Op. 100
ESCHATOLOGY OR SCATOLOGY -
Judgement at the
Crossroads
Aphoristic Philosophy
Copyright © 2013 John
O'Loughlin
____________
CONTENTS
Aphs. 1–156
____________
1. From
time to time it becomes philosophically expedient to defer to the colourful
slang or casual obscenities of life such that echo in the streets and rooms all
around one, in order to encapsulate and expound the philosophical or moral
implications of what, to their users, are incontrovertible evidence of a
particular disposition, be it fiery, watery, earthy, or airy, which may or may
not warrant censure or rebuke.
2. What
follows, not for the first time in my work, is a determined effort to do
justice to the full-gamut of descriptive and/or denigratory
expressions which may - and hopefully will - lead to fresh insights and
understandings likely to impact upon my philosophy in general.
3. To
contrast the fiery 'pus' (scum?) of 'frigg***
jerks' with the earthy 'shit' of 'sodd*** pricks', as
one would contrast metachemical objectivity with
physical subjectivity, or autocracy with democracy.
4. To
contrast the watery 'piss' of 'fuck*** cunts' with
the airy 'gas' of 'snogg*** bums', as one would
contrast chemical objectivity with metaphysical subjectivity, or bureaucracy
with theocracy.
5. This
recourse to the colourful language of the masses is not, admittedly, in quite
the best taste; but it goes some way towards highlighting a more logical
approach to such categories which, frankly, with the majority of swearers are much less methodically employed and much more partisanly upheld, as when the word 'fucking' is used
indiscriminately, as though in reflection of a specific class and/or gender
standpoint which is characteristically more representative of certain types of
societies or environments than others.
6. But
really, from a more sophisticated philosophical perspective, whereby one is
determined to do logical justice to each and every context of life, it stands
to reason that no single category can be wholly representative of every
situation and that, as people speak, so they betray their limitations and/or
affiliations.
7. Frankly,
use of words like 'pus', 'piss', 'shit', and 'gas' boils down to a colloquial
'take' on the Elements, as alluded to above, and reveals the manner in which
fire, water, earth (vegetation), and air are regarded from different class
and/or gender points of view when the object of their employment is to
denigrate that which is deemed unrepresentative or unattractive, as the case
may be.
8. Of
course, in the wider framework described above, I have purposely broadened the
terms of reference in order to do justice to the Elemental totality of denigratory or descriptive possibilities, and the reader
familiar with certain of my earlier attempts, expressed in a variety of mature
texts, to standardize such verb-noun combinations in the interests of a more
comprehensively exacting interpretation of their applicability may be aware
that, hitherto, I have not spoken of 'fuck*** cunts'
or 'sodd*** pricks' but, on the contrary, of 'sodd*** cunts' and 'fuck***
pricks'.
9. Was I
wrong, then, to employ such paradoxical terminology in relation to the
respective Elemental contexts - chemical and physical - being
described? Clearly, the answer must be
'yes', but not wholly so. For these
terminological combinations cut both ways, if from different points of view.
10. As
described in my previous text, the distinction between the falling axis of
autocracy-democracy and the rising axis of bureaucracy-theocracy, as in general
terms between Britain and Ireland, is that of State and Church, with the Church
subordinate to the State in the autocratic-democratic axis, but the State
subordinate to the Church in the bureaucratic-theocratic axis.
11. Thus
when we examine the relevant expletive verb-noun pairings to each axis, we find
that the autocratic-democratic axis, characterized by a state hegemony, has
reference to the fiery 'pus' of 'frigg***jerks' on
the one hand and to the earthy 'shit' of 'sodd***
pricks' on the other hand, whereas the bureaucratic-theocratic axis,
characterized by a church hegemony, has reference to the watery 'piss' of
'fuck*** cunts' on the one hand and to the airy 'gas'
of 'snogg*** bums' on the other hand.
12. When
we examine the terms of each axis more closely, we find that the
autocratic-democratic axis has been characterized in relation to 'frigging' and
'sodding', which are in effect descriptions of
anti-sexual behaviour, one might almost say of negative sexual behaviour,
whereas the bureaucratic-theocratic axis has been characterized in relation to
'fucking' and 'snogging', which are effectively
descriptions of positive sexual behaviour, of pro-sexual behaviour which does
not skirt around the edges of sex but, rather, dives straight into it, in a
life-affirming manner.
13. Therefore
it should be evident that whereas such terms as 'frigging' and 'sodding' are primarily identifiable with the State, or with
a state hegemony along autocratic-democratic lines, terms like 'fucking' and 'snogging' can be identified with the Church, or with a
church hegemony along bureaucratic-theocratic lines, since they are the more positive
and life-affirming expletives which serve to highlight a pro-sexual attitude on
both chemical and metaphysical, watery and airy, terms.
14. Consequently
the positivity of such pro-sex expletives as
'fucking' and 'snogging' must be contrasted with the
negativity of such anti-sex expletives as 'frigging' and 'sodding',
as one would contrast the positivity of the rising
bureaucratic-theocratic axis of the Church with the negativity of the falling
autocratic-democratic axis of the State.
But that is only in relation to the primary aspects of each axis, or to
each axis regarded solely in relation to its primary functions.
15. There
is ever a secondary Church to be reckoned with where autocracy and democracy
are concerned, and, by contrast, a secondary State to be considered in relation
to bureaucracy and theocracy; for neither type of society can be exclusively
one thing or the other but will combine Church and State to different extents
and on differing terms.
16. Thus
while we might logically satisfy ourselves that the autocratic-democratic axis
deserves to be primarily identified with 'frigg***
jerks' on the one hand and with 'sodd*** pricks' on
the other, we cannot dismiss the secondary possibility of 'snogg***
jerks' in relation to the autocratic form of the Church and of 'fuck*** pricks'
in relation to the democratic form of the Church, so that such paradoxical
terms, used in connection with predominantly fiery and earthy contexts
respectively, need to be considered in a subordinate, or secondary, relationship
to the aforementioned primary terms which, with their anti-sexual implications,
stand closer to the State, as to a society or civilization which is primarily
of the State, whether along autocratic or democratic lines, and only
secondarily of the Church.
17. Conversely,
while we might logically satisfy ourselves that the bureaucratic-theocratic
axis deserves to be primarily identified with 'fuck*** cunts'
on the one hand and with 'snogg*** bums' on the
other, we cannot dismiss the secondary possibility of 'sodd***
cunts' in relation to the bureaucratic form of the
State and of 'frigg*** bums' in relation to the
theocratic form of the State, so that such paradoxical terms, used in
connection with predominantly watery and airy contexts respectively, need to be
considered in a subordinate, or secondary, relationship to the aforementioned
primary terms which, with their pro-sexual implications, stand closer to the
Church, as to a society or civilization which is primarily of the Church,
whether along bureaucratic or theocratic lines, and only secondarily of the
State.
18. Clearly,
whilst it would be logically consistent to identify the former type of
civilization with Protestant Britain, which is primarily of the State and only secondarily
of the Church, the theocracy of which is either autocratically or
democratically subverted in fundamentalist and humanist vein, one would have to
identify the latter type of civilization with Catholic Ireland, which is only
secondarily of the State because primarily of the Church, the theocracy of
which is bureaucratically subverted in nonconformist vein.
19. But even Irish Protestants must be given the benefit of the
doubt and identified with either autocratic or democratic subversions of theocracy
which yet leave them primarily Anglicans or Puritans rather than primarily
royalists or parliamentarians in British, and especially English, vein. For Ireland, being largely Celtic, is a case
apart from England, and one can believe that, in Ireland, God and the Church
come first irrespective of whether one is Catholic or Protestant, just as the
descriptions of people in terms of 'Catholic' or 'Protestant' tend to take
precedence over their political counterparts in relation to either Royalism or Parliamentarianism.
20. Be
that as it may, I have no doubt that whereas 'jerks' are primarily 'frigging'
and only secondarily 'snogging', their democratic
inferiors are no-less primarily 'sodding' and only
secondarily 'fucking' orders of 'prick', insofar as in each case the State
takes precedence over the Church in respect of a civilization primarily
characterized by anti-sexual attitudes and behaviour relative to an autocratic
and/or democratic disposition in society as a whole.
21. Likewise,
if from a contrary standpoint, I have no doubt that whereas 'cunts' are primarily 'fucking' and only secondarily 'sodding', their theocratic superiors are no-less primarily
'snogging' and only secondarily 'frigging' orders of
'bum', insofar as in each case the Church takes precedence over the State in
respect of a civilization primarily characterized by pro-sexual behaviour and
attitudes relative to a bureaucratic and/or theocratic disposition in society
as a whole.
22. Granted
a distinction, then, between the sex-affirming attitudes of Church hegemonic
societies and the sex-denying attitudes of societies characterized by State
hegemonies, it must follow that there is something better, spiritually and
emotionally, about the former than the latter, which are more partial to
instinctual and intellectual corruptions of sexuality in State-oriented vein,
with 'frigging' and 'sodding' implications in respect
of 'jerks' and 'pricks', neither of whom can be equated with a positive
attitude to sex, while the 'positivity' of their secondary
church counterparts must remain questionable in view of the extents to which
such people are still 'jerks' or 'pricks' even when they approach their
respective bents from a paradoxically fundamentalist or humanist point of view,
and 'snoggingly' or 'fuckingly'
inform their carnal appetites accordingly.
23. But
of course the secondary church paradox of a 'snogg***
jerk' will involve a quasi-masturbatory approach to sex which, whilst
incontrovertibly preferable to or, rather, less bad than onanism
as such, is unlikely to embrace much beyond oral sex, whether in terms of
fellatio or, more especially in view of the female nature of the context in
question, cunnilingus, and therefore to remain basically fundamentalist.
24. Likewise
the secondary church paradox of a 'fuck*** prick' will involve a quasi-sodomitic approach to sex which, whilst incontrovertibly
preferable to sodomy as such, is unlikely to embrace much beyond coital
pleasure, especially through recourse to male contraception, and therefore to
remain basically humanist.
25. For
while the former type of people, more usually autocratic, are basically fiery
and voyeuristic, the latter type will, in their democratic bent, be more earthy
and hedonistic, given to pleasure as a raison d'être, and therefore determined to keep sex pegged to
the earth and not to become the basis of subsequent flowering in conceptual
vein.
26. However,
even with such patently hedonistic limitations and constraints, I will not say
they are dirt, or that their sexuality is pure dirt, analogous to a hard-line
mode of 'shit'; for that is something one has to reserve for 'sodd*** pricks' and, most especially, for a more stupid
species of 'sodd*** prick' who is not prepared to
compromise with 'fuck*** pricks', as from a liberal democratic standpoint, but
strives for and actually relates, in outright homosexual vein, to what could,
in political terms, be described as a Social Democratic absolutism, with the
implication of an atheistic rejection of any form of religious affiliation in
the interests of a sort of Marxist dead-end of proletarian humanism.
27. Thus
the more absolute 'sodd*** prick', a Social Democrat,
is not even prepared to compromise his political humanism with religious
humanism, in a sort of parliamentary/puritan relativity, but sees freedom in
terms of an end to such a relativity and an outright state totalitarianism, the
sexual corollary of which would be less bisexual than overly homosexual and
thus completely earthy, totally 'shitty' in its refusal to tolerate even a
'fucking' approach to being a 'prick' which at least endows pleasure - for that
is, after all, the principal concern of 'pricks' - with a liberal dimension
equivalent to heterosexual intercourse.
28. It
was in the penultimate decade of the last century, I believe, that an attempt
was made in
29. Whether
or not the movement for Social Democracy would have taken Britain towards a
totalitarian state, which on the evidence of their limited following and
popularity must seem exceedingly unlikely even if other, more traditional
factors, including the entrenched power of autocracy, are not taken into
account, the implications of a Social Democracy are such as to leave no room
for doubt that any compromise with 'fuck*** pricks' would be considered
undesirable and that a more totalitarian approach to humanism, as to sexuality,
must alone rank as properly Social Democratic.
30. But
this is the nadir of both the State and sex along the autocratic-democratic
axis, a nadir that, taken to its logical conclusion, desires the eradication of
constitutional autocracy and its correlative religious 'bovarization'
of established-church fundamentalism, and an end to the parliamentary pluralism
of liberal democracy and its correlative religious 'bovaryization'
of so-called 'free church' humanism, so that there are neither soft-line 'frigg*** jerks' and 'snogg***
jerks' on the one hand, nor soft-line 'sodd***
pricks' and 'fuck*** pricks' on the other hand, but only hard-line 'sodd*** pricks' whose politics are as 'shitty' as their
sexuality, and no-less unproductive!
31. Fortunately
for Britain, Social Democracy did not come to pass, and it is hard to see how it
could, short of the break-up of the United Kingdom and an end to the Monarchy,
as to the Celtic/Anglo-Saxon relativity which plays no small part, I believe,
in keeping Britain pluralist and open to compromise.
32. But
even in the 'good sense' of its liberal pluralism, Britain - the land of sexual
perversion par excellence
according to a well-known if not always respected literary authority - is still
a place where sexual perverts are free to pursue their respective 'frigging' or
'sodding' bents under the protective mandate of an
autocratic-democratic axis, and where any form of positive or natural sex gets
a comparatively raw deal, bearing in mind the extent to which such wholesome
sex requires a bureaucratic-theocratic precondition if 'fucking' and 'snogging' criteria are to more openly and even
conservatively prevail.
33. Even
the 'sodd*** pricks' of the parliamentary relativity
are less, in logical terms, than au fait with sexual conservatism if we accept a 'fuck*** prick'
paradox as being more germane to the religious corollary of parliamentary
democracy in which an almost puritanical horror of conception, of fertility and
fecundity, leads to a paradoxical emphasis on pleasure, for better or worse,
with the use of contraception in heterosexual intercourse virtually de
rigueur if the worst is not to come to the worst and earthy humanism be
conceptually subverted in nonconformist, or Marian, watery vein.
34. But
if that is the more likely attitude of religious humanists, then their
political counterparts can only, in the dubious privileges of a state hegemony,
be of an ilk that logically fights shy even of heterosexual pleasure in one of
two - or even a number of - ways, according as to whether their 'sodding' predilection takes an oscillatory Celtic or a
middle-ground Anglo-Saxon form, the former arguably involving bisexuality, the
latter the anal violation of women and sometimes - on the so-called far left -
even outright homosexuality, in effectively Social Democratic mode.
35. Certainly
there is nothing about recourse to a rubber sheath that necessitates that one
sticks to heterosexual intercourse, and it has not escaped my attention that
perhaps the anti-conceptual confidence that comes from wearing such a sheath
facilitates a move towards homosexuality, whether directly, in outright male
terms, or indirectly, via the anal violation of women or some paradoxical
bisexual oscillation more likely to suit liberals than either radicals or, in
the case of heterosexual sodomy, conservatives.
36. However
that may be, anal violation, whether of women in respect of heterosexual
conservatism or of men in respect of homosexual radicalism, is what accords, in
parallel terms, with a democratic proclivity; for democracy, like its religious
handmaiden, puritanism, which democratically subverts
theocracy, is a corrupt form of politics, as is any form of politics, including
autocracy, that parts company from a Church hegemony and proceeds to rule
and/or govern on its own behalf, with 'frigging' or 'sodding'
consequences, consequences which corrupt sexuality and thus a person's whole
attitude to life and the bedrock of life in conception.
37. Therefore
it is not with irony or flippancy that I equate democracy with 'sodd*** pricks' whether of the left or the right or even
something in between which strives to reconcile the conflicting bents, in
paradoxically liberal vein, of conservatives and radicals - the latter always
seemingly stretching things, or wanting to be seen as stretching things,
towards an outright homosexual dead-end in Social Democracy.
38. For
whatever the form of parliamentary democracy, the 'sodding'
bent is still what most characterizes it, and it is a bent which has always to
do with the sexual violation of a non-reproductive organ which, as the anus/rectum,
has only one function, and that is to excrete faeces or, in common parlance,
'shit'.
39. But
when your ideal of freedom is earthy, or democratic,
then a 'shitty' sexuality is its logical concomitant, whether or not you are
aware of the fact or would consciously endorse anally-oriented behaviour. It is 'shitty' on the conservative right,
which remains paradoxically faithful to heterosexuality, 'shitty' on the
radical left, which equates with a rather more homosexual approach to sodomy,
and at least part 'shitty' in the liberal centre where, paradoxically, some
kind of bisexuality suggests the likelihood if not of an oscillation between
heterosexual and homosexual forms of anal violation, then an oscillation
between pleasure-centred heterosexual coitus and anally-oriented homosexuality,
so that a puritan-like dimension cannot be entirely ruled out of our logical
equations.
40. So
much for parliamentary democracy and its sexual or, rather, anti-sexual
parallels! If the well-known notion of
the British not being in favour of sex - the 'no sex, please, we're British' -
is to be properly understood, it is not because the British are against the
corrupter forms of sex, but precisely because of their 'frigging' and/or 'sodding' commitments along an autocratic-democratic axis to
anti-sex, to negative sexual attitudes and behaviour, that they have such
little respect, compared with most other nations, for positive and wholesome
sexual behaviour in the manner of a 'fucking' and/or 'snogging'
disposition, a disposition which, it if is to flourish unimpeded by political
or other constraints, requires a bureaucratic-theocratic axis as its
ideological precondition, one characterized not by the hegemony of one form or
other of the State but, on the contrary, by the hegemony of one form or other
of the Church.
41. Thus
the British uneasiness with sex, their reluctance to be open, in Continental
fashion (including Ireland), about the more positive forms of sexuality, stems
in large part from their ideological structure, their political system, and is
therefore the systemic product not of moral superiority, as many of them would
have us believe, but of a gross failure in morality stretching all the way back
to the excommunication of Henry VIII and the subsequent corruptions of politics
and religion which inexorably led to the State hegemonies of both autocratic
and, subsequently, democratic freedoms and, as a corollary of that, to the
autocratic and democratic subversions of the Church which led both to Anglican
fundamentalism and to Puritan humanism, to the monarchic subversion of
transcendentalism - for after all religion, when properly theocratic, is all
about transcendentalism - in the one case and to the parliamentary subversion
of it in the other case, neither of which forms of the Church can be anything
but subordinate to the State in consequence.
42. But
in Ireland, by contrast, it is the State which, at least since independence, is
by and large subordinate to the Church, principally in terms of Liberal
Republicanism of a non-executive presidential order vis-à-vis Roman
Catholicism, the bureaucratic form of the Church par excellence which has been correctly
identified with 'Mother Church' by dint of its basis in Marian nonconformism (nonconformism
vis-à-vis fundamentalist precedent tending to be the classical Western form of
religion and basis of Christian independence from and rejection of Judaism) and
tendency to subvert transcendentalism, and thus theocracy, accordingly.
43. Therefore
one would have to say that, in sexual parallel to the above, the 'sodd*** cunts' of a secondary
State were subordinate to the 'fuck*** cunts' of the
hegemonic Church, and in sexual terms this would imply a distinction between
heterosexual coitus with a female contraceptive bias on the one hand, that of
the State, and conceptually-oriented heterosexual coitus on the other hand,
that of the Church.
44. Whether
the 'sodding' form of heterosexual coitus implies
humiliating recourse to intrauterine devices (IUDs) or to the Pill, it would be
the republican mode of coitus par excellence and thus the secondary form of heterosexuality
as relative to the State. It would exist
in the shadow of unprotected heterosexual coitus, as in the shadow of the Roman
Catholic Church, as something 'soddingly'
life-denying or life-thwarting from a female point of view, and therefore
inferior to the conceptually-oriented form of heterosexual coitus one would
have to identify with 'fuck*** cunts'.
45. Thus the
bureaucratic subversion of theocracy germane to the Christian 'worldliness' of
the Roman Catholic Church ensures that conception remains the bedrock of sex
and justification for intercourse. It is
the Marian 'ideal' of the Madonna and Child which persists at the expense of
theocratic otherworldliness in some freer transcendentalism and truer idealism,
but it also persists to protect the world, at least of the Faithful, from
democratic corruption and pleasure-centred sex, whether heterosexual or homosexual,
and if the price of that has to be tolerance of female-oriented heterosexual
contraceptive sex in respect of republicanism of a secondary state order, then
that price is surely worth paying in view of the more freely anti-sexual nature
of the democratic alternatives!
46. But
theocracy still exists within the relative framework of the Roman Catholic
Church, and one may speculate that it does so 'snoggingly'
in respect of the church order of 'bum' who would be a like-cut above any
secondary state parallel of a 'frigging' order which one may surmise to have
intimate associations if not with plastic inflatables,
or so-called 'sex dolls', then arguably with anal masturbation.
47. Laying
a kiss upon someone non-lasciviously is certainly within the bounds of
theocratic probity, and for a sexual parallel to theocracy one need look no
further than kissing, whether on a heterosexual or, indeed, a homosexual basis,
this latter likely to appeal to the more radically theocratic as a metaphysical
expression of Social Theocracy and thus properly otherworldly kind of kissing
which has long been practised in the Orient with the utmost discretion and
noble intent.
48. Doubtless
expressions of brotherly affection between theocratic males would continue
within the more radically theocratic framework of 'Kingdom Come', as habitually
identified by me with Social Theocracy, though always on a discreet and
honourable basis. For there is a
distinction, after all, between religious praxis in transcendentalism and any
possible sexual parallel which would tend to prevail independently of one's
religious devotions.
49. Transcendentalism
is not about kissing, or 'snogging', even if that
happens to be the sexual parallel to it, and the same would apply to its
political or state corollary of what, in previous texts, has been termed the
administrative aside to the triadic Beyond, where recourse to anal masturbation
and the like would be a quite separate matter from the actual Social Theocratic
administering of political, economic, or scientific expertise in the interests
of enhanced religious fulfilment and the overall development of
transcendentalism, not to mention, in the lower tiers of our projected triadic
Beyond and their respective subsections (as already described in previous
works) the overall development, within Social Transcendentalism, of modified
fundamentalist, humanist, and nonconformist devotions.
50. Actually,
if one allows that fundamentalism is usually more alpha than omega, and
therefore more sensual than sensible, more negative than positive, and nonconformism likewise, then any such modifications of
fundamentalism and nonconformism would, in view of
their female natures, be contrary to their free manifestations in sensuality
and accordingly pertain not to doing but to antidoing
in the one case and not to giving but to antigiving
in the other case, so that one could logically speak of antifundamentalism
and antinonconformism, the former as subordinate
complement to transcendentalism, the latter as subordinate complement to
humanism, albeit that, too, would be modified transcendentally in relation to
Social Transcendentalism and therefore be less than germane to itself and
correspondingly more deferential to the religious ideal of godliness per se.
51. But
since humanism is already sensible and a kind of omega alternative within 'the
world' to nonconformism, it could not be described in
antihumanist terms, but would simply be the modified
taking that was expected to defer to the overall hegemony of being, as to transcendentalism,
in pseudo-humanist vein.
52. In
this respect, the pattern of administrative aside and triadic Beyond, as
germane to our projection of 'Kingdom Come', would more resemble a plurality of
sensible factors in which the administrative aside would be characterized by a
sort of antigiving antinonconformism
of antibureaucratic strength designed to serve the
taking pseudo-humanism, or modified humanism, of knowledge on the bottom tier
of the triadic Beyond, while the antidoing antifundamentalism of beauty duly lined up under the beingful transcendentalism of truth, like an anti-autocracy
under a pure theocracy, the latter of which would determine the overall shape
and scope of the triadic Beyond in respect of psychic freedom.
53. For
such freedom would ensure that a beautiful approach to truth and a loving
approach to joy were the psychic corollaries of truth and joy in the
relationship of antifundamentalism to
transcendentalism, anti-autocracy to theocracy, with a strong approach to
knowledge and a proud approach to pleasure being the psychic corollaries of
knowledge and pleasure in the relationship of antinonconformism
to pseudo-humanism, antibureaucracy to
pseudo-democracy or, rather, the pseudo-democratic 'take' on theocracy that
would pertain to the bottom tier of the triadic Beyond in suitably phenomenal,
or lower-class, terms.
54. Only
the transvaluation of bureaucracy in respect of antibureaucracy can guarantee, it seems to me, that the
administrative aside to the triadic Beyond will be primarily of the Church
rather than of the State and therefore identifiable with the serving rule of a
'God Kingship' rather than of either a 'Devil Kingship' or a secular monarchy
likely to be incompatible with the lead of God.
55. Therefore,
in general terms, it is as though the transcendence of bureaucracy by theocracy
would ensure an antibureaucratic transmutation of
bureaucracy - analogous in sexual terms to the substitution of plastic inflatables for conceptual coitus - in keeping with the
enhanced sensibility that would flow down from above, making for a strong
support, in the administrative aside, to the triadic Beyond, the middle and
bottom tiers of which would be characterized not by chemical sensibility, still
less by metaphysical sensibility, but by the metachemical
and physical sensibilities of beauty and knowledge.
56. Hence
a plurality of religious praxis in the triadic Beyond stretching from knowledge
and beauty to truth, while the administrative aside was primarily characterized
by strength, as by a determination to serve the 'good', the beautiful, and the
true.
57. But
all would be subsumed into and led by truth, as by joy, and therefore not be
independent forms of strength, knowledge, or beauty, but modified, or 'bovaryized', forms subject to transmutation by truth and
ever subordinate, in consequence, to the lead of transcendentalism, which is of
the essence of Social Theocracy.
58. For
only truth over beauty in the upper-class, or noumenal,
contexts of metaphysics and metachemistry or, rather,
antimetachemistry, and knowledge over strength in the
lower-class, or phenomenal, contexts of physics and chemistry or, rather, antichemistry (as germane to the administrative aside to
the triadic Beyond) can guarantee, in male hegemonic vein, a psychic monism in
which not beauty but a beautiful approach to truth defers to truth, and not
strength but a strong approach to knowledge defers to knowledge, together with
their respective spiritual and emotional concomitants.
59. Therefore
antichemistry must be behind the eternities of
physics, antimetachemistry, and metaphysics, like an antibureaucracy behind pseudo-democracy, anti-autocracy,
and theocracy, albeit, in all cases, that which was less than fully or properly
theocratic would be deferentially subordinate to the prevailing ideal, the
ultimate ideal of transcendentalism.
60. Certainly
I have shifted my ground slightly from how I had formerly conceived of the
administrative aside and triadic Beyond (without, however, the denominational
hierarchies that would place persons of Catholic descent above their Anglican
counterparts and persons of Anglican descent above their Puritan counterparts
being in any way altered), but that is only because subsequent moral insights
or logical gains have made such a shift possible.
61. The
truth, the truly eternal virtue of metaphysical sensibility, has remained
intact and steadfast, as it could only be expected to, but other and lesser
concerns, not least in respect of knowledge, are often subject to re-evaluation
and modification in light of how the truth is conceived, and that has proved to
be the case once again.
62. Only
that which is properly germane to Eternity, the Truth, can remain unchanged in
the flux of time. Everything else -
strength, knowledge, beauty - is subject to change and will continue to be
changed as circumstances dictate, which is to say until they no longer exist
independently of truth but have been subsumed into truth and effectively done
away with as eternity replaces time.
63. For
even if you have to start with a plurality of factors, whatever their sensible
scope, the end of evolutionary progress must be the one alone, the divine
factor, which would have the right, in the religiously sovereign context of
'Kingdom Come', not only to subordinate everything else to itself, but to carry
on modifying and transmuting strength, knowledge, and beauty until they were no
longer recognizably different, but one and indivisible with Truth.
64. Of
course, we are not concerned with anything properly autocratic, even on
constitutional terms, nor properly democratic, as in relation to the
autocratic-democratic axis of State hegemonic civilization, whether in England
or elsewhere, but with autocratic and democratic subversions of theocracy which,
unlike the bureaucratic subversion of it more typifying 'Mother Church', have
to do with the secondary forms of the Church which, in Ireland and even Celtic
countries generally, typify Protestants and make them distinct from overly
political types and affiliations.
65. Therefore
the transmutation of autocracy into anti-autocracy for Anglicans in respect of
the middle tier of the triadic Beyond and the transmutation of democracy into
if not antidemocracy then pseudo-democracy for
Puritans in respect of the bottom tier of the triadic Beyond does not imply the
transmutation of their political counterparts but, rather, only of the
autocratic and/or democratic subversions of theocracy with which Irish
Protestants - and Celtic Protestants in general - could be identified in
shadow-church vein to the bureaucratic subversion of theocracy characterizing
their Catholic counterparts, most of whom, released from bureaucratic
constraint, would soar into the airy heights of the top tier of our projected
triadic Beyond and thus achieve the nearest thing, where applicable, to a
transcendentalist per se.
66. Hence
the pluralism of 'Kingdom Come' does not imply that the autocratic-democratic
axis of British and, in particular, English civilization dissolves itself in
order to fit in, albeit on subordinate terms, with such changes as might be in
store for the bureaucratic-theocratic axis typifying Irish civilization but,
rather, that only Irish Protestants and their Celtic counterparts in Scotland
and possibly Wales could be expected to vote for religious sovereignty and, in
the event of a majority mandate, take up predetermined positions in the triadic
Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', insofar as their relationship to autocracy and/or
democracy had been primarily religious and secondarily political, and this in
spite of the state primacy accruing to autocratic and democratic affiliations
in countries like England where, not God and the Church, but what could be
called either the Devil and the State or Man and the State come first.
67. Hence
the possibility of an anti-autocratic accommodation of theocracy in beauty and
love for Irish and Celtic Anglicans, together with the possibility of a
pseudo-democratic accommodation of theocracy in knowledge and pleasure for
Irish and Celtic Puritans should not be confounded with the fanciful notion of
either an autocratic accommodation of theocracy or a democratic accommodation
of theocracy, since state-hegemonic autocracy and democracy are two entirely
different and separate issues which cannot be reconciled to a theocratic
hegemony.
68. But a
transmuted autocratic subversion of theocracy that becomes an anti-autocratic
deference to a freer theocracy within Ireland and such countries is certainly
within the bounds of plausibility, as is a transmuted democratic subversion of
theocracy that becomes a pseudo-democratic deference to such a freer theocracy
within a framework of religious praxis that is served by an antibureaucratic
deference to pure theocracy in what has been termed the administrative aside to
the triadic Beyond.
69. But
in order for 'Kingdom Come' to actually come to pass, there must first be a
paradoxical election, effectively pertaining to Judgement, which has the aim of
bringing the world to the gates of the otherworldly context alluded to above,
and for that to transpire a majority mandate for religious sovereignty would be
necessary - something which is only likely to materialize in countries where,
whether in Catholic or Protestant or some other form, God and the Church come
first and a majority mandate for such a revolutionary sovereignty can
reasonably be inferred and even expected.
70. Clearly
this would not be the case in royalist-parliamentary England, where the
autocratic-democratic axis ensures that God and the Church, to the extent we
may recognize anything religious in the autocratic and democratic 'bovaryizations' of theocracy, take a secondary place in the
overall hierarchy of hegemonic values, and that far from God and the theocratic
Church or even Woman and the bureaucratic Church, much less their
fundamentalist or humanist counterparts, it is if not the Devil and the State
then, in democratic freedom, Man and the State that come first, and would
reduce everything to the aforementioned 'frigging' and/or 'sodding'
corruptions.
71. One
cannot save or deliver from sensuality to enhanced sensibility a corrupt
people, and therefore it can only be left to such a people to deliver
themselves from corruption and make themselves more amenable to the possibility
of theocratic liberation, whether in relation to theocracy per se or to some
deference to it on the part of other factors which, duly transmuted, will no
longer prove subversive of and detrimental to anything sensibly
transcendentalist.
72. But one can deliver from sensuality a Church people, a
Christian people, a people who are primarily bureaucratic-theocratic, as in the
case of Irish Catholics, and only secondarily, if on religious grounds,
autocratic-democratic, as in the case of Irish Protestants. This people and other such peoples can
certainly be saved from sensuality to sensibility, as from crime and sin to
punishment and grace, and it is for them to decide for themselves whether or
not to endorse the concept of religious sovereignty and, in the event of a
paradoxical election, vote accordingly, abandoning both primary bureaucracy and
secondary autocracy and/or democracy for the prospect of 'Kingdom Come', in
which the Church will exist on a Social Transcendentalist basis led by an enhanced,
or freer, theocracy truly reflective of metaphysical sensibility to an ultimate
degree.
73. For
if bureaucracy is sinful, then theocracy is its graceful redemption, as things
proceed from weakness and humility (if not humiliation following the exposure
of weakness) to truth and joy, Woman and Purgatory to God and Heaven, water to
air, the world of the 'general bad' to the otherworld, so to speak, of the
'particular good', the objective Many to the subjective One.
74. Likewise
the subversions of theocracy from autocratic and democratic points of view can
be delivered from ugliness and hatred to beauty and love, as from the Devil and
Hell to the Antidevil and Antihell,
the netherworld of the primary 'particular bad' to the otherworld of the
secondary 'particular good', whilst its democratic counterpart can be delivered
from ignorance and pain to knowledge and pleasure, as from Antiman
and the Anti-earth to Man and the Earth, the world of the secondary 'general
bad' to the otherworld of the primary 'general good', albeit a good that, duly
transmuted, defers to the 'particular good' of truth and joy, God and Heaven.
75. In
general terms, it could be argued that the deliverance from bureaucracy to
theocracy is equivalent to a leap from massive mass to spaced space, as from
sin to grace, whereas the deliverance from the autocratic subversion of
theocracy to an anti-autocratic deference to theocracy is from spatial space to
a repetitive time deferential to spaced space, and the deliverance from the
democratic subversion of theocracy to a pseudo-democratic deference to
theocracy is from massed mass to voluminous volume, neither of the latter being
quite axial progressions but simply transmutations of basically autocratic and
democratic positions in relation to religion.
76. For
the autocratic-democratic axis proper does not permit of any such transvaluations, bearing in mind that it pertains to a
different civilization, a different type of society, which has to be evaluated
primarily in terms of the State and only secondarily in terms of the Church,
and if one were to generalize on axial terms it would more likely entail the
notion of a descent from Time to Volume rather than an ascent, as in the case
of the bureaucratic-theocratic axis, from Mass to Space.
77. Be
that as it may, such a descent would have more applicability to crime and
punishment than to sin and grace, and we have already seen that the shift from
autocratic to democratic criteria within the context of state-hegemonic
societies implies a shift from 'frigg*** jerks' to 'sodd*** pricks', as from 'pus' to 'shit', and thus ties-in
with negative attitudes to sex which result in the criminal and punishing
corruptions of sexuality in relation to such a system.
78. But
the shift from bureaucratic to theocratic criteria within the context of
church-hegemonic societies implies a shift, by contrast, from 'fuck*** cunts' to 'snogg*** bums', as
from 'piss' to 'gas', and thus ties-in with the redemptive elevation of
sexuality from sin to grace.
79. Therefore
where the former type of society obtains, there can be no Social Theocracy but
only a Social Democracy if the worst comes to the worst and things degenerate
from autocratic-democratic compromise to outright democratic totalitarianism -
the sort of totalitarianism whose sexual
parallel is explicitly homosexual, and not merely bisexual or anally
heterosexual.
80. Such
a society, if it 'goes to the dogs', will end up in a 'shitty' dead-end of
proletarian humanism and be incapable of metaphysical progress, having
regressed to a nadir of democratic stupidity in which the notion of 'sodd*** pricks' has to be interpreted solely in homosexual
terms.
81. Of
course, all 'pricks' are stupid in one degree or another; for they are
symptomatic of an axial descent from autocracy to democracy, the criminal
wickedness of the 'particular bad' to the punishing stupidity of the 'general
good', and end-up in a state-hegemonic cul-de-sac of their own devising, where
man plays God and defies the Devil.
82. But
hope of God stems from bureaucracy, stems, one might say, from woman, and in
the axial ascent from bureaucracy to theocracy, the sinful cursedness of the
'general bad' to the graceful blessedness of the 'particular good', the
'goodness' of God, there is no 'shitty' dead-end of democratic delusion but an
open-ended gaseousness which stretches into eternity and the perfection of
being in the transcendentalism of 'Kingdom Come'.
83. In
such fashion can the limitations of 'Mother Church', the Catholic Church, be
transcended, and precisely by utilizing the democratic relativity of the
secondary state, the liberal republican state, to a primary church end, the
church not of a Marian cursedness but of a Messianic blessedness, not of sin
but of grace, not of the world but of the otherworld, not of death-in-life but
of Eternal Life, so that progress from the 'general bad' to the 'particular
good' can be democratically endorsed and achieve, if the People so choose, a
majority mandate, and not because the People, the electorate in question, are
primarily of the State and thus inveterately democratic, but rather because
they are sufficiently of the Church to be desirous of deliverance from sin to
grace, cursedness to blessedness, folly to wisdom, and thus of a higher destiny
than the world, a destiny which stretches beyond the world to the otherworldly
heights of 'Kingdom Come', in which God will reign supreme and therefore
subsume all that is less than God into godliness and, more importantly,
heavenliness, no matter how long it may take for this to happen to any
appreciable extent, bearing in mind the complexities and pluralities which have
to be 'ironed out'.
84. For,
ultimately, the triumph of God/Heaven implies the transmutation of
woman/purgatory and, in secondary vein, the Devil/Hell and man/earth towards a
godly/heavenly end, and for this to happen woman/purgatory must become antiwoman/antipurgatory, and the Devil/Hell the Antidevil/Antihell, and man/earth pseudo-man/pseudo-earth,
so that strength will take its place beneath, though to one side of, knowledge
and knowledge, duly reformed, its place beneath a beauty which is deferential
to truth and therefore secondarily graceful in psychic vein.
85. All
such transmutations will take time, even in eternity, and will lead to excisions
as well as incisions, to separations as well as amalgamations, to a whole range
of cyborg-oriented developments which will impact
upon evolving and/or counter-devolving life and progressively change it for
ever - as described in all the previous texts which have a bearing on 'Kingdom
Come'.
86. For
man is, in Nietzschean parlance, something to
overcome, and only in God, in the most evolved and therefore per se manifestation of God, will it be
possible to engineer his 'overcoming' in such fashion that only the Cyborg prevails and the Cyborg
becomes the meaning not merely of the earth but, more significantly, of Heaven,
of the attainment by evolving life to its maximum of joy through maximized
truth in a synthetically artificial context in which the self, the brain stem
and spinal cord, is granted a more than mortal support/sustain service for the
benefit of its immortal aspirations.
87. Eventually,
on this basis of life transmutation legitimized by religious sovereignty, there
will be stable populations that do not arbitrarily increase and are not subject
to or dependent upon sex, with all its attendant perils, for reproduction,
still less for pleasure alone.
88. Such cyborg-oriented populations will simply be fine-tuned ever
forwards and upwards towards the omega point of perfect God/Heaven in space
centres, and all the problems which currently and have traditionally beset man
will be things of the past, never to be resurrected in the future.
89. The
sinfulness of woman-oriented mankind will be transcended by the gracefulness of
God, of the Cyborg, and neither the criminality of
the Devil nor the punishingness of man-oriented
humanity will persist into eternity for ever or even to any appreciable extent
at all, but be subject to ongoing modification in the interests of enhanced
grace and joyfulness for all concerned.
90. Therefore
the autocratic-democratic axis is doomed; for it does not lead on and up but
effectively back and down, down to the nadir of a 'shitty' stupidity. Only the bureaucratic-theocratic axis can be
significantly progressed; for this is the axis of life, whether of
death-in-life or of Eternal Life, not the axis of the negation of life, whether
in Eternal Death or life-in-death, to which both the 'frigg***
jerks' of autocratic 'pus' and the 'sodd*** pricks'
of democratic 'shit' are subjected and perforce condemned through their own
wickedness and stupidity.
91. They
may fight on to protect their vested interests, the interests of aristocracy on
the one hand and of plutocracy on the other, but they are doomed to fighting a
loosing battle; for they are the born or re-born enemies of life and can only
perish in the death of their own crime and punishment.
92. They
have shut themselves out from life, and now they fear life as a threat to their
death, the Eternal Death of 'frigg*** jerks' and the
life-in-death of 'sodd*** pricks', and seek to 'save'
themselves by spreading their death far and wide, by taking the battle
pro-actively to the 'enemy', or anyone who is not equally or even partially
democratic.
93. But
the morale of life is that life cannot be defeated by death but triumphs over
death to rise again re-born into eternity, the Eternal Life which is master and
fate of all who would honour God and themselves and turn from the world to
heavenly redemption in 'Kingdom Come'.
94. Life can use democracy, even liberal democracy, to its own higher
ends, the ends of metaphysical salvation in God and Heaven, and an end to both
sin and crime alike. But such a divine destiny
can only transpire where the desire for grace, for an end to sin, is paramount,
not in connection with the punishment of crime and an obsession with crime and
punishment which bespeaks the autocratic-democratic axis of all that is
inimical to life.
95. There
must be at least some underlying sense of bureaucracy-theocracy, of sin to
grace, before the endorsement of a society centred in grace and an end to sin
can be countenanced. For the wages of
sin is death, death-in-life, and where life is deemed precious because society
is based in life and not in death, then the desire for Eternal Life will be all
the greater, and eternity will truly come to pass.
96. But
the life-in-death of the hard-line democratic, the 'sodd***
pricks' of a 'shitty' disposition, can only fear the Eternal Death, the
death-in-death, so to speak, of the 'frigg*** jerks'
of a scummy disposition whose autocracy either rules or has ruled the roost in
criminal vein and would set things back to a world, a netherworld,
characterized not by form but by power, not by ego but by will, not by
knowledge but by ugliness, not by man but by the Devil.
97. Such
'sodd*** pricks' have reason to fear the Devil. But the longer they persist in fearing the 'frigg*** jerks' whose crime would demolish their world, the
less possibility there is of an accommodation with God and an end to their
punishing disposition, not least in respect of an ethos that, in state
hegemonic vein, puts work above play in the interests, falsely conceived, of
self-enrichment.
98. It
may even be the case that the one reinforces the other and that as long as the
autocratic-democratic axis persists there will be crime and punishment, not an
end to crime or a cessation of punishment, but the persistence of crime and
punishment world without 'shitty' end.
99. This
is not, in truth, a world worth fighting for or defending against the perceived
threat of life, including a greater respect, through church hegemonic criteria,
for play. It is, rather, one that needs to
come to an accommodation with bureaucracy and theocracy as soon as it can, in
order to put an end to the vicious rule of crime and its virtuous punishment
and step closer to the possibility of the virtuous transcendence of sin through
grace, as of corporeal play through ethereal play.
100. For
only theocracy, and the freeing of theocracy from both bureaucratic and,
secondarily, autocratic and/or democratic constraints and subversions can lead
the world towards a brighter future in which not only is there little or no sin
but little or no crime and punishment as well, and heavenly criteria
accordingly stand triumphant over the world, as over death.
101. The
axis of death, of autocracy-democracy, is by and large, though not exclusively,
White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) in the contemporary world, and the axis of
life, of bureaucracy-theocracy, effectively all that is not White Anglo-Saxon
Protestant, including White Celtic Catholic and even, in paradoxical vein,
White Celtic Protestant, though their subversion of theocracy along autocratic
(Anglican) and/or democratic (Puritan) lines does mean that, even when they are
more of the Church than the State, their church affiliation is what stands
closer to the axis of death than to that of life, even though they may approach
such an axis on the paradoxical terms of life and thus within parameters that
are either 'snogging' or 'fucking', albeit in
relation to 'jerks' and 'pricks'.
102. Nevertheless,
even then one can discern a distinction between these twisted Celts of an
autocratic-democratic affiliation and their Anglo-Saxon neighbours in countries
like England, and if such a distinction is possible to discern between
Protestant Celts and their Anglo-Saxon counterparts, how much more discernible
is it in respect of Catholic Celts and Protestant Anglo-Saxons!
103. Verily,
he who underestimates race makes a grave mistake in this life! As grave a mistake, it could be said, as that
made by anyone who underestimates gender or even class. But the underestimaters
are more usually the denigrators of higher values and the reducers of life to
the lowest-common-equalitarian-denominator, including death.
104. Not so long ago I wrote a text called Valuations
of a Social Transcendentalist, and it was divided between evaluations,
revaluations, and transvaluations. What it
did not deal with - and advisably - were devaluations; for the devaluators are precisely the detractors of life who revel
in death, whether from a democratic or, most especially, an autocratic
standpoint.
105. The devaluers will not have it said that certain things defy
equalitarian reductionism and are either ineluctable or too profound to be
understood by simple souls. They refuse
to accept the contravention of their negative principles by higher values or
ineluctable realities which defy rational explanation. They would have everything 'brought low'
until what goes for one goes for all, and what suits one should be found
suitable to everyone.
106. Thus
has democracy poisoned life and made an authority out of the lowly and allowed
ignorance to walk unashamed in the guise of knowledge and even - God forbid! - truth. Instead of
elevating life to a higher plane, these lowly democratic 'shits' have made it
their business to reduce life to the understanding of man and the governance of
man, so that what suffices for and as the 'general good' suffices for all,
irrespective of how inapplicable and, indeed, harmful it may be to those whose
blood or skin or hair or eyes or heart or soul, or what have you, does not
accord with the overall stupidity of the 'sodd***
pricks' who strive to remake the world in their own 'shitty' image.
107. By
making an ideal out of man they alienate the godly, not to mention the womanly
and the devilish. They alienate everyone
but themselves, the partisans of their racial or ethnic ideal, and in
alienating those who differ from themselves they poison and corrupt life and
transform it into a sickly mirror of their own distorted concepts. For no matter how apparent their victory over
autocracy and, incidentally, over both bureaucracy and theocracy, the actuality
of opposition to their values persists and undermines even their questionable
confidence as to its final worth.
108. They
may kid themselves that 'fuck*** cunts' are the worst
things going, but the reality of their position as 'sodd***
pricks' leaves much to be desired, not least in respect of the fear of 'frigg*** jerks' whose criminality still autocratically
persists and is, by any objective evaluation, the worst thing going, the
sensual 'first mover' and very Devil Herself!
109. At
least 'fuck*** cunts' can live in hope of a better
world to come, a world characterized by the 'gas' of 'snogg***
bums'. But 'sodd***
pricks'? No, their punishment is not
better than sin; it is simply contrary to crime and a 'shitty' dead-end that
can lead nowhere better, least of all if it turns unequivocally 'shitty' in
state-totalitarian vein under the misguided aspirations of Social Democracy!
110. Democracy
is, to be sure, preferable to autocracy, as man to the Devil; but it is a low
kind of ideal which makes the notion of an absolute earthiness commensurate
with heaven, the ideal of a low kind of class or race which, in opposing
autocracy, becomes ever more democratic and mired in the 'shitty' bog of a
homosexual dead-end in which the more radical type of 'sodd***
prick' is 'king', and able to flaunt his homosexuality as the logical goal of
sexual development, much as his musical counterpart will perform on a
solid-bodied electric guitar for the dubious satisfaction of devotees of hard
rock and/or heavy metal, or his computing counterpart prefer a single-bay
tower/thin-film-transistor (TFT) package to anything else.
111. This
is not the sort of paradise on earth with which a self-respecting human being
would wish to identify or lend any encouragement to, and it is doubtful that
even many democrats are attracted by it, bearing in mind that the greater
proportion of such people are liberal and more flexible in their approach to
sodomy, not least in respect of anal heterosexuality.
112. But
if democratic, in parliamentary vein, they remain, then they are, by logical
extrapolation, identifiably 'sodd*** pricks' and
fundamentally 'shitty' characters who might be preferable to 'frigg*** jerks' but are in no way preferable to 'fuck*** cunts', not because there is not something superficially
more attractive about the 'general good' than about the 'general bad' in the
incompatible terms in which such worldly alternatives exist, but because,
however superior they may consider themselves to be, they have made an ideal
out of the earth and turned their back on heaven and reduced life to a
life-in-death sodomitic dead-end which, unlike their
bureaucratic counterparts on the other side of the world, the female or watery
side of it, does not exist in relation to the 'particular good' of theocratic
salvation and does not live in hope of the resurrection to a more perfect
theocracy in 'Kingdom Come', but rejects and defies the notion of world overcoming
from a basis of Hell-overcoming worldliness which, with fear of the 'particular
bad' as its motivation, leaves little or no place for anything truly heavenly.
113. That,
more than anything else, is what condemns democracy, and even when the advantages
of the physical 'general good' are weighed against the disadvantages of the
chemical 'general bad', still the latter live in partnership with the
metaphysical 'particular good' and can hope for better things to come, whereas
the former can only fear the worse things behind them even when they are
obliged to live in partnership with it, as with the metachemical
'particular bad', and struggle cynically with the fascinations of crime, as
with the 'pus' of 'frigg*** jerks'.
114. But,
in truth, the advantages which 'sodd*** pricks' have
over their worldly neighbours pale to insignificance when once one considers
that 'sodding' implies a state hegemony and an
anti-sexual attitude commensurate with sexual corruption, whereas the 'fucking'
of 'fuck*** cunts' implies a church hegemony and a
pro-sexual attitude commensurate with sexual conservatism, a conservatism that
does not culminate in the life-denying radicalism of a 'sodding'
dead-end but is ever open to the possibility of liberation from 'fucking', as
from sin, in the graceful radicalism of a 'snogging'
eternity in which the 'bum' is king.
115. In
short, the death-dealing and death-revelling denigrators of life are way off
the track; they are not even perversely 'fucking' or 'snogging'
like their church counterparts in the arguably more Celtic manifestations of
Christian fundamentalism and humanism, but overly 'frigging' and 'sodding' and therefore everything they do and say has been
corrupted by their political affiliations to the autocratic-democratic axis and
rendered despicable or, at the very least, suspect, turned into an argument
against life and an apologetics of death, including the death, not least, of
plutocratic greed and materialism.
116. For
it is easier, we have been reliably informed, for a camel to pass through the
eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the 'Kingdom of Heaven', and since
we identify such a 'Kingdom' with 'Kingdom Come', there can be no doubt that
anyone overly identifiable with democracy will be ineligible for theocracy
which, as we have seen, requires a bureaucratic precondition in 'Mother
Church', and could not emerge Messianically
triumphant without such a precondition, and therefore axis of
bureaucracy-theocracy, being representatively in place - something that could
not be claimed for those affiliated, in democratic vein, to the descending axis
of autocracy-democracy which descends, or can descend, all the way down to the
most 'shitty' earth-grubbing dirt of which it were possible to conceive, the
dirt, needless to say, of a Social Democratic totalitarianism.
117. There
is therefore nothing intrinsically meritorious or morally desirable about
democratic freedom as such; for it is not a progressive ideal that enriches
life but a death-obsessed solution to the problem, from a democratic
standpoint, of autocratic tyranny, the crimes of which, including a tendency to
make others physically work for one, exist to be punished and effectively
reduced to proportions which allow the false modesty of plutocracy to have its
death-exploiting way.
118. To
say that democracy leads anywhere on this basis would be equivalent to saying
that punishment should become the ultimate ideal and that the 'shittyness' of a homosexual disposition therefore achieve
universal sanction, something which, even without plutocratic exploitation of
that very modesty which revels in democratic punishment, only a clown or a
madman would seriously endorse!
119. But
then those whose favoured disposition is 'sodding'
are arguably less than sane from a mainstream sexual point of view; for they
have reduced life, and the expression of life through sex, to dirt, to their
own overly earthy 'shittyness', and in such a
reduction is life demeaned and ultimately negated, rendered null and void in
the life-in-death partisanship of plutocracy-serving liberal democracy and,
more so, in plutocracy-rejecting democracy, or Social Democracy, which is more
like an antilife-in-death than life-in-death as such.
120. Of
course, such people can claim that life-in-death is preferable to the Eternal
Death, the death-in-death criminality of autocracy, with its aristocratic
acquiescence in the crimes of a centrifugal centralization. But that is a poor excuse for making an
ideal, in de-centralizing vein, out of the devolutionary nature of
democracy! For such an ideal stands on
shaky legs even before the death-in-life reality of bureaucracy, which may
appear superficially inferior to it but is still rooted in life and capable of
holding out hope of better things to come for the Faithful as and when they
gravitate to theocracy, whether in relation to bureaucracy, or with the coming
of the 'Kingdom', that purer theocracy which has been called Social Theocracy
and would radically elevate life beyond the world of death-in-life to the otherworld
of Eternal Life, a cyborg-oriented eternity that,
ultimately, would not be subject to death at all, but stand in eternal
testimony to its overcoming, as to the overcoming of man and his obsession with
death.
121. And
as a corollary to such an elevation of theocracy would come the transmutation
of bureaucracy into antibureaucracy, as the
administrative aside of 'God Kingship' to the triadic Beyond of the Centre
proper, the foci of religious praxis in 'Kingdom Come', so that even 'fucking'
would achieve something of an airy transvaluation in
respect of plastic inflatables, or so-called 'sex
dolls', for those who required them, and 'snogging'
be further enhanced and transcendentalized to a
degree inconceivable on a
bureaucratic-theocratic axial basis, a basis transcending the corporeal
impersonality of sin and rendered truly universal.
122. But
that is another matter, and before any prospect of 'Kingdom Come' is possible
there must first be the bureaucratic-theocratic hope for and expectation of it,
which could not be anticipated in respect of those for whom autocracy-democracy
is the principal axial affiliation and all thought of 'Kingdom Come' is either
democratically subverted to suit the earthy ambitions of plutocrats and/or antiplutocrats (social democrats) or dismissed out-of-hand
as a figment of some superstitious imagination and anachronistic disposition
which is anti-worker in character and therefore contrary to 'social progress'.
123. But,
then, what would state democrats understand of church bureaucracy when they
have no relationship to 'Mother Church' but at most only - and then rather
intermittently - relations to some democratic subversion of theocracy that
encourages faith in democratic values and its corollary of plutocracy, and thus
of a 'heaven on earth' of the 'general good' conceived in respect of liberal
democracy or, where the rejecters of plutocracy are concerned, of social
democracy and an end to the exploitation of man by man, as to the pluralism of
political devolution, in the overly male-oriented centralization of a
pseudo-evolutionary state totalitarianism.
124. Well,
it should be apparent that the latter type of people would less be about
'Kingdom Come' than putting an end to liberal democracy and its plutocratic
death-revelling exploitation of the masses which would be less a 'heaven on
earth', a life-in-death than the political corollary of antilife-on-earth,
namely 'antiheaven-on earth', and the rule, to all
intents and purposes, of an Antichrist to keep the People pegged to earth in
the most unequivocally 'shitty' terms, terms one can only conclude to have
intimate associations with outright homosexuality in the dirt of anal coitus.
125. For
if there is earthiness, and nothing more, in the sheath-utilizing heterosexual
coitus of 'fuck*** pricks', whose puritanical opposition to conception drives
them into the arms of masculine pleasure and what could be called a sort of life-in-antideath, there is not even earthiness in the anal
violation of 'sodd*** pricks', whether allegedly
heterosexual or homosexual, but dirt purely and simply, the 'shitty'
life-in-death lowness and dead-endedness of a species
of man whose sole aim in life is political homosexuality and who goes about
achieving this at the expense of the earth and anything that might grow out of
and ennoble it by justifying its existence to a higher power and/or being.
126. But
the pleasure-in-anal violation of the heterosexually conservative 'sodd*** pricks' must be distinguished, all the same, from
the antipleasure-in-anal violation, the antilife-in-death, of the homosexually radical 'sodd*** pricks', whether of the parliamentary left or,
beyond parliament, in the state totalitarianism of a social democratic resolve,
the sort of Antichristic resolve which would reduce
the world to the purest dirt and ultimately most barren working-class wasteland
imaginable, a wasteland that would make even certain forms of 'shit' appear
productive and life-affirming!
127. No,
it is abundantly obvious that these more radical idiots are simply a symptom of
democratic 'shittyness' in general and not a solution
to it; for they would reduce things still further, even below any earthy-dirty
relativity that still clings, no matter how paradoxically, to liberal democracy
and prevents it from falling into the sodomitic
cesspit of political absolutism.
128. The
life-in-antideath affirmers of the earth are still,
it must not be forgotten, far from honourable or respectable in their
life-subverting pleasure-seeking 'fuck*** prick' recourse to male-oriented
contraceptive heterosexuality, but they are less bad, less low, in their
liberal/puritan relativity, than the 'sodd*** pricks'
of the democratic socialist or social democratic Left who would reduce the
world to antilife-in-death homosexuality and make
even the life-in-death anally-oriented heterosexuality of the conservative
Right, or those who would paradoxically appear to be conserving heterosexuality
within a state-hegemonic context, appear a plutocratic crime against the
People. Such abysmally low 'shits' are
frankly beneath contempt, and they should be exposed and judged accordingly!
129. For
you can come back from the earth, even from the liberal bisexual 'take' on it
which does not invariably entertain the dirt of anal violation. But from the dirt as such there is no return, no possibility of redemption, and therefore
only a more complete death than that typifying the life-in-death of their
liberal counterparts.
130. But
for those who are not so 'down to earth' that they cannot return from the 'pit
of shit' into which they have so ignominiously dug themselves, there is the
prospect, ever open from the sinful 'piss' of bureaucracy, of the redemption
not merely of the earth in water but of earthy-water in air, and of theocratic
liberation from the world in the heaven-revelling gaseousness of the Beyond, of
the triadic Beyond, of 'Kingdom Come', and thus of the social theocratic
solution to liberal theocracy which lifts things ever higher, towards ever more
godly and heavenly peaks of eternity.
131. And
because 'Mother Church' yearns for such a transcendence of its nonconformist
limitations in bureaucracy, it is ever open to the prospect of salvation and an
end to the world of death-in-life which keeps the Faithful on their sinful
knees and precludes the attainment of that grace which is no mere liberally
ecclesiastic antideath-in-life reward for
confessional contrition, but the Eternal Life of otherworldly redemption.
132. Verily,
'fuck*** cunts' can rise relatively above their 'pissy' limitations and achieve that gaseous redemption
which is the reward of 'snogg*** bums'. But those who transcend the
bureaucratic-theocratic axis altogether ... achieve something more, and for
them there is no way back to 'Mother Church' but only the infinite progress of
'Father Centre', the purer gas of 'Kingdom Come' which applies to a context in
which, in Social Theocratic vein, 'snogg*** bums' are
the rule and 'fuck*** cunts' the exception.
133. For
until that becomes the case there can be no Heaven in Space, no definitive
heaven, but only a paradoxical heaven in mass, heaven in the watery aspect of
the world which must continue to bow before sin as before a 'fuck*** cunt' mean which is to bureaucracy what the punishing mean
of 'sodd*** pricks' is to democracy, world without
end.
134. He
who corresponds to a Second Coming, to a Messianic destiny, to God in some
provisional sense of representing, in his teachings, religious sovereignty to
the world, cannot be in favour of the world, whether with a bureaucratic sinful
bias or a democratic punishing bias; for he is primarily concerned, in his
Messianic resolve, with theocratic grace, and his 'Kingdom' is accordingly not
of this world of sin and punishment, still less of the netherworld of
autocratic crime, but primarily of the otherworld of 'Kingdom Come' which would
take theocratic grace to a new level of timeless bliss such that was
independent of worldly criteria, and thus of bureaucratic restrictions.
135. This
otherworld of a more evolved theocratic grace can only come to pass via Social
Theocracy, which is to heaven what Social Democracy is to the earth, only a lot
higher and finer, in every sense of the word.
For it is not about the reduction of earth to dirt, of pleasure to antipleasure, but about the elevation of air to heaven, of
happiness, or antihappiness, to bliss.
136. Thus
it is as far removed, in People's terms, from the 'shit' of Social Democracy as
it is possible for anything nobler to be; for far from closing down in a
dead-end of homosexual personality, or antipersonality,
it opens up to an endless life of unisexual universality, in which not 'sodding' but 'snogging' is the
sexual metaphor for everything that unfolds to the greater contentment of
God-in-Heaven.
137. But
for Social Theocracy to stand any chance of coming to pass, in such
otherworldly vein, the world will have to allow a paradoxical election, on the
part of the People, for religious sovereignty, and the possibility of rights in
respect of 'Kingdom Come' which such a sovereignty would confer.
138. Now
such a paradoxical election would only be more likely to come successfully to
pass in a context of democracy which, with 'sodd*** cunt' implications, was more deferential to bureaucracy
than to one that wasn't, and which was therefore of a secondary state order of
democracy which had been designed with the primary church order of bureaucracy
in mind, so that the interests and aspirations of 'fuck*** cunts'
took precedence both over itself and anything likely to undermine the status
quo from a politically irrelevant or ethnically extraneous point-of-view.
139. Now
since the 'fuck*** cunts' of church bureaucracy are
all the time praying for deliverance from their sins in respect of the grace of
church theocracy, it stands to reason that the secondary state can become the
ideal vehicle whereby such an aspiration may be brought to a more conclusive
heavenly realization, and precisely by allowing for the paradoxical election
whereby a primary church people opts for religious sovereignty and the prospect
of deliverance from their sins by utilizing the secondary state to that end,
thereby determining whether or not the world is to be overcome in the interests
of otherworldy redemption in 'Kingdom Come'.
140. For
it is only in a context which affirms religious sovereignty that steps can be
taken to approach life from an eternal perspective and establish the necessary
framework whereby sin can be transcended by grace on a much more permanent and
lasting basis, a basis owing little to prayer and a lot to a synthetically
artificial mode of transcendental meditation that will tie-in with the overall cyborgization of life for which religious sovereignty would
pave the way, ensuring that both man and woman were 'overcome' in and through
God, and that Heaven accordingly became the true end of life for all eternity.
141. Therefore
it is primarily in relation to a secondary state order of republicanism
affiliated to a primary church order of catholicism,
as of secondary corporeal work to primary corporeal play, that such a
paradoxical election, which I have long equated with Judgement, can stand any
chance of viably coming to pass, and with it the possibility of a new order of
life commensurate with Eternity.
142. For
the thrust of bureaucracy is towards theocracy, the bureaucratic-theocratic
axis confirming this on worldly, or religiously liberal, terms, and only within
the framework of such an axis, even with peripheral factors to bear in mind,
can one reasonably expect a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, for the
fulfilment of bureaucratic hope, through 'Mother Church', in the theocratic
redemption of 'Father Centre', as pertaining to what has been described as the
triadic Beyond within the overall context of 'Kingdom Come', in which an antibureaucratic transmutation of bureaucracy would stand
as administrative aside to the Beyond in question, and therefore in a sort of
secondary state-like relationship to the primacy of the church-like entity we
have identified with 'Father Centre', as with a possible federation of Social
Theocratic Centres.
143. Of
course, there will be those who, whether from vested interests or out of
laziness and hostility to the new, will argue that such a Social Theocracy is
too utopian, too fanciful, too idealistic, and no less radically Left in
respect of theocracy than its democratic counterpart in respect of democracy,
and that you cannot just turn against the world and uproot theocracy from its
bureaucratic moorings as though it were of small account.
144. Doubtless,
there is some truth to that kind of argument, and no-one need suppose that
'Kingdom Come' can be brought to pass overnight and all in one go, as though a
majority mandate for religious sovereignty would guarantee immediate
deliverance from sin and eternal salvation in heavenly bliss.
145. I
have never made that claim, and I would be the first to concede that, even with
the green light, the process of setting up and developing such a 'Kingdom', in
which a primary ethereal order of play came to supersede its corporeal
counterpart, would be slow and arduous, with no drastic steps being taken
against the religious status quo before the new religion or civilization was up
and running and could prove itself and justify the removal or scaling-down of
anything old.
146. For
if you destroy before you build, you make the building of the new all the
harder and put more pressure on yourself to make it work - something it is less
likely to do if approached with the revolutionary burden of a barbarous
reputation for iconoclastic destruction bearing down on it!
147. No,
and much as the new must first prove itself worthy to supersede the old, it is
not envisaged as being utopian or overly partisan, but has been structured, in
respect of our projected triadic Beyond, along lines guaranteed to do justice
to the totality of factors which have to be embraced if both Catholics and
Protestants alike are to be saved, or delivered, to the Beyond in question, so
that, quite unlike the pseudo-evolutionary centralizing totalitarianism of
Social Democracy vis-à-vis a largely de-centralized pluralistic democratic
tradition, Social Theocracy might appear pseudo-devolutionary in respect of its
de-centralizing pluralism vis-à-vis both Protestant and, especially, Catholic
centralized theocratic traditions, if only until such time as things could be
tightened up again and a truly evolutionary drive towards the omega point of
ultimate godliness/heavenliness eventually get under way, as and when
circumstances permitted.
148. I
have discussed that and similar matters in previous texts, so will not dwell on
the point here, except to say that in a time when democrats of one persuasion
or another are globally on the march, and doing their level-best to reduce
every people on the planet to some kind of work-obsessed 'sodd***
prick' dead-end, whether ethereal or neo-corporeal, it would be a foolish or
overly complacent sort of theocrat who was happy to stand still and allow the
storms of democratic clamour to outmanoeuvre him and if not blow him away, then
bury him beneath their dead-weight of earthy opinion, blotting out the sky in
the smoke and dust of their rude advance as they carry away all life before
them in an insane quest of global death.
149. There
is no way that one can stand complacently, in the contemporary world, as a
theocrat rooted in bureaucracy and pretend that one's own system and values are
not under threat from this avalanche of 'shit' and of 'shitty' opinion which
bears down on everything before it and would engulf it in a darkness worse than
night!
150. What
started out as a solution to the overbearing might of autocracy and its
absolute primary exploitation of corporeal work in certain countries which, due
to historical circumstances, were insufficiently deferential to the corporeal
play of 'Mother Church' and too internally fractious for their own good, turned
into a snowballing monster of its own which has no respect for higher values
because little or no understanding of them, not having developed along
bureaucratic-theocratic lines, but persisted in its autocratic-democratic
tracks in respect of different primary approaches to work.
151. But
that does not mean to say it will leave bureaucratic-theocratic peoples
alone. For even if it keeps to its own
tracks, which in the circumstances of its ideological limitations it is more
likely to do, this arrogant monster of sexual and other perversities will be
loathe to acknowledge the existence of alternative tracks, of tracks which run
playfully contrary to it and would challenge its claim to universal supremacy
and 'show it up' for its own monstrous limitations, including the 'sodding' if not, when push comes to shove, 'frigging'
worship of death and, as a social corollary to that, work, whether in primary
ethereal plutocratic terms or primary neo-corporeal neo-autocratic terms such
that equate with, among other things, Social Democracy's neo-centralizing state
totalitarianism.
152. It is
determined to persist in its own democratization of the entire globe in the
interests, by and large, of the plutocratic exploitation of the resources of
all peoples; for it is a fundamentally corrupt ideology which, much as it may
take itself for granted, is always suspicious of everyone and everything else,
even when they are manifestly not autocratic and patently criminal, but either
sinfully bureaucratic or gracefully theocratic.
153. Therefore
it cannot be presumed that this perverse ideology of democratic profanity, which
liberally revels in plutocracy-inspired ethereal work, will leave the godly or
god-aspiring or even woman-idolizing alone if only they sit still and shut
their eyes and pretend that nothing is happening. To sit still, in such an age, is to court certain
disaster!
154. For
this low and godless ideology of a profane people will only be defeated when
those who are in favour of theocracy and the free development of theocracy
stand-up for themselves and refuse to sit on the fence of a bureaucratic-theocratic
compromise, but show both themselves and the world in general that they, too,
have an ideological goal and a radically progressive capacity to realize and
further it in the interests of global peace and harmony achieved through play
of the highest order, of a true universality in which the brotherhood of man -
always a democratically and therefore sexually dubious proposition - will be
rivalled and transcended by the brotherhood of all those who, ever godly, would
take theocracy to its logical conclusion in the most evolved and therefore per
se manifestations of God and Heaven, in which truth and the vindication of
truth in joy will reign forever supreme.
155. Therefore
it cannot be the 'sodd*** pricks' who have the final
say as to the destiny of this planet; for such a say would reduce everything in
life to the physical 'shit' of a work-oriented death from which it would never
recover, as all that made life precious was reviled and demeaned from a
standpoint rooted in the molecular-wavicle punishment
of ethereal work if not, in certain more radical instances, the
elemental-particle neo-criminality of neo-corporeal work, and the virtual
neo-slavery of workaholics.
156. Only
the elemental-wavicle 'snogg***
bums', by radically turning against the molecular-particle 'fucking'
limitations of their religious traditions, can bring metaphysical 'gas' to the
gates of paradise and open the way towards a better future in which not
woman-based death-in-life, still less man-centred life-in-death, but God-centred
Eternal Life is sovereign, and the world is led by God into Heaven as into
life's true destiny in the universal play of a theocracy supreme, the Social
Theocracy of 'Kingdom Come'.
LONDON 2003 (Revised
2012)
