Redefining the Left and the Right. We have established an axial compass which stretches from northwest to southeast on state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms and from southwest to northeast on church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms, thereby supporting the thesis of two separate and indeed opposite types of society, no less incompatible, in fact, than Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland, or the UK and Eire. At each point of the inter-axial compass we have paired hegemonic positions with their upended gender subordinate complements, whether as metachemistry with antimetaphysics at the northwest point or as physics with antichemistry at the southeast point, or, across the axial divide, as chemistry with antiphysics at the southwest point or as metaphysics with antimetachemistry at the northeast point. We have also maintained that antithetical links tend to be formed between the same gender polarities, whether between metachemistry and antichemistry on primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms or between antimetaphysics and physics on secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms or, across the axial divide, between metaphysics and antiphysics on primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms or between antimetachemistry and chemistry on secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms. These pairings have also been discussed, on such a polar basis, in relation to terms like upper class and anti-classless vis-à-vis anti-lower class and middle class where state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria are concerned and, conversely, to such terms as classless and anti-upperclass vis-à-vis anti-middleclass and lower class in the context of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, as well as in relation to distinctions between, say, space and antitime vis-à-vis antivolume and mass or, conversely, time and antispace vis-à-vis antimass and volume. We have even resorted, in Bunyanesque vein, to such terminological distinctions as Vanity Fair and Anti-Celestial City vis-à-vis Anti-Slough of Despond and Mr Worldly Wise or, from the contrary axial standpoint, Celestial City and Anti-Vanity Fair vis-à-vis Anti-Mr Worldly Wise and Slough of Despond. One of my favourites was noumenal objectivity and noumenal anti-subjectivity vis-à-vis phenomenal anti-objectivity and phenomenal subjectivity on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis, but of noumenal subjectivity and noumenal anti-objectivity vis-à-vis phenomenal anti-subjectivity and phenomenal objectivity on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis, where we had ascertained that the noumenal anti-subjective and phenomenal anti-subjective positions were contrary to noumenal subjectivity and phenomenal subjectivity respectively, while their anti-objective counterparts were contrary to noumenal objectivity if noumenal and to phenomenal objectivity if phenomenal, not to anything else. In such fashion one could link autocracy and antitheocracy with antibureaucracy and democracy on the one (axial) hand, but theocracy and anti-autocracy with antidemocracy and bureaucracy on the other (axial) hand, thus establishing a polar antithesis between autocracy and antibureaucracy on primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms and between antitheocracy and democracy on secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms, with a similar, if axially contrary, antithesis between theocracy and antidemocracy on primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms and between anti-autocracy and bureaucracy on secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms. So where does all this leave us with respect to such definitions as Left and Right, whether extreme (noumenal) or moderate (phenomenal), ethereal or corporeal? It leaves us, I believe, with a fundamental dichotomy between sensuality and sensibility, left and right, female and male, objectivity and subjectivity, outer sanity and inner sanity, soma and psyche, since a definite distinction exists between a perception of the Left as sensual and in some sense anti-Christian and of the Right as sensible and if not Christian then of a disposition that favours religion and male-hegemonic values generally. Hence if we follow our axial parameters and attach such distinctions to each of the polar pairings we shall find that, contrary to accepted wisdom or what convention may have led people to suppose, metachemistry and chemistry, corresponding to noumenal and phenomenal modes of female hegemony, are of the left, if in objectively disparate ways, whereas metaphysics and physics, being respectively noumenal and phenomenal modes of male hegemony, are of the right, if in subjectively disparate ways. For if metachemistry is autocratic upper-class and chemistry bureaucratic lower-class, then metachemistry is extreme left in its noumenal objectivity and chemistry merely moderate left in its phenomenal objectivity. Conversely, if metaphysics is theocratic classless and physics democratic middle-class, then metaphysics is extreme right in its noumenal subjectivity and physics merely moderate right in its phenomenal subjectivity. But, of course, nothing left or right, whether extreme or moderate, can exist without a subordinate gender complement, whether in sensuality (objectivity) or in sensibility (subjectivity), and therefore we have to address such a complement if each point of the axial compass is to be paired off with representatives of both gender positions and thus accord with axial relativity and indeed polar interdependence. Therefore the male complement to the unequivocal female hegemony at the northwest point of the axial compass is of an extreme anti-rightwing disposition which is subordinate to extreme left-wing criteria (overlooking the hype of Devil the Mother as God and, hence, as Extreme Right), as antitheocracy to autocracy and anti-classlessness to upper classfulness, and this contrasts with the female complement to the equivocal male hegemony at the southeast point of the axial compass which is of a moderate anti-leftwing disposition subordinate to moderate right-wing criteria, as antibureaucracy to democracy and anti-lowerclassfulness to middleclassfulness. Turning, on the other hand, from state-hegemonic/church-subordinate to church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, we shall find that the female complement to the unequivocal male hegemony at the northeast point of the axial compass is of an extreme anti-leftwing disposition which is subordinate to extreme right-wing criteria (as properly germane to God the Father), as anti-autocracy to theocracy and anti-upperclassfulness to classlessness, and this contrasts with the male complement to the equivocal female hegemony at the southwest point of the axial compass which is of a moderate anti-rightwing disposition subordinate to moderate left-wing criteria, as antidemocracy to bureaucracy and anti-middleclassfulness to lowerclassfulness. Hence a primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate polar antithesis, female-wise, on the one axis between Extreme Left and moderate anti-left is juxtaposed with a secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate polar antithesis, male-wise, between Extreme Anti-Right and moderate right, since that which is Extreme Left in the one case can only form a polar antithesis with moderate anti-left elements at the expense of the moderate right, its axial and gender hegemonic antithesis, while that which is Extreme Anti-Right in the other case can only form a polar antithesis with moderate right-wing elements in view of the irrelevance of the moderate anti-left to its gender position, whereas a primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate polar antithesis, male-wise, on the other axis between Extreme Right and moderate anti-right is juxtaposed with a secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate polar antithesis, female-wise, between Extreme Anti-Left and moderate left, since that which is Extreme Right in the one case can only form a polar antithesis with moderate anti-right elements at the expense of the moderate left, its axial and gender hegemonic antithesis, while that which is Extreme Anti-Left in the other case can only form a polar antithesis with moderate left-wing elements in view of the irrelevance of the moderate anti-right to its gender position. Yet even here we have to distinguish between worldly and post-worldly forms of both left and right, whether moderate or extreme, corporeal or ethereal, since that which is genuine in a worldly age, namely the phenomenal points of the axial compass, will be pseudo in a post-worldly age (such as the present), whereas that which is pseudo in a worldly age, namely the noumenal points of the axial compass, will be genuine in a post-worldly age when, if not netherworldly and anti-otherworldly criteria (as arguably in the case of America), otherworldly and anti-netherworldly criteria will obtain, to the detriment of anything pseudo-noumenal and in the interests, certainly in the otherworldly/anti-netherworldly case, of the salvation and counter-damnation of the pseudo-worldly, with specific reference to its alpha and anti-omega, lower-class and anti-middleclass, manifestations, as properly germane to the southwest point of the axial compass. Therefore we should really speak of the salvation of the pseudo-moderate anti-right by the Extreme Right and of the counter-damnation of the pseudo-moderate left by the Extreme Anti-Left … where the elevation of antiphysical to metaphysical and of chemical to antimetachemical elements are concerned, and contrast this with the possible damnation of the Extreme Left to the pseudo-moderate anti-left and of the counter-salvation of the Extreme Anti-Right to the pseudo-moderate right … where the collapse of metachemical to antichemical and of antimetaphysical to physical elements are concerned, in the event of a more genuine, and therefore properly extreme-right, order of theocracy coming to pass, in conjunction with a subordinate order of anti-autocracy, at the northeast point of the axial compass in response to a majority mandate for religious sovereignty in countries, like Eire, with a catholic or, more correctly in this post-worldly age, lapsed Catholic majority, the pseudo-moderate standings of which portend the more genuine extremism of the noumenal heights to which they would, in the event of ‘democratic’ endorsement, be saved and/or counter-damned, as described in these and other writings pertaining to the development of ‘Kingdom Come’ in relation to Social Theocracy and the fuller evolution of the northeast point of the compass in question, the only logical outcome to which would be the downfall of its northwest point as those at the southwest point were delivered from the evil and pseudo-folly, crime and pseudo-sin, which typifies that extreme immoral and extreme anti-moral northwest point in respect of both metachemistry and antimetaphysics, the Extreme Left and the Extreme Anti-Right. Only the triumph of the Extreme Right and the Extreme Anti-Left over the pseudo-moderate anti-right and the pseudo-moderate left will bring about the downfall of all that is of the Devil and Antigod, and precisely into the judgemental clutches of pseudo-antiwoman and pseudo-man, who can be expected to make it over in their own image in the interests of their own future entitlements to axial conversion and, following southwest point make-over in pseudo-womanly and pseudo-antimanly terms, due salvation and counter-damnation to God and the Antidevil, to an Eternity of Extreme Right righteousness and an Anti-Infinity of Extreme Anti-Left counter-justice, the pseudo-justice of that which, in antimetachemistry, is forever subordinate to the metaphysical righteousness of God in ‘Kingdom Come’.