Preview the Centretruths eBook version of
REVALUATIONS AND TRANSVALUATIONS
Op.
114
REVALUATIONS
AND
TRANSVALUATIONS
Aphoristic
Philosophy
Copyright
©
2011
John
O'Loughlin
_____________
CONTENTS
Aphs.
1–136
____________
1. I
wrote in an earlier text, viz. Revolutionary Afterthoughts, of
conservatism being right-wing and radicalism left, as the following
extract
will show: 'One could - and I'm confident many people would - identify
conservatism with being right wing and radicalism with being left wing,
and
therefore it should be maintained that salvation from moral
conservatism to
moral radicalism, bound psyche to free psyche, is commensurate with a
progression from the moral right to the moral left, as from the vicious
morality of sin and (for females) pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality
of
Grace (and for females) pseudo-Punishment, all of which would
diametrically
contrast with damnation, on the descending axis, from immoral
radicalism to
immoral conservatism, free soma to bound soma, as being commensurate
with a
regression from the immoral left to the immoral right, as from the
vicious
immorality of Evil and (for males) pseudo-Folly to the virtuous
immorality of
good and (for males) pseudo-wisdom.'
Frankly, I do not now believe that I was correct to do so, and
for the
following reasons.
2. Whether
one is viciously or virtuously moral or immoral is a different issue,
it now
seems to me, from whether one is to be adjudged left or right; for one
can be
vicious or virtuous in either psyche or soma, and therefore moral or
immoral
according to whether one is adjudged to be psychic or somatic -
something
which, in any case, is not about being virtuous or vicious but, on the
contrary, about being either left or right, left in psyche, right in
soma, as
the following paragraph will attempt to demonstrate.
3. The
radical, we had established, are always free, but this is equally true
of both
types of hegemonic radicalism, viz. metachemical and metaphysical, and
both
types of subservient radicalism, viz. antimetaphysical and
antimetachemical,
except that the latter are free contrary to their respective gender
actualities
and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either soma for the
antimetaphysical
or psyche for the antimetachemical in consequence of the hegemonic
gender's
primary influence being either somatic in the case of metachemistry or
psychic
in the case of metaphysics.
4. But
no mode of radical freedom exists independently of a subordinate mode
of
radical binding, whether in respect of psyche in the noumenally sensual
context
of metachemistry and antimetaphysics or of soma in the noumenally
sensible
context of metaphysics and antimetachemistry.
For either the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate, as
in the
former context, or the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate,
as in the
latter context, and in neither is the State to be associated with
anything
other than soma or the Church with anything other than psyche.
5. In
contrast to this, the conservative, we found, are always bound, but
this is
equally true of both types of nominally hegemonic conservatism, viz.
chemical
and physical, and both types of nominally subservient but
- at the behest of their respective overall
hegemonic gender parallels - subversive conservatism, viz. antiphysical
and
antichemical, except that the latter are bound contrary to their
respective
gender actualities and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either
psyche for
the antiphysical or soma for the antichemical in consequence of the
nominally
hegemonic gender's primary influence being either somatic in the case
of
chemistry or psychic in the case of physics.
6. But no
mode of conservative binding exists independently of a subordinate mode
of
conservative freedom, whether in respect of soma in the phenomenally
sensual
context of chemistry and antiphysics or of psyche in the phenomenally
sensible
context of physics and antichemistry.
For either the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate, as
in the
former context, or the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate,
as in the
latter context, and in neither is the Church to be associated with
anything
other than psyche or the State with anything other than soma.
7. Granted,
then, an axial disparity between an ascent from conservatism to
radicalism in
the case of church-hegemonic society and a descent from radicalism to
conservatism in the case of state-hegemonic society, this is not,
contrary to
the extract from Revolutionary Afterthoughts quoted above,
equivalent to
a progression from the moral right to the moral left on the one hand
and to a
regression from the immoral left to the immoral right on the other
hand,
despite the indubitable distinctions between vice and virtue which
characterize
the contrary fates in such diametrically antithetical terms, but is,
rather,
equivalent to a progression from the conservative left to the radical
left in
respect of church-hegemonic criteria and, conversely, to a regression
from the
radical right to the conservative right in respect of state-hegemonic
criteria,
so that what finally determines whether something is 'left' or 'right'
is not
its class status in relation to radicalism or conservatism, the free
few or the
bound many, but its moral or immoral significance in relation to psyche
or
soma.
8. Thus
an axial ascent, within church-hegemonic society, from the vicious
morality of
the psychically bound to the virtuous morality of the psychically free
is
commensurate with a progression from the conservative left to the
radical left,
as from anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace, whereas an
axial
descent, within state-hegemonic society, from the vicious immorality of
the
somatically free to the virtuous immorality of the somatically bound is
commensurate with a regression from the radical right to the
conservative
right, as from pro-notself to anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war.
9. Therefore
in representatively hegemonic terms each axis is either of the Left or
of the
Right, psychically left in church-hegemonic terms or somatically right
in
state-hegemonic terms, but each of these principal positions is
divisible
between 'anti' and 'pro' manifestations of psyche or soma which
distinguish the
many from the few, the conservative from the radical, since those who
are
viciously and virtuously moral, or psychic, stand to those who are
viciously
and virtuously immoral, or somatic, as the conservative/radical Left to
the
radical/conservative Right.
10. One
cannot, however, leave this axial disparity in representative terms, as
between
the hegemonic factors already described; for there are also subordinate
factors
to be considered, whether state subordinate in relation to the axis
diagonally
ascending from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility or church
subordinate in relation to the axis diagonally descending from noumenal
sensuality to phenomenal sensibility, both of which complicate the
overall
picture.
11. In
the case of the diagonally ascending axis, it should be maintained
that,
correlative with the salvation of the moral from bound to free psyche,
comes
the counter-damnation of the pseudo-immoral from free to bound soma,
and that
this is commensurate with a counter-regression from the pseudo-radical
right to
the pseudo-conservative right, as from the 'pseudo' modes of
pro-notself to
anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war, whereas in the case of the
diagonally
descending axis it follows that, correlative with the damnation of the
immoral
from free to bound soma, comes the counter-salvation of the
pseudo-moral from
bound to free psyche, which is commensurate with a counter-progression
from the
pseudo-conservative left to the pseudo-radical left, as from the
'pseudo' modes
of anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace.
12. Therefore
in what could be called unrepresentatively subordinate terms each axis
is
either of the pseudo-Right or of the pseudo-Left, somatically right in
state-subordinate terms or psychically left in church-subordinate
terms, but
each of these subordinate positions is divisible between 'pro' and
'anti'
manifestations of soma or psyche which distinguish the many from the
few, the
conservative from the radical, since those who are viciously and
virtuously
pseudo-immoral, or somatic, stand to those who are viciously and
virtuously
pseudo-moral, or psychic, as the radical/conservative pseudo-Right to
the
conservative/radical pseudo-Left.
13. There
is as considerable a difference, however, between the hegemonic and
subordinate
modes of church morality as between the hegemonic and subordinate modes
of
state immorality, and therefore one cannot suppose that the
pseudo-Left,
whether viciously or virtuously of psyche, are anything like as
unfreely or
freely psychic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis that
diagonally
ascends from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility, or that the
pseudo-Right, whether viciously or virtuously of soma, are anything
like as
freely or unfreely somatic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis
that
diagonally descends from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility.
14. Moreover
the pseudo-Left are as fated to remain in the shadow of the genuine
Right in
state-hegemonic society as the pseudo-Right in the shadow of the
genuine Left
in church-hegemonic society. And this
applies equally to both genders, whether in relation to the primary and
secondary manifestations of church subordination vis-à-vis their
state-hegemonic counterparts on the diagonally descending axis or in
relation
to the primary and secondary manifestations of state subordination
vis-à-vis
their church-hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally ascends.
15. Therefore
there is no sense in trying to hype or exaggerate the significance of
either
the pseudo-Left or the pseudo-Right vis-à-vis the more representatively
Right
or Left of each type of society, any more than there would be much
sense in
trying to exaggerate the significance of the pseudo-Left at the expense
of the
Left or of the pseudo-Right at the expense of the Right across the
axial divide
which distinguishes those led by morality in church-hegemonic fashion
from
those ruled by immorality in state-hegemonic fashion.
16. What
really matters is not the standing of Left to pseudo-Left or of Right
to
pseudo-Right, or vice versa, but the deference of pseudo-Right to the
Left,
whether in sensuality or sensibility, and of pseudo-Left to the Right,
likewise
whether in vice or virtue, in the interests of axial stability and
overall
accountability; for there is no more a situation in which the Left can
exist
independently of the pseudo-Right than one in which the Right can exist
independently of the pseudo-Left, radicalism and conservatism hanging
together
almost as two sides of the same phenomenal or noumenal coin even as one
either
progresses/counter-regresses or regresses/counter-progresses, according
to
axis, from the one to the other on both genuine and 'pseudo', hegemonic
and
subordinate, terms in both primary and
secondary gender contexts.
17. Therefore
along with the progressive axial ascent in male salvation from sin to
grace of
the antihumanistically antiphysical to the, as it were,
transcendentalistically metaphysical and in
female salvation from pseudo-crime to pseudo-punishment of the
nonconformistically chemical to the antifundamentalistically
antimetachemical,
as from conservative Left to radical Left on both primary and secondary
psychic
terms, must go the counter-regressive axial ascent in male
counter-damnation
from folly to wisdom of the antinaturalistically antiphysical to the
idealistically metaphysical and in female counter-damnation from
pseudo-evil to
pseudo-good of the realistically chemical to the antimaterialistically
antimetachemical, as from pseudo-radical Right to pseudo-conservative
Right on
both primary and secondary somatic terms.
18. Conversely,
along with the regressive axial descent in female damnation from evil
to good
of the materialistically metachemical to the antirealistically
antichemical and
in male damnation from pseudo-folly to pseudo-wisdom of the
anti-idealistically
antimetaphysical to the naturalistically physical, as from radical
Right to
conservative Right on both primary and secondary somatic terms, must go
the
counter-progressive axial descent in female counter-salvation from
crime to
punishment of the, as it were, fundamentalistically metachemical to the
antinonconformistically antichemical and in male counter-salvation from
pseudo-sin to pseudo-grace of the antitranscendentalistically
antimetaphysical
to the humanistically physical, as from pseudo-conservative Left to
pseudo-radical Left on both primary and secondary psychic terms.
19. In
the case of the ascending axis, therefore, that which is authentically
Left will
be accompanied by a pseudo-Right the somatic nature of which stands in
state
subordination to a church hegemony, whether the triumph of psyche over
soma to
which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, bound or free,
conservative or radical, sensual or sensible, whereas in the case of
the
descending axis that which is authentically Right will be accompanied
by a
pseudo-Left the psychic nature or, rather, nurture of which stands in
church
subordination to a state hegemony, whether the triumph of soma over
psyche to
which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, free or bound,
radical
or conservative, sensual or sensible.
20. Obviously
the overall distinction between church-hegemonic/state-subordinate
society and
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society owes much if not everything
to
gender, since the former can only prevail under a male lead of society
as a
reflection of the male gender actuality of psyche both preceding and
predominating over soma, whether on the absolute terms of most
wavicles/least
particles which characterizes the metaphysical male as a sensible
upper-class
noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared to most)
wavicles/less
(compared to least) particles characterizing the antiphysical male as a
sensual
lower-class phenomenon, whereas the latter only prevails in consequence
of a
female rule of society as a reflection of the female gender actuality
of soma
both preceding and predominating over psyche, whether on the absolute
terms of
most particles/least wavicles which characterizes the metachemical
female as a
sensual upper-class noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared
to
most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles characterizing the
antichemical female as a sensible lower-class phenomenon.
21. Ironically,
whereas the absence of a noumenally sensible upper-class control of
society in
respect of the diagonally ascending axis would make for a heathenistic
state of
worldly freedom in which the hegemonic chemical sought their own freely
somatic
advantage at the expense of the antiphysical, feminine females
conditioning
society, after their own relative somatic bias, towards free soma and
bound
psyche in such fashion that the emphasis could only be on the former,
the
presence of a noumenally sensual upper-class control of society in
respect of
the diagonally descending axis is what makes for a heathenistic state
of
worldly binding in which the nominally hegemonic physical are unable to
seek
their own psychic advantage at the expense of the antichemical because
the
latter are able, at the behest of the overall metachemical hegemony, to
subvert
the masculine male conditioning of society, after their own relative
psychic
bias towards free psyche and bound soma, in such fashion that the
emphasis does
not fall on the former but on the latter, in paradoxically
female
fashion.
22. Consequently
while the absence of a noumenally sensible control of society
would be
heathenistically bad for the phenomenally sensual, not least for males,
it is
the presence of a noumenally sensual control of society that is
heathenistically good for the phenomenally sensible, with particular
reference
to females, since in all but a small minority of cases males are
precluded from
being anything like as psychically free as they would otherwise be, no
matter
how morally desirable such freedom may happen to seem from a physical
standpoint, and are rendered psychically subordinate to a somatic
emphasis and
overall control of society which guarantees axial stability on
state-hegemonic terms
and ensures that the Church - and hence Christianity - will never be
more than
subordinate and effectively pseudo-moral, primarily concerned not with
sin in
antiphysics and grace in metaphysics but, in paradoxical vein, with
crime in
metachemistry and punishment in antichemistry, neither of which have
any
bearing on ecclesiastic authenticity whatsoever but testify, in
counter-progressive fashion, to counter-salvation from the female
manifestation
of noumenal sensuality to its phenomenal counterpart in sensibility,
the male
psychic equivalents in antimetaphysical pseudo-sin and physical
pseudo-grace
being merely secondary in the overall female-dominated integrity of
church
subordination.
23. For
you cannot be secondary in the State and primary in the Church in such
circumstances. Such primacy, were it to
materialize, would be independent of the antichemical subversion of
physics at
the behest of an overall metachemical controlling power and therefore
contrary
to the heathenistic integrity and interests of state-hegemonic society. It would, in fact, amount to a more pedantic
approach to Christianity that made a God out of Man and elevated the
Word, as
an intellectual medium for the transmission of knowledge, out of all
proportion
to its actual worth, reducing religion from metaphysics to physics in
such
fashion that salvation or redemption, as you prefer, became falsely
commensurate with intellectual knowledge rather than with the
transcendence of
ego in soul - something that can only happen in relation to
metaphysics, and
therefore in terms, for mankind, of a respiratory repudiation of
cerebral
knowledge from the standpoint of Truth and of pleasure from the
standpoint of
Joy, so that universality prevails at the expense of personality or,
more
correctly, personality is transcended by universality, as vegetation by
air.
24. There
are, however, several reasons why certain persons should prefer
personality to
universality, not least in relation to a lower-class disposition
conditioned,
in no small measure, by lowland criteria in a temperate region of the
world
which conduced towards what some might consider an unduly humanistic
bias, but
such reasons would not stand up to metaphysical logic where such logic
was
possible by dint of a more upper-class disposition stemming from or
appertaining to airy environments that were comparatively otherworldly
in
consequence of a highland orientation that airily 'flew in the face' of
temperate nature, with its verdant vegetation.
25. Truth
is not susceptible to being other than what it is, and those who are
capable of
Truth will always 'see through' the lie of lesser or contrary
allegiances, such
as knowledge and strength or even beauty, not to mention weakness and
ignorance
or ugliness and illusion, posing as Truth.
Even if they can be justified for a time, such allegiances
cannot expect
to prevail in
lieu of Truth for
ever; for time, in a manner of speaking, catches up with them and their
pretensions and impostures are exposed, to stand nakedly bereft of
credibility
before the cool inner light of Truth, whose airy spirit should have no
difficulty in blowing them away.
26. Granted
that those who are reduced, as males, to being secondary in the State
will
continue to be secondary in the Church, which is no genuine church, it
does not
necessarily follow that, the hegemonic state being right wing and the
subordinate church pseudo-Left, there is no such dichotomy within
either the
State or the Church; for of course there is, if with a bias favouring
the Right
in view of the extent to which soma prevails over psyche in consequence
of
female dominion.
27. Contrariwise,
granted that those who are reduced, as females, to being secondary in
the
Church will continue to be secondary in the State, which is no genuine
state,
it does not necessarily follow that, the hegemonic church being left
wing and
the subordinate state pseudo-Right, there is no such dichotomy within
either
the Church or the State; for of course there is, if with a bias
favouring the
Left in view of the extent to which psyche prevails over soma in
consequence of
male dominion.
28. But
when we speak of such a dichotomy in either the State or the Church we
should
be careful not to exaggerate it in relation to right/left or left/right
polarity; for in neither case could there be any such polarity but,
rather, a
distinction between the primary and secondary manifestations of
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria on the one hand, amounting
to Right
and quasi-Right in the political context and to quasi-pseudo-Left and
pseudo-Left in the religious context, and between the primary and
secondary
manifestations of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria on the
other
hand, which amounts to Left and quasi-Left in the religious context and
to
pseudo-Right and quasi-pseudo-Right in the political context. For in all such contexts the dominion of the
one gender over the other ensures that nothing truly independent - and
therefore contrary to - the prevailing ethos can expect to exist.
29. Consequently
in the case of the diagonally ascending axis of
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate society it must follow that primary
and
secondary modes of bound or free psyche are as much of the Left as
their
somatic counterparts are of the pseudo-Right, nothing right wing,
whether 'pseudo'
or otherwise, having any more place in the hegemonic church than
anything left
wing, whether genuine or otherwise, could possibly have a legitimate
place in
the subordinate state, exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding.
30. Likewise
in the case of the diagonally descending axis of
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society it must follow, in complete
contrast
to the above, that primary and secondary modes of free or bound soma
are as
much of the Right as their psychic counterparts are of the pseudo-Left,
nothing
left wing, whether 'pseudo' or otherwise, having any more place in the
hegemonic state than anything right wing, whether genuine or otherwise,
could
possibly have a legitimate place in the subordinate church, exceptions
to the
general rule notwithstanding.
31. That
said, it follows that neither type of society can really countenance
deviations
from its prevailing ethos, for the stability of each is premised upon
the
ability of the relevant upper-class free radicals to fashion the
lower-class
masses of bound conservatives after their own image, albeit in reverse
psychic
or somatic disposition, as the case may be, and thereby not only
preclude
worldly tyranny or anarchy, the former more likely to follow from
untempered
chemical hegemony over antiphysics in phenomenal sensuality, the latter
from
untempered physical hegemony over antichemistry in phenomenal
sensibility, but
simultaneously bolster and legitimize their own respective overworldly
hegemonies - metachemistry over antimetaphysics in noumenal sensuality,
metaphysics over antimetachemistry in noumenal sensibility - so that
unrest or
revolt on the part of the subservient gender is overruled, if not
neutralized,
in relation to the importance attaching to worldly stability in respect
of either
the antichemical subversion of physics from the standpoint of
state-hegemonic
criteria or the antiphysical subversion of chemistry from the
standpoint of
church-hegemonic criteria, neither of which lower-class paradoxes would
be
possible without the overall hegemonic control of their upper-class
gender
parallels.
32. Therefore
although it may be harsh on the antimetaphysical and
antimetachemical
upended
genders
under
the hegemonic control of metachemical rulers or metaphysical leaders,
the
metachemical/antimetaphysical complementarity constituting a 'vicious
circle'
in noumenal sensuality and the
metaphysical/antimetachemical complementarity a 'virtuous circle' in
noumenal
sensibility, their paradoxical fates have to be weighed against the
benefit to the
world that comes from worldly stability in compromise as, in the one
case, the
physical hegemony over antichemistry is precluded from anarchically
leading, in
male vein, to an undue emphasis on psychic freedom through being
somatically
subverted from below at the behest of metachemical freedom diagonally
backwards
'on high', and, in the other case, the chemical hegemony over
antiphysics is
precluded from tyrannically leading, in female vein, to an undue
emphasis on
somatic freedom through being psychically subverted from below at the
behest of
metaphysical freedom diagonally forwards 'on high', with a consequence
that, in
the one instance, Christian anarchy becomes rather more the exception
to the
heathenistic rule and, in the other instance, heathen tyranny rather
more the
exception to the Christianistic rule, so to speak, insofar as in
neither
phenomenal case is freedom more than subordinate to binding and
consequently
ever in the shadow of the antithetical modes of conservatism which
become the
lower-class counterparts to the prevailing modes of upper-class
radicalism, be
they somatic in metachemistry or psychic in metaphysics.
33. Considered
dispassionately, as from the noumenal standpoint of an overview of the
phenomenal world, you cannot encourage freedom in the masses, because,
quite
apart from the irrelevance of somatic freedom to antiphysical males and
of
psychic freedom to antichemical females, all large numbers of people
have, like
animals, to be herded or husbanded or otherwise corralled and
shepherded in
such fashion that they do least damage to one another and to
themselves; for
too many creatures wandering if not stampeding everywhichway can only
lead to
violence or confusion - something, alas, which does happen from time to
time
and in some societies or so-called civilizations more than others,
whether
because they have degenerated from axial sense or never really acquired
any,
with consequences that are all-too-predictably tyrannical or anarchic,
as the
case may be.
34. But
if the masses are to be protected from the consequences of too much
freedom of
one sort or another, depending on the prevailing gender disposition of
any
given people, then it is necessary that freedom should remain the
principal
concern of the few, the radical elites whose duty it is to control the
masses
both in their own and one another's best interests, insofar as worldly
stability can only be guaranteed on the basis of axial consistency in
either
church-hegemonic or state-hegemonic fashion, and such stability is
crucial if
overworldly stability is to be assured and the hegemonic positions of
females
over males in noumenal sensuality or of males over females in noumenal
sensibility stand the test of eternal validation - something it can
only do in
conjunction with the worldly masses and not independently of them,
since the
time-under-space subservient gender will protest its paradoxical
secondary
radicalism - somatic in the case of the antimetaphysical, psychic in
the case
of the antimetachemical - if the primary radicalism which controls it
cannot
justify itself in relation to the stability of the many in respect of
worldly
compromise between the nominally hegemonic and subservient genders in
volume
and mass achieved at the behest of the overall controlling influence of
the
metachemical in the case of noumenal sensuality or of the metaphysical
in the
case of noumenal sensibility, antichemistry only turning the gender
tables on
physics by dint of metachemical primacy, antiphysics only doing
likewise to
chemistry by dint of metaphysical primacy or, more correctly, supremacy
- the
former rooted in soma, the latter centred in psyche.
35. Consequently
the world is intensely problematic to the point of unworkable without
these
controlling agents, these ruling and/or leading authorities, and the
paradoxical sufferings of that section of the few who are obliged to
live at
cross-purposes with their gender actualities under the hegemonic gender
can be
eternally justified only in relation to the benefits which accrue to
the many
in consequence of such 'world overcoming' as ensues from the overall
hegemonic
gender having its way at the expense of the nominally hegemonic gender
via its
lower-class gender parallel who establishes the axial link that binds
the
conservative to the radical, the bound to the free in reverse image of
its
Maker, be that Maker somatically evil or psychically graceful, of Devil
the
Mother or, in metaphysics, of God the Father, the under-plane corollary
of the
one being the Antison of Antigod and of the other being the
Antidaughter of the
Antidevil.
36. Be
that as it may, radicalism, like conservatism, can be either left or
right
wing, but will only be Left when psychic and Right when somatic, the
progression
from the conservative left to the radical left having to be weighed not
only
against the regression from the radical right to the conservative right
but, in
each case, against their respective subordinate complements in either
soma or
psyche, whose affiliations, ever at open or closed variance with their
own,
will remain 'pseudo' in both radicalism and conservatism.
37. Where
each of these primary and secondary positions are paradoxically
equivalent,
however, is in their status with respect to either vice or virtue. For vice is not simply
somatically free and virtue psychically so, although that is arguably
the
principal case. That which is
psychically bound is the vicious complement to whatever is somatically
free
and, conversely, the somatically bound has a virtuously free psychic
complement.
38. But
besides the need to know whether something is primarily or secondarily
vicious
or virtuous, hegemonic or subordinate, it could, with reason, be argued
that
the only really vicious positions are somatically free and the only
really
virtuous positions psychically free, so that anything that was
psychically
bound, whether in noumenal or phenomenal sensuality, would be less
vicious per
se than viciously neutral vis-à-vis its
somatic complement, whereas whatever was somatically bound, whether in
phenomenal or noumenal sensibility, would be less virtuous per se
than
virtuously neutral vis-à-vis its psychic complement.
39. For
just as there is a state/church distinction between free soma and bound
psyche
in noumenal sensuality, whether in respect of metachemistry or
antimetaphysics,
so there may well be a vicious/viciously neutral distinction between
these
upper-class representatives of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative
binding
which would contrast with the virtuously neutral/virtuous distinction,
in
phenomenal sensibility, between the antichemical and physical
manifestations of
conservative binding and pseudo-radical freedom, the axial antithesis
between
free and bound soma not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous
immorality
but, rather, of vicious immorality and virtuously neutral immorality
or, more
correctly in relation to an approximately neutral position, amorality;
that
between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis
virtuous pseudo-morality
but, rather, of viciously neutral pseudo-amorality vis-à-vis virtuous
pseudo-morality. For on this basis
virtue is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the sphere of the
State than
vice from that of the Church, even if a neutrality that leans one way
or the
other, and is effectively amorally intermediate between immoral and
moral
alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free
conditioning
factors, whether primary or secondary.
40. Likewise
just as there is a church/state distinction between bound psyche and
free soma
in phenomenal sensuality, whether in respect of antiphysics or
chemistry, so
there may well be a viciously neutral/vicious distinction between these
lower-class representatives of conservative binding and pseudo-radical
freedom
which would contrast with the virtuous/virtuously neutral distinction,
in
noumenal sensibility, between the metaphysical and antimetachemical
manifestations of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative binding, the
axial
antithesis between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious
vis-à-vis
virtuous morality but, rather, of viciously neutral amorality and
virtuous
morality; that between free and bound soma not simply one of vicious
vis-à-vis
virtuous pseudo-immorality but, rather, of vicious pseudo-immorality
vis-à-vis
virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality. For
on this basis vice is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the
sphere of
the Church than virtue from that of the State, even if a neutrality
that leans
one way or the other, being amorally intermediate between immoral and
moral
alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free
conditioning
factors, whether primary or secondary.
41. Consequently
we must distinguish the viciously neutral amorality of antiphysical and
chemical
bound psyche from the vicious pseudo-immorality of antiphysical and
chemical
free soma in phenomenal sensuality, distinguishing each of these from
the
virtuous morality of metaphysical and antimetachemical free psyche and
the
virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality of metaphysical and
antimetachemical bound
soma in noumenal sensibility, so that as one progressively ascends, in
church-hegemonic vein, from the viciously neutral amorality of sin and
pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality of grace and pseudo-punishment,
so one
counter-regressively ascends, in state-subordinate vein, from the
vicious
pseudo-immorality of folly and pseudo-evil to the virtuously neutral
pseudo-amorality of wisdom and pseudo-good.
42. Contrariwise
we must distinguish the vicious immorality of metachemical and
antimetaphysical
free soma from the viciously neutral pseudo-amorality of metachemical
and
antimetaphysical bound psyche in noumenal sensuality, distinguishing
each of
these from the virtuously neutral amorality of antichemical and
physical bound
soma and the virtuous pseudo-morality of antichemical and physical free
psyche
in phenomenal sensibility, so that as one regressively descends, in
state-hegemonic vein, from the vicious immorality of evil and
pseudo-folly to
the virtuously neutral amorality of good and pseudo-wisdom, so one
counter-progressively descends, in church-subordinate vein, from the
viciously
neutral pseudo-amorality of crime and pseudo-sin to the virtuous
pseudo-morality of punishment and pseudo-grace.
43. Taking
the diagonally ascending axis of church-hegemonic and state-subordinate
criteria first, it should be evident that the ascent, in progressive
vein, from
bound to free psyche, is equivalent to salvation from negative
amorality to
positive morality, anti-blessedness to pro-blessedness, whereas the
counter-descent, in counter-regressive vein, from free to bound soma,
is
equivalent to counter-damnation from positive pseudo-immorality to
negative
pseudo-amorality, positive pseudo-cursedness to negative
pseudo-cursedness, the
'pro' and 'anti' forms of pseudo-cursedness.
44. Where,
on the other hand, the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic
and
church-subordinate criteria is concerned, it should be evident that the
descent, in regressive vein, from free to bound soma, is equivalent to
damnation from positive immorality to negative amorality,
pro-cursedness to
anti-cursedness, whereas the counter-ascent, in counter-progressive
vein, from
bound to free psyche, is equivalent to counter-salvation from negative
pseudo-amorality to positive pseudo-morality, negative
pseudo-blessedness to
positive pseudo-blessedness, the 'anti' and 'pro' forms of
pseudo-blessedness.
45. For
whereas that which is positive is either somatically free or
psychically free,
that, by contrast, which is negative is either psychically bound or
somatically
bound, and therefore the biased amoral complement to either an immoral
(if
somatic) or a moral (if psychic) order of freedom.
46. Hence
whilst it is logical, on the diagonally descending axis, that positive
immorality and negative pseudo-amorality should live together as two
sides of
the same noumenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between
metachemically
primary and antimetaphysically secondary manifestations of each type of
vice,
it is just as demonstrably logical that negative amorality and positive
pseudo-morality should live together as two sides of the same
phenomenally
sensible coin, a coin divisible between antichemically primary and
physically
secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
47. Likewise
whilst it is demonstrably logical, on the diagonally ascending axis,
that
negative amorality and positive pseudo-immorality should live together
as two
sides of the same phenomenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between
antiphysically primary and chemically secondary manifestations of each
type of
vice, it is just as logical that positive morality and negative
pseudo-amorality should live together as two sides of the same
noumenally
sensible coin, a coin divisible between metaphysically primary and
antimetachemically secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
48. Verily,
vice and virtue are only absolute antitheses in respect of free soma
and free
psyche, but in no case is there a parallel axial antithesis between
vicious
immorality and virtuous morality, but either between vicious immorality
and
virtuous amorality in state-hegemonic society or between vicious
amorality and
virtuous morality in church-hegemonic society, vicious pseudo-amorality
being
the church-subordinate antithesis to virtuous pseudo-morality and
vicious
pseudo-immorality the state-subordinate antithesis to virtuous
amorality.
49. Consequently
morality and immorality will never be found in church/state
juxtaposition but
only either morality or immorality of one kind or another and its
complementary
mode of amorality, amorality leading to morality no less surely than
immorality
to amorality on both primary and secondary terms in either
church-hegemonic and
state-subordinate or state-hegemonic and church-subordinate societies,
given
the requisite distinctions between 'authentic' and 'pseudo' modes of
each.
50. But
in every case where there is a moral/amoral or an immoral/amoral
complementarity, whether in such fashion or the other way round, there
will be
either a virtuous correspondence between positivity and negative
neutrality or
a vicious correspondence between negativity and positive neutrality;
for in no
axial position can there be two positives or two negatives in any given
class/gender juxtaposition but only a distinction between free and
bound or
bound and free, the free always being positive, whether viciously or
virtuously, and the bound ... negative, whether viciously or virtuously.
51. Hence
the viciously immoral positivity of absolute somatic freedom has ever
to be
contrasted with the viciously pseudo-amoral negativity of absolute
psychic
binding in the noumenally sensual context of metachemistry and
antimetaphysics,
and both of these, in axial descent, with the virtuously amoral
negativity of
relative somatic binding and the virtuously pseudo-moral positivity of
relative
psychic freedom in the phenomenally sensible context of antichemistry
and
physics.
52. Hence
the viciously amoral negativity of relative psychic binding has ever to
be
contrasted with the viciously pseudo-immoral positivity of relative
somatic
freedom in the phenomenally sensual context of antiphysics and
chemistry, and
both of these, in axial ascent, with the virtuously moral positivity of
absolute psychic freedom and the virtuously pseudo-amoral negativity of
absolute somatic binding in the noumenally sensible context of
metaphysics and
antimetachemistry.
53. I
believe I have used such terms as 'concrete ethereal' and 'abstract
ethereal'
in the past - see, for example, Revelationary Afterthoughts -
in order
to distinguish the absolute nature of noumenal sensuality from the
absolute
nurture of noumenal sensibility, and would like to revert to them now
in order
to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which exists between
these
antithetical manifestations of noumenal absolutism which of course
operate in
relation to what has been described as the elemental bias of
the
contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a most
particle/least
wavicle absolutism in the case of noumenal sensuality or, conversely,
for a
most wavicle/least particle absolutism in the case of noumenal
sensibility.
54. Hence
not only was the concrete ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with
noumenal
sensuality, specifically with respect to its metachemical component,
but that
which was defined as concrete in an ethereal way had reference to a
context
typified by elemental particles in most particle/least wavicle mode in
which
there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of particles as against wavicles and
therefore in favour of soma as against psyche, with the emphasis very
much on
somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding, which, as we now know,
is merely
the viciously pseudo-amoral corollary of immoral vice.
55. Contrariwise,
not only was the abstract ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with
noumenal
sensibility, specifically with respect to its metaphysical component,
but that
which was defined as abstract in an ethereal way had reference to a
context
typified by elemental wavicles in most wavicle/least particle mode in
which
there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of wavicles as against particles and
therefore in favour of psyche as against soma, with the emphasis very
much on
psychic freedom as opposed to somatic binding, which, as we now know,
is merely
the virtuously pseudo-amoral corollary of moral virtue.
56. Similarly
I have used such terms as 'concrete corporeal' and 'abstract corporeal'
in the
past in order to distinguish the relative nature of phenomenal
sensuality from
the relative nurture of phenomenal sensibility, and would like to
revert to
them now in order to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which
exists
between these antithetical manifestations of phenomenal relativity
which of
course operate in relation to what has been described as the molecular
bias of the contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a more
(compared
to most) particle/less (compared to least) wavicle relativity in the
case of
phenomenal sensuality or, conversely, for a more (compared to most)
wavicle/less (compared to least) particle relativity in the case of
phenomenal
sensibility.
57. Hence
not only was the concrete corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with
phenomenal
sensuality, specifically with respect to its chemical component, but
that which
was defined as concrete in a corporeal way had reference to a context
typified
by molecular particles in more (compared to most) particle/less
(compared to
least) wavicle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½ in favour of
particles
as against wavicles and therefore in favour of soma as against psyche,
with the
emphasis very much on somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding,
which, as
we now know, is merely the viciously amoral corollary of pseudo-immoral
vice.
58. Contrariwise,
not only was the abstract corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with
phenomenal
sensibility, specifically with respect to its physical component, but
that
which was defined as abstract in a corporeal way had reference to a
context
typified by molecular wavicles in more (compared to most) wavicle/less
(compared to least) particle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½
in favour
of wavicles as against particles and therefore in favour of psyche as
against
soma, with the emphasis very much on psychic freedom as opposed to
somatic
binding, which, as we now know, is merely the virtuously amoral
corollary of
pseudo-moral virtue.
59. Anyone
familiar with the above theories might reasonably suppose that one
could
proceed from the concrete to the abstract ethereal via the concrete and
abstract corporeal, as though from will to soul via spirit and ego or,
alternatively, from power to contentment via glory and form, but such
would
not, in fact, be the case; for not only are the concrete ethereal and
the
abstract ethereal absolutely antithetical, and therefore
incommensurate, but
the phenomenal positions of the concrete and abstract corporeal will
not, as a
rule, be independent of axial controlling agents in the noumenal sphere
and
therefore won't typify the world, excepting in the unfortunate event of
the
context of phenomenal sensuality being overly heathen in respect of an
untempered chemical hegemony over antiphysics or the context of
phenomenal
sensibility being overly Christian in respect of an untempered physical
hegemony over antichemistry, so that the one was characterized by a
molecular-particle bias and the other by a molecular-wavicle bias, as
suggested
above.
60. Such,
however, is not how things generally pan-out in practice; for a context
of
phenomenal sensuality that was overly characterized by a
molecular-particle
bias would be heathenistically aloof, in the concrete corporeal, from
the
possibility of Christian or, better, Catholic redemption, whereas a
context of
phenomenal sensibility that was overly characterized by a
molecular-wavicle
bias would be Christianistically or, better, puritanically aloof, in
the
abstract corporeal, from the possibility of Heathen redemption which,
no matter
how seemingly bad from a pedantically Christian point of view, is
precisely
what makes for the goodness of bound soma, specifically with regard to
the
antichemical mode of phenomenal sensibility, and thus for axial
consistency and
continuity in respect of state-hegemonic criteria, which, no matter how
undesirable from a more genuinely religious standpoint in which the
Church was
hegemonic, at least guarantees worldly stability in the context of
phenomenal
sensibility and thereby precludes the likelihood and, indeed,
inevitability of
anarchy in consequence of an unduly physical lead of society in the
interests
of a knowledgeable free psyche.
61. Obviously
an undue emphasis on free psyche of a physical order is no more
desirable from
an antichemical standpoint than an undue emphasis on free soma of a
chemical
order from the standpoint of
antiphysics, the revolt of males against such an emphasis almost
bound
to lead to tyrannical opposition on the part of the chemically
hegemonic,
whether literally female or not, since objective oppression directed
against
psyche must ever be contrasted, in sensibility, with subjective
repression of
soma.
62. Therefore
neither phenomenal sensuality nor phenomenal sensibility can be left at
the
mercy of their respective hegemonic genders, for whom, in volume over
mass,
either the concrete corporeal relativity of a molecular-particle bias
in the
more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles of
the
chemical would spell free-somatic heathen doom to the antiphysical or,
in
phenomenal sensibility, the abstract corporeal relativity of a
molecular-wavicle bias in the more (compared to most) wavicles/less
(compared
to least) particles of the physical would spell free-psychic Christian
doom to the
antichemical.
63. As we
have seen, what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a
diagonally
ascending order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both
worldly
and overworldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal
sensuality,
the antiphysical partially turn the tables on the chemical at the
behest of the
metaphysical over the antimetachemical in noumenal sensibility, so that
instead
of a molecular-particle bias in overly heathen vein the lower-class
male
actuality of more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least)
particles in the relative precedence of soma by psyche is able to
establish a
molecular-wavicle bias commensurate with an emphasis on psyche, even if
such an
emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's
actuality
(in relation to the more - compared to most) particles/less - compared
to least
- wavicles of the relative precedence of psyche by soma) of bound
psyche as the
corollary of free soma, except that now it is not as the subordinate
corollary
of free soma but, with the psychic assistance of that which freely
pertains to
the overall metaphysical hegemony, effectively hegemonic over free soma
in
consequence of the antiphysical subversion of chemistry.
64. Contrariwise,
what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a diagonally
descending
order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both overworldly
and
worldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal sensibility,
the
antichemical partially turn the tables on the physical at the behest of
the
metachemical over the antimetaphysical in noumenal sensuality, so that
instead
of a molecular-wavicle bias in pedantically Christian vein the
lower-class
female actuality of more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to
least)
wavicles in the relative precedence of psyche by soma is able to
establish a
molecular-particle bias commensurate with an emphasis on soma, even if
such an
emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's
actuality
(in relation to the more - compared to most - wavicles/less - compared
to least
- particles of the relative precedence of soma by psyche) of bound soma
as the
corollary of free psyche, except that now it is not as the subordinate
corollary of free psyche but, with the somatic assistance of that which
freely
pertains to the overall metachemical hegemony, effectively hegemonic
over free
psyche in consequence of the antichemical subversion of physics.
65. Thus
through the paradoxical subversions of the nominal phenomenal
hegemonies at the
behest of their noumenal gender counterparts, neither phenomenal
sensuality nor
phenomenal sensibility remain contexts that could be simply defined as
either
concrete or abstract corporeal but, notwithstanding the basic
persistence of gender
influence appertaining thereto, become respectively abstract corporeal
in terms
of bound psyche taking precedence over free soma and concrete corporeal
in
terms of bound soma taking precedence over free psyche, with axial
consistency
established between the de
facto abstract corporeal and the de jure abstract ethereal
in respect
of church-hegemonic society, and between the de jure concrete
ethereal
and the de facto concrete corporeal in respect of
state-hegemonic
society, each of which has its own subordinate orders of state or
church, as
already discussed.
66. Hence
as salvation proceeds from the relative wavicle aspects of the abstract
corporeal to the absolute wavicle aspects of the abstract ethereal in
respect
of bound to free psyche in church-hegemonic society, thereby
progressing from
sin and pseudo-crime to grace and pseudo-punishment, so
counter-damnation
counter-recedes from the relative particle aspects of the abstract
corporeal to
the absolute particle aspects of the abstract ethereal in respect of
free to
bound soma in state-subordinate society, thereby counter-regressing
from folly
and pseudo-evil to wisdom and pseudo-good.
67. Contrariwise,
as damnation recedes from the absolute particle aspects of the concrete
ethereal to the relative particle aspects of the concrete corporeal in
respect
of free to bound soma in state-hegemonic society, thereby regressing
from evil
and pseudo-folly to good and pseudo-wisdom, so counter-salvation
counter-proceeds from the absolute wavicle aspects of the concrete
ethereal to
the relative wavicle aspects of the concrete corporeal in respect of
bound to
free psyche in church-subordinate society, thereby counter-progressing
from
crime and pseudo-sin to punishment and pseudo-grace.
68. Hence
there is about the diagonally ascending axis from phenomenal sensuality
to
noumenal sensibility a progressive/counter-regressive ascent from more
(compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles to most
wavicles/least particles, as from a 2½:1½ to a 3:1 ratio in favour of
psyche at
the expense of soma, in which antihumanism and transcendentalism take
precedence over nonconformism and antifundamentalism in
church-hegemonic terms
and antinaturalism and idealism over realism and antimaterialism in
state-subordinate terms.
69. Contrariwise,
there is about the diagonally descending axis from noumenal sensuality
to
phenomenal sensibility a regressive/counter-progressive descent from
most
particles/least wavicles to more (compared to most) particles/less
(compared to
least) wavicles, as from a 3:1 to a 2½:1½ ratio in favour of soma at
the
expense of psyche, in which materialism and antirealism take precedence
over
anti-idealism and naturalism in state-hegemonic terms and
fundamentalism and
antinonconformism over antitranscendentalism and humanism in
church-subordinate
terms.
70. Just
as, from a strictly somatic point of view, it could be said that
females get a
raw deal on the diagonally ascending axis, so, from a strictly psychic
point of
view, it has to be said that males get a raw deal on the diagonally
descending
axis; for in no society is it possible to treat males and females
exactly
alike, as though they were equal, when the basic somatic/psychic
contradiction
of the genders - the Biblical 'friction of the seeds' - is such that
the female
can only have her freedom (in reflection of the precedence of psyche by
soma in
either absolute or relative terms according to class) at the expense of
the
male in sensuality or the male only have his freedom (in reflection of
the
precedence of soma by psyche in either relative or absolute terms
according to
class) at the female's expense in sensibility.
71. Such
antithetical types of freedom lead, as we have seen, to antithetical
types of
society in which either somatic freedom is triumphant in female vein
or, on the
diagonally ascending axis, psychic freedom triumphs in male vein, and
each of
these societies will tend to trumpet its own brand of freedom as though
there
could be only one freedom, so accustomed are they to either being
ruled, in
female-hegemonic vein, by a somatic concept of freedom which, from the
standpoint of morality, is commensurate with what is worst in
civilization and
therefore alone reflective of vice in both barbarous and
pseudo-philistine
terms, or led, in male-hegemonic vein, by a psychic concept of freedom
which,
in contrast to immorality, is commensurate with what is best in
civilization
and therefore alone reflective of virtue in both cultural and
pseudo-civil
terms.
72. But
the enemy of that which is centred in virtue in both cultural and
pseudo-civil
terms is of course the society rooted in vice in both barbarous and
pseudo-philistine terms, and such a society is scarcely worthy of the
name
'civilization', since ruled by Devil the Mother rather than led by God
the
Father, and therefore disposed to somatic freedom at the expense of
psychic
freedom and at the cost, more pertinently, of psychic binding, which
can only
stand in a church-subordinate relationship to what is, in fact, a
state-hegemonic situation reflective of the precedence of psyche by
soma.
73. Such
an enemy of moral virtue, rooted shamelessly in immoral vice, does not
and in
all probability cannot exist independently of amoral virtue; for such
somatic
freedom as accrues to noumenal sensuality is only viable as long as it
is
antithetically partnered, one might say, by somatic binding in the
phenomenally
sensible realm at the worldly base of the diagonally descending axis,
so that
there is an inter-class relationship between evil and good on the one
hand and
between pseudo-folly and pseudo-wisdom on the other hand, the hand not
of
primary but of secondary state-hegemonic criteria on the male side of
the
gender divide.
74. Therefore
even in state-hegemonic terms, the male is secondary to the female and
no more
than a quasi-right-wing shadow to the Right who has to accept criteria
stemming
from and appertaining to the precedence of psyche by soma.
He is, to say the least, 'bent'; for no male
can escape unscathed from the subversion of his gender in
state-hegemonic
society, and few if any such pseudo-foolish or pseudo-wise males,
notwithstanding gender transmutation in relation to either evil or
good, can
escape the taint of somatic deviousness which betrays what is
colloquially
termed a 'sonofabitch', or someone who is always likely to betray his
gender
for somatic gain, whether in relation to noumenal sensuality or to
phenomenal
sensibility, and thus whether from the standpoint of what could be
no-less
colloquially described as an 'antibum' or a 'prick'.
75. I
believe it was Sartre who, in Existentialism
and
Humanism, said that existence precedes
essence, but, frankly, I don't think he was speaking from a male point
of view
but, rather, as someone whose Protestant-derived worldview owed more
than a
little to state-hegemonic criteria in which the precedence of psyche by
soma is
institutionalized in such fashion that males get turned from the path
or
possibility of righteousness in sync with their gender actuality (of
psyche
preceding and predominating over soma in one of two class ratios, as
discussed
above) to one of gender corruption in which they play second fiddle, as
it
were, to females or to what effectively appertains to female-hegemonic
and/or
subversive criteria, and no longer become worthy of respect as males to
the
extent that they are only too ready to oppose male liberation from a
standpoint
rooted in female dominion.
76. Thus
do they reveal themselves as the heathenistic enemies of God the Father
(not to
mention his antimetachemical bride the Antidaughter of the Antidevil)
for whom
religion is largely a closed issue and science alone worthy of respect
or
furtherance, particularly that aspect of science which most conforms
with
materialistic free enterprise, not forgetting its anti-idealistic
complement in
antimetaphysics, and is able to prey upon the weak and ignorant masses
of what,
in church-hegemonic society, would be called the meek, all the more
ruthlessly
and successfully so in proportion to the extents to which they have
been
democratized and therefore divided between various competing political
interests which no longer or, rather, cannot hold the People to any
degree of
flock-like homogeneity vis-à-vis ecclesiastic authority because
fundamentally
in opposition to any such homogeneity, having come, by whatever devious
or
circuitous path, from that which directly stems from the manifold
divisiveness
of somatic freedom in Devil the Mother and has its parliamentary
resolution in
somatic binding, not least in respect of allegiance to the reigning
monarch,
but which, in republican transmutation, still manages to further
political
heterogeneity and to further weaken the masses in the face of the kinds
of
noumenally sensual exploitation stemming from somatically free
enterprise which
rain down upon them on a weekly if not daily basis, rendering them less
capable
of psychic redemption in proportion as they become more somatically
deferential
and merely the passive playthings of wilful licence.
77. One
has heard the Catholic Irish rather graciously and, I think, fairly
described
as a God's people, but, boy! are they up against it at the moment, what
with
all the metachemical and antimetaphysical distractions and impositions
which
owe little or nothing to God the Father, never mind the Antidaughter of
the
Antidevil, and much if not everything to Devil the Mother together with
her
pseudo-foolish 'fall guy' accomplice, the Antison of Antigod, and these
days
more than ever on a synthetically artificial basis commensurate with a
sensually
superficial manifestation of cyborgization.
78. I am
no blind humanist, whether bourgeois or proletarian, to have anything
against
the cyborgization of life in relation to the development of
globalization, but
I certainly believe that the sooner its sensual manifestation is
augmented and
even overhauled by a sensible manifestation commensurate with 'Kingdom
Come'
(as defined in previous texts), the better it will be for the entire
globe, not
just the West or the East, and the more genuinely universal life will
become.
79. For
at the moment it is still pretty personal, even under a polyversal
heterogeneity appertaining to the divide-and-rule principles of
noumenal
sensuality, and worse from a divine standpoint than its being either
personal
or polyversal is the extent to which the impersonal masses of what were
formerly more homogeneously the meek are being exploited and deflected
towards
those very state-hegemonic distractions which make universality all but
impossible, all but impossible because it requires a precondition that,
having
been influenced and exploited by external factors, is neither
quasi-personal in
political vein nor quasi-polyversal in scientific vein, but properly
impersonal
in social vein and therefore in line for the possibility - indeed
inevitability
- of theocratic universality.
80. Such
universality has always been more the hope of the faithful in Christ
or, at any
rate, the Catholic Church, than an actual fulfilment; for no matter how
much
they may opt for the grace of verbal absolution the meek have ever had
to
contend with the shortcomings of their worldly predicament in the
impersonality
and, for that matter, antipersonality of phenomenal sensuality, coupled
to the
impositions of a distractive nature which stem, by and large, from the
combined
class efforts of the polyversal and what shall be called the
anti-impersonal,
the former hegemonic over what could be called the anti-universal, the
latter
subversive of the personal at the behest of an overall metachemical
hegemony.
81. Therefore
not simply impersonality leading to universality, or, indeed,
personality
stemming from polyversality, but, more gender specifically,
antipersonality
leading, for the antiphysical, to universality, coupled to
impersonality
leading, for the chemical, to antipolyversality, on both
church-hegemonic and
state-subordinate terms, in contrast to anti-impersonality stemming,
for the
antichemical, from polyversality, coupled to personality stemming, for
the
physical, from anti-universality, on both state-hegemonic and
church-subordinate terms.
82. But
it is very difficult, if not impossible, for antipersonality to lead to
universality, not least in the church-hegemonic terms of antihumanism
to
transcendentalism, if impersonality is being preyed upon by
polyversality to
such an extent that it becomes quasi-polyversal and in turn makes it
all the
more likely, if not inevitable, that antipersonality, preyed upon by
anti-universality, will become quasi-antiuniversal and therefore as
ready to
defer to illusion as its female counterpart to evil.
83. Unless
there is a new order of universality, coupled to a new order of
antipolyversality, it will not be possible to bring both the
antipersonal and
impersonal back into line with church-hegemonic and state-subordinate
criteria,
and that is what has to be done if those of phenomenal sensuality are
to be
both saved and counter-damned from their worldly predicament to one
that offers
them not merely hope for a universal/antipolyversal deal in 'Kingdom
Come', but
the actual realization of that hope in practical and theoretical
fulfilment.
84. That
is where the Second Coming or, as I prefer to phrase it, equivalent to
a Second
Coming fits-in to the overall picture; for it is only through the
advocate and
embodiment of religious sovereignty that the people of phenomenal
sensuality
can ever achieve, via a paradoxical utilization of the democratic
process to a
profoundly theocratic/anti-aristocratic end, rights in relation to
religion
which will deliver them from the world more expeditiously and,
ultimately,
efficaciously than would otherwise be possible, and precisely because
it will
lead to the kind of system and moral order, broadly identifiable with
Social
Theocracy, in which the development of religious sovereignty will be
given the
sorts of synthetically artificial encouragement that would be
commensurate with
the attainment, later if not sooner, of global universality and, hence,
global
peace in unity with what has been described as the virtuous circle of
noumenal
sensibility.
85. Therefore
Social Theocracy is the solution to the problem not only of the world
considered from a phenomenally sensual point of view, but to the
problem of
that which exploits the alpha world of the phenomenally sensual from
the
contrary state-hegemonic and church-subordinate standpoints of noumenal
sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, in a sort of
alpha-overworldly/omega-worldly axial conspiracy against the meek.
86. For
nothing short of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty will
enable the
phenomenally sensual to be delivered both from themselves and their
exploiters
to a system that, centred in noumenal sensibility, will dedicate most
if not
all of its energies to transmuting them from their lowly status in
antiphysics
and chemistry to the high estates of metaphysics and antimetachemistry
on terms
which, deriving from and pertaining to synthetic artificiality, will
portend
the possibility if not inevitability of global
universality/antipolyversality
in God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, thereby remaining
aloof
from anything worldly, not to mention netherworldly, as it brings the
otherworldly to its righteous culmination via the sensible
cyborgization of
life to an eternal end in the omega points of a space/time continuum
that will
constitute the virtuous circle of an ultimate yang and yin or, more
correctly
antiyin.
87. That,
in a nutshell, is the goal. But it
remains a possibility that I believe can be technologically and
ideologically actualized
in the decades and centuries to come, as was never possible in previous
centuries, not least because of the want of sufficient global and
technological
sophistication. In fact, it would not be
exaggerating to say that, certainly in the West, there has never really
been
any great commitment to God the Father, not to mention the Antidaughter
of the
Antidevil, in the virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry,
and for
the simple reason that such a noumenally sensible commitment has never
really
been possible for want of genuine transcendentalism/antifundamentalism
in the
face of other and more basic orientations.
88. For
what, in a word, was Christianity, but the death not of God, as might
at first
appear to be the case, but the death if not literally of Devil the
Mother then
certainly of the worship of Devil the Mother on the Cross, that Devil
who was
taken, heathenistically, for God, and made the subject of pagan
sacrifice,
being allegedly wrathful and something to fear.
Did not the sacrifice of man to some Devil hyped as God end with
the
sacrifice of Devil the Mother's Son on the Cross? And
is
not
the
Immaculate Conception
theologically justified on the basis that Mary symbolizes not an agent
of God,
miraculously impregnated by God as cosmic Creator, but the earthly
embodiment
of Devil the Mother who attests to the fact that there is nothing
anterior in
the Cosmos, nor even in nature or mankind, to Devil the Mother, and
therefore
nothing or no-one that could
impregnate her from above (a metachemical
position) and make her the vehicle of a conventional female conception? What was worshipped as the Son of God by
Christians was in effect the Son of Devil the Mother who, by his
sacrifice on
the Cross, put an end to the need of mankind to sacrifice to Devil the
Mother,
as the Catholic West passed beyond both cosmic and natural religion.
89. Henceforth
mankind would bear witness, in Christianity, not to the literal death
of God -
for something commensurate with Eternal Life can never die, nor can we
accept
that what died on the Cross was literally the Son of God - but to the
effective
death of worship of Devil the Mother,
whose earthly personification gave birth to a Son who would die
that
mankind could live independently of pagan sacrifice by bearing
Eucharistic
witness to His own sacrifice through the bread and wine of His
sacramental body
and blood, partaking of the death of paganism through the worship of
the
Crucified.
90. Therefore
Christianity does not bear witness to the death of God on the Cross but
to the
death of the worship of Devil the Mother which paves the way for the
birth of
man, for the Son of Man (or the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother)
who,
following the resurrection, becomes in theological estimation the Son
of God who
sits on the right-hand side of the so-called Father, meaning not God
the Father
(in the metaphorical sense of psyche preceding soma, father preceding
son, as
the male actuality par
excellence) but
Devil the Mother, so that His ascension is akin to an implicit
metaphysical
omega that exists independently of an explicit metachemical alpha that
His
sacrifice made it possible for Christian mankind to relegate to the
historical
background of religious significance.
91. All
that mattered was that there was a Son of God 'on high' who - distinct
even
from the concept of a so-called Sacred Heart of the Risen Christ that,
in
antimetachemical bound soma, can and does get roped-in to a
perpendicular
triangularity of Catholic decadence in which some symbolic analogues of
eyes
and ears constitute its noumenally sensual components - would remain on
the
right-hand side of Devil the Mother until his return to earth, in the
guise of
the Second Coming, when He would proclaim the absence of God the Father
from
Heaven, of metaphysical free psyche, and of the need to establish God
the
Father not only at the expense of mankind but at the expense of any
remaining
allegiance to Devil the Mother hyped as God, so that it becomes evident
that it
was in fact the sacrificial rejection of Devil the Mother by the Son of
the
Immaculate Conception, or the earthly incarnation of Devil the Mother,
that
makes God the Father possible, even if, things being what they are,
such a
possibility can be no more than latent during the ensuing era of man,
of
mankind, that necessarily follows, in Western worldly vein, upon the
heels, so
to speak, of the cosmic and natural deaths of Devil the Mother (albeit
Anglican
Monarchism to some extent revived the natural form of the
latter in the
course of its affiliation with the apex of the diagonally descending
axis of
state-hegemonic criteria, one step back from Catholic mankind that was
only
precluded from embracing Judaic cosmic-kind in unequivocally Old
Testament vein
by the persisting relevance of the New Testament, in respect of
Christendom).
92. Thus
must the Resurrected remain theologically peripheral to the world in
anticipation of the time when His return to earth in the guise of a
Second
Coming is feasible by dint not only of the ensuing era of man drawing
towards a
close, but of the technology which man has developed being sufficiently
advanced that some more genuine aspiration towards God the Father,
coupled to
the Antidaughter of the Antidevil for females, becomes possible -
something it
never was in the transcendentally implicit past when, short even of
transcendental meditation in Eastern Buddhist vein, the Catholic West
made do
with verbal absolution for penitential contrition as its phenomenally
sensual
instincts went their temperate worldly way in effectively lowlander
vein, the
welfare of the masses as opposed to a monk-like elite being of
paramount
concern to a religion rooted in the many in typically Western fashion.
93. Christianity,
then, bears witness if not literally to the death of Devil the Mother -
for
cosmic bodies corresponding to metachemical sensuality, not to mention
antimetaphysical sensuality, still persist - then certainly to the end
of pagan
worship thereof, even as such a noumenally sensual entity, with
specific
reference to metachemistry, continues to be broadly regarded, in Old
Testament
vein, as God. But it bears witness to
the death of paganism on both totalitarian and, later, liberal terms,
broadly
commensurate with Catholicism and Protestantism, just as the birth of
man follows
on both liberal and, later, totalitarian terms, broadly commensurate
with
bourgeois and proletarian forms of humanism to which first the French
Revolution and then the Russian Revolution paid their respective
tributes, and,
indeed, the death of man follows from this on both totalitarian and,
subsequently, liberal terms, broadly commensurate with Fascism (Nazism)
and
Capitalism, of which America is the latter-day exemplar of the liberal
death of
man par
excellence.
94. What
must come next is the birth not of the Devil, as conventional champions
of the
'death of God' theory would have us believe, but the birth, through
cyborgization of a sensibly synthetic orientation, of God the Father,
coupled
to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, so that, via the
Second Coming, the teacher and advocate of
such a birth, it becomes possible, for virtually the first time in the
West, to
champion something that transcends not merely man but the Resurrection
of
Christ to Son-of-God status and thereby enters into global co-operation
and
competition with the East, overhauling such Buddhist transcendentalism
as
transcendental meditation signifies in a penultimate, or mankind, stage
of
metaphysical evolution, but also challenging and, hopefully, liberating
that
other and more alpha-stemming segment of the East from the still-extant
adherences to Devil the Mother hyped as God (not to mention Antidevil
the
Antimother hyped as God from an antimetachemical standpoint which,
bereft of
metaphysical freedom to defer to, gets roped-in, somatically, to the
cosmic
mode of perpendicular triangularity characterizing civilizations
unequivocally
rooted in Old Testament criteria) which persist for want of that
temperate
environmental advantage, traditionally characterizing much of the West,
that
made a Christian alternative to space/time heathenistic norms dominated
by
noumenal sensuality religiously possible.
95. But
if the death of man has had to pass through totalitarian and liberal
stages,
the latter of which is still extant, then it cannot come as a surprise
for
anyone to learn that the birth of God will also pass from a liberal to
a
totalitarian stage as it evolves from its initial pluralism in what, in
previous texts, has been described as the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom
Come' to a
more noumenally sensible culmination in which metaphysics and
antimetachemistry
will represent the Beyond in non-triadic terms, terms closer to a
monadic
duality between God the Father/Heaven the Holy Soul coupled in
metaphysical
bound soma to the Son of God/the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and the
Antidaughter of
the Antidevil/the Unclear Soul of Antihell coupled in antimetachemical
bound
soma to Antidevil the Antimother/Antihell the Unclear Spirit, which
will
signify the virtuous circle of Truth and Joy coupled to a truthful
approach to
beauty and a joyful approach to love, together with Beauty and Love
coupled, in
secondary free psyche, to a beautiful approach to truth and a loving
approach
to joy as constitutive of the antifundamentalist complement, in
antimetachemistry,
to the transcendentalism of that primary free psyche commensurate with
Truth
and Joy in the church-hegemonic aspects of metaphysics.
96. After
the totalitarian stage of the birth of God/the Antidevil, one might
speak, in
space-centre vein, of the Eternal Life of God/the Antidevil as the
complete
antithesis, on either count, to the Eternal Death of the Devil/Antigod,
the
Eternal Death of that which cosmically burns in a stellar/solar,
clear/unholy
alliance of noumenal sensuality in which Devil the Mother/Hell the
Clear Spirit
coupled to the primary bound psyche of
the Daughter of the Devil/the Clear Soul of Hell rules over the
Antison
of Antigod/the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven coupled, in secondary bound
psyche,
to Antigod the Antifather/Antiheaven the Unholy Soul, which signifies
not a
virtuous circle but a sort of vicious circle of Ugliness and Hatred
coupled to
an ugly approach to illusion and a hateful approach to woe, together
with
Illusion and Woe coupled, in secondary free soma, to an illusory
approach to
ugliness and a woeful approach to hatred
as constituting the anti-idealist complement, in antimetaphysics, to
the
materialism of that primary free soma commensurate with Ugliness and
Hatred in
the state-hegemonic aspects of metachemistry.
97. Thus
one could speak of an overall noumenal antithesis between Devil the
Mother/the
Antison of Antigod and God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil
which
would flank, on an alpha/omega basis, the death of the worship of Devil
the
Mother/the Antison of Antigod, the birth of man, or the worship of
mankind, the
death of man, or the worship of the machine, and the birth of the
experience of
God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil which has still to
come and
will make possible the definitive realization, in space centres, of
noumenal
sensibility, being that which logically leads on to it in the course of
the
synthetically artificial evolution, in 'Kingdom Come', of both
metaphysics and
antimetachemistry.
98. But
that is a grand overview, somewhat wishful at present, of both death
and life,
and before there can be any possibility of the birth of God the
Father/the
Antidaughter of the Antidevil, coupled to their respective somatic
corollaries,
the death of man must proceed apace and enter a new phase, in certain
countries, which encourages the prospect of cyborg resurrection from
out the
worship of the machine characterizing contemporary civilization.
99. There
are, as already described, two main views of man over and above the
simple
generic concept of mankind (as lying somewhat in between the animal
kind and
cyborgkind), not only in respect of birth and death, but in terms of
man as a
sort of end-in-himself, which is rather humanistic and therefore
physical, and
man not as an end-in-himself but, rather, as an antihumanistic means to
a new
and higher end, what in Catholic tradition would be regarded as God in
respect
of a sort of implicit transcendentalism that dare not speak its name
openly
from fear not only of contradicting the explicit materialism - I say
nothing of
subordinate fundamentalism - of the Old Testament in regard to Devil
the Mother
hyped as God, but of revealing its shortfall in regard to
transcendental
meditation as the mankind stage or manifestation of God the
Father/Heaven the Holy
Soul, etc., that would parallel Christianity, if from a Buddhist
standpoint, as
the religion, centred New Testament-wise in Christ, of a people given,
environmentally and for other reasons, to a mankind stage of religious
evolution that necessarily overhauled anything rooted, Old
Testament-wise, in
either nature or the Cosmos, but just as inevitably fell short of
anything
centred, Social Theocratically, in the Cyborg, conceived, from a
somewhat
Nietzschean standpoint, as man's logical successor.
100. Nevertheless,
even if Catholic man is not capable, exceptions to the human rule
notwithstanding, of attaining to God the Father on anything like an
explicit
and genuinely transcendentalist basis, albeit still within a
penultimate
context of godliness that not only falls short of the possibility of
its
ultimate manifestation in the coming age of cyborgization, but exists
in the
shadow, as it were, of man, whether in terms of his birth or death, he
is still
a far cry, traditionally, from being an end-in-himself, like those
males for
whom the world is its own reward and whom we have characterized as
physical,
whether on humanistic church-subordinate terms or on naturalistic
state-hegemonic terms.
101. There
is therefore, in this narrower sense, antiman and man, the antiphysical
and the
physical, but also, in each phenomenal context, woman and antiwoman,
the
chemical and the antichemical, neither of whom can be left out of the
overall
worldly dichotomy between the phenomenally sensual and their sensible
counterparts.
102. There
is also, as we have seen, that which controls antiman and woman, being
germane
to the metaphysical and antimetachemical contexts of noumenal
sensibility,
which we may call godly and antidevilish, thereby
classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with
phenomenal
sensuality.
103. But there is also, as
noted, that which controls antiwoman
and man, being germane to the metachemical and antimetaphysical context
of
noumenal sensuality, which we can call devilish and antigodly, thereby
classing
them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal
sensibility.
104. Therefore
in returning to our axial distinctions between the meek and the
righteous,
phenomenal sensuality and noumenal sensibility, on the one hand, and
the vain
and the just, noumenal sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, on the
other
hand, it becomes evident that we are dealing, outside simple species
definitions, with more than simply man or antiman.
We are also dealing with woman and antiwoman,
the devilish and the antigodly, the godly and the antidevilish, all of
whom
differ from one another on a class or a gender basis within contexts
either
ruled by sensuality or led by sensibility.
105. The
concept of 'mankind', as a crass generalization for a two-legged
species
capable of thought, becomes rather irrelevant in the face of such
manifold
distinctions, as does the notion of 'human being' vis-à-vis people who
spend
much of their time demonstrating that, quite apart from the existence
of human
beings, they are more like doings or givings or takings, not to mention
antidoings, antigivings, antitakings, and even antibeings who will be
more or
less human depending on the extents to which they are also, or
alternatively,
devilish or antigodly, godly or antidevilish, womanly or antimanly,
manly or
antiwomanly, as the case may be.
106. Man
as a kind distinct from animals and plants is no more homogeneous than
the
other kinds but is capable of being identified with a great many
different
roles and circumstances, and while there are some who will more
literally
approximate to what is human, or humanistic, there will be others who
just as
readily approximate to what is antihuman, or antihumanistic, not to
mention to
what is antinaturalistic rather than naturalistic within antiphysics as
opposed
to physics, thereby suggesting a closer affiliation with the death of
man than
with his birth or worship.
107. There is nothing special about being human, or
humanistic, in the estimation of God, or godliness. The
godly are only really interested in the antihumanistic, the antimanly,
and then
to the extent that they can be saved to transcendentalism; for the
death of man
is a precondition of the birth of God, while the antidevilish corollary
of
godliness would evince a similar interest in the salvation of the
nonconformistic, the subverted womanly, to the extent that they could
be saved,
in secondary vein, to antifundamentalism, passing from the death of
woman under
antihumanist subversion to the birth of the Antidevil under a divine
hegemony
in transcendentalism.
108. But those who are neither
antiphysical nor chemical, neither
antimasculine nor feminine, but either antifeminine or masculine,
antichemical
or physical - what can the godly and/or antidevilish do for them? Nothing!
For they appertain to a different axis from that which reflects
church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria, being at the worldly
base of
the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and
church-subordinate
criteria, and far from the few wishing to save the many, as from bound
to free
psyche, and to counter-damn them, as from free to bound soma, it is the
many
who would like to damn the few and render them less somatically free in
consequence, perhaps even rendering some of them more psychically free
in
proportion as they become counter-saved from bound to free psyche and
thus
partake in the worship of the birth of both antiwoman and man in
phenomenally
sensible partnership, the former primary in both state and church, the
latter,
duly subverted from below, no more than secondary manifestations of
state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria who consequently have
no option
but to live the life of man as a sort of slave to antiwoman, who is in
turn a
slave to the devilish who rule a freely somatic metachemical roost at
the
expense of an antigodly 'fall guy'.
109. No,
'mankind' is too vague a word to do justice to these much more complex
and
multiform operations of disparate categories of persons, some of whom
are more
or less human than others. There are
those who are of God and the Antidevil, there are those who, though of
antiman
and woman, can be saved, no matter how intermittently or impermanently,
to God
and the Antidevil; and there are those, by contrast, who are of
antiwoman and
man, and others who, though of the Devil and Antigod, can be damned, no
matter
how intermittently or impermanently, to antiwoman and man.
Saved, in church-hegemonic
vein, from bound to free psyche, and damned, in state-hegemonic vein,
from free
to bound soma. Not forgetting, of
course, the counter-damnation, in state-subordinate vein, from free to
bound
soma and the counter-salvation, in church-subordinate vein, from bound
to free
psyche, as in relation to the somatic or psychic affiliates, as the
case may
be, of the hegemonic factors.
110. Therefore
just as there are godly and antidevilish types at work trying to save
antimasculine and feminine types, as from phenomenal sensuality to
noumenal
sensibility, so there are devilish and antigodly types at work trying
to resist
being damned by antifeminine and masculine types, as from noumenal
sensuality
to phenomenal sensibility. The axes
effectively pull in opposite directions, the diagonally ascending one
up from
the many to the few, the diagonally descending one down from the few to
the
many, and therefore they are completely incommensurate and antithetical
in
virtually every respect.
111. And,
in overall historical terms, it could be argued that the death, at
least in
cosmic terms, of Devil the Mother leading to the birth of man, on both
liberal
and totalitarian humanist terms, has closer associations with the
diagonally
descending axis than ever it does with its diagonally ascending
counterpart, in
connection with which it is more logical to distinguish between the
death of
man and the birth of God the Father, as and when, transcending mere
implicit
hope of and allusion to the latter, the Second Coming equivalent brings
his
teachings into the world to lead the antiphysical, coupled to their
chemical
counterparts, towards the possibility of a new metaphysical
dispensation which,
hegemonic over antimetachemistry, will resurrect the phenomenally
sensual dead
in such fashion that they become the recipients of a degree and kind of
Eternal
Life commensurate with the most evolved and therefore per
se manifestation of God/the Antidevil in
the cyborg supersession not simply of mankind's more (compared to most)
evolved
approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable), but also, and no
less
importantly, of nature's less (compared to least) evolved approach to
noumenal
sensibility (where applicable) and the Cosmos's least evolved approach
to
noumenal sensibility (where applicable) - approaches that, with good
reason,
have always been in the shadow of either man, woman, or the Devil, as
the case
may be, and are not capable of a truly representative stance or status
in
consequence.
112. Be
that as it may, the ascending and descending axes differ so
antithetically that
even in sex and sport, about which I shall now expatiate at some
length, there
are major differences, not least in respect of the relationship of
psyche to
soma or vice versa, and the extent to which sport, reflecting such
relationships, can be either church hegemonic and state subordinate or,
by
contrast, state hegemonic and church subordinate.
113. For it has logically
occurred to me that sport is no more
simply one thing or another, of the State or of the Church, than sex,
since
there is always a subordinate somatic dimension to church-hegemonic
society and
a subordinate psychic dimension to state-hegemonic society, no matter
how much
psyche and soma may typify the respective alternatives.
Therefore just as in Revolutionary
Afterthoughts I distinguished the Irish games of hurling and Gaelic
football
from their British counterparts rugby and association football on the
basis of
an axial distinction between the many and the few of church-hegemonic
society
on the one hand and the few and the many of state-hegemonic society on
the
other hand, I did not, I believe, exclude soma from the former context
or,
indeed, psyche from the latter, and therefore it can be maintained that
each of
the sports is indicative, in their different ways, of both a church and
a state
dimension, if with a bias one way or the other according to the axis to
which
the sport would seem to conform.
114. Therefore
we can no more limit hurling and Gaelic football to bound and free
psyche
respectively than rugby and association football to free and bound
soma, even though
such ascriptions would arguably conform to what most characterizes each
of
these particular kinds of sport, bearing in mind their association with
church-hegemonic criteria in the case of the Irish games and with
state-hegemonic criteria in the case of the British games.
Clearly there is a state-subordinate
dimension to both hurling and Gaelic football, not least in respect of
points
or goals scored under the crossbar, which complements, from below, the
points
scored over the bar between the extended uprights in arguably more
representatively church-hegemonic vein, as when a bound (in the case of
hurling) or a free (in the case of Gaelic) psychic parallel is
indicated in
respect of the greater height attaching to such points.
115. Contrariwise,
there is evidently a church-subordinate dimension to both rugby and
association
football, not least in respect of points scored (more usually via spot
kicks)
between the extended uprights in the case of rugby or goals scored via
the head
in the case of football, which complements, from above, the points
scored under
the bar or to either side of the uprights in the form of tries in rugby
and
goals scored via the foot in football in arguably more representatively
state-hegemonic vein, as when a free (in the case of rugby) or a bound
(in the
case of football) somatic parallel is indicated in respect of the
lesser height
and/or greater depth attaching to such tries and/or goals.
116. But
just as we cannot limit such games to church or state, even if a bias
towards one
or the other will more usually typify their respective axial
integrities,
neither, it seems to me, can they be limited to only one gender or
gender
influence, as though simply significant of a male input from
antiphysics to
metaphysics on the ascending axis or of a female input from
metachemistry to
antichemistry on the descending one; for if the Irish games are not
entirely
male to the extent that they, or some equivalent thereof, are often
played by
females, then it would be foolish to suppose that the British games
were
entirely female when more usually played by males.
Or, rather, it would be as presumptuous to
suppose that there was no chemical or antimetachemical dimension to the
Irish
games as that there was no antimetaphysical or physical dimension to
the
British games, irrespective of the extents to which both pairs of
axially
antithetical games remained either church hegemonic or state hegemonic
which,
in any case, is something that can apply from the standpoint of either
gender,
if on different terms, since according with either a primary or a
secondary
approach to each.
117. Frankly
I like to think that, in association football, low goals scored with
the foot
should be somatically distinguished from high goals scored with the
foot,
whether in consequence of having been hit on the volley or simply
struck with a
top corner or arching descent in mind, just as low goals scored with
the head
should be psychically distinguished from high goals scored with the
head, more
usually in consequence of the player having to jump rather than dive,
and if
such a distinction is between an antirealist and a naturalist approach
to a
state-hegemonic parallel in the case of booted goals and an
antinonconformist
and a humanist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of
headed
goals, then who am I to argue? I see no
other interpretation to put on the methodology of football scoring than
one
that confirms either a bound somatic or a free psychic orientation on
both
antichemical and physical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will
take
precedence, in bound soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping
with the
general nature of phenomenal sensibility as that which, stemming from
noumenal
sensuality, signifies the just retort of the many to the somatically
free
antics of the few.
118. Likewise,
in respect of the latter, I see no reason not to think that, in rugby,
tries
scored either side of the uprights should be somatically distinguished
from
those scored inside the uprights, while points scored between the
uprights in
consequence of a drop kick should be psychically distinguished from
those
scored in such fashion from a spot kick, and if such a distinction is
between a
materialist and an anti-idealist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel
in the
case of tries and a fundamentalist and an antitranscendentalist
approach to a
church-subordinate parallel in the case of drop and spot kicks, then
who am I
to argue? I see no other interpretation
to put on the methodology of rugby scoring than one that confirms
either a free
somatic or a bound psychic orientation on both metachemical and
antimetaphysical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take
precedence,
in free soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the
general
nature of noumenal sensuality as that which, issuing from an overall
female
hegemony, signifies the right of the somatically free to have their
centrifugal
way on both loosely and closely objective terms.
119. Be
that as it may, distinctions in hurling similar to those of football
between
low and high points between the extended uprights and low and high
goals under
the crossbar should confirm an antiphysical/chemical distinction
between
church-hegemonic criteria in respect of antihumanism/nonconformism and
state-subordinate criteria in respect of antinaturalism/realism, even
if this
may be the reverse of the Gaelic football distinctions between high and
low
points between the extended uprights and high and low goals under the
crossbar
as confirmation of a metaphysical/antimetachemical distinction between
church-hegemonic criteria in respect of
transcendentalism/antifundamentalism
and state-subordinate criteria in respect of idealism/antimaterialism,
in that
the male positions would be higher than the female and therefore truly
reflective of a hegemonic position.
120. Either
way, whether with an emphasis on bound psyche at the expense of free
soma in
hurling or, from the standpoint of noumenal sensibility, on free psyche
at the
expense of bound soma in Gaelic football, points between the extended
uprights
would, I argue, be more representatively church-hegemonic than those
scored
beneath the crossbar, even if counting for less in the overall points
register
than goals, and therefore one can only conclude that, in contrast to
the
British games, the Irish ones attach greater significance, morally and
culturally, to whatever is scored above the crossbar than to its more
mundane
and, in effect, state-subordinate counterpart beneath it.
121. Of
course, there will be those who say that I have got the Irish games the
wrong
way around, since hurling is demonstrably higher - the application of
hurley to
slitter, or sliothar, generally requiring that play proceeds at a
consistently
greater height from the ground to football
where any running or dribbling-like tendency is concerned - than
Gaelic
football which, as the name suggests, simply parallels association
football
from the standpoint of phenomenal sensuality as opposed to sensibility,
and is
therefore more of a People's game than hurling.
However, much as I would respect such an argument, I frankly
don't
believe that to be the case; for Gaelic football is no more foot-low,
like
soccer so often is, than American so-called football, and is in that
sense also
something of a misnomer, as indeed is the term rugby football for a
game that
generally proceeds on the basis of carrying and running with the ball -
necessarily elongated or oblong to facilitate grip - close to one's
chest.
122. Besides,
quite apart from the more elevated standing of Gaelic football than the
latter
part of the name would suggest, there is something phallic-like about a
hurley
that, no matter how high it may be wielded, suggests more of a mundane
status
in relation to the world, while points scored with it between the
extended
uprights are more likely to suggest a correlation with bound than free
psyche
in respect of the more pressing need to clasp the hurley with both
hands,
especially since points scored between the uprights in Gaelic football
can be
via the clenched fist of a raised arm, and there is surely nothing more
ideologically or morally elevated than the clenched fist of a such an
arm -
something to which the more noumenally sensible are invariably drawn,
as to a
subjectively centripetal omega-point of ideological resolution.
123. However,
I am prepared to concede that I could be wrong in my estimation of the
relative
standings of hurling and Gaelic football (though virtually every
stick-wielding
game one can think of seems to appertain to a lower plane than its
stick-free
counterpart, cricket to rugby, baseball to gridiron, hockey to
football, etc.)
even if, despite or perhaps because of my long exile from Ireland, I
don't
happen to believe so, largely, I suspect, because I am confident that
Gaelic football
is not only axially antithetical on an upper-class basis to rugby
football, but
that a like-antithesis between Australian rules football and American
football
can be adduced which might well be respectively more radically Left and
Right
again than these antithetical manifestations, within the comparatively
narrow
confines of the British Isles, of the radical Left and the radical
Right, the
freely psychic and the freely somatic.
124. But
if games like these are divisible, over and above class distinctions,
between
psyche and soma, then so, of course, is sex, which is not just a matter
of
coitus, of somatic intercourse, but also has a long and even in some
respects
honourable tradition of oral sex behind it which, so I believe, would
stand in
a broadly psychic relationship to its somatic counterpart, whether
arguably
more prevalent or not.
125. Obviously
that can be logically reduced to an antithetical distinction between
church-
and state-hegemonic criteria; for if the one is to be identified with
psyche
and the other with soma, then oral sex will always stand closer to the
Church
and coitus to the State, irrespective of whether in hegemonic or
subordinate
vein, depending, one could argue, on the axis to which it is affiliated
in any
given context.
126. But
we should distinguish, in any event, between oral sex in respect of
church-hegemonic criteria and its church-subordinate counterpart, as
well as
between coitus in respect of state-subordinate criteria and its
state-hegemonic
counterpart on each of the rival axes.
For in such fashion we will come to the conclusion that whereas
it could
be said that oral sex takes precedence over coitus on the diagonally
ascending
axis, logic compels us to the view that coitus would take precedence
over oral
sex on the diagonally descending axis, the former characterized by a
psychic
emphasis, the latter by a somatic one.
127. Be
that as it may, it would not be my view that oral and coitus took
exactly the same
forms on each of these axes, in view of the extents to which they
conformed to
either an overall male dominion in church-hegemonic society or to an
overall
female dominion in state-hegemonic society, the lower-class female and
male
positions of each duly subverted by the technically subordinate
opposite gender
at the behest of its parallel overall
controlling one, whether in respect of rulership or leadership.
128. Therefore
much as I incline to the assumption that coitus would more typify a
society in
which the State was hegemonic rather than subordinate, I cannot pretend
that
that only applies to heterosexual coitus, since it seems to me that,
whilst
embracing coitus of a broadly heterosexual nature, especially with
respect to
the use of contraception, such a society would be more partial, in
consequence
of female hegemonic and subversive criteria in metachemistry and
antichemistry,
to both lesbian and gay modes of homosexual coitus, with lesbianism
epitomizing
the height of sexual vanity and male homosexuality the just retort,
largely
though not exclusively from a secondary state-hegemonic standpoint, of
somatically subverted males to the hegemonic or subversive power of
females
which is fundamentally responsible, all along, for deflecting them from
psychic
freedom in relation to their gender actuality to either free or bound
somatic
emphases, according to class, which exist in the shadow of their
respective
female counterparts.
129. Of
course, one cannot categorically presume that lesbianism is simply the
product
of a metachemical hegemony and male homosexuality the physical retort
to
antichemical subversion on the part of somatically bound females,
although this
may appear to be the most logical conclusion.
What I am
convinced of is that both lesbianism and male
homosexuality can be noumenal or phenomenal, absolute or relative, so
that we
can distinguish, class-wise, between a solitary approach to homosexual
coitus
which may or may not involve some form of penetrative sex and a
couple-based
approach to it in which there will be penetrative sex in one of both
cases
between the consenting couples. Hence
coitus need not automatically imply coupling, least of all in respect
of
metachemical and antimetaphysical somatic criteria, where it will more
usually
take the form of masturbation, nor need we suppose that any such
absolute
approach to sex necessarily excluded lower-class people or, conversely
and more
bizarrely, that sexual coupling was exclusively lower class.
130. But
whatever the context, whether noumenal or phenomenal,
homosexual coitus will, together with
modified heterosexual coitus, including recourse to anal penetration,
more
typify persons affiliated to the diagonally descending axis of
state-hegemonic
criteria by dint of the extent to which such an axis is reflective of
female
dominion, whilst oral sex, although secondary to such criteria, will
take a
more somatic form than its church-hegemonic counterpart in respect of
recourse
on either an absolute or a relative basis to cunnilingus or fellatio,
female or
male types of oral sex which, when not heterosexually balanced, can
take either
a lesbian or a gay form on both one- and two-sided terms.
131. But
if the axis descending from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal
sensibility
attests to a distinction between free and bound forms of coitus in
state-hegemonic vein and bound and free forms of oral sex in
church-subordinate
vein, then it is on its diagonally ascending counterpart that one would
expect
oral sex, suitably reinterpreted in relation to various types of
kissing, to
take on more significance than coitus in relation to church-hegemonic
criteria,
and for a similar distinction between a
phenomenally sensual and a noumenally sensible approach to both
oral and
coitus to make their appearance, not least in respect of a progression
from the
relativity of couples to the absolutism of individuals, as from the
many to the
few.
132. Frankly,
I do not doubt that oral sex, regarded in this more elevated light,
would be
more characteristic of church-hegemonic criteria, progressing, as it
were, from
the psychic binding of loving couples to the psychic freedom of
individuals
bestowing solitary or one-sided kisses in a much freer, less personal
manner. Also I do not doubt that, in a
society characterized by male hegemonic and subversive criteria in
metaphysical
and antiphysical terms, not only will kissing be the principal mode of
oral sex
and even of sex, but baser forms of oral sex will be effectively taboo,
as
taboo, in respect of somatic irrelevance, as cunnilingus and fellatio
and,
indeed, the whole spectrum of lesbian and gay homosexuality, whether
oral or
coital. For such manifestations of
sexual perversion stem, in large measure, from female domination of
society,
and where that is institutionally and culturally taboo, then so will be
all
forms of sexual perversion and, not least, deviation.
133. Even
heterosexual coitus will be comparatively independent of contraceptive
perversion of sex from its original propagative essence in respect of
the reproductive
organs, since the male who subverts the female allows himself to be
sucked-in
by and to free soma from a standpoint centred in bound psyche,
preferring that
coitus should not become the focus of sexual attention but remain more
the
by-product, as it were, of oral stimulation in a loving relationship,
even, in
some sense, the exception to the general (kissing) rule.
134. Of
course, times change and other criteria impose themselves, as in
relation to
AIDS, or are imposed upon any given society from without
via imperial influence, not withstanding the
extent to which the overall death of man factors-in to a general
withdrawal
from reproductive sex in favour of pleasure or pain in connection with
the
utilization of various gadgets or artificial stimulants; but I cannot
pretend
that, as a rule, the godly are partial to acquiescence in sexual
perversion or
deviation, and would wish to condone activities which fly in the face
of
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, including undue emphasis
on coitus
of one type or another at the expense of oral sex, as defined above.
135. Frankly,
there is no way that a society built around the lead of God the
Father/the
Antidaughter of the Antidevil could allow itself to be implicated in
acquiescing in sexual perversion or deviation, of which not only
bestiality and
paedophilia, but rape and self-abusive recourse to pornography must be
accounted among the more extreme departures from sex, whether straight
or
perverse, between consenting adults, but would be obliged to condemn
any such
acts outright and trust to the goodwill and sense of the People to
reject and
refrain from them.
136. For
it is not for the elect of God the Father to condone what stems,
whether
directly or indirectly, from Devil the Mother, but to deliver the
People, as
far as lies in their power, from such corruptions, in order that they
may be
all the more capable, when the time is ripe, of living as and like God
the
Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, whether this means on a basis
that
transcends relative sex altogether or on a basis that, more positively,
appertains to noumenal sensibility in whatever synthetically artificial
transmutations of psychic freedom come radically to pass in the
progressive
evolution of Eternal Life beyond the alpha-world, or perhaps one should
say
antiworld of antiman, in the omega points of otherworldly redemption,
where sex
for reproductive purposes would become a thing of the past in view of
the
extents to which civilization had been or was becoming sensibly
cyborgized and
therefore even more orally hegemonic and coitally subordinate than
would be
metaphysically or antimetachemically the case at present (where
applicable), as
can only transpire in the noumenal sensibility of the most evolved
manifestations
of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil in the definitive
heaven of
joy/antihell of the loving approach to joy which constitute, in their
pure and
impure, male and female, approaches to supreme being, Heaven the Holy
Soul/the
Unclear Soul of Antihell, both of which, in the achievement of their
evolutionary perfection, will be as much beyond sex as beyond sport of
any
description, and therefore blessedly at peace with themselves in the
virtuous
circle of a gender harmony that will last for ever.
LONDON
2004
(Revised
2011)
