OPEN
AND ENCLOSED AS FREE AND BOUND
The Skull & Crossbones, being X-shaped, is
every bit as bad, if not worse, than the nazi
swastika. Blackbeard
= Hitler.
Schopenhauer was wrong about females being
number two of the human kind. Males are.
The Union Jack, national flag of
The Scottish flag, the so-called Cross of St
Andrew, is X-like in its bisecting diagonals and therefore reminiscent of the diagonal
clash of swords that one would identify with battle and strife, as though an
abstraction thereof.
In relation to females, open-toed high heels go
with a flounced dress as a metachemical mean;
open-toed low heels go with a flounced skirt as a chemical mean; enclosed-toe
low heels go with a tight skirt as a pseudo-chemical mean; and enclosed-toe
high heels go with a tight dress as a pseudo-metachemical
mean.
High heels, whether open or enclosed, alpha or
omega, sensual or sensible, summery or wintry, are upper order, or noumenal, ethereal, absolute; low heels, whether open or
enclosed, alpha or omega, etc., are lower order, or phenomenal, corporeal,
relative.
One fancies that large-breasted females have
more of a right to high heels than their small-breasted counterparts. As also to dresses as opposed to skirts.
Open societies, like open-toed heels, are
alpha, heathenistic, female-dominated, sensual;
enclosed societies, like enclosed-toe heels, are omega, christianistic,
male-dominated, sensible.
This is not, however, a distinction between
‘left’ and ‘right’, which is rather more axial in character. ‘Left’ and ‘right’ are not in overall axial
polarity in relation to the hegemonic factors; they pertain, above all, to
opposite axes.
Extreme Right = Upper Class; Moderate Right =
Middle Class; Moderate Left = Lower Class; Extreme Left = Classless.
Hence an upper-class/middle-class polarity,
characterizing the hegemonic axial positions, between metachemistry
and physics, science and economics, noumenal female
and phenomenal male. But a
lower-class/classless polarity, again characteristic of the hegemonic axial
positions, between chemistry and metaphysics, politics and religion, phenomenal
female and noumenal male.
The church-hegemonic axis stretching from the
southwest to the northeast points of the intercardinal
axial compass, being hegemonically political and
religious, is illustrative of a polarity between moderate and extreme left-wing
positions.
The state-hegemonic axis stretching from the
northwest to the southeast points of the intercardinal
axial compass, being hegemonically scientific and
economic, is illustrative of a polarity between extreme and moderate right-wing
positions.
In overall axial terms, left-wing societies are
more psyche than soma, mind than body; right-wing ones … more soma than psyche,
body than mind. This is because females,
whether hegemonically or subversively, dominate
state-hegemonic and males, by contrast, church-hegemonic societies.
In overall hegemonic terms, the state-hegemonic
polarity between science and economics is equivalent to an Extreme
Right/Moderate Right polarity between autocracy and plutocracy, with, in
subordinate terms, pseudo-religion and pseudo-politics indicative of a
pseudo-Extreme Left/pseudo-Moderate Left polarity between pseudo-theocracy
(aristocracy) and pseudo-democracy (meritocracy).
In overall hegemonic terms, the
church-hegemonic polarity between politics and religion is equivalent to a
Moderate Left/Extreme Left polarity between democracy and theocracy, with, in
subordinate terms, pseudo-economics and pseudo-science indicative of a
pseudo-Moderate Right/pseudo-Extreme Right polarity between pseudo-plutocracy
(bureaucracy) and pseudo-autocracy (technocracy).
The polarity between autocratic science and
plutocratic economics is indirect, i.e. of a female/male character, as is that
between pseudo-theocratic pseudo-religion (pseudo-male) and pseudo-democratic
pseudo-politics (pseudo-female), whereas the polarity between autocratic
science and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics is direct, i.e. of a
female/pseudo-female character, as is that between pseudo-theocratic
pseudo-religion (pseudo-male) and plutocratic economics (male).
The polarity between democratic politics and theocratic
religion is indirect, i.e. of a female/male character, as is that between
pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics (pseudo-male) and pseudo-autocratic
pseudo-science (pseudo-female), whereas the polarity between democratic
politics and pseudo-autocratic pseudo-science is direct, i.e. of a
female/pseudo-female character, as is that between pseudo-plutocratic
pseudo-economics (pseudo-male) and theocratic religion (male).
The primary state-hegemonic polarity, being
female, is between autocratic science, the Extreme Right, and pseudo-democratic
pseudo-politics, the pseudo-Moderate Left, whereas the secondary
state-hegemonic polarity, being male, is between pseudo-theocratic
pseudo-religion, the pseudo-Extreme Left, and plutocratic economics, the
Moderate Right.
The primary church-hegemonic polarity, being
male, is between pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics, the pseudo-Moderate
Right, and theocratic religion, the Extreme Left, whereas the secondary
church-hegemonic polarity, being female, is between democratic politics, the
Moderate Left, and pseudo-autocratic pseudo-science, the pseudo-Extreme Right.
Science, being metachemical,
is more about Doing than Being; religion, being metaphysical, more about Being
than Doing; politics, being chemical, is more about Giving than Taking;
economics, being physical, more about Taking than Giving.
Pseudo-science, being pseudo-metachemical, is more about Pseudo-Doing than Pseudo-Being;
pseudo-religion, being pseudo-metaphysical, more about pseudo-Being than
pseudo-Doing; pseudo-politics, being pseudo-chemical, is more about
pseudo-Giving than pseudo-Taking; pseudo-economics, being pseudo-physical, more
about pseudo-Taking than pseudo-Giving.
Doing prevails over pseudo-Being as metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics, science over
pseudo-religion, autocracy over pseudo-theocracy, at the northwest point of the
intercardinal axial compass, where females, being
unequivocally hegemonic, dominate pseudo-males in primary state-hegemonic
terms.
Taking prevails over pseudo-Giving as physics
over pseudo-chemistry, economics over pseudo-politics, plutocracy over
pseudo-democracy, at the southeast point of the intercardinal
axial compass, where males are equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-females but
are effectively subverted by pseudo-females to somatic emphasis at the behest
of metachemical females in secondary state-hegemonic
terms.
Giving prevails over pseudo-Taking as chemistry
over pseudo-physics, politics over pseudo-economics, democracy over
pseudo-plutocracy, at the southwest point of the intercardinal
axial compass, where females are equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-males but
are effectively subverted by pseudo-males to psychic emphasis at the behest of
metaphysical males in secondary church-hegemonic terms.
Being prevails over pseudo-Doing as metaphysics
over pseudo-metachemistry, religion over
pseudo-science, theocracy over pseudo-autocracy, at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, where males, being
unequivocally hegemonic, dominate pseudo-females in primary church-hegemonic
terms.
Open and enclosed are correlative factors at
all points of the intercardinal axial compass, though
the openness can be somatic (female) or psychic (male) and the enclosedness psychic (male) or female (somatic), depending
on the elemental/pseudo-elemental positions.
Hence the somatic openness of noumenal objectivity in metachemistry
has to be seen in relation to the psychic enclosedness
of noumenal pseudo-subjectivity in
pseudo-metaphysics, where bound psyche prevails over free soma in the ratio of
3:1, the converse of the metachemical position.
Hence the somatic openness of phenomenal
objectivity in chemistry has to be seen in relation to the psychic enclosedness of phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity in
pseudo-physics, where bound psyche prevails over free soma in the ratio of
2½:1½, the converse of the chemical position.
Hence the psychic openness of phenomenal
subjectivity in physics has to be seen in relation to the somatic enclosedness of phenomenal pseudo-objectivity in pseudo-chemistry,
where bound soma prevails over free psyche in the ratio of 2½:1½, the converse
of the physical position.
Hence, finally, the psychic openness of noumenal subjectivity in metaphysics has to be seen in
relation to the somatic enclosedness of noumenal pseudo-objectivity in pseudo-metachemistry,
where bound soma prevails over free psyche in the ratio of 3:1, the converse of
the metaphysical position.
Just as autocracy unequivocally holds dominion over
pseudo-theocracy (aristocracy), so the equivocally hegemonic dominance of
pseudo-democracy (meritocracy) by plutocracy is subverted to a secondary
state-hegemonic position in relation to the primary state-hegemonic polarity
between autocratic science and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics on the female
side of the gender divide, as between metachemistry
and pseudo-chemistry.
Just as theocracy unequivocally holds dominion
over pseudo-autocracy (technocracy), so the equivocally hegemonic dominance of
pseudo-plutocracy (bureaucracy) by democracy is subverted to a secondary
church-hegemonic position in relation to the primary church-hegemonic polarity
between theocratic religion and pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics on the male
side of the gender divide, as between metaphysics and pseudo-physics.