1. We have established, in recent texts, a clear-cut distinction between the rising axis of a church hegemonic - coupled to a state subordinate - society, as in Eire, and the falling axis of a state hegemonic - coupled to a church subordinate - society, as in Britain and, in particular, England, the land of autocracy and the plutocratic subversion of democracy par excellence.

2. This rising axis of sin to grace on the one hand, that of meritocracy-theocracy, and of pseudo-punishment to pseudo-crime on the other hand, that of bureaucracy-technocracy, has been characterized as signifying an overall male-hegemonic situation in which theocracy effectively conditions the acceptance of sin in the meritocratic 'below' in the interests of its own grace, and therefore effectively overcomes 'the world' of what would otherwise, in the more narrowly female-hegemonic nature of water over vegetation (earth) in the sensual realms of bureaucracy and meritocracy, be characterized, in due objective fashion, by relative crime.

3. Contrariwise, the falling axis of crime to punishment on the one hand, that of autocracy-plutocracy, and of pseudo-grace to pseudo-sin on the other hand, that of aristocracy-democracy, has been characterized as signifying an overall female-hegemonic situation in which autocracy effectively conditions the acceptance of punishment in the plutocratic 'below' in the interests of its own crime, and therefore effectively overcomes 'the world' of what would otherwise, in the more narrowly male-hegemonic nature of vegetation (earth) over water in the sensible realms of democracy over plutocracy, be characterized, in due subjective fashion, by relative grace.

4. Therefore we have found that there are two approaches to 'world overcoming' - the omega-aspiring theocratic approach which upends the terms of reference of the sensual 'below' ... of bureaucracy and meritocracy in its own graceful interests, and the alpha-stemming autocratic approach which upends the terms of reference of the sensible 'below' ... of democracy and plutocracy in the interests of crime, albeit its interests are distinctly metachemical and fiery rather than metaphysical and airy, and therefore stand in an antithetical light to the interests of theocracy, and pretty much as the outer light to the inner light.

5. For if you ascend from sin to grace in primary, or church-hegemonic, terms and from pseudo-punishment to pseudo-crime in secondary, or state-subordinate, terms you effectively ascend from the outer darkness to the inner light, as though from the church sinful to the church graceful, with the pseudo-punishment and pseudo-crime of the subordinate states likewise reflecting this subjective orientation of male-hegemonic criteria.

6. But if you descend from crime to punishment in primary, or state-hegemonic, terms and from pseudo-grace to pseudo-sin in secondary, or church-subordinate, terms you effectively descend from the outer light to the inner darkness, as though from the state criminal to the state punishing, with the pseudo-grace and pseudo-sin of the subordinate churches likewise reflecting this objective orientation of female-hegemonic criteria.

7. Clearly, to ascend from sin to grace is to ascend from a genuine church in meritocracy to a genuine church in theocracy, with the corollary of a pseudo-state in bureaucracy and a pseudo-state in technocracy which are conditioned, contrary to genuine states, by subjective criteria appertaining to the hegemonic churches, or contrary aspects of the Church, so that they remain largely pseudo-punishing and pseudo-criminal in consequence.

8. Likewise, to descend from crime to punishment is to descend from a genuine state in autocracy to a genuine state in democracy or, rather, plutocracy, with the corollary of a pseudo-church in aristocracy and a pseudo-church in democracy which are conditioned, contrary to genuine churches, by objective criteria appertaining to the hegemonic states, or contrary aspects of the State, so that they remain largely pseudo-graceful and pseudo-sinful in consequence.

9. Fear of the dark will not be a characteristic of the rising axis of, in primary terms, sin to grace, but of the falling axis of, in primary terms, crime to punishment, the outer light of metachemical sensuality to the inner darkness of chemical sensibility; for the outer light lives in fear of the inner darkness, whether in the primary terms of state-hegemonic autocracy-plutocracy or in the secondary terms of church-subordinate aristocracy-democracy, wherein the fear is of the devil of pseudo-sin rather than of the justice of punishment.

10. But if fear of the sensible darkness is characteristic of the sensual light, then hope of the sensible light, the inner light, is what most characterizes the outer darkness, the sensual darkness, of both sin and, in subordinate vein, pseudo-punishment, as physical sensuality longs for the peace of metaphysical sensibility, wherein the unholiness of sin is redeemed by the grace of God and the injustice of pseudo-punishment by the pseudo-crime of the Law.

11. Yes, no less surely than 'the unlawful' live in fear of Justice and 'the ungodly' in fear of the Devil, so, in contrary vein, do 'the unholy' live in hope of God and 'the unjust' in hope of the Law; for 'the criminal' can be sentenced down to punishment and 'the pseudo-graceful' damned down to pseudo-sin no less surely than 'the sinful' can be saved up to grace and 'the unjust' released up to pseudo-crime.

12. Therefore hope by those in the outer darkness for the inner light is no less characteristic of the diagonally rising axis which proceeds from sin and pseudo-punishment 'down below' to grace and pseudo-crime 'up above' than ... fear by those in the outer light for the inner darkness is characteristic of the diagonally falling axis which proceeds or, rather, recedes from crime and pseudo-grace 'up above' to punishment and pseudo-sin 'down below'.

13. Those who live in the outer light of a metachemical hegemony must ever fear the inner darkness of a sensibly chemical (antichemical) punishment which, paradoxically, has been engineered - at the expense of physics - by the metachemically criminal in the interests of power, not least their own.

14. Those, by contrast, who live in the outer darkness of a sensually physical (antiphysical) sin should ever remain in hope of the inner light of a metaphysical hegemony the theocratic proponents of which, paradoxically, have engineered - at the expense of chemistry - such sin in the interests of grace, their own not excepted.

15. I brought in the terms 'antichemical' as shorthand for chemically sensible and 'antiphysical' for physically sensual in the above aphorisms and, to be sure, thinking in terms of a diagonal rise from antiphysics to metaphysics and of a diagonal fall from metachemistry to antichemistry is helpful in drawing attention to the kind of paradoxes which obtain in the respective 'belows' by dint of contrary conditioning influences from 'above', not least in respect of the sidelining of chemistry in the one context and of physics in the other, so that the nominal hegemony of female over male in respect of chemistry and antiphysics, volumetric volume over massive mass, and of male over female in respect of physics and antichemistry, voluminous volume over massed mass, is overturned in 'world-overcoming' vein by the respective conditioning factors 'above', with metaphysics and antiphysics confirming the male-hegemonic prevalence of grace and sin at the expense of chemical crime in the one case, and metachemistry and antichemistry confirming the female-hegemonic prevalence of crime and punishment at the expense of physical grace in the other case.

16. Treating each axis separately, it can be maintained that the antiphysical to metaphysical diagonally rising axis of sin and grace - to take its primary aspects alone - is equivalent to antihumanism vis-à-vis transcendentalism or, in slang parlance, to 'fuck*** antipricks' vis-à-vis 'snogg*** bums', since we are dealing with the preconditions of an approach to, or hope of, God which presupposes an antihumanist willingness to undergo self-overcoming in the interests of that enhancement of self which is commensurate with grace and is avowedly universal rather than personal or, in this instance, what could, in antiphysical vein, be called antipersonal.

17. On the other hand it must be maintained that, in like primary terms, the metachemical to antichemical diagonally falling axis of crime and punishment is equivalent to materialism vis-à-vis antirealism or, in slang parlance, to 'frigg*** jerks' vis-à-vis 'suck*** anticunts', since we are dealing with the preconditions of an approach to, or fear of, Justice which presupposes a materialist unwillingness to undergo not-self overcoming in the interests of that reduction of not-self which is commensurate with punishment and is avowedly anti-impersonal rather than impersonal or, in this instance, polyversal.

18. One can see from the above aphorism how important it is that the reader should have familiarized himself with preceding texts in order to understand the distinction between terms like 'polyversal' and 'universal' on the one hand, and 'impersonal' and 'personal' on the other, quite apart from their 'anti' versions which slot in subordinately to the prevailing reality and/or ideality, as the case may be; for I cannot repeat myself from text to text except in a sketchy and passing manner in order to be able to push ahead with new material or further develop such material as already exists.

19. Therefore the reader should be aware that the polyversal and the metachemical (not to mention the antipolyversal and the antimetachemical) are as intertwined as the universal and the metaphysical (not to mention the anti-universal and the antimetaphysical), while, 'down below', the impersonal and the chemical are as deeply intertwined as the personal and the physical or, for that matter, the antipersonal and the antiphysical, not to mention the anti-impersonal and the antichemical.

20. And he will know too, if he has read as advised, that being anti-self is as contrary to being pro-self in relation to sin and grace ... as being pro-notself is contrary to being anti-notself in relation to crime and punishment, where the overall dichotomy between the theocratic struggle against chemical soma in the interests of psychic freedom and the autocratic struggle against physical psyche in the interests of somatic freedom is what chiefly differentiates the two axial contexts - that of the male-hegemonic diagonally rising axis on the one hand, in which bureaucracy is subverted by meritocracy at theocracy's graceful behest, and that of the female-hegemonic diagonally falling axis on the other hand, in which democracy is subverted by plutocracy at autocracy's criminal behest.

21. Therefore just as being sinfully anti-self follows from the subversion of chemical not-self by antiphysical self acting under the lead of an omega-oriented inner light of metaphysical self, so being punishingly anti-notself follows from the subversion of physical self by antichemical not-self acting under the rule of an alpha-stemming outer light of metachemical not-self, so that in the one case the antiphysical self is twisted against itself by dint of its relationship to the chemical not-self, whilst in the other case the antichemical not-self is twisted against itself by dint of its relationship to the physical self, neither of which are free to be 'true' to themselves in respect of either relatively pro-self or pro-notself behaviour but, in binding their relatively criminal and graceful antagonists of the chemical and physical planes above, function at cross-purposes with themselves in the paradoxical manners described.

22. But such is the price of theocratically maintaining sin at the expense of crime in the one context, that of meritocracy and bureaucracy, and autocratically maintaining punishment at the expense of grace in the other context, that of plutocracy and democracy, so that each manifestation of 'the world' is overcome in diametrically opposite fashions, whether with regard to the autocratic ideal of criminal freedom (to which is bound the pseudo-grace of the aristocratic church) on the one hand, or with regard to the theocratic ideal of graceful freedom (to which is bound the pseudo-crime of the technocratic state) on the other hand.

23. One could characterize the descending axis of state-hegemonic criteria in respect of crime and punishment as being equivalent to the female chromosomal reality of 'XX', in which a double negativity, analogous to fire and water (photons and electrons?), exists by dint of the vacuously-conditioned objective orientation of both the autocratic state and the plutocratic state, whereas the ascending axis of church-hegemonic criteria in respect of sin and grace could be characterized as being equivalent to the male chromosomal reality of 'XY', in which something approximating to a double positivity or, at any rate, to an anti-negative and effectively pro-positive neutrality coupled to a positivity, analogous to vegetation and air (neutrons and protons?), exists by dint of the plenumously-conditioned subjective orientation of both the meritocratic church and the theocratic church which, contrary to their axial antitheses, tend to operate in the indirect terms of a curvilinear divergence (sensuality) or convergence (sensibility) rather than in the direct terms, vacuously conditioned, of a rectilinear divergence (sensuality) or convergence (sensibility).

24. Be that as it may, there can be no question that whereas the descending axis is characterized by female-hegemonic criteria in which anything 'XY' is dominated by 'XX', even to the extent of the 'Y' of church-subordinate pseudo-grace and the 'X' of church-subordinate pseudo-sin being consigned to an inferior status vis-à-vis the prevailing autocratic and plutocratic factors which proclaim the primacy of crime and punishment, the ascending axis, by contrast, is characterized by male-hegemonic criteria in which anything 'XX' is sidelined, if not exactly dominated, by 'XY', even to the extent of the 'X' of state-subordinate pseudo-punishment and the 'X' of state-subordinate pseudo-crime being consigned to an inferior status vis-à-vis the prevailing meritocratic and theocratic factors which proclaim the primacy of sin and grace.

25. But no less than sin and grace cannot exist without pseudo-punishment and pseudo-crime in the shadow 'XX' to the prevailing 'XY' of male-oriented criteria in respect of a hegemonic church, so crime and punishment cannot exist without pseudo-grace and pseudo-sin in the shadow 'XY' to the prevailing 'XX' of female-oriented criteria in respect of a hegemonic state.