or physics to a
metaphysical per se.
100. And
just as giving devolves from most primal to least primal via more and less
primal in regressive stages of spirit, devolving from a chemical per se to a chemistry
compromised by metachemistry, metaphysics, or physics, so taking evolves from
least supreme to most supreme via less and more supreme in progressive stages
of ego, evolving from a physics compromised by chemistry, metachemistry, or
metaphysics to a physical per se.
101. But
we must not forget that where there is doing there will be antibeing, which
devolves or, rather, counter-evolves in regressive stages of antisoul, and, conversely,
that where there is being there will be
antigiving (not antidoing!), which evolves or, rather, counter-devolves
in progressive stages of antispirit.
102. Likewise
where there is giving there will be antitaking, which devolves or, rather,
counter-evolves in regressive stages of anti-ego, and, conversely, where there
is taking there will be antidoing (not antigiving!), which evolves or, rather,
counter-devolves in progressive stages of antiwill.
103. For
no less than will, and therefore doing, is the principal attribute of
metachemical primacy in no matter what stage of devolution, so soul, and
therefore being, is the principal attribute of metaphysical supremacy in no
matter what stage of evolution, soul accordingly being the main aspect of psyche
to be subverted by will in noumenal sensuality, spirit (not will!) being the
main aspect, however, of soma to be subverted or, rather, inverted by soul in
noumenal sensibility.
104. Likewise,
no less than spirit, and therefore giving, is the principal attribute of
chemical primacy in no matter what stage of devolution, so ego, and therefore
taking, is the principal attribute of physical supremacy in no matter what
stage of evolution, ego accordingly being the main aspect of psyche to be
subverted by spirit in phenomenal sensuality, will (not spirit!) being the main
aspect, however, of soma to be inverted by ego in phenomenal sensibility.
105. For you cannot just reverse the sensual realities of either
class position in sensibility, making soul responsible for inverting will and,
correlatively, ego responsible for inverting spirit, when soul had been
subverted by will in the noumenal context and ego by spirit in the phenomenal
one. On the contrary, soul is no more capable
of directly subverting or, rather, inverting will than ego of directly
inverting spirit.
106. But
the inversion, in metachemical sensibility, of spirit by metaphysical soul
confounds will and makes it more amenable to egoistic control, while the
inversion, in chemical sensibility, of will by physical ego confounds spirit
and makes it more amenable to soulful control, such are the paradoxes of the
gender antagonism which pits an XX-chromosomal absolutism against an
XY-chromosomal relativity, the ambiguity of which puts it at a natural disadvantage
to females and ensures that male hegemonies are only possible on the
paradoxical basis of nature confounded by nurture on the aforementioned terms
of either the main psychic attribute in metaphysics, viz. the soul,
neutralizing the subordinate somatic attribute of metachemistry, viz. the
spirit, or the main psychic attribute in physics, viz. the ego, neutralizing
the subordinate somatic attribute of chemistry, viz. the will, with a result
that neither the metachemical will nor the chemical spirit, as principal
somatic attributes, are able to function according to their natural best, as in
sensuality, but are confounded and rendered vulnerable to sensible management
by the ego and the soul of metaphysics and physics respectively - the reverse
of what happens in sensuality when the soul of the one and the ego of the
other, corresponding to their main attributes, are upended and subverted by
metachemical will and chemical spirit along lines which have been identified,
in previous texts, with the id and the superego, the instinctualized soul of
the one and the spiritualized ego of the other only too ready to passively
acquiesce in the free will and free spirit of somatic licence, with predictably
sinful consequences.
107. Doubtless
male deviousness in relation to females owes not a little to this requirement
of a split-character, with an XY-chromosomal relativity, and hence ambiguity, to get the better of
female nature through the paradoxical employment of nurture, something,
incidentally, which does not apply in respect of his own somatic nature, where
will and spirit can be more adequately dealt with, or bound, on a straight
ego-to-will and soul-to-spirit basis, albeit the former more typifies physical
sensibility and the latter metaphysical sensibility, bearing in mind the
third-rate orders of will and spirit in each Elemental context which rather
contrast with the first-rate orders of will and spirit in metachemistry and
chemistry, the female Elemental contexts par excellence.
108. Be
that as it may, the reign of doing in metachemical primacy at the expense of
being in metaphysical supremacy means that the latter becomes quasi-primal in
metaphysical or, more correctly, antimetaphysical antibeing, which is the
subordinate gender complement to a metachemical hegemony. For the noumenal, or upper-class, male is not
by nurture antimetaphysical but becomes partial to the woe of antibeing under
pressure of a metachemically hegemonic nature on the part of his female counterpart,
which causes his psychic nurture, duly subverted, to foolishly defer to nature
in the aforementioned antimetaphysical terms.
109. Likewise
the reign of giving in chemical primacy at the expense of taking in physical
supremacy means that the latter becomes quasi-primal in antiphysical
antitaking, which is the subordinate gender complement to a chemical
hegemony. For the phenomenal, or
lower-class, male is not by nurture antiphysical but becomes partial to the
ignorance of antitaking under pressure of a chemically hegemonic nature on the
part of his female counterpart, which causes his psychic nurture, duly
subverted, to foolishly defer to nature in the aforementioned antiphysical
terms.
110. Conversely,
the lead of taking in physical supremacy at the expense of giving in chemical primacy
means that the latter becomes quasi-supreme in antichemical antigiving, which
is the subordinate gender complement to a physical hegemony. For the phenomenal, or lower-class, female is
not by nature antichemical but becomes partial to the pride of antigiving under
pressure of a physically hegemonic nurture on the part of her male counterpart,
which causes her somatic nature, duly inverted, to modestly defer to nurture in
the aforementioned antichemical terms.
111. Likewise
the lead of being in metaphysical supremacy at the expense of doing in
metachemical primacy means that the latter becomes quasi-supreme in
antimetachemical antidoing, which is the subordinate gender complement to a
metaphysical hegemony. For the noumenal,
or upper-class, female is not by nature antimetachemical but becomes partial to
the beauty of antidoing under pressure of a metaphysically hegemonic nurture on
the part of her male counterpart, which causes her somatic nature, duly
inverted, to modestly defer to nurture in the aforementioned antimetachmical
terms.
112. The
instinctuality or, in sensibility, anti-instinctuality of noumenal females
should be contrasted with the spirituality or, in sensibility, antispirituality of phenomenal females,
whereas the intellectuality or, in sensuality, anti-intellectuality of
phenomenal males should be contrasted with the emotionality or, in sensuality,
anti-emotionality of noumenal males, so that a clear-cut class distinction may
be said to exist between the upper-class femaleness of metachemical will and/or
antimetachemical antiwill and the lower-class femaleness of chemical spirit
and/or antichemical antispirit, in contrast to the lower-class maleness of
physical ego and/or antiphysical anti-ego and the upper-class maleness of
metaphysical soul and/or antimetaphysical antisoul.
113. Obviously,
the metachemical triumph of will implies the antimetaphysical defeat of soul in
terms of antisoul, just as the chemical triumph of spirit implies the
antiphysical defeat of ego in terms of anti-ego, so that, from a male
perspective, whether noumenal or phenomenal, neither the triumph of will nor
the triumph of spirit, neither power nor glory, are desirable.
114. Conversely,
the physical triumph of ego implies the antichemical defeat of spirit in terms
of antispirit, just as the metaphysical triumph of soul implies the
antimetachemical defeat of will in terms of antiwill, so that, from a female
perspective, whether phenomenal or noumenal, neither the triumph of ego nor the
triumph of soul, neither form nor contentment, are desirable.
115. And
yet, from the standpoint of civilization, wherein we are primarily concerned
with culture and civility rather than their opposites, such free psyche and
bound soma as are constitutive of culture and civility on both primary and
secondary, male and female, terms can only come to pass with either an emphasis
on form in the event of a physical male hegemony or, in higher terms, an
emphasis on contentment in the event of a metaphysical male hegemony, so that
either egocentric taking gets the antigiving better of giving or psychocentric
being gets the antidoing better of doing, and civilization accordingly attains
to its maturity on both evolutionary and counter-devolutionary, cultural and
civil, terms, terms which, in respect of the former, presage further progress
in regard to ego or soul, as the case may be.
116. When
civilization is thwarted by will and/or spirit, doing and/or giving, on the
other hand, such progress is inconceivable, and we can speak rather of a want
of subjective freedom under the rule, from a male standpoint, of tyrannical
objectivities, such that maintain the interests of free soma at the expense of
free psyche and stifle male resolve and initiative, whether from a
state-oriented basis in autocracy and its corollary of aristocracy, or from a
church-oriented basis in bureaucracy and its corollary of meritocracy, neither
of which are greatly conducive to the freedom of democracy and its corollary of
plutocracy or to the freedom of theocracy and its corollary of technocracy.
117. In
fact, it is more usual, in avowedly worldly societies, for a compromise to
exist between what is rooted in will and its egocentric counterpart where the
State is concerned, and what is rooted in spirit and its psychocentric
counterpart where the Church is concerned, so that, in the one case, democracy
and plutocracy are subverted and/or vitiated by autocracy and aristocracy,
whilst, in the other case, theocracy and technocracy are subverted and/or
vitiated by bureaucracy and meritocracy, to the detriment of either proper
state freedom or proper church freedom.
118. Thus
instead of a proper democracy, with its somatic complement of a fully
functioning plutocracy, a hybrid is maintained in which such democracy and
plutocracy as exist are compromised by autocracy and aristocracy, and thereby
prevented from achieving anything like their maximum potential for physical
development in knowledgeable self-realization.
119. Likewise,
instead of a proper theocracy, with its somatic complement of a fully
functioning technocracy, a hybrid is maintained in which such theocracy and
technocracy as exist are compromised by bureaucracy and meritocracy, and
thereby prevented from achieving anything like their maximum potential for
metaphysical development in joyful self-realization.
120. Such
civilizations are not fully or properly civilized, for they are characterized
by a want of male freedom/binding whether in relation to the State or to the
Church, but have such democratic/plutocratic and/or theocratic/technocratic
freedoms/bindings as they have achieved held in check and prevented from
reaching their true potential by the tyrannical prevalence, artfully disguised
in constitutional or other legal niceties, of the autocratic/aristocratic
and/or bureaucratic/meritocratic freedoms/bindings which characterize the
traditional manifestations, in female vein, of state power and church glory, to
the detriment, in male terms, of state form and church contentment.
121. Clearly,
no-one who is primarily concerned with either democratic state freedom or
theocratic church freedom can possibly be satisfied with such a worldly and, in
many ways, amoral and androgynous situation, and most republican democracies
provide ample evidence of the extents to which democratic freedom and its
corollary of plutocratic binding are more genuine than in countries where an
autocracy and its bound aristocracy still hold sway, to the detriment of
phenomenal male self-respect.
122. But
there is also, and more importantly, the consideration of a noumenal, or
upper-class, male self-respect to be borne in mind, and this does not follow
from state freedom but, rather, with freedom from bureaucratic subversion of
religion by the freely somatic aspect of 'Mother Church' which reduces
everything to spirit, to spirituality in chemical-oriented vein, and ensures
that such ego as exists in relation to it is not free but psychically bound in
respect of a scripturally pedantic meritocracy who are the bound servants of
spiritual freedom and thus of a phenomenal female subversion of religion which
prevents its male aspects from attaining to anything like the theocratic
freedom necessary to a joyful redemption of truth via the relevant binding of
metaphysical soma to technocratic praxis and organic transmutation.
123. Therefore
the struggle for ultimate freedom, which is a religious rather than a political
ideal, presupposes the rejection of all bureaucratic/meritocratic obstacles to
the full-flowering of theocracy and its corollary of technocracy, including,
not least, the undermining of what is properly metaphysical in such freely
chemical fashion. For as long as spirit
is sovereign, in bureaucratic freedom, soul will remain in the theocratic wilderness
and not be brought into the mainstream of religious life, existing as the goal
and raison d'être of
theocracy for all Eternity.
124. Not
that the bureaucratic/meritocratic subversion of religion is the sole way in
which theocracy/technocracy is subverted, even if it happens to correspond to
what broadly appertains to the Church considered as a monistic or synthetic
alternative to pluralistic or analytic organizations more usually identifiable
with the State. But it does so as a sort
of watery, or chemical, subversion of air, of metaphysics, and thus in relation
to clerical authoritarianism, which could be identified, in Biblical terms,
with a compromise between the Old Testament and the New Testament which, when
push comes to shove, nevertheless favours the Old Testament.
125. There
is also, anterior to that, what could be called the autocratic/aristocratic
subversion of religion, which would correspond to a sort of fiery, or
metachemical, subversion of air, of metaphysics, in relation to feudal
authoritarianism, which could be identified, in Biblical terms, with the Old Testament. While,
posterior to clerical authoritarianism, is what could be called the
democratic/plutocratic subversion of religion, which would correspond to a sort
of vegetative, or physical, subversion of air, of metaphysics, in relation to
liberal pluralism, which could be identified, in Biblical terms, with the New
Testament.
126. However
that may be, metaphysics can be subverted, as we have seen, from metachemical,
chemical, or physical points of view, and in all cases we have something less
than a genuine theocracy/technocracy, but a theocracy/technocracy compromised
by the prevailing scientific or political or economic bias of the feudal,
clerical, or liberal powers-that-be which constitute the representative class
of each phase or type of civilization, be it autocratic and aristocratic,
bureaucratic and meritocratic, or democratic and plutocratic, and therefore as
something which falls short, in traditionally Western, not to mention Eastern,
vein of People's civilization, conceived in relation to a global intent the
resolution of which can only be universal and therefore properly religious, as
germane to a pure, unadulterated or uncompromised theocracy and technocracy.
127. For
global civilization is that which transcends both Western and Eastern
civilizations alike, in all and any of their various permutations, and such a
transcendence of fundamentalism, nonconformism, and humanism can only be
achieved in relation to the urban proletariat, who in their windy-city
cosmopolitanism are the class par excellence of theocracy and technocracy and thus of
religion, of an absolute resolution of civilization in terms of global
universality.
128. Thus
it is for the proletariat to decide for themselves if they wish to come into
their theocratic/technocratic own and accept their true destiny in relation to
religion full-blown, as it were, rather than to remain in the ideological
wilderness, subjected to criteria which in their feudal, clerical, or liberal
implications, have nothing whatsoever to do with a class which is neither
autocratic, bureaucratic, nor democratic but potentially if not actually, at
this point in time, theocratic, and thus capable of the utmost universality of
which evolutionary life is capable.
129. With
the People one cannot speak of the autocratic/aristocratic subversion of
religion but, rather, of the theocratic/technocratic inversion of science,
which resulted in party-political Fascism; nor of the bureaucratic/meritocratic
subversion of religion but, rather, of the theocratic/technocratic inversion of
politics, which resulted in State Socialism; nor even of the
democratic/plutocratic subversion of religion but, rather, of the
theocratic/technocratic inversion of economics, which has resulted in
Corporatism, the third and effectively penultimate mode of totalitarianism
within the global context of the People, a class that, in its global
universality, can only be totalitarian and thus committed to a
theocratic/technocratic mean such that is only fully and properly resolved in
religion, not in 'bovaryized' science, politics, or economics, but in terms of
a metaphysics which is loyal to itself, as and when the urban proletariat come
to a realization of their true character and accept their divine/sublime
destiny in God and Heaven.
130. For
no more than they are really autocratic or bureaucratic, like the feudal and
clerical classes, can it be said that the urban proletariat are really
democratic, like the liberal bourgeoisie; for they are beyond physics in the
metaphysics of windy-city cosmopolitanism and are even now totalitarian in
terms of Corporatism, the People's mode of economics par excellence, which requires a
pseudo-democratic pluralism in order to safeguard itself from resurgent Fascism
or Socialism, but is not commensurate with democracy per se.
131. In
fact, I have previously described this democratic pluralism as the 'Achilles
heel' of economic totalitarianism; for in a free society, a society with
political freedom from autocratic/aristocratic tyranny, it is there to be
exploited and should be exploited by the People in the interests of religious
sovereignty, and thus the possibility, in the event of a majority mandate for
such an ultimate sovereignty wherever such a paradoxical election takes place,
of that religious totalitarianism which is commensurate, so far as I am
concerned, with 'Kingdom Come' and thus the coming of the urban proletariat
into their own in respect of theocracy/technocracy and the long-term inevitability
of global resolution in metaphysical universality, the beingful end to all
evolutionary struggle.
132. Thus
'judgement' is about the People, as urban proletariat, deciding whether they
wish to remain democratically subordinate to their true destiny and entitlement
in theocracy/technocracy full-blown, which will ultimately involve the
profoundest cyborgization of life, or whether, given their totalitarian
essence, their urban circumstances, they would not rather paradoxically use
democracy to vote for religious sovereignty and the rights that would appertain
to such an ultimate sovereignty in relation to the synthetically artificial
'overcoming of man' in the interests of godly and heavenly development.
133. Obviously
most of what I have said in previous texts still applies now, and so that must
continue to be the case. But I did not
make it sufficiently evident that the proletariat are no more properly
democratic, and liberal, than they are properly bureaucratic, and clerical, or
properly autocratic, and feudal. They
have the potential to be properly theocratic and hence Centrist, committed in
ongoing centro-complexification of psychic monism to the Centre ... conceived
in relation to globalization as the absolute successor, divisible between
administrative aside and triadic Beyond, to both the State and the Church, and
in that and that alone will they exist in freedom and dignity as a class which
has properly arrived at its true destiny and is no longer content to be
satisfied with economic freedom, much as that may be subjectively preferable to
political or scientific tyranny within a 'bovaryized' order of chemistry or
metachemistry that, even with metaphysical vitiation, would have smacked
uncomfortably of somatic freedom in objectivized relation to female values
generally.
134. But
even Socialism and Fascism have to be distinguished from neo-bureaucratic or
neo-autocratic forms of clericalism and feudalism which are less totalitarian,
in party-political vein, than authoritarian in relation to a military
dictatorship, and therefore not even 'bovaryizations' of chemistry or
metachemistry from a People's - albeit objectively misguided - standpoint, but
attempts to safeguard or bring back clerical or feudal criteria at the People's
- and sometimes even the bourgeoisie's - libertarian expense.
135. Therefore
much as Socialism and Fascism are to be deplored from a properly metaphysical
standpoint, which, in Social Transcendentalism, would seek the communistic
transcendence of socialism, as of People's bureaucracy by People's theocracy,
they are not to be compared with attempts on the part of the older classes to
restore their former glory or power at the expense of both form and
contentment, but especially in consequence of the former's de-stabilization at
the hands of what portended the latter, when liberalism seemed on the point of
being vanquished by communism and such dark powers took advantage of the
ensuing vacuum to re-establish their authoritarian grip on the People and
prevent further progressive change.
136. Rest
assured that Social Transcendentalism, the truer and higher form of Communism
that desires the People's liberation from worldly sovereignty in the interests
of religious sovereignty, is not another political party, with socialistic or
liberalistic implications, but an ideological philosophy which hopes to be the
source of a world-wide Movement for a radical transformation in People's
society from corporate economics to Centrist religion, as from what remains of
man beyond the liberal bourgeois framework to what properly - and ultimately -
appertains to God in terms of a more genuine approach to globalization such
that cannot but culminate in the true universality of a transcendence sublime
for a class that, in the windy-city airiness of its urban cosmopolitanism,
deserves nothing less than complete metaphysical redemption - and ultimately
transmutation - in a theocracy/technocracy supreme.
137. Only
thus will God the Father achieve Heaven the Holy Soul in psyche via the Son of God
and the Holy Spirit of Heaven in soma to an extent which is commensurate with
the most evolved manifestations of supreme taking and supreme being in
theocracy and the least counter-devolved manifestations of supreme antidoing
and supreme antigiving in technocracy, the truthful approach to beauty and
joyful approach to love of the latter serving and complementing truth and joy
within the synthetically artificial
context of that freedom of metaphysical sensibility which will not be
compromised by the Cosmos, Nature, or Humankind, but be purely and solely of
the Cyborg - the final and ultimate manifestation of Eternal Life.
LONDON 2003 (Revised
2012)
