On the Relationship between Righteousness and Justice. I have consistently argued in my writings that righteousness and justice hang together as male and female principles of sensibility, whether this sensibility be in the phenomenal realm of physics and antichemistry at the southeast point of our intercardinal axial compass or, indeed, in the noumenal realm of metaphysics and antimetachemistry at the northeast point of the said compass, wherein we are not concerned with genuine justice and pseudo-righteousness (this latter a product, initially, of male counter-salvation) but, on the contrary, with genuine righteousness and pseudo-justice (the latter of which is the product of female counter-damnation). Hence there are two orders of righteousness and two orders of justice, neither of which can co-exist with the other but only as expressions of entirely opposite kinds of society and, indeed, civilization – genuine righteousness and pseudo-justice being germane to church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria, pseudo-righteousness and genuine justice being germane, by contrast, to state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria. Therefore a society will be either partial to genuine righteousness at the expense of pseudo-justice or, conversely, to genuine justice at the expense of pseudo-righteousness. But either way there can be no justice, whether genuine or pseudo, without the corresponding hegemonic entrenchment of righteousness as the male principle which is responsible, in some degree, for conditioning the corresponding female position towards a refutation of its natural condition, be that condition metachemical or chemical, noumenal or phenomenal, according to axis. Hence without the free psyche and bound soma of the male sensible position in metaphysics or physics, there can be no upending of the female position towards a corresponding rejection of free soma and bound psyche in favour, contrary to sensuality, of bound soma and free psyche. Without grace in free psyche and wisdom in bound soma of the respective male sensible positions, whether metaphysical (and genuine) or physical (and pseudo), there can be no punishment in free psyche and goodness in bound soma of the complementary female anti-sensual positions, whether antimetachemical (and pseudo) or antichemical (and genuine), and therefore no unclear complement of holiness for a creature who, whether noumenal or phenomenal, ethereal or corporeal, is more naturally disposed to free soma and bound psyche. Hence righteousness is crucial to the establishment of justice, without which there will be a gradual slide towards injustice and even outright vanity. But such a slide is more likely to transpire in relation to pseudo-righteousness than ever it is in connection with genuine righteousness; for the physical male, though hegemonic over the antichemical female, does not have the benefit of an unequivocal hegemony, and therefore is subject to the subversion of physics by an antichemistry acting in conjunction with metachemistry over antimetaphysics within the axial framework of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society. Such subversion, as we have seen, results in a switch of emphasis, contrary to male gender actuality, from free psyche to bound soma, and therefore ensures that the fulcrum of authority is always with the state rather than the church in the interests of female-dominated state-hegemonic criteria. Hence not only is the physical male rendered pseudo-righteous by dint of the emphasis being put on bound soma rather than free psyche, but his authority is undermined in proportion as the focus of attention remains with the state in relation to justice as the antichemical female counterpart to the vanity of metachemical free soma and bound psyche which rules over the pseudo-meekness of antimetaphysical free soma and bound psyche at the northwest point of the axial compass, obliging pseudo-righteousness to take a secondary position in both state (physical bound soma) and church (physical free psyche) as it links with the pseudo-meek complement to vanity as its male antithesis in the interests of secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria. Now of course where the metachemical hegemony, necessarily unequivocal, over antimetaphysics is deeply entrenched, as in Britain, the prospects of justice breaking away from pseudo-righteousness at the southeast point of the axial compass must be pretty remote, since the vanity and pseudo-meekness of the northwest point of the said compass acts as an anchor to whatever is afoot below, in both physics and antichemistry, and precludes anything remotely resembling a social democratic state absolutism from emerging at its expense. But state absolutism of a social democratic nature has emerged from such a combination of pseudo-righteousness and justice in the past, and precisely as a cry for absolute justice, the justice, that is, of proletarian humanism to have its way at the expense of bourgeois humanism and for social democracy to eclipse liberal democracy in the interests of a kind of Bolshevistic nadir of totalitarian justice. And yet how just is the justice that wears a social democratic mask in the name of proletarian humanism? Is it not the case, as history has shown, that such absolute justice is unworkable and quickly degenerates into its axial antithesis, becoming indistinguishable from neo-vanity for want of any kind or degree of righteous guidance? For justice without righteousness is a contradiction in terms. Justice without righteousness is a license to vanity to criminally acquiesce in evil, the freely somatic activity directed against such manifestations of bound soma as follow from a free psychic hegemony. As soon as justice demands freedom for itself, it ceases to be just and becomes indistinguishable from vanity. The old gods are toppled, no matter how corrupt or sham they may have been, in the name of the new devils. The repudiation of the Church, no matter how puritanically pseudo, leads from a state hegemonic just ascendancy over pseudo-righteousness to a state-absolutist unjust independence of pseudo-righteousness. Such pseudo-righteousness has paid the penalty, it could be said, of its sham nature, its coerced emphasis on bound soma at the expense of free psyche, but, even so, no such penalty would have to have been paid had vanity already been sufficiently hegemonic over pseudo-meekness at the northwest point of the axial compass as to preclude justice from having such ambitions in the first place or, more to the point, from carrying them through even in the not unlikely event of ambitions unbefitting its status as an adjunct to pseudo-righteousness. For the guarantor against absolute justice on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis is not pseudo-righteousness but the constitutional entrenchment of vanity of a more traditional nature such that will not brook any alternative to its own metachemical rule directly over antimetaphysics and indirectly, down the said axis, over antichemistry and physics, both of which phenomenal positions it is able to hold to liberal political and religious account. But this is far from contending, however, that state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society is ideal, at least from a male standpoint. There is nothing ideal about the parliamentary/puritan positions, even if those affiliated to monarchy and the Anglican church have some connection with the ideal, and then less from an antimetaphysical point of view than from that appertaining to metachemistry and its free soma and bound psyche, the natural condition of metachemical females. Yet that it entirely contrary to the male ideal of free psyche and bound soma, not least where metaphysics is concerned, and therefore to a society for which some approximation to genuine righteousness and pseudo-justice is the hallmark by which it is to be judged. Such a society, being church-hegemonic/state-subordinate, is able to keep antimetachemistry subordinate to metaphysics in both church and state, and precisely through the unequivocal nature of the metaphysical hegemony allowing the emphasis to be placed on free psyche in keeping with the male actuality of psyche preceding and preponderating over soma, bound soma being its logical affiliate. Such a society, however, will not encourage righteousness to develop totally at the expense of pseudo-justice, else one could end up with a situation that was no less unrighteous than state-absolutist justice was and remains unjust. Such unrighteousness would doubtless owe more to meekness than to vanity, but it would still be an absolutist perversion of righteousness and no less counter-productive than was the emergence of vanity out of absolute justice with social democratic totalitarianism. Therefore there can be no social theocratic totalitarianism in the sense of an absolute righteousness expanding at the expense of pseudo-justice. Both metaphysics and antimetachemistry are equally necessary to the proper functioning of the northeast point of the axial compass, even if they are unequal in gender and attributes and therefore in their respective standings as manifestations of godliness and antidevilishness, heavenliness and antihellishness. Just as in the alpha-ruled beginning there was no devilishness without antigodliness, no hellishness with antiheavenliness, whatever the conventional hype of Devil the Mother as God may have to say about the respective positions of metachemistry and antimetaphysics, so in the omega-led end there can be no godliness and heavenliness without antidevilishness and antihellishness, whether in psyche or in soma. An absolute church is not the goal of Social Theocracy, but rather the establishment and maintenance of church/state relativity on a basis which favours the unequivocal hegemony, for all eternity, of metaphysical righteousness over antimetachemical pseudo-justice. Holiness without unclearness in accompaniment is no more desirable than grace without pseudo-punishment or wisdom without pseudo-goodness where the respective relationships of metaphysical psyche to antimetachemical psyche and of metaphysical soma to antimetachemical soma are concerned. The virtuous circle of the beautiful approach to Truth and the loving approach to Joy which antifundamentalistically complements the Truth and Joy of metaphysical transcendentalism is only possible because the truthful approach to Beauty and the joyful approach to Love which idealistically stem from the metaphysical church have made possible the Beauty and Love of that antimaterialism which is the secondary state-subordinate foundation, for all anti-infinity, of the secondary church-hegemonic deference to Truth and Joy which was have characterized in intermediate terms and know to be antimetachemically subordinate to metaphysics as the Antidaughter of the Antidevil and the Unclear Soul of Antihell to God the Father and Heaven the Holy Soul, just as the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven are deferential to Antidevil the Antimother and Antihell the Unclear Spirit as they stem from above in order to inform the below which, once established in antimetachemical bound soma, is the platform from which that which completes the virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry is launched, pseudo-justice and righteousness joining hands across the gender divide for all Anti-Infinity and Eternity in both the Anti-Vanity Fair and the Celestial City of ‘Kingdom Come’.