Genuine and Pseudo Axial Antitheses. Having distinguished between genuine and pseudo modes of the noumenal and the phenomenal in the previous entry, not least in respect of the distinction between worldly and post-worldly ages, I should add that this is in no way identical to the more intrinsic distinctions between genuine and pseudo which exist on an axial basis between church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria and, conversely, state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria, where, irrespective of era, a fundamental distinction between genuine sin and grace in relation, somatically, to genuine folly and wisdom has to be distinguished from its pseudo counterpart within the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis, just as, conversely, the fundamental distinction between genuine evil and good in relation, psychically, to genuine crime and punishment has to be distinguished from its pseudo counterpart within the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.  For what is true of the one axis is manifestly not true of the other.  In other words, what is genuine on the one axis will be pseudo on the other, the distinctions between genuine sin and genuine grace and pseudo-sin and pseudo-grace where church-hegemonic and church-subordinate axial criteria are respectively concerned being a case in point, as, to reverse the axial standpoint, are the distinctions between genuine evil and genuine good and pseudo-evil and pseudo-good in relation to state-hegemonic and state-subordinate axial criteria respectively, neither axis being compatible with the other because antithetical in virtually every respect.  Therefore much as we have to allow for worldly and post-worldly distinctions between the genuine and the pseudo, these still exist in conjunction with the rather more fundamental distinctions inhering to either axis which are simply a reflection, after all, of the dichotomy between a genuine church coupled to a pseudo state and a genuine state coupled to a pseudo church, whether in the phenomenal or in the noumenal.  But, of course, the positions of the respective axes are modified by epochal or historical factors, as described in some detail in several of the mature texts in Opera D’Oeuvre, my collected writings.  For instance, the establishment of pseudo-chemical and pseudo-antiphysical positions at the expense of traditional chemical and antiphysical positions at the southwest point of the axial compass is due in large part to the impositions, from the northwest point of the compass in question, of metachemical and antimetaphysical liberties of a somatic nature which ensure that what was formerly antiphysically sinful and foolish becomes, under antimetaphysical pressure, quasi-pseudo-sinful and quasi-pseudo-foolish, pseudo-sin and pseudo-folly typifying the antimetaphysical position in respect of bound psyche and free soma, while likewise ensuring that was what formerly chemically pseudo-criminal and pseudo-evil becomes, under metachemical pressure, quasi-criminal and quasi-evil or, in quasi-state-hegemonic/church-subordinate vein, quasi-evil and quasi-criminal, evil and crime typifying the metachemical position in respect of free soma and bound psyche.  Therefore while the genuine sensually phenomenal positions at the southwest point of the axial compass have effectively been overhauled and eclipsed by their post-worldly pseudo successors, they are still distinct from anything either pseudo-foolish and pseudo-sinful in antimetaphysics or genuinely evil and genuinely criminal in metachemistry, being simply the quasi-state-hegemonic/church-subordinate transmutation of genuinely church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria which, ever distinct from metachemistry and antimetaphysics, will be merely quasi-evil and quasi-criminal in relation to pseudo-chemistry, and quasi-pseudo-foolish and quasi-pseudo-sinful in relation to pseudo-antiphysics.  Yet it is precisely in that paradoxical straining towards the northwest point of the axial compass that the transmuted southwest point, now more democratically and somatically free than ever before, finds itself in a pseudo-worldly situation which requires to be delivered from its paradoxical predicament via an equally paradoxical utilization of those very same democratic freedoms which are not germane to church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria but a consequence, in large measure, of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate cultural imperialism from without, in order that the people concerned may be returned, progressively, to church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty and be delivered, in terms of salvation (males) and counter-damnation (females), from those who now prey upon them in such unabashedly metachemical and antimetaphysical vein, twisting them from the path of righteousness and, for females, counter-justice to the pit of vanity and, for males, pseudo-meekness or, in other words, to all that is unjust and unrighteous.  Only the application, within countries like the Irish Republic, of one paradox to the existence of another, one that is flagrantly at variance with church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, can return the peoples concerned to the path of righteousness and counter-justice.  But only in respect of the Social Theocratic overhaul of outmoded and ineffectual Catholic traditions, so that the ensuing modes of salvation and counter-damnation that could only be encouraged and developed within the new ideological and religious framework really will be able to deliver them from their secular enemies and keep them up in the grace and wisdom for males and pseudo-punishment and pseudo-good, or counter-punishment and counter-good, for females of the Celestial City and Anti-Vanity Fair of our projected overhaul of anything pseudo-otherworldly and pseudo-netherworldly, anything that, in High Catholic vein, would have pandered to a more genuine worldly tradition and is now irrelevant to the lapsed Catholic pseudo-worldly urban majority and to their paradoxical predicament, the deliverance from which can only be achieved on a radically new – and more genuine – theocratic basis commensurate with Social Theocracy.  For only a majority mandate for religious sovereignty can deliver the peoples concerned from the limitations of political sovereignty and the sorts of democratic freedoms that render them vulnerable to secular imposition and exploitation.