1.
Anyone who has followed the evolution of my thinking thus far would be aware
that I have developed a concept of dialectical interaction in the explanation
of the historical process, in relation to the development of civilization, which
differs quite substantially from, say, Hegel or Marx, those, in many respects,
forerunners of my own philosophical development in this regard. For it is
not simply the case that thesis plus antithesis equals synthesis, or that a
consequence of the interaction of thesis with antithesis is a sort of synthetic
fusion which yet transcends the dialectical struggle whether in terms of
idealism, as with Hegel, or materialism, as with Marx, but, rather, in contrast
to any such simplistic deduction, that something corresponding to a thesis
subsequently engenders an antithesis which becomes the starting point for or
catalyst of a new thesis which exists in a synthetic relationship to the
preceding antithesis.
2.
I have described this process in terms of an action leading to a reaction which
in turn becomes the subject of an attraction which, as the basis of a new
action, subsequently engenders another reaction, and so on, in a dialectical
process which involves both progression and regression, centro-complexification
and de-centralization, evolution and devolution, in relation to either positive
or negative stages of civilized development.
3.
We may, however, equate the action with a thesis, the reaction with an
antithesis, and the attraction with a synthesis, and thus arrive at a process
of dialectical interaction which explains, more fully and, I believe, credibly
than either Hegelian or Marxian dialectics, the historical process, as bearing
upon the development of civilization, as from an alpha point in the past to a
hypothetical omega point in the future.
4. For I have contended that civilization begins
positively, with birth, and concludes positively, with birth, albeit on
diametrically antithetical terms, while in between come a series of alternations
between death and birth which constitute intermediate manifestations of
negative and positive development.
5.
Furthermore the distinction between positivity and negativity isn't necessarily
commensurate with progress on the one hand and regress on the other, nor is
reaction to an action, the antithetical retort to a thesis, necessarily
negative and/or regressive. For what determines whether something is
progressive or regressive is not its affiliation with positivity or negativity,
birth or death, but whether it conforms to centro-complexification in relation
to de-centralization, evolution in relation to devolution, in which case it is
progressive, or whether, on the contrary, it conforms to de-centralization in
relation to centralization, devolution in relation to evolution, in which case,
quite obviously, it will be regressive.
6.
Let us look into this matter in more detail. We began, you may recall,
with the contention that civilization began liberally, in de-centralized vein,
and subsequently embraced a centralizing tendency commensurate with
totalitarianism, as though in a distinction between Hinduism and Judaism,
polytheism and monotheism. I would call this early civilization pagan in
character, because it has more to do with free soma than with either bound
psyche, bound soma, or free psyche; more to do, in other words, with the
freedom of Devil the Mother conceived as that which most corresponds to free
soma within civilized contexts, or societies, that are more cosmic than
naturalistic or humanistic or cyborgistic, and which consequently tend to
orientate their religious devotions, their worship, towards the most dominant
and characteristic elements of the Cosmos, which happen to be stellar bodies.
7.
Be that as it may, any distinction between liberalism and totalitarianism,
polytheism and monotheism, in relation to somatic freedom of a broadly
metachemical order, the order most affiliated to stellar bodies in the Cosmos,
will have reference not only to positivity, the positivity of a stage of
civilization corresponding to the birth of Devil the Mother, to worship of
Devil the Mother hyped as God, but once that distinction is understood to
embrace both thesis and antithesis, action and reaction, in relation to somatic
freedom of a metachemical order, also to a progression from the liberal version
of paganism to its totalitarian version, as indeed from Hinduism to Judaism,
commensurate with a shift, where applicable, from cosmic polytheism to cosmic
monotheism, such that enables us to infer a progression, correlatively, from
de-centralization to centralization and, indeed, to interpret such a
progression in terms of centro-complexification in respect of Devil the Mother.
8.
Thus pagan civilization presents us with a positive stage of civilization
divisible into two phases, the active phase which is liberal in its cosmic
polytheism, and the reactive phase which is totalitarian in its cosmic
monotheism, the latter of which signifies a progression over the former as
somatic freedom proceeds from stellar bodies in general to one stellar body in
particular, the focus of Creator for Judaic and, subsequently, Christian
civilizations or, more correctly, stages of civilization.
9.
Polytheistic thesis plus monotheistic antithesis does not, however, equal a
pantheistic synthesis, at least not in relation to what already exists, but
only in terms of a negative attraction to the progressive reaction to a
positive action, the negativity of which takes the totalitarian form of the
death of Devil the Mother or, more correctly, the death of the (paganistic)
worship via sacrifice to Devil the Mother as the coming of Christianity,
specifically in terms of its inceptive manifestation in Catholicism,
establishes what can be regarded as a synthetic context whereby like backs away
from like, in this case the totalitarianism of monotheism, albeit on the
negative terms alluded to above, so that one may speak of the overlap between
Judaism and Roman Catholic Christianity as constituting a synthetic attraction
involving both the preceding antithetic reaction and the ensuing thetic action,
the former both progressive and positive, the latter negative, since the death
of Devil the Mother must ever contrast negatively with the actual worshipful
birth and, in some sense, life of Devil the Mother conceived as
characteristically pagan.
10.
Christianity, on the other hand, is precisely that which is contrary to or
against anything pagan, and therefore the death of the Son of Devil the Mother
or, more correctly, of the earthly and effectively pantheistic embodiment of
Devil the Mother constitutes an altogether new stage of civilization in which
the Crucifixion comes to symbolize the death of pagan sacrifice to Devil the
Mother (hyped as God) as Devil the Mother gave Her Son to be sacrificed in such
fashion that mankind, albeit not yet fully human, could partake of the
Eucharistic paradox of Her Son's self-sacrifice instead, thereby ceasing to be
pagan and becoming what we would regard as Christian. Even the 'Virgin
Birth' makes a certain amount of theological sense in relation to Devil the
Mother, to the fact that there is nothing anterior to Devil the Mother, least
of all in the Cosmos, that could be held responsible for impregnating Her,
since not only is space anterior to time, as, lower down the hierarchy of
planes, volume would be anterior to mass, but the stellar plane is anterior to
the solar one, as the lunar plane to the terrestrial one, and therefore even
the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother, the so-called 'Mother of God', can
be regarded as being extrapolated out from a primal status in such manner that
the concept of a virgin birth remains theologically credible.
11.
But if the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother is no 'Mother of God', then
neither is the Son of Devil the Mother commensurate with 'God the Son' or 'the
Son of God', but simply that which, issuing from Devil the Mother, made it
possible for people, who became known as Christians, to partake of His own
'body and blood' in Eucharistic rejection of pagan sacrifice, or sacrifice of
animal or other somatic matter to Devil the Mother, since His sacrifice on the
Cross had the effect of allowing civilization to advance a stage further than
paganism as it effectively turned its back on Devil the Mother through worship
of Her Son, albeit Devil the Mother was still hyped as 'God' and the Son of
Devil the Mother still regarded, somewhat illogically and paradoxically, as the
'Son of God'.
12.
The above fact continued to be the case even when this totalitarian thesis of
Christian negativity came up against a regressive reaction in the guise of the
Reformation, and the ensuing schism within Christianity that led to a
distinction between the totalitarian version of the death of (pagan worship of)
Devil the Mother and its liberal version, this latter, broadly identified as
Protestant, itself subject to subsequent denominational splinterings and
divisions, whether in terms of Puritanism against Anglicanism, for example, or
indeed of subsequent rifts and splinterings within Puritanism itself.
13.
However that may be, Christianity remains broadly negative in its worship of
the Crucified, Whose sacrifice put an end to pagan positivity and thus to the
taking for granted of somatic freedom, His body nailed to the Cross in a
graphic paradigm of somatic binding, a binding that, in rejecting pagan
freedom, inevitably paves the way for greater emphasis, albeit within a limited
context prescribed by both Catholic and Protestant structures of Christian
worship, on free psyche, regarded as salvation. But the development from
Roman Catholicism to Protestantism, however one conceives of the latter, was
certainly symptomatic of a regressive reaction to a negative thesis, one
leading, as noted, from totalitarian centralization in respect of a pantheistic
order of monotheism to a sort of liberal or pluralistic de-centralization in
respect of a pantheistic order of polytheism or, rather, polytheistic order of
pantheism in which Christ Himself became fragmented along multi-denominational
lines broadly corresponding not only to the Protestant schism between
Anglicanism and Puritanism but, more generally, to the ensuing denominational
sub-divisions within Puritanism itself, of which Quakers, Baptists, Methodists,
Unitarians, Presbyterians, Calvinists, and Seventh Day Adventists are only a
selection.
14.
But if the second stage of civilization is broadly negative, then what ensues
with the coming of humanism in synthetic attraction with the liberal phase of the
death of (pagan worship of) Devil the Mother, is altogether more positive in
character, a birth and not a death, the birth, more particularly, of man, and
thus of a new emphasis on mankind and mankind's ability to take care of itself
and sort out its own problems, whether with or without 'God's' help. Thus
a new synthesis is established and remains discernible in which the liberal
version of the birth of man backs off the liberal version of the death of Devil
the Mother, a positive action backing off a regressive reaction which paves the
way, in due humanistic course, for a progressive reaction to this action, which
of course takes the form of the totalitarian version of the birth of man, call
it social democracy after liberal democracy or communism after parliamentary
liberalism or even proletarian humanism after bourgeois humanism, as the
greatest happiness of the greater number is developed to its logical conclusion
along broadly Marxist lines.
15.
Were social democracy the end of the evolutionary line of civilization's
advance, history would already have reached its culmination, and we would now
live in a communist world. Such, of course, was not to be the case, for
even the totalitarian version of the birth of man, being a phase of the third
stage of civilization, became subject, in due historical course, to a negative
synthetic attraction in the guise of the totalitarian version of the death of
man, which, having more to do with worship of the machine and of machine
culture than of mankind's self-worship along broadly political lines, can be
equated with fascism, that arch-rival to communism which owes not a little to
Hegelian dialectics and to state-worship of a markedly different kind, a kind
effectively more economic than political, and dedicated to the furtherance of
national self-interest at the expense of internationalism, including the
so-called internationalism of Marxism-Leninism which, for a totalitarian
version of the birth of man, must rank somewhat below bourgeois liberalism in
terms of international endeavour and appeal, not least in respect of
empire-building.
16.
Be that as it may, the more avowedly nationalistic form of totalitarianism that
emerged with fascism, while it might oppose social democratic totalitarianism,
soon found itself up against a regressive reaction in terms of the liberal
version of the death of man that, hailing principally from America, duly made a
major contribution to the demise of economic totalitarianism in the so-called
corporate state as it sought not only to supplant fascism but, in conjunction
with what had survived of the liberal version of the birth of man, principally
in respect of Great Britain, to squeeze out totalitarian competition wherever
it raised its anachronistic head, whether on positive or negative terms, and to
further, in conjunction with countries like Britain, a world safe for
liberalism, for secular pluralism, for economic internationalism, which is not
only distinct from economic nationalism, but from political nationalism,
including the Bolshevik variety, as well!
17.
Not altogether surprisingly, political internationalism and economic
internationalism, the two ends of the humanistic spectrum, have been able to
work together to defeat humanistic totalitarianism, whether that totalitarianism
took a positive reactionary turn, as in the case of communism, or a negative
actionary turn, so to speak, as in the case of fascism, discarding for a moment
fascism's own synthetic status in the negative attraction with communism which
spanned the humanistic divide between the birth of man and the death of man,
politics and economics, as civilization, besotted by the machine, entered its
fourth stage of development, and did so via arguably the worst war in the
history of mankind.
18.
But now that both communism and fascism are no more, or at least no more than
peripheral to the mainstream thrust of civilization, and liberalism stands
triumphant over the world like a pluralistic colossus bestriding both the
political and economic forms of mankind's internationalism, the time is fast
approaching when a new synthesis will emerge, when civilization will enter its
fifth and final stage, as a positive attraction to economic liberalism's
regressive reaction to totalitarian economics signals the dawn of the liberal
birth of God the Father, of the coming of 'the Kingdom' under the auspices of
Messianic leadership, broadly identifiable with the Second Coming, in which a
pluralistic manifestation of what has been termed Social Theocracy, aiming at a
triadic Beyond and administrative aside to the said Beyond, utilizes liberal
democracy for purposes of encouraging the electorates of certain
already-specified countries to vote for religious sovereignty and thus move
beyond humanism, whether in respect of its birth or its death, but especially
in relation to its more contemporary manifestation, towards that
transcendentalism which will be properly commensurate with God the Father, and
thus with a divine leadership of society to a self-transcending end.
19.
Therefore just as totalitarian corporatism, or fascism, opposed totalitarian
socialism, or communism, from a contrary humanistic standpoint, so must liberal
centrism, or social theocracy, offer mankind an alternative to liberal
corporatism, the non-fascist corporatism of the present age, in order that man
may be overcome and superseded, where applicable and where possible, by God the
Father, civilization attaining to its omega-oriented goal along pluralistic
lines, relative to the triadic Beyond, which can only become subject to a
progressive reaction as a more totalitarian orientation in respect of centrism
brings civilization to its Omega Point, in complete contrast to the
liberalism, and therefore polytheistic pluralism, of its alpha-most inception.
20.
For it is in God's nature or, rather, nurture to raise that which is lower to
the heights of noumenal sensibility, and in due course whatever appertained, in
the triadic Beyond, to phenomenal sensibility would have to be raised towards
the noumenal heights, where a virtuous circle of metaphysics and
antimetachemistry, God the Father and the Antidaughter of the Antidevil,
coupled, in bound soma, to the Son of God and Antidevil the Antimother, will
seek their respective psychic redemptions in Heaven the Holy Soul and the
Unclear Soul of Antihell, though not without recourse, in bound soma, to the
Holy Spirit of Heaven and Antihell the Unclear Spirit, so that truth may know
joy via the truthful approach to beauty and the joyful approach to love of its
own bound (metaphysical) soma, and the beautiful approach to truth know the
loving approach to joy via the beauty and love of its own bound
(antimetachemical) soma.
21. The outcome of civilization, and therefore of the
historical and indeed dialectical process, is therefore no longer in
doubt! That which, as the liberal manifestation of centrism, will
constitute a positively synthetic attraction vis-à-vis liberal corporatism
will, as a new thesis to a fresh stage of civilization, become subject, in due
course, to a progressive reaction in the form of the totalitarian version of
the birth of God the Father which will bring centrism to a properly social
theocratic head, a head which would have been there all along thanks to the top
tier of and administrative aside to the triadic Beyond, but which will
gradually overcome the body of its own liberal pluralism and elevate 'the
phenomenally sensible' to positions of noumenal sensibility, so that, as
civilization draws towards its space-centre omega point, there will be nothing
but noumenal sensibility in respect of both metaphysics and antimetachemistry
remaining, and therefore nothing to contest the ethereal abstraction and
anticoncretion of Eternal Life.
22.
For God the Father, coupled in antimetachemical terms, to the Antidaughter of
the Antidevil, will not die, as men die and even as Devil the Mother and her
Antison of Antigod 'fall guy' can be made to die, or at least be rejected, in
Christian fashion, but live-on in cyborgistic transcendence of mankind for ever
and ever, never being subject to a negative synthetic attraction in the
hypothetical guise of a totalitarian version of the death of God which would
entail the likelihood if not inevitability of a regressive reaction in due
liberal vein, and for the simple reason that the death of God would be a
contradiction in terms, a patent absurdity, given the fact or, rather, truth
that God is the one being that doesn't die but is commensurate with Eternal
Life, and never more so than in relation to the coming per se manifestation
of Divinity in cyborgization, which would overhaul all previous manifestations
of Divinity, of metaphysical sensibility, whether in mankind, in nature, or in
the Cosmos, the latter being the context where God the Father is least evolved,
least psychically free, and therefore most under the shadow of Devil the
Mother, of the most devolved, and therefore somatically free, manifestation of
metachemical sensuality, as already defined in relation to the stellar bodies
of spatial space.
23.
Nothing could be less desirable or indeed feasible than the illogical concept
of the death of God the Father; for not only would it contradict the eternal
essence of godhead, of genuine godliness as germane to metaphysical
sensibility, but could lead, if you will permit me to persist with this line
for the sake of argument, to the even greater absurdity of a cyclical
recurrence in which Devil the Mother came back around again, the liberal
version of that backing off, in positively synthetic attraction, from the liberal
version of the death of God, with the likelihood that everything else would
have to come back around again in due course, the death of Devil the Mother,
the birth of man, the death of man, etc., in a futile and altogether insane
repetition of what had already happened before, as described above in relation
to the historical process.
24.
No, let us not delude or deceive ourselves with insane Nietzschean notions like
the 'death of God' or 'eternal recurrence' or whatever! If the East has a
tendency to think in cyclical terms, whether in relation to the doctrine of
reincarnation or to some kind of 'eternal recurrence', let us remember that
globalization is more than both the East and the West regarded either
separately or together, being a transcendence of both which, while taking
elements from each, develops a whole new structure of and perspective on life,
in which the rectilinear and the curvilinear not only no longer exist in
effective cultural isolation from each other but, in coming together, support
and sustain each other on an altogether transcendent footing, the curvilinear
stabilized, as it were, by the rectilinear in such fashion that the idealistic
emphasis of the former is prevented from succumbing to a cyclical recurrence of
other and lesser matters, but held to a stable position commensurate with the
Omega Point.
25.
And this stable position will not only allow transcendentalism to have its
divine way, its metaphysical sensibility, but preclude any possibility of a
death-like paradox from subverting Eternal Life and reducing it to a forerunner
of the return of Devil the Mother on a wheel of suffering which would bring
everything one had already lived through and got away from back around again to
no positive avail! Thanks to the utilization of technology in relation to
the cyborgization of life to an eternal end, there will be no cyclical
recurrence, and therefore no prospect of God the Father having to make way, in
insane course, for Devil the Mother, Who, in Her evil nature, her metachemically
free soma, would start the whole process of devolution and evolution off all
over again, with painfully predictable consequences!