101.
But of course America, as a superficial manifestation of and extrapolation from
the West, is also given to cremation, if on a rather more synthetically
artificial basis than has typified, say, India traditionally, and it must be
said that America is often less Christian than heathenistic in its approach to
life, one overlapping with and even indistinguishable at times from certain
Middle Eastern and Far Eastern traditions, like Judaism and Hinduism, so that
it seems that its Biblical bias is distinctly towards the Old Testament.
102.
There is, in fact, about America a strong suggestion of upper-class alpha, of
metachemical objectivity, of perpendicular triangularity, of death worship, of
disposable culture, of a triadic (or triangular) approach to corporal
punishment, of something, in sum, which is profoundly un-Western or, at any
rate, West European in character, so that one wonders whether its political
system isn't rather un-European in character too, apparently democratic but
fundamentally a sort of pluralistic autocracy the presidential executive of
which is not incompatible with responsibilities associated with being
commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.
103.
Frankly, I am quite prepared to believe that, compared to Britain and even
France, America is less a liberal democracy, whether parliamentary or
republican, than a sort of liberal autocracy which stands to Britain and
France, though especially Britain, in a somewhat overshadowing role analogous
to the higher outer darkness vis-à-vis the lower inner light of an
autocratic-democratic axis. America may speak of democracy, and the
virtues of freedom conceived in democratic terms, but its actions suggest
something rather more autocratic in character, if with a pluralistic or, more
accurately, dualistic essence.
104.
For
105.
Therefore America values somatic freedom above every other kind of freedom,
with a bias, in its noumenally objective and effectively upper-class alpha, for
metachemistry, for fieriness, for the stellar aspect of the Cosmos (to which
the 'stars and stripes' quite naturally or deferentially lends itself), and
thus for an explosive culture not the least potent aspect of which is
film. If Britain - and England in particular - is a country politically
congenial to 'pricks', given its physical orientation within a parliamentary
democracy that nevertheless answers quite paradoxically to antichemical
pressures from subordinate females in consequence of its own metachemically
autocratic traditions still being very much extant, then America is the land
where the 'jerk' is top-dog and 'frigging' criteria take jazzy precedence over
anything 'sodding', not to mention, from a bureaucratic-theocratic perspective,
anything 'fucking' or 'snogging'.
106.
Therefore the American view of the world, as of life, is one in which the
'jerk' should be free to do his 'frigging' thing within the bounds of a
pluralistic political structure which, whilst it might have the appearance of
being democratic, is fundamentally autocratic and ranged against democracy, not
only democracy in its parliamentary mode, which embraces a left-wing
orientation, but more especially the extra-parliamentary republican democracy
which we have generically termed Social Democracy and hold to be both
pseudo-democratic and neo-autocratic, since it resurrects the higher outer
darkness in dictatorial pursuance of state totalitarianism, and such a forceful
darkness, causing the higher outer light of bound soul to shed its
pseudo-aristocratic radiance upon the lower inner darkness of an earthly
proletariat, a lumpen proletariat, effectively if not literally blue-collar,
cannot but prove problematic to the American version of autocracy which,
besides being pluralistic, is profoundly capitalistic in respect of the
exploitation of somatic freedom to a metachemically powerful and/or chemically
glorious end.
107.
Frankly, the anti-capitalist co-operative rhetoric of Social Democracy is
anathema to a system whose enterprise is rooted in the exploitation of a
metachemically free soma to a corporate capitalist end and which is intensely
competitive in consequence. Therefore, unlike France and even
Britain, America will feel compelled to forcefully go for the throat of any
country which resists its cultural influence in the name of Social Democratic
values; for to such a country attack is the best defence, America being
fundamentally extreme right-wing and therefore the natural, one might say born,
enemy of the democratic Extreme Left, though I dare say that even
theocratically extreme-left peoples and individuals, not to mention their
liberal counterparts, would feel less than secure in a world dominated by
American values.
108.
Britain and France, on the other hand, being sensibly democratic, I might even
say properly democratic, have both a parliamentary Left and an
extra-parliamentary Extreme Left to consider, and would not rush in where
angels fear to tread, no matter how weary of Social Democracy they might be in
respect of their respective liberal democratic interests and traditions.
But Britain, having a stronger and freer autocratic tradition than France, one
which even now is still very much part of the overall autocratic-democratic equation,
has a tendency to 'look up', if paradoxically, to America, language and
cultural ties notwithstanding, and allow itself to be bewitched and even
dominated by America to an extent which it would be difficult to imagine
applying to any other country, including France.
109.
Such a cultural fatality on the part of Britain towards America weakens its own
democratic instincts in respect of the punishment of crime as it comes under
the shadow of American culture and the obsession with crime which characterizes
America as a metachemically free nation, thereby shooting itself in the foot
and further undermining its democratic freedom, something which, in the right
circumstances, I would have no problem with, but which in relation to the
autocratic pluralism of America one can hardly view as an improvement!
110.
Therefore the Anglo-American alliance is not only bad for Britain, it is bad
for the world in general; for it makes America stronger and all the more ready
to throw its weight about at the expense of weaker or more sensible nations,
while simultaneously making Britain more of an autocratically-subverted problem
for its European neighbours, most of whom are decidedly more
bureaucratic-theocratic in character, and therefore less well-disposed towards
the sexual and other perversions so typifying the state-hegemonic aberrations
of the two Western countries in the modern world which are most removed from
the rising axis in question, and therefore most problematic from the standpoint
of self.
111.
Even France is less state hegemonic than Britain, given its Catholic traditions
and the inability or unwillingness even of the most executive of republican
presidents to discard the feelings and teachings of the Church in matters of
grave importance. There may be a struggle, amounting to something of a
tradition, in France between republicans and Catholics, conservatives and
radicals, but the fact of France being a fundamentally Catholic nation cannot
be totally discarded from considerations relating to the freedom of the State
which, despite official rhetoric, is qualified, not unqualified, and would be a
disgrace to itself were it to be totally independent of the Church and no
better, in consequence, than a radical Social Democracy. France remains a
liberal republic not because it continues to compromise with autocracy, which
is much less institutionally significant in France than in monarchic Britain,
but because it is unable or unwilling to completely sever ties with the
Catholic Church, no matter how conservative the bureaucratic aspect of that
Church may happen to be.
112.
For once you server ties with the Church through Social Democracy, through
undue state freedom culminating, it may be, in outright totalitarianism,
you put yourself beyond the possibility of theocratic redemption not only in
and through the verbal absolution for penitential contrition of the Catholic
confessional, but, more significantly from the standpoint of genuine grace,
through the possible deliverance of theocracy from bureaucratic constraint
which Social Theocracy, as germane, so I have argued, to 'Kingdom Come', is
designed to further. In such fashion you would be deprived not only of
hope for the future, but of that ultimate liberation which is commensurate with
eternity and an end to the sinful mean of 'the world'. In short, that
ultimate mode of left-wing freedom which, to repeat, can only be social
theocratically ranged against 'the world' from an otherworldly vantage-point
led and characterized, in subjectively upper-class vein, by eternal values.
113.
France is not of course Eire, and therefore there are and will, for the
foreseeable future, continue to be differences in respect of the relationship
between Church and State, but even Napoleon Bonaparte was unable, as a military
dictator, to completely undermine the Church in consequence of the alleged
collusions between papal bureaucracy and monarchic autocracy which when once
autocracy was undermined in the State only retreated into the Church where it
lay low, biding its time and supporting the defence of the Church from undue
state impositions or threats of a radically democratic nature.
114.
To suggest, from a democratic standpoint, that that was therefore the best
possible reason to oppose the Church would only be to compound the error of
undue state freedom and make what is already a tricky if not paradoxical
situation much worse; for the freer the State endeavours to become, the more
will ultra-conservative elements within the Church struggle to resist it, and
with a vengeance! France is not Britain, still less America, and were
France to become genuinely state hegemonic in either Protestant or communist
fashion it would be a tragedy for French culture and civilization and, above
all, for the Church which made such culture and civilization, or civility,
possible and may yet make a better future possible in the event, at some
appropriate time, of church backing for a paradoxical utilization of the
democratic process to a freely theocratic end, the sort of end which, in the
event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, would enable the People
to transcend the Catholic Church through the Social Theocratic Centre and climb
beyond the parameters of 'the world' to the otherworldly heights of 'Kingdom
Come'.
115.
For, unlike Social Democracy, which can only reduce people to the
lowest-common-collective-denominator in earthly submission before a despot,
Social Theocracy will have the ability and intent to raise people, bit by bit,
year after year, decade after decade, century after century, towards the
highest-common-individual-denominator of heavenly redemption in which the
religiously sovereign People would have rights in respect of
synthetically-artificial self-development such that would bring them ever nearer,
through progressive cyborgization, to a definitive manifestation of God and
Heaven, and take them ever further from the Great Lie of the Devil and Hell
hyped as God and Heaven which is the Old Testament Creatoresque obstacle to
Truth which, even now, is swallowed unequivocally in certain countries that
have a vested interest in dominating the world from just such a lying
perspective and thereby precluding its universal development towards a maximum
of truth and joy, sanctity and sublimity, grace and holiness, godly taking and,
above all, heavenly being, while yet using the terminology of religion in
respect of the most hidebound autocratic conservatism, a conservatism which
makes even the bureaucratic conservatism of 'Mother Church' seem comparatively
liberal.
116.
We who struggle against the Lie will be 'beast' to its power-obsessed
exponents; but we should also know that the only real beast - apart from the
more obvious Social Democratic one who revels in homosexual darkness - is he
or, rather, she who, in bitch-like diabolical vein, opposes Truth and the
evolutionary development of God in the interests of a noumenal freedom which is
not metaphysically psychic but metachemically somatic, and therefore rooted,
stellar-wise, in the Cosmos, as that which is most representatively cosmic and
therefore germane not to God the Father but to Devil the Mother. Rest
assured that the universal, when it properly emerges, will be nothing like the
cosmic, nor even the natural or human, but completely transcendent and therefore
as far removed from the Eternal Death at the roots of the Cosmos as it is
divinely possible to be.
117.
Such a universal removal of transcendence, commensurate with Eternal Life at
its most evolved manifestation, from polyversal fundamentalism will be the
destiny of the urban proletariat when once they democratically opt for
religious sovereignty and put themselves upon the path that leads from
post-historical post-humanity and post-modernity in post-egocentricity to the
optimum eternal divinity and sublimity in psychocentricity of the definitive
Cyborg, come the omega point of universal perfection.
118.
For only through the gradual cyborgization of post-human(ist) life will
eternity attain to its ultimate omega point, an omega point of beingful
supremacy in the evolutionary subjectivity of metaphysical sensibility which
will be not merely least evolved, as in the metaphysically sensible aspect of
the Cosmos, nor less (relative to least) evolved, as in the metaphysically
sensible aspect of nature, nor even more (relative to most) evolved, as in the
metaphysically sensible aspect of humankind, but most evolved, and therefore of
a per se order of universality which will leave such
manifestations of it as accrue to planets like Saturn, winged seed-pods on
certain tall trees, and transcendental meditation decidedly in its wake as it
heads, calmly and gracefully, towards its optimum manifestation in the most
supreme being of a synthetically artificial mode of transcendentalism which
will grant to the self, the brain stem and spinal cord of ego and soul, their
immortal reward in an afterlife that will never end but remain eternally valid,
as the self is saved by the soul to the timeless bliss of heaven.
LONDON 2003
(Revised 2012)
Preview OPTI-MYSTIC
PROJECTIONS eBook
