101. Far from good being socially or ethically superior to evil, it is distinctly the inferior objective, and therefore immoral, option in any context in which somatic freedom must be contrasted with somatic binding, the psychic binding which criminally appertains to the one and the psychic freedom punishingly appertaining to the other being secondary considerations in the overall actuality of an axis characterized, in hegemonic female terms, by soma, and thus by evil and good and, in subordinate gender vein, by pseudo-folly and pseudo-wisdom, to which the bound psychic and free psychic affiliates of pseudo-sin and pseudo-grace must be even more secondary.

102. Of course, one could argue in regard to the indubitable fear of good which is symptomatic of evil, or 'the evil', that there should be a pseudo-hope for grace from the standpoint of pseudo-sin, but, that said, it must be remembered that pseudo-folly and pseudo-wisdom are more characteristic of church-subordinate criteria in relation to a state hegemony in which evil and good count for more than crime and punishment, and consequently that just as there will be a want of criminal and punishing, but most especially criminal, consciousness in relation to evil, so there will be a want of pseudo-sinful and pseudo-graceful, but most especially pseudo-sinful, consciousness in relation to pseudo-folly, the somatic nature of which in antimetaphysics will mirror, in secondary vein, the somatic primacy of metachemical evil.

103. Therefore it makes more logical sense to argue for a double fear of the good and pseudo-wise 'below' on the part of those for whom evil and pseudo-folly are somatically more characteristic, than to split the 'above' between fear of the good/punishing 'below', the antifeminine female position divisible between antirealism and antinonconformism, and pseudo-hope for the pseudo-wise/graceful 'below', the masculine male position divisible between naturalism and humanism.

104. This is not to say that there cannot be such pseudo-hope on the part of anti-idealist/antitranscendentalist males, avowedly antidivine in antimetaphysical character, but that it would be uncharacteristic of a context governed by somatic emphasis, contrary to male gender reality, in consequence of a state-hegemonic mean stemming from the evil of free metachemical females, whose materialism/fundamentalism is diabolic.

105. Likewise one could argue in regard to the indubitable hope for grace which is symptomatic of sin, or 'the sinful', that there should be a pseudo-fear of pseudo-punishment from the standpoint of pseudo-crime, but, that said, it must be remembered that pseudo-crime and pseudo-punishment are more characteristic of state-subordinate criteria in relation to a church hegemony in which sin and grace count for more than folly and wisdom, and consequently that just as there will be a want of foolish and wise, but most especially foolish, consciousness in relation to sin, so there will be a want of pseudo-evil and pseudo-good, but most especially pseudo-evil, consciousness in relation to pseudo-crime, the psychic nature of which in chemistry will mirror, in secondary vein, the psychic primacy of antiphysical sin.

106. Therefore it makes more logical sense to argue for a double hope for the graceful and pseudo-punishing 'above' on the part of those for whom sin and pseudo-crime are psychically more characteristic, than to split the 'below' between hope for the graceful/wise 'above', the divine male position divisible between transcendentalism and idealism, and pseudo-fear of the pseudo-punishing/good 'above', the antidiabolic female position divisible between antifundamentalism and antimaterialism.

107. This is not to say that there cannot be such pseudo-fear on the part of nonconformist/realist females, avowedly purgatorial in chemical character, but that it would be uncharacteristic of a context governed by psychic emphasis, contrary to female gender reality, in consequence of a church-hegemonic mean stemming from the grace of free metaphysical males, whose transcendentalism/idealism is divine.

108. Frankly, one can no more hope for salvation from pseudo-folly/sin to pseudo-wisdom/grace in relation to an axial descent dominated, in somatic vein, by evil and good, kindness to not-self and cruelty to not-self, than ... fear damnation from pseudo-crime/evil to pseudo-punishment/good in relation to an axial ascent characterized, in psychic vein, by sin and grace, cruelty to self and kindness to self. A kind of somatic monism in the one case and psychic monism in the other becomes the prevailing tendency, and this simply points, as we have argued, to the very divergent realities of fear of damnation by the evil/pseudo-foolish and hope for salvation by the sinful/pseudo-criminal.

109. For the free soma of the chemical female is no-less subverted in favour of bound psyche by the antiphysical male acting in like-psychic fashion in contrast to the psychic freedom of metaphysical males ... than the free psyche of the physical male is subverted in favour of bound soma by the antichemical female acting in like-somatic fashion in contrast to the somatic freedom of metachemical females. You can therefore no more properly fear from a context of bound psyche, avowedly pseudo-criminal, than hope for a context of bound soma, avowedly good, when the respective bases of fear and hope have been so paradoxically undermined.

110. Therefore those who, as the somatically free in evil and pseudo-folly, fear the somatic binding of good and pseudo-wisdom from a state-hegemonic axial standpoint must ever be contrasted with those who, as the psychically bound in sin and pseudo-crime, hope for the psychic freedom of grace and pseudo-punishment from a church-hegemonic axial standpoint, and such a contrast, amounting in axial divergence to a British/Irish (Protestant/Catholic) dichotomy, is nothing less than that between fear of descent, whether this be called sentencing down or damnation, and hope for ascent, whether this be called salvation or releasing up; though, in point of fact, the state-hegemonic distinction between free soma and bound soma amounts in all cases to a sentencing down from evil to good, as, in subordinate vein, from crime to punishment, whereas the church-hegemonic distinction between bound psyche and free psyche amounts in all cases to a salvation from sin to grace, as, in subordinate vein, from folly to wisdom, as though from an inferior mode of subjectivity, and therefore morality, to a superior mode of subjectivity in what amounts, in contrary fashion to the state-hegemonic axis, to an effective change of class, even if necessarily temporary in character, given the inevitability, within the world, of class distinctions between the Many and the Few.

111. However, no greater overall contrast could be imagined, and that is why, at this moment in time, Britain and Ireland, with especial reference to the Republic of Ireland (Eire) rather than to that part of Ireland which, as six of the nine counties of the Province of Ulster, constitutes within the United Kingdom what is called Northern Ireland, are so contrary and effectively incompatible, incommensurate, and axially divergent in their respective approaches to civilization, with the inevitability that they constitute, within the British Isles, two quite distinctive and independent nations, minority exceptions notwithstanding.

112. I have spelt out in previous texts what I believe the solution to this divided predicament - for it is a predicament, even without the division of the island of Ireland by the British - actually is, and it was not one that left either country, Great Britain or Ireland, the United Kingdom or Eire, however you prefer to regard it, as they are at present, but formulated a methodology, based on democratic consent, whereby substantive changes in both Britain and Ireland would be needed before such a dichotomy, the source of age-long rivalry and bitterness, could be effectively undermined and eventually overcome.

113. I have no doubt that only a transformation in Eire which led to Ireland becoming a Social Theocratic Centre, a republican theocracy premised upon a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, can pave the way not only to a united Ireland - something that every Irishman in his heart of hearts ultimately desires - but, as a corollary of this, to the break up of the United Kingdom and to an end to the state-hegemonic aberration which leads if not to damnation, though often enough it does, then to the prosecution of evil and pseudo-folly as a matter of somatic course, with little or no prospect, not even for Catholics, the politically excluded minority who have been systematically discriminated against since the Reformation first hit Britain all those centuries ago, of psychic freedom and graceful redemption.

114. Such a society is a disgrace to the word 'civilization', for it is chiefly characterized, to all elitist intents and purposes, by those sensual attributes governed by a somatic precedence which fly in the face of civilized values, namely freedom for barbarity and philistinism or, rather pseudo-philistinism, evil and pseudo-folly, at the expense of civility and culture or, rather, pseudo-culture, good and pseudo-wisdom.

115. And yet even the Irish Republic, though still nominally given to culture and civility or, rather, pseudo-civility, of grace and pseudo-punishment at the expense of philistinism and barbarity or, rather, pseudo-barbarity, of sin and pseudo-crime, is not given to it anywhere near enough, at least not to an extent that would lift society beyond the Catholic norms of verbal absolution for penitential contrition into a realm of more genuine transcendentalism and, hence, grace.

116. One feels that the intercessor, the priestly intermediary between the penitential confessee and God, or what has been taken for God, is somewhat disingenuous in his relation to God and even hamstrung by Scripture to such an extent that nothing properly godly and/or heavenly is ever mooted, let alone held up as an example to the penitential as something to actively emulate. For at this level of religion, avowedly human and therefore of mankind rather than either nature or the Cosmos (in Old Testament vein), there is only one interpretation of God and Heaven which has any relevance and thus value to the human - even if ethnically antihumanist and/or nonconformist - confessee, and that is the interpretation that stands above the confessional context of verbal absolution in transcendental meditation, as germane, traditionally, to the Buddhist East.

117. No priest, one feels, is going to intimate of what God is in relation to the practitioners of transcendental meditation; for that would beg the question as to why such meditation is not officially encouraged to obtain in the West, in Christianity, as an alternative to penitential confession and verbal absolution, and such a question would be at best awkward for the Christian clergy, at worst downright embarrassing and racially or ethnically humiliating, not least in respect of the obvious fact of Christic idolatry. For it can only be answered in terms of the discrepancy between Western lowlander criteria stemming from Rome (and even traditionally hostile to such Bible-hampered highlander criteria as characterized so-called Celtic Christianity) and a more genuinely upper-class orientation in religion only possible on the basis of highlander criteria more typifying the Buddhist East.

118. No priest, in any case, is going to encourage such an awkward or potentially embarrassing question, and precisely because he already knows or believes he knows, through scripture, what constitutes God, and it has no bearing, alas, on the Eastern practitioners of transcendental meditation, despite the indubitable relevancy of this more elevated and authentic mode of transcendentalism to mankind, and hence even to such Western manifestations of mankind, it may be, as are more given, as Roman Catholic Christians, to penitential contrition and verbal absolution in what I have elsewhere in general terms described as transcendentalized humanism as against humanized transcendentalism.

119. No, priests if pressed, as they seldom have been or would be, will cite some alternative concept of God and/or Heaven to what properly appertains to the human take on and level of religious evolution - say, if not the rather Protestant Christ whose relative grace, in 'the word made flesh' and thus effectively physical, is as vulnerable to antichemical subversion from punishing females as any other manifestation, including capitalism, of masculine maleness, then almost certainly the so-called Sacred Heart of the Risen Christ (in reality not male but metachemically female in the bound somatic instinctual and spiritual sensibility of Antidevil the Antimother and Antihell the Unclear Spirit vis-à-vis the free psychic intellectual and emotional sensibility [if applicable] of the Antidaughter of the Antidevil and the Unclear Soul of Antihell) which would at least be a sort of 'on high', diagonally speaking, to the penitential confessee of sin but not, alas, the ultimate 'on high' for mankind, which would of course be God the Father and Heaven the Holy Soul as free psychic intellectual and emotional sensibility in relation to the bound somatic instinctual and spiritual sensibility in metaphysics of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven, none of which, amounting to a male devotee of transcendental meditation, would permit of anything less than complete deference on the part of metachemical sensibility (antimetachemistry) to itself in female subordination to a male-hegemonic ideal, and therefore would completely rule out the sensual possibilities, ever characteristic of implicit New Testament symbols for eyes over ears in the Catholic decadence of human religion, once the heart is added, of perpendicular triangularity as a heathenistic or largely 'once-born' mean, of the so-called Risen Virgin and the so-called Father, viz. Devil the Mother and Hell the Clear Spirit in metachemical free instinctual and spiritual soma vis-à-vis the Daughter of the Devil and the Clear Soul of Hell in metachemical bound intellectual and emotional psyche as far as the eyes-to-self parallel in humankind (New Testament) religion is concerned, and the Antison of Antigod and the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven in metaphysical free instinctual and spiritual soma (under female hegemonic pressures) vis-à-vis Antigod the Antifather and Antiheaven the Unholy Soul in metaphysical bound intellectual and emotional psyche (under female hegemonic pressures) as far as the ears-to-self parallel in such religion is concerned - or, more simply, the Risen Virgin as Devil the Mother and the Father as the Antison of Antigod vis-à-vis the Sacred Heart (of the Risen Christ) as Antidevil the Antimother.

120. Are any of those symbols for actual New Testament parallels actually God, much less godly? No, absolutely not! They are all distinct from anything metaphysically sensible and therefore pertinent to God as God the Father, quite apart from any instinctual, spiritual, or emotional corollaries of the intellectual - and therefore egoistic - component in the totality of metaphysically sensible factors.

121. But if implicit New Testament reference, amounting to a Catholic and therefore Christian decadence of space/time sensual hegemony is bad enough, what follows in respect of priestly recourse to the Old Testament is even worse - much worse! For such scriptural reference tends, willy-nilly, back not merely parallel to the so-called Father of New Testament usage, which would be the nature of David and the cosmos of Satan but, with sleight-of-hand, up from the so-called Father to a parallel with the Risen Virgin which goes back via the nature of Saul to the cosmos of Jehovah, back through manifestations of metachemical sensuality that are sensual first movers in nature and the Cosmos which are not merely of a less devolved or somatically free disposition vis-à-vis the least devolved or somatically free disposition of contemporary New World secularity (of which cameras would appear to be the principal metachemical manifestation), but the more (compared to most) and most devolved manifestations of somatic freedom in metachemistry, and therefore the more and most evil manifestations of Devil the Mother.

122. But of course this per se manifestation of Devil the Mother which is cosmic first mover in metachemical sensuality is considered God not only by the Jews but by many if not all so-called Christians as well, whose acceptance of the Old Testament as part of the overall Bible, the so-called Christian Bible, makes them semi-Judaic in character and only too capable, when push comes to shove, of abandoning the New Testament for the largely if not completely unrelated Old Testament, abandoning the so-called Father who is really the Antison of Antigod for the so-called God Jehovah who is really Devil the Mother in Her most devolved, and therefore somatically free, manifestation, as germane to that aspect of cosmic sensuality according with stellar primacy as the basis of first mover in the Cosmos, whether in so-called polytheistic (Hindu) or so-called monotheistic (Judeo-Christian) terms.

123. Well, so much for the Old Testament! And so much for the priestly sleight-of-hand that, when push comes to shove, can jump a plane from time to space, sequential time to spatial space, and abandon mankind for both nature and especially the Cosmos, falling back from Europe to the Middle East! For the fact of Devil the Mother being in a per se manifestation in that aspect of the Cosmos according with metachemical sensuality means that, if such an entity is taken for God and worshipped as God, it is difficult if not impossible to conceive of God being bettered or outmatched anywhere else, including the sphere of mankind.

124. But if, like me - and I hope I'm not unique in this respect - you are rather of the opinion that while Devil the Mother is indeed in a devolutionary per se because most somatically free manifestation in the cosmic mode of metachemical sensuality, God the Father is only in a least evolved because least psychically free manifestation in the cosmic mode of metaphysical sensibility which, far from being a sensual first cause, is a sort of sensible last effect there, a mode of subsequent cosmic development in sensibility that would have more in common with ringed (and almost haloed) planets like Saturn than with anything avowedly stellar in character, and which is therefore of such a cosmically insignificant order as to be not only insignificant from the standpoint of natural and human manifestations of metaphysical sensibility but grossly in the shadow of Devil the Mother as that which most typifies, certainly on a galaxy-wide basis, the Cosmos and, if history is anything to judge by, prevails over both it and life on this and doubtless other planets in unequivocally diabolic terms.

125. No wonder early peoples, not least in the Middle East and similar environments especially under the stellar/solar influences of cosmic sensuality, opted to divinize the diabolic in their imaginations and to scripturally enthrone the per se manifestation of Devil the Mother as God! But Jehovah is not only not God in relation to any more developed cosmic, never mind natural or human, sphere of existence according, in complete contrast to anything metachemically sensual, with metaphysical sensibility, 'He' is not even commensurate with the so-called Father of New Testament usage, Who obviously has some Christian-type relation to both a Mother and a Son (though seemingly not a Daughter), and Who would derive, in a manner of parallel extrapolation beyond cosmic and natural modes of metaphysical sensuality, from Satan and David as the New Testament equivalent, if such were widely acknowledged by Christians, to the 'fall guys' of the Old, being, as only male sensuality can be, under the so-called Risen Virgin who would be the New Testament parallel, for mankind, to what precedes mankind in both the Cosmos and nature, namely the Jehovahesque and Saulian reference-points for metachemical sensuality, which far from being antidivinely male are, as we have seen, diabolically female.