1. Perceptual
and conceptual, appearances and essences, extrovert and introvert, imagination
and intuition, protons and electrons, alpha and omega, external and internal,
centrifugal and centripetal, dreams and thoughts, films and meditations, etc.,
etc. A duality that applies as much to
the new brain as to the old one. For the
brain is of course divisible into 'new' (cerebrum) and 'old' (cerebellum), and
it is my belief that whereas everything naturalistic appertains to the old
brain, that which is supernatualistic, or artificial,
appertains to the new brain. Thus we can
speak of an alpha/omega dichotomy in both the old and the new brains, with, for
example, dreams and thoughts appertaining to the former but films and
meditations to the latter. Furthermore,
it seems to me that if alpha is perceptual and omega conceptual, then alpha is
immoral and omega moral, since the one is apparent and the other essential, as
relative to protons and electrons, imagination and intuition, centrifugal and
centripetal, etc. Whether alpha is
absolutely immoral or relatively immoral will depend on the brain to which it
pertains, i.e. 'old' or 'new', and we may believe that it will be absolutely
immoral (alpha) in the former case, but relatively immoral (alpha-in-the-omega)
in the latter case. Likewise, whether
omega is relatively moral or absolutely moral will depend on the brain to which
it pertains, i.e. 'old' or 'new', and again we may believe that it will be
relatively immoral in the former case (omega-in-the-alpha), but absolutely
moral in the latter case (omega). Now if
dreams, appertaining to the old brain, are absolutely immoral (perceptual) in
relation to films, which, so I argue, appertain to the new brain, then
thoughts, appertaining to the old brain, will be relatively moral (conceptual) in relation to
meditation, which, so I contend, appertains to the new brain. But in between dreams and thoughts we shall
find the relatively negative and positive amoral equivalents
(protons/electrons) ... of fantasies and books, whereas in between films and meditation
we shall find the relatively negative and positive amoral equivalents
(protons/electrons) of videos and word processors. However, in between fantasies and books (or
the reading thereof) we shall find the absolutely negative and positive amoral equivalents
(dynamic neutrons) of seeing and speaking, whereas in between videos and word
processors (or the reading thereof via VDU) we shall find the absolutely
negative and positive amoral equivalents (dynamic neutrons) of cameras and
talking computers. Finally, in between
seeing and speaking we shall find the absolute amoral equivalent (static
neutrons) of natural visionary experience, whereas in between cameras and
talking computers we shall find the absolute amoral equivalent (static
neutrons) of trips, or artificial visionary experience. Thus in the naturalistic context of the old
brain we shall find the following: dreams - fantasies - seeing - visions -
talking - book reading - thinking, with dreams and thinking immoral alpha and
moral omega, but fantasies and reading, seeing and talking, and visions
pertaining to different degrees and kinds of old-brain amorality. Likewise in the supernatural context of the
new brain we shall find the following: films - videos - cameras - trips -
speaking computers - WP reading - meditation, with films and meditation immoral
alpha and moral omega, but videos and WP reading, cameras and speaking
computers, and trips pertaining to different degrees and kinds of new-brain
amorality. The old brain context is
naturalistic, the new brain context supernaturalistic
(artificial). Alpha is perceptual, omega
conceptual. The perceptual precedes the
conceptual. The VDU screen leads to
meditation just as surely as the Bible (books) leads to prayer (a religious
form of thought). But before the
conceptual can arise on either level (or in either brain), the perceptual must
have its day, with videos superseding cinema films just as surely as fantasies
supersede dreams.
2. Where,
formerly, I was disposed to regarding Fascism and Communism in terms of a new-brain
alpha/omega dichotomy, I can now (and I believe correctly) perceive Fascism -
and especially Nazism - in terms of an old-brain omega, but Communism in terms
of a new-brain alpha, which is to say, as natural conceptual verses artificial
perceptual, the book verses the film, the 'broken cross' (for Nazism was, after
all, an extreme form of conceptual ideology) verses the star, 'the bourgeoisie
in arms' verses the proletariat, a warped 'good' (omega) verses a straight
'bad' (alpha), and for that very reason a doomed cause, insofar as the 'March
of History' demands that the new-brain alpha supersedes the old-brain
omega. However, if Fascism could never
ultimately triumph over Communism, the probability of Social Transcendentalism
doing so, or at any rate triumphing over Communism's democratic successor
(about which more in due course), can only be much greater, insofar as I
envisage this as the ultimate conceptual ideology, the ultimate ideology, and
thus one that, appertaining to the new-brain omega, is as much beyond Communism
as Fascism was before it, the supercross verses the
star, the computer disc verses the film, the civilized proletariat verses the
barbarous proletariat, a supergood verses a
super-evil, conceptual morality verses perceptual immorality, the goal of all
historical striving. No, Fascism was not
alpha but very much a 'bent' omega, a petty-bourgeois extremism which reacted
against the political barbarism of the star, a star-like cross which overlapped
with Socialism while remaining fundamentally capitalist. For Capitalism is a bourgeois (naturalistic)
omega, a relatively moral, because centralized and individualized, mode of
economics, whereas Socialism, particularly in its mass-participatory manifestation
of literal worker ownership of the means of production, is a proletarian
(artificial) alpha, a relatively immoral, because decentralized and
collectivized, mode of economics.
3. Whereas
we used to think that Socialism automatically led to Communism, we now know
that while Communism is beyond democratic socialism, the 'theocratic' socialism
of a social democracy lies beyond Communism.
Socialism is democratic, Communism totalitarian, and while democratic
socialism can only exist within the liberal framework of a capitalist
democracy, 'theocratic' socialism, its proletarian equivalent, will only exist
within the socialist framework of a social democracy, or a democracy in which a
variety of proletarian parties are in socialistic contention beyond the
totalitarian bounds of Communism or, more correctly, Bolshevism. Thus a social democracy can only be
socialist, whereas a liberal democracy will be capitalist - the difference, in
short, between bourgeois and proletarian forms of pluralism. It is good that autocratic Bolshevism
(Stalinism) should, as a new-brain alpha, have been superseded by social
democracy. But such supersession
can only be sustained on the basis of socialist economics, not by any
compromise with Capitalism which, by contrast, would signify a regression from
'Communism' rather than a progression beyond it. However, if democratic socialism, pertaining
to a bourgeois democracy, is anterior to totalitarian communism, and social
democracy, pertaining to a proletarian democracy, posterior to it, then the
only thing that lies beyond social democracy is ... social theocracy, or the
democratic acceptance by the proletariat of religious sovereignty, the ultimate
mode of sovereignty, which will bring about the 'Kingdom of Heaven' and thus
salvation from 'the World', i.e. democratic sovereignty and its judicial and
economic concomitants. Such religious
sovereignty will effectively mean that the proletariat have rights appertaining
to their spiritual self-realization, the right to artificial visionary
experience and regular meditation in specially-built meditation centres not
least among them, and these religious rights would have taken the place of such
political rights as appertained to democratic republicanism. For all such political rights, not to mention
their judicial and economic concomitants, would have to devolve upon the Social
Transcendentalist Centre through its Messianic figurehead, in order that the
proletariat could be saved from them ('sins of the world') and be all the more
credibly divine (as ultimate Godhead) in consequence. Only the political Centre, through its chief
figurehead, would then be politically sovereign, and it would be the duty of
this political Centre to serve the religious sovereignty of the proletariat,
like Moses outside the Promised Land or Christ bearing 'sins of the world', in
their spiritual interests. Hence an
ultimate totalitarianism which will be the logical successor to republican
democracy, a sort of supertheocratic dictatorship
designed to lead and encourage the People out of the 'darkness' of the world
and into the 'light' of Heaven.
4. Speaking
atomically, one could say that, within the old-brain context, dreams correspond
to proton wavicles, thoughts to electron wavicles; fantasies correspond to proton particles, book
reading to electron particles; seeing corresponds to proton-biased neutron
particles, talking to electron-biased neutron particles; visions correspond to
neutron wavicles.
Likewise, within the new-brain context, it could be said that films
correspond to proton wavicles, meditation to electron
wavicles; videos correspond to proton particles,
VDU-reading to electron particles; cameras correspond to proton-biased neutron
particles, voice computers to electron-biased neutron particles; LSD trips
correspond to neutron wavicles. Hence, within the contexts of both the old
and new brains, we find devolution, on the one hand, from proton wavicles to neutrons via proton particles and proton-biased
neutron particles, and an evolution, on the other hand, from neutrons to
electron wavicles via electron-biased neutron
particles and electron particles. A
devolution from negative divine immorality, whether absolute or relative
(depending on the brain context in question) to worldly amorality via negative
diabolic immorality and negative purgatorial amorality on the one hand, and an
evolution from worldly amorality to positive divine morality via positive
purgatorial amorality and positive diabolic immorality on the other hand.
5. Rather
than 'In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was God', it should be said
that 'In the End was the Word and the Word was Truth (the Idea). For 'in the beginning' was the Dream, and the
Dream was God or, depending on your point of view, Strength (the Almighty).
6. Music
is the most conceptual of the Arts, which is to say, the most idealistic,
whereas painting is the most perceptual of the Arts, which is to say, the most
naturalistic. In between these
naturalistic and idealistic extremes, corresponding to alpha and omega, one
finds the realistic and materialistic arts of literature and sculpture
respectively - the former conceptual and the latter perceptual. Put theologically, one could say that music
is the divine art, painting the diabolic art, sculpture the purgatorial art,
and literature the worldly art, given their correspondences to idealism,
naturalism, materialism, and realism respectively, or, in elemental terms, to
air, fire, water, and earth. Thus music
and literature would be as far apart as earth and air, or the world and heaven,
whereas painting and sculpture would be akin to fire and water, or hell and
purgatory, and therefore come in-between the other two arts when considered in
terms of a vertical, or elemental, hierarchy.
In Spenglerian parlance, painting would
correspond to 'Historyless Chaos', literature to 'the
Culture', sculpture to 'the Civilization', and music to 'Second Religiousness',
assuming a chronologically historical progression, as it were, from naturalism
to idealism via realism and materialism.
Thus music is not only the most idealistic art form, it is the ultimate
and final art form, towards which history would seem to tend. And music is never more idealistic than when
highly or even absolutely conceptual, which is to say, when rhythm triumphs
over pitch to a degree which puts it beyond any melodic/harmonic compromise ...
in an intensely rhythmic purism. For in
music, pitch corresponds to the perceptual (is perceptible as notes on scores),
whereas rhythm corresponds to the conceptual (the duration of notes), and the more
conceptual and, hence, essential the society, the less pitch and the more
rhythm will there be. The most evolved
music, which can only be of the Holy Spirit, will be the most rhythmic (though
not necessarily the most percussive), and thus of a degree of centripetal
idealism which is positively divine. In
the twentieth-century cleavage between rhythm and pitch, which typified the
retreat from 'liberal' melodic/harmonic civilization, rhythm was of the omega
and pitch of the alpha, the one effectively centripetal and thus of the Saved,
while the other was effectively centrifugal and thus of the Damned - a cleavage
between theocracy and autocracy, electrons and protons, introvert and
extrovert, conceptual and perceptual, idealism and naturalism, the Holy Spirit
and the Father, profound and superficial, etc., etc. Melody, corresponding to materialism, and
harmony, corresponding to realism, are akin to Christ and the Blessed Virgin
within the vertical axis of 'liberal', or Western, civilization, and thus will
be flanked by the naturalism of pitch and the idealism of rhythm, as Christ is
flanked by the Father and the Holy Spirit within the Blessed Trinity. Thus whereas pitch is a proton equivalent and
rhythm, by contrast, an electron equivalent, melody reflects a proton/electron
compromise, while harmony is a neutron equivalent. In fact, harmony is inherently feminine and
therefore supportive, traditionally, of masculine melody ... as the Blessed
Virgin was (and remains) supportive of Christ.
Only pitch and rhythm, corresponding to the horizontal axis, as it were,
of a sort of Judeo-Eastern civilization (see diagram),
PITCH/MELODY/RHYTHM
(naturalism)(materialism)(idealism)
|
|
|
|
|
|
HARMONY
(realism)
are mutually exclusive or, depending on
your point of view, absolutely antagonistic.
For the more of the one the less there can be of the other, and in the
end rhythm must triumph over pitch if music is to attain to an ultimate
salvation in the most divine idealism.
Verily, the omega supercross (of rhythm) must
triumph over the alpha star (of pitch) and transcend both the purgatorial cross
(of melody) and the worldly star (of harmony), if the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is to
come to pass in musical no less than all other terms!
7. Anyone
familiar with both alpha and omega music, or pitch-oriented and rhythmic
alternatives, will know that whereas the former constrains one to idolatrous
worship and reverential self-transcendence, the latter, by contrast, sets one
free to realize the self in some degree or kind of 'groovy'
self-indulgence. Thus whereas the one is
autocratic, the other can only be theocratic, and there will be all the
difference in the world, or perhaps I should say above it, between these two
kinds of music. Whether one transcends
the self through idolatrous worship of some great pitch-oriented composition,
or realizes the self through 'groovy' response to some great rhythmic
composition, will depend upon whether one is disposed to alpha or to omega,
autocracy or theocracy, the Father or the Holy Ghost, and is thus of the
naturalistic centrifugal or of the idealistic centripetal. Evolution is on the latter's side, but the
former still exists in all 'open societies', where the worship of
pitch-oriented compositions will have especial appeal to those who, as
autocrats, are accustomed to selflessly imposing themselves upon others, and
who can only relate to self-transcendence in consequence.
8. Autocratic
pitch-oriented virtuoso at a grand piano in, say, some concerto or jazz
context. Democratic melodic/harmonic
pianist at an upright piano in, say, some pop or rock context. Theocratic rhythmic pianist at an electric
piano in, say, some soul or funk context.
Perceptual-perceptual/conceptual-conceptual distinctions which range
right across the musical spectrum.
Additionally, one could argue that a harmonic pianist at a baby grand in
some folk or pop context would correspond to a Catholic equivalent, and that
the upright piano should be confined to rock or punk contexts in which melody
predominates over harmony in typically Protestant fashion (see diagram 1).
1.
GRAND
PIANO/UPRIGHT/ELECTRIC PIANO
(Father)(Christ)(Holy
Spirit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
BABY
GRAND
(Virgin Mary)
Thus whereas the harmonic pianist would be
realistic and the melodic pianist materialistic, the pitch-oriented pianist
would be naturalistic and the rhythmic pianist idealistic. An inharmonious type of 'harmonic' playing on
the baby grand would be liberal as opposed to Catholic, whereas an unmelodic
type of 'melodic' playing on an upright piano would be republican as opposed to
Protestant. In the former case, pop as
opposed to folk. In the latter case,
punk as opposed to rock. Likewise it
could be argued that when pitch-oriented virtuoso playing is less regularly
scalar (and thus perceptual) than in concerto playing, it is jazz, which is a
sort of decadent 'classical', whereas when rhythmic playing is less soulful
(and thus conceptual) than in soul, it is funk, which is a kind of decadent
soul music, a rhythmic music that has lost its soul and become soulless (see
diagram 2).
2.
CONCERTO/JAZZ(ROCK/PUNK)SOUL/FUNK
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOLK/POP
In this respect, funk stands to soul as
word processing to teletext, which is to say, as a
kind of particle rather than wavicle omega equivalent
within the artificial terms of their respective contexts. Now what applies to funk in relation to soul
applies just as much to each of the other pairs, viz. jazz in relation to
classical, punk in relation to rock, and pop in relation to folk, which are likewise
particle 'falls' from the wavicle ideal. In terms of the cross and the star, it should
follow that whereas the full-sized grand piano and classical/jazz will
correspond to the superstar (alpha), the baby grand and folk/pop will
correspond to the star (alpha-in-the-omega), the upright piano and rock/punk to
the cross (omega-in-the-alpha), and the electric piano and soul/funk to the supercross (omega), as in diagram 3.
3.
SUPERSTAR/CROSS/SUPERCROSS
(Classical)(Rock)(Soul)
|
|
|
|
|
|
STAR
(Folk)
Although, strictly speaking, religious
references should be confined to classical, folk, rock, and soul, considering
that jazz, pop, punk, and funk correspond to particle falls as opposed to wavicle ideals, and are thus effectively secular and
political, as applying to Communism, Liberalism, Republicanism, and Fascism
respectively (see diagram 4):-
4.
COMMUNISM/REPUBLICANISM/FASCISM
(jazz)(punk)(funk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIBERALISM
(pop)
in contrast to the religious alternatives
of Marxism, Catholicism, Protestantism, and Nietzscheanism
(see diagram 5):-
5.
MARXISM/PROTESTANTISM/NIETZSCHEANISM
(concerto)(rock)(soul)
|
|
|
|
|
|
CATHOLICISM
(folk)
with their musical correspondences, as
described above.
9. Socialism
is of the star, whereas Capitalism, by contrast, is of the cross, insofar as
the former is public and decentralized vis-à-vis the collective, but the latter
is private and centralized vis-à-vis the individual. Socialism is alpha but Capitalism omega, and whereas
both Communism and Liberalism are socialistic, Republicanism and Fascism are
capitalistic. Superstar (alpha) and star
(alpha-in-the-omega) on the one hand, cross (omega-in-the-alpha) and supercross (omega) on the other hand. Or, rather, super-antistar
and antistar on the one hand, (for here we are
dealing with the political, and hence secular, falls from religion), anticross and super-anticross on
the other hand. For, in reality, Marxism
(a paternalistic religious creed) is of the superstar and Catholicism (centred
in the Virgin Mary) of the star.
Protestantism is of the cross (centred in Christ) and Social
Transcendentalism of the supercross (centred in the
Holy Spirit).
10. Impossible
not to see a connection between pro-filmic literature, by which I mean novels
or other prose works of a strongly narrative bent, and trad
jazz, conceiving of the latter as in some sense pro-electronic ... to the
extent that it reflects a strongly rhythmic bias within a largely acoustic, and
hence traditional, musical framework.
Thus a direct parallel between jazz and the popular novel, as, on higher
terms, between, say, rock and film.
11. Realistic
law, materialistic economics, naturalistic politics, and idealistic
religion. Earth, water, fire, and air
equivalents, with worldly, purgatorial, diabolic, and divine connotations
respectively. No less than religion is a
thing of God ... it can be said that politics is a thing of the Devil. Law and economics, by contrast, are of the
world and purgatory respectively, having feminine and masculine connotations
along a sort of Catholic/Protestant or, more correctly, Liberal/Republican axis
... such that, in terms of our T-like framework, would accord with the vertical
rather than the horizontal bar, as follows:-
POLITICS/ECONOMICS/RELIGION
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAW
with politics and religion more alpha and
omega than anything else. Thus whereas
law is dark (earth) and economics cold (water), politics is hot (fire) and
religion light (air). In terms of their
relationship to the arts, law and literature would be no less hand-in-glove
than economics and sculpture, whereas politics and painting would be no less
hand-in-glove than religion and music.
For literature is the realistic art form par excellence, sculpture the materialistic
art form par excellence, painting the naturalistic art form par
excellence, and music the idealistic art form par excellence.
12. Now
that the autocratic star is crumbling towards worldly or, rather, superworldly democracy ... in a majority of those countries
formerly under its centrifugal sway, the ground will soon be ripe for the
planting of the supercross, in order that the People
may be led towards the divine blossoming of a religious sovereignty, and thus
achieve Superchristic salvation (from the world/superworld) in the interests of their spiritual betterment.
13. The
sign of the Messiah is the supercross (Y), which is
intended to eclipse the star. The
political or, rather, politico-religious ideology of the supercross
is Social Transcendentalism - a supra-national ideology which derives its
inspiration from Nietzsche's idea that 'man is something that should be
overcome' ... in the interests of 'the Superman' ... 'the meaning of the
earth', etc., and points towards the possibility of a post-Human
Millennium. It is as a champion of the
notion of religious sovereignty in the masses ... that Social Transcendentalism
stakes and, in my view, justifies its claim to be the true religion of 'Kingdom
Come', a religion so intensely ideological and omega orientated ... as to be in
an idealistic class of its own. Only
through Social Transcendentalism can the People achieve salvation - a condition
of religious sovereignty in a '
14. Speaking
is realistic, writing materialistic, reading naturalistic, and thinking
idealistic - an elemental progression, as it were, from earth to air via water
and fire. It could be said that one
talks in order to write, one writes in order to be read, and one reads in order
to think. Speaking, being bodily in
relation to writing, is of the will; writing, being of the brain in relation to
reading, is of the intellect; reading, being of the mind in relation to
thinking, is of the soul; and thinking, being of the mind in relation to
itself, is of the spirit. Although all
four activities are effectively of the cross instead of the star, since on the
omega-oriented side of life, each of them pertains to the old brain and is
accordingly naturalistic, forming positive amoral and moral conceptual
contrasts to seeing, hallucinating, fantasizing, and dreaming
respectively. For just as seeing and
talking are antithetical on a perceptual/conceptual basis, so are hallucinating
and writing, fantasizing and reading, dreaming and thinking, with worldly,
purgatorial, diabolic, and divine implications.
Treating each context in the T-like framework to which we have grown
accustomed, we shall find the following:-
READING/WRITING/THINKING
|
|
|
|
|
|
TALKING
FANTASIZING/HALLUCINATING/DREAMING
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEEING
with seeing and talking antithetical in
their equivalent realistic (earth) positions, hallucinating and writing
antithetical in their equivalent materialistic (water) positions, fantasizing
and reading antithetical in their equivalent naturalistic (fire) positions, and
dreaming and thinking antithetical in their equivalent idealistic (air)
positions, as between alpha (perceptual) and omega (conceptual) manifestations
of the world, purgatory, hell, and heaven.
Realism is statically amoral (neutron), materialism is dynamically
amoral (proton/electron), naturalism is immoral, both negatively and
positively, and idealism is moral, both negatively and positively, which is to
say, in relation to alpha and to omega.
15. Marxist
idealism, Communist naturalism, Socialist materialism, and Liberal realism - an
alpha-stemming devolutionary regression from the divine to the worldly (superworldly in the context of social democracy) via the
diabolic and the purgatorial, as from religion (theocracy) and politics
(autocracy) to economics (bureaucracy) and law (democracy). Conversely, Capital Democratic realism,
Capitalist materialism, Fascist naturalism, and Nietzschean
idealism - an omega-oriented evolutionary progression from the worldly (superworldly in the context of capitalist democracy) to the
divine via the purgatorial and the diabolic, as from law (democracy) and
economics (bureaucracy) to politics (autocracy) and ideology (theocracy). Hence:-
COMMUNISM/SOCIALISM/MARXISM
|
|
|
|
|
|
SOCIAL
DEMOCRACY
FASCISM/CAPITALISM/NIETZSCHEANISM
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAPITAL
DEMOCRACY
with perceptual (alpha) and conceptual
(omega) implications between the two contexts, divisible, as they are, into the
fourfold antitheses of Social Democracy and Capital Democracy, Socialism and
Capitalism, Communism and Fascism, and Marxism and Nietzscheanism,
in accordance with realistic, materialistic, naturalistic, and idealistic
alternatives broadly within the context of the new brain. Thus a particle/wavicle
distinction between the perceptual, which is public, and the conceptual, which
is private - collectivism and individualism in alpha/omega confrontation. Actually the divine dichotomy is rather more
within the context of an old-brain/new-brain distinction, with omega and alpha
implications. For while Capital
Democracy, Capitalism, Fascism and Nietzcheanism may
all be conceptual, and thus pertain to the wavicle
aspect of a continuum which is both private and individualistic, they are
decidedly naturalistic, and therefore of the old brain in a kind of anterior
rather than posterior moral relation to Social Democracy, Socialism, Communism,
and Marxism, which, by contrast, are effectively super-alpha. The super-omega alternative to the latter has
still to come, but when it does it will have a superconceptual
status pertaining to the supercross, and will ascend
from a superworldly basis in Social Democracy to a superdivine culmination in Loughlinism
via superpurgatorial Centrist and superdiabolic
Social Transcendentalist stages, as in the following diagram:-
SOCIAL
TRANSCENDENTALISM/CENTRISM/LOUGHLINISM
|
|
|
|
|
|
SOCIAL
DEMOCRACY
where Social Democracy is the pluralist context
which permits the politically sovereign People to vote for religious
sovereignty (and thus effectively put an end to democracy), Centrism is the
economic framework whereby the means of production are transferred, by the
sovereign People, to the trusteeship of the Centre, Social Transcendentalism is
the politico-religious manifestation of the ideology of 'Kingdom Come', and Loughlinism is the ideological inspiration and fount from
which Social Transcendentalism draws its justification as the means through
which the People may be lead to salvation from the world ... of Social
Democracy, the democracy in which Social Transcendentalism was permitted to
exist and appeal to the People, in the name of the Second Coming, to vote for
religious sovereignty and thus, by implication, put an end to the democratic
pluralism of Social Democracy in the interests of the supertheocratic
totalitarianism of Social Transcendentalism and the coming to pass of the
'Kingdom of Heaven' on earth.
16. Where,
formerly, I was inclined to see rhythm and pitch in alpha/omega terms, or even
in omega/alpha terms (if my most recent thoughts on the subject of music are
anything to judge by), I now see them as both alpha and omega or, depending on
your standpoint, as neither alpha nor omega specifically, but parallel
quantities which can be either alpha or omega, immoral or moral, depending on
the context, which is to say on whether the rhythm/pitch is outer and
centrifugal or inner and centripetal, apparent or essential. If outer, then we are talking of reactive
musical techniques and instruments. If
inner, we are talking, by contrast, of attractive musical techniques and
instruments. In the former case, for
example, drums and guitars; in the latter case, electronic percussion and keyboards....
Though here, as elsewhere, a distinction between old- and new-brain alpha/omega
divisions has to be borne in mind, so that the outer/inner dichotomy is
perceived as being either absolute or relative, depending on the musical
context. Clearly, while drums are of the
new brain, hand percussion, being more naturalistic, is their old-brain
counterpart, an absolute outer which forms an alpha pole to music boxes, in
which rhythm and pitch are inner to the extent and in the sense that they stem
from the internal workings of the music box and are relatively essential, not
perceptible to the eyes, like the manipulation of hand percussion, but
contained in and surrounded by the music box, which is to the old brain what
drum machines are to the new one - an inner alternative to the outer, and thus
effectively a moral pole to it which, certainly in the case of drum machines,
indicates an absolutely inner, or moral, mode of percussive instrumentation
suitable to a centripetal, and hence
attractive, musical bias commensurate with theocratic as opposed to
autocratic criteria. For in this
distinction between the 'outer' and the 'inner' we have an
autocratic/theocratic dichotomy, germane to alpha and omega, which pertains to
opposite types of music - the former reactive and the latter attractive, the
former centrifugal and the latter centripetal, as, for example, between jazz
and soul. Only when outer and inner
instruments/music are combined in the same musical group/format, can we speak
of a sort of democratic cross between the two extremes. For democracy is effectively a middle ground
in between autocratic and theocratic extremes - a pluralistic relativity in
between totalitarian absolutes, and when, for example, drums and drum machines,
or guitars and violins, or xylophones and pianos, or even saxophones and
electronic wind instruments are found together in the same band, it seems to me
that one has a democratic state-of-affairs existing in-between the
above-mentioned extremes which, while morally and ideologically preferable to
the autocratic, is inferior, as the world vis-à-vis heaven, to the theocratic,
i.e. to a context in which only the inner instruments/musical techniques exist
on both rhythmic and pitch-oriented terms, in deference to a more enlightened, and
hence moral, age - an age of centripetal attractiveness. Thus while bands that embrace keyboards, drum
machines, violins, etc., in addition to reactive instruments, will be ideologically preferable to those which are
rooted in an effectively autocratic format of guitars, drums, vocals, with
perhaps an alpha-stemming wind instrument like the saxophone or an
alpha-stemming keyboard instrument like the xylophone thrown in for good
measure, they can only be ideologically inferior to bands which exclude the
reactive instruments altogether, in fidelity to an omega-oriented centripetal
absolute which avails itself of violins, keyboards, drum machines, synthesized
wind instruments, in pursuit of a more attractive and interiorized kind of
music. Such music, it has to be said,
was rather the exception to the rule in the late-twentieth century, but it is
the only way forwards from democratic compromise, and should eventually come
into its own as theocratic criteria begin to supersede both democratic and
autocratic norms in the interests of heavenly salvation. It will also have to come into its own on
increasingly idealistic and divine-oriented terms, which will slough off the
lower attractive instrument families, including violins and keyboards, in
favour of synthesizers, synthesized wind instruments, and other such higher
attractive instruments germane to a moral-biased naturalistic and/or idealistic
(though preferably idealistic) society.
Doubtless, drum machines will have a significant role to play in this
ultimate music, the funky soul of the future.
But (contrary to what I wrote earlier) rhythm is arguably more
naturalistic than idealistic, and in a truly idealistic society the emphasis
could only be on pitch, since pitch is a wavicle
equivalent commensurate with individualism, and in a society stressing
spiritual self-realization, pitch could only take precedence, for ideological
purposes, over rhythm, especially when percussive, that particle equivalent
more suited to political collectivism, and hence diabolic naturalism, than to
divine idealism. Again, one is made
conscious of a sort of Social Transcendentalist/Loughlinist
distinction between the political and religious sides of the ultimate ideology,
which contrasts absolutely with Marxism/Communism, the religious and political
sides of the alpha-stemming ideology, whose music, whether pitch- or
rhythm-orientated, could only be reactive and centrifugal, as befitting its
autocratic essence. But the star,
fortunately, is being eclipsed by superworldly democracy,
and one day even that will be superseded by the supercross,
as supertheocracy lays claim to the World in the name
of divine salvation and the establishment, thereby, of the omega 'Kingdom of
Heaven', wherein only the attractive will prevail.
17. An
autocratic band, a band under the star, will be one in which bass, guitar, and
drums hold sway to the accompaniment, more usually, of vocals. A theocratic band, a band of the supercross, will be one in which drum machines,
synthesizers, and electric wind instruments of a centripetal design hold sway
to the accompaniment, it may be, of synthesized vocals. A democratic band, or a band in between the
star and the supercross, will be one in which a
combination of reactive and attractive, or autocratic and theocratic,
instruments holds sway to the accompaniment, more usually, of vocals, whether
straight or synthesized. Alpha - world -
omega, with outer - outer/inner - inner rhythmic/pitch implications
respectively. Additionally, one must
allow for the bureaucratic possibility of 'harmonic' instrumentals involving a
variety of 'bodily' instruments, including guitars and violins, in a context
which is a kind of worldly inner of folk/pop instrumentation in which
finger-picking/string-plucking, rather than strumming/bowing, is the technical
norm. Again, in terms of our T-like
design, we would have something as follows:-
AUTOCRATIC/DEMOCRATIC/THEOCRATIC
(jazz)(rock)(soul)
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUREAUCRATIC
(pop)
which, in theological terms, amounts to:-
FATHER/SON/HOLY
GHOST
(protons)(protons/electrons)(electrons)
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIRGIN
MARY
(neutrons)
though this is, of course, a
generalization which currently overlooks particle/wavicle
distinctions between one type of music and another within any given ideological
context. It also tends to concentrate on
the new brain and, by implication, electric instruments rather than on the old
brain and its acoustic instrumental parallels.
18. Like
rhythm and pitch, collectivism and individualism are less alpha and omega
polarities than parallel alternatives which can be either alpha or omega,
centrifugal or centripetal. Royalism is a naturalistic outer form of collectivism,
Fascism a naturalistic inner form of collectivism - alpha and omega of the old
brain. Communism is an artificial outer
form of collectivism, Social Transcendentalism an artificial inner form of
collectivism - alpha and omega of the new brain. Paganism is a naturalistic outer form of
individualism, Christianity a naturalistic inner form of individualism - alpha and
omega of the old brain. Marxism is an
artificial outer form of individualism, Loughlinism
an artificial inner form of individualism - alpha and omega of the new
brain. Individualism is no less superior
to collectivism than religion to politics or, put metaphysically, wavicles to particles, and this is so whether we are
referring to alpha or omega (in whatever brain) or, indeed, to some
'democratic' cross between the two. Royalism and Paganism are alike tribal, Fascism and
Christianity alike nationalist; Marxism and Communism are alike
internationalist, Loughlinism and Social
Transcendentalism alike supra-nationalist.
However, it could also be said that terms like tribalism, nationalism,
internationalism and supra-nationalism are essentially collectivist and
accordingly have more applicability to the collectivity
than to the individual, since they concern society and the nature, whether
outer or inner, of society, which in turn conditions the individualism of its
individual members. For one can no more
completely separate the individual from society than society from the
individual. Societies are composed of
individuals, but individuals are also the products of the society in which they
live, and their individualism is coloured thereby. As unlikely that prayerful individualism
could flourish in a pagan society as meditative individualism in a Marxist
one. Only the outer individualism of
dreams and films respectively, in accordance with the perceptual criteria of
the outer, could be expected to flourish there.
Likewise collectives will be perceptual or conceptual depending on
whether the alpha or omega type of collectivism prevails - perceptual in
Royalist and Communist contexts, conceptual in Fascist and Social
Transcendentalist contexts ... where the word will take precedence over the
visual image in the preservation of collective cohesion. Thus from art to the printed word (book) in
the old-brain context of Royalism/Fascism, and from
photography to the VDU word (computer disc) in the new-brain context of
Communism/Social Transcendentalism.
Through such media the collective psyche of society is forged, but the
collective psyche of society will be of little avail unless supplemented by the
individualized psyche of the individual, and wavicles
accordingly eclipse particles in the achievement of culture:
self-transcendently in the outer contexts of dreams and films, self-realizingly in the inner contexts of prayer and meditation
- alpha barbarism and omega civilization of the old and the new brains respectively.
19. If
nationalism is bourgeois and internationalism proletarian, then
supra-nationalism is proletarian in a civilized, and hence centripetal, rather
than a barbarous, and hence centrifugal, way - the way of unity between
proletarian peoples of different ethnic or cultural traditions. It is for this reason that nationalist
struggles by peoples who reject the federal unity of the broadly proletarian
states against which they are in revolt constitute a reactionary tendency
compatible with bourgeois criteria.
Proletarian progress cannot come from reactionary nationalist
backslidings, but only from greater regional autonomy within the federal
framework of the supra-national State.
Thus it is with a view to granting as much regional autonomy as is commensurate
with the maintenance of the supra-national integrity of the proletarian State
that the prevailing governments should dedicate themselves - difficult though
this may be in the face of countervailing reactionary currents which, in the
guise of bourgeois nationalism, threaten the integrity in question. A difficult balancing act, but one that must
succeed if the worst is not to come to the worst and proletarian progress be
rendered impossible.
20. Socialism
is collective ownership of the means of production by the People (or persons of
any given factory, office, shop, etc.) rather than individual ownership in the
interests of the individual capitalist, who makes private profits in
consequence. A mixed economy between the
private and the public would fall as short of Socialism as a mixed political
pluralism between capitalist and socialist parties inevitably falls short of
Social Democracy. Like Social Democracy,
Socialism has to do with the proletariat, who own the means of production. If at first this was done, in the name of the
proletariat, through state bureaucracy, which effectively functioned as an
autocracy, it must subsequently be done through the proletariat themselves in
accordance with a progression from 'Bolshevik vanguardism'
and state control to Social Democracy and the assumption of economic
responsibility by the proletariat. For
in taking economic, together with political and judicial, power upon themselves
the proletariat are then in a position whereby they, and they alone, can opt to
fob off such 'sins of the world' upon the Messiah (or his chosen
representatives) in return for religious sovereignty, and hence salvation from
their 'sins'. Unless they acquire power
in all contexts, the proletariat will simply
not be in a position to make the historic move from democracy to theocracy,
when the possibility of such a move finally presents itself. They will be under the heel of 'vanguard
autocracy', and while that autocracy may have been historically necessary and
beneficial to the proletariat in the struggle against bourgeois and
aristocratic precedent, its perpetuation could only be an obstacle to the
achievement, by the proletariat themselves, of the democratic power which is
the precondition of theocratic salvation.
For while there is no contiguity between alpha autocracy and omega
theocracy, there is certainly contiguity, and thus the possibility of progress,
between worldly democracy and omega theocracy, the latter of which can only
emerge from the former once the proletariat decide to vote for it, and thus
achieve salvation.
21. Will
Socialism, within the Social Democratic context outlined above, really
work? No, I don't think so. Nor do I think it would ultimately be desirable,
since the proletariat would then bog down, as it were, within the bodily
darkness of a superworldly context, and probably be
unwilling to make the move towards theocratic salvation. Yet, as a short-term expedience, its value is
incontrovertible, and the achievement of Social Democracy is of the utmost
historical importance. Only, we should
perhaps see it more in terms of a transition (from new-brain autocracy) than as
an end-in-itself. For if it could work,
it would most certainly be an end-in-itself and not, as I believe, a means to a
greater end - the end, namely, of Social Transcendentalism and the concomitant
assumption, by the proletariat, of religious sovereignty.
22. There
are people who foolishly divide the brain into left and right hemispheres and
leave it at that, as though there was nothing more to it than logic and
sentience. There are others who just as
foolishly divide it into backbrain and forebrain, as
though it was simply torn between dreams and awareness. Both are equally wrong. For in reality the brain is divisible into
both the former and
the latter, being
akin to the fourfold divisions of the elements, as indeed of the many other
divisions we have already investigated (see, for example, the Critique of Post-Dialectical Idealism)
with the help, by any large, of our T-like framework - a framework which serves
just as well in this context, viz:-
BACKBRAIN/LEFT
BRAIN/FOREBRAIN
|
|
|
|
|
|
RIGHT
BRAIN
where we have a vertical axis of left- and
right-brain hemispheres, contrasted to which we find a horizontal axis of backbrain and forebrain hemispheres, the former axis
relative, by and large, to Western, though in particular Anglo-Saxon,
civilization, and the latter axis relative to non-Western, though in particular
Third World, countries, which are rather more disposed to alpha/omega
distinctions than to worldly and purgatorial ones corresponding, in theological
terms, to the Blessed Virgin and to Christ.
Thus if the right brain can be equated, in such terms, with the Blessed
Virgin, and the left brain with Christ, then it behoves us to equate the backbrain with the Father (Creator) and the forebrain with
the Holy Spirit, thereby affirming an allegiance both anterior and posterior to
the left-brain/right-brain divisions.
Treated diagrammatically, we shall find the following:-
THE
FATHER/THE SON/THE HOLY SPIRIT
(backbrain)(left
brain)(forebrain)
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE
BLESSED VIRGIN
(right brain)
with, broadly, naturalistic,
materialistic, idealistic, and realistic implications, as we proceed through
the Trinity on the one hand, and then down to the Blessed Virgin on the
other. Actually, history proceeds rather
more on the basis of naturalism (the Father) to realism (the Blessed Virgin) on
the one hand, and from materialism (Christ) to idealism (the Holy Spirit) on
the other, so that we start with a backbrain emphasis
and proceed to a right-brain one. After
which time, corresponding to the rise of Protestantism at the expense of
Catholicism, we have a left-brain emphasis which is destined to be eclipsed or,
at any rate, superseded by the forebrain, as the Holy Spirit eclipses Christ,
and 'Civilization', in Spenglerian parlance, gives
way to 'Second Religiousness', to the meditative self-realization which is no
mere identification with nature (contrary to the almost Buddhist sentience of
right-brain realism) but a supra-natural transcendence of the world which is
its own goal and justification. Thus
whereas the right brain is integral to the world, the forebrain has the
capacity to lift one beyond it in the interests of spiritual salvation. For it is the forebrain which is commensurate
with the utmost superconsciousness, just as, in
contrast to the left brain, the backbrain is
commensurate with the utmost subconsciousness and,
hence, dreamy immanence. The right
brain, by contrast, is less subconscious than conscious in a subconscious
manner, i.e. sensual and sentient, whereas the left brain is less superconscious than conscious in a superconscious
manner, which is to say, logical and rational, a profoundly intellectual part
of the brain which contrasts, as Christ to the Virgin, with the wilful
sentience of the right brain. Of course,
what applies in this religious context applies no less in the secular, or
political one underneath, where we are concerned with the 'anti' manifestations
of each of the four divisions, and which accordingly take a particle rather
than a wavicle manifestation commensurate with the
secular (the collective). For there is
an Antichristic left brain no less than a Christic one, and while the latter is commensurate with
love and goodness, the former, by contrast, will be commensurate with hate and
evil, as befitting a sort of Protestant/Republican cleavage in the left, or
logical, brain between wavicle and particle, positive
and negative poles. Now what applies to
the left brain also applies to the right one, with the religious/secular
cleavage in question taking a Catholic/Liberal guise, as befitting a distinction
between beauty and pleasure on the one hand (the Blessed Virgin) and ugliness
and pain on the other hand (the Antivirgin). Thus whereas goodness and love/evil and hate
appertain to the left brain, beauty and pleasure/ugliness and pain just as
surely appertain to the right brain, albeit on the basis of a
positive/negative, wavicle/particle division. Similarly, whereas the backbrain
is divisible between strength and pride on the wavicle
side, that of the Creator as it were, its particle side takes the form of a
division between weakness and humiliation, as befitting the Antifather
(read: Satan). Now whereas the forebrain
is divisible between truth and joy on the wavicle
side, that of the Holy Spirit, its particle side takes the form of a division
between falsity and woe, as befitting the Antispirit
(read: Marx). Thus strength and
pride/weakness and humiliation appertain to the backbrain
no less than truth and joy/falsity and woe to the forebrain. For each component of the overall brain has
its own positive and negative extremes, and can be known accordingly. Were this not so, how could we distinguish
between good and evil, right and wrong, or have any sense of moral direction or
ideological distinctions? We can no more
heap all the quantitative and qualitative attributes of the brain together in
one place ... than accord the Father, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Blessed
Virgin an equal status. What may be
relevant to a given people at one point in time may become quite irrelevant to
them at another point. We change to
live, and live to evolve. Thus whereas
strength and pride/weakness and humiliation are of the backbrain,
they are naturalistic attributes ever pertinent to the alpha. Whereas beauty and pleasure/ugliness and pain
are of the right brain, they are realistic attributes ever pertinent to the
worldly. Whereas goodness and love/evil
and hatred are of the left brain, they are materialistic attributes ever
pertinent to the purgatorial. And
whereas truth and joy/falsity and woe are of the forebrain, they are idealistic
attributes ever pertinent to the omega.
The only difference is that in the one case, that of the positive
attributes, we are dealing with religious wavicles,
whereas in the other case, that of the negative attributes, we are dealing with
secular particles.
23. It
seems to me that whereas trad jazz is essentially nazistic in its acoustic introversion, modern jazz is
fundamentally communistic in its electric extroversion. A distinction, if you will, between joy/truth
in the one context, and pride/strength in the other - the former a naturalistic
omega, the latter an artificial alpha. Trad jazz avails itself of traditional acoustic
instruments, including string basses, and plays them in a decadent or
particle-biased (plucking) manner.
Modern jazz avails, by contrast, of contemporary electric instruments,
including guitars, and plays them in a particle-biased manner. Thus we have a distinction, it seems to me,
between bourgeois decadence (the broken cross) and proletarian barbarism (the
modern star); between, for example, the plucking or pizzicato playing of
acoustic instruments and the plucking of electric ones - the technique, in each
case, reactive and hence centrifugal, albeit in the acoustic case stemming from
a centripetal (bowing) tradition. A
sexual parallel to the above Nazi/Communist distinction would, I believe,
involve oral sex on the one hand and masturbation on the other, since the one
is essentially extreme centripetal whereas the other is extreme centrifugal,
with the suggestion of a naturalistic/artificial distinction between couples
and films, or the use thereof.
24. Where
formerly I would have thought of the aggressive proletarian slang-words 'cunt' and 'prick', so often used in books/films and on the
street these days, in a sort of alpha/omega sense, I now find that I am
disposed to regarding them in relation to the vertical axis, as it were, of the
world/purgatory, the Blessed Virgin/Christ, realism/materialism, earth/water,
etc., so that the word 'cunt' conveys a worldly
connotation and 'prick', by contrast, a lunar one, as between, say, Liberals
and Republicans. Both are applicable, it
seems, to Anglo-American civilization, and whereas a person described in regard
to the former term of abuse tends to have a parting in his hair, those defined
in regard to the latter don't, since their hair is brushed back from the
forehead. Thus 'cunts'
and 'pricks' are confined more to the Christian West than to either what
preceded it in the pagan past or to what may succeed it in the transcendental
future. It should also be noted that 'cunts' and 'pricks' are terms of abuse with rather more
reference to bourgeois, or middle-class, elements within this civilization than
to its proletarian, or working-class, elements, who are more usually derided in
terms of 'arseholes' (the American word 'asshole' is of course an equivalent
term of abuse) and 'sods' respectively - the former worldly and the latter
lunar (purgatorial). In this respect, it
could be argued that 'arseholes' and 'sods' appertain rather more to Liberalism
and Republicanism respectively than to, say, Catholicism and Protestantism,
given the more decadent and particle-biased nature of the former phenomena and
their correspondence to the sexuality in question, which is less bourgeois than
proletarian, less biased towards the wavicle than
towards the particle, and less religious than secular. The only apparent difference between a 'cunt' and an 'arsehole', given their similarly-parted
hairstyles, would be in regard to the wearing of a collar shirt without tie in
the one case, that of the 'cunt', and a T-shirt
hanging loosely in the other case, that of the 'arsehole', whereas the
'prick'/'sod' distinction above would be no less sartorially apparent on the
basis, given their non-parted combed-back hair, of a tie-and-collar/tucked-in
T-shirt dichotomy. Thus whereas the 'cunt'/'prick' is a shirt man, the 'arsehole'/'sod' is a
T-shirt man.
25. While
on the subject of hair, it should be possible for us to distinguish, further to
the above parted/non-parted styles, a sort of alpha/omega, or horizontal,
dichotomy between non-parted hair that is centrifugal, and hence worn in a kind
of pudding-basin style, and non-parted hair that is centripetal, and hence tied
back in a ponytail. Both these latter
kinds of hairstyle are outside the official pale of Anglo-American
civilization, since they are neither Catholic/Liberal nor Protestant/Republican
in character, but pertain, in their antithetically absolutist ways, to
autocratic and theocratic options which, depending on their length, will be
either anterior or posterior to its essentially democratic essence - anterior
if very long, posterior if relatively short, and hence of the new brain rather
than the old one.
