5

In the contemporary West, then, the whole gamut of antinatural sexuality is permissible, and homosexuals - the most radically decadent category of sexual degenerates, with the possible exception of child molesters and paedophiles generally - are entitled to a respect under the law that Oscar Wilde never received and would, no doubt, greatly envy them if he could see their activities from the other side of the grave. Even the Protestant Church, that bastion of antinatural behaviour, is increasingly disposed to the endorsement and protection of homosexuals, perhaps seeing in them the radical fulfilment of its centuries-old struggle against the natural. Now 'gays' are considered as 'natural' as everyone else, which, to say the least, is a radical distortion of the truth, considering that, from any objective point of view, they are the most consistently antinatural of all sexual deviants, for whom the uncorrupted, whether heathen or Catholic, have rightly reserved the unflattering epithet 'bent', meaning divorced from the natural and, hence, 'queer' - the sort of word more likely to spring to the lips of a catholic Irishman than a liberal Englishman!

Be that as it may, I want to make one point particularly clear - namely, that being 'bent', or antinatural, stops at homosexuality, does not and cannot go beyond homosexuality except on sublimated terms, as implying recourse to an antinatural mode of pornography which, in a sense, is less morally degenerate than the actual perverse indulgence of the flesh; though whether as a successor or an alternative to it ... is an open question. At any rate, I want to make absolutely clear that recourse to naturalistic pornography does not constitute a mode of perversion, but, on the contrary, is the logical antithesis to natural sexuality, being the supernatural sexuality of sublimated heterosexuality, about which the reader will have already learnt enough. This supersex is the truly progressive, classical, and radical sex of the age, a theocratic sexuality in which the emphasis is on the spiritual, in sublimated sexuality, rather than on the flesh, as in straight, or bourgeois, heterosexuality. Even the relative variety, making use of two models, is sexually valid, if more as an inducement to voyeurism than to actual masturbation. Provided the sexuality being simulated is natural rather than antinatural, we are on supernatural territory, if only just. There is nothing decadent about heterosexual pornography, not even the relative variety, but there is surely a clear manifestation of decadence in the homosexual, male-dominated type, whether involving the sodomization of women or its male-centred counterpart, both of which modes of pornographic antinaturalism must nevertheless be accredited a superior status to the actual fleshy violation of anuses, if only on the basis of their photographic sexuality, the result a sublimated evil, less immoral or obscene than the literal perversions, but still a reflection of sexual decadence.

The man who makes use of such anti-supernatural pornography for masturbatory purposes is still 'bent', his attention focused on the anus - if visible - of the preferred model, whom he intends to violate subliminally, a more intellectualized decadence, the furthest reach - if one discounts the anal violation of juveniles - of the antinatural, though less evil, paradoxically, than the literal fleshy violation of the excretory organ and simultaneous degradation of the penis, whether in regard to women or men. The user of homosexual pornography is more like a right-wing Communist than a Fascist, on account of his sublimated antinaturalism, the antinatural ever a left-wing, and hence socialist/communist, phenomenon, but its sublimation in pornography drawing it closer to the supernatural - the truly right-wing fascistic sexuality of heterosexual pornography.

From the converse point of view, one might argue that recourse to hard-core heterosexual pornography, in which a simulated coupling forces the voyeur into an accessory position, would constitute a left-wing fascistic sexuality, the nearest thing, albeit still nominally supernatural, to the antinatural.... Not the kind of pornography that I use, but still morally preferable to the overtly antinatural variety, with its sublimated evil; just as natural sex is morally superior to antinatural sex, a plus as opposed to a minus. Nevertheless, anyone who habitually indulges in supernatural sex is unlikely to have much time or inclination for the natural, even though the two kinds of sex, corresponding to conservative and fascist levels of politics, are not mutually exclusive.

The more a man sublimates his sexual instincts, the less he actually copulates, to paraphrase Baudelaire. Supernatural sex can be indulged to the exclusion of natural sex, and the same, I dare say, may apply to the distinction between anti-supernatural and antinatural sex. Admittedly, such extremes will be the exception to the rule at present, particularly in countries with a strong naturalistic and/or atomic tradition, but they are possible. If, in the future, a supra-natural sex, involving juvenile models, takes over from the supernatural variety, then the likelihood of one's regressing to the naturalistic level will be extremely remote, the supra-natural being beyond the pale of natural relativity. A Fascist can become a Conservative and/or Republican (in the American party-political sense) in his sexuality and vice versa, but no Social Transcendentalist could become one, since, by that time, natural sex would be taboo. The natural leads to the supernatural, but the supra-natural belongs to an altogether more absolute part of the evolutionary spectrum!

Indeed, one could argue that, while the above may hold true in theory, in practice the supernatural could not be attained to without the antinatural coming in-between, since the natural, pertaining to a sensual classicism, is complete in itself, the embodiment of a specific class/environmental ideal. Few Conservatives are ever likely to become Fascists, since the latter politics reflects a different class-stage of evolution - one more relevant to petty-bourgeois theocrats than to bourgeois democrats. You don't just evolve from Conservatism and/or Republicanism to Fascism. Fascism only arose in reaction to Communism and the correlative threat of a Marxist-Leninist take-over - in other words, after the antinatural had undermined the natural and suggested, to right-thinking men, the possibility of supernaturalism as the next logical step, one necessarily hostile to the antinatural. Thus, as a dialectical materialist would argue, the natural gave rise, as thesis, to an antinatural antithesis, the fusion of which led to a supernatural synthesis, a process which should lead, in due course, to the latter becoming a new thesis against which an anti-supernatural antithesis will arise, to bring about, one way or another, the supra-natural synthesis of the ultimate politics and/or sexuality.

Such a triadic logic certainly has its appeal, though I cannot quite reconcile myself to a synthesis arising out of two mutually antagonistic theses, as though they would somehow come together and form this new whole when, in point of fact, they are frictional and mutually exclusive, indisposed to fusion but ever antithetical, ever apart. You cannot derive a synthesis from a friction! How, then, can you expect the natural and the antinatural, heterosexuality and homosexuality, to combine to form the kind of heterosexual supernaturalism I have been describing on previous pages? Not for me this dialectic, nor its application to religion, where Father plus Holy Spirit equals Son (though there is a certain paradoxical logic to it, as to so much else). What I was attempting to underline, before succumbing to this dialectical intrusion, is that whilst, in theory, it may appear that the natural leads to the supernatural, in practice the latter cannot arise before the antinatural has discredited the natural and thus indirectly paved the way for a new, higher classicism - one centred on the spirit rather than on the flesh.

It is less that the supernatural arises out of the antinatural than as a revolt against it, the desire for a new naturalism now that the old one has been sufficiently discredited by its romantic antagonist, an antagonist which, whether as homosexuality or communism, leaves much to be desired! Men of good will who revolt against the antinatural evil, though not in the name of the traditional good. Men of sufficient intelligence and moral calibre as to perceive, amidst all the evil and friction, the possibility of a superior good, appertaining to the supernatural. And to perceive it precisely because they live in the more artificial environment of the big city and therefore aren't disposed to naturalistic criteria, like a provincial or suburban classicist.

The antinatural may be evil fools, but they signify a superior evil to the pre-natural variety; they are more akin to perverse electrons (neutrons?) than to absolute protons, pseudo-electrons as opposed to the free-electron supernaturalists who signify the higher possibility - that of a new, ultimate good - and must consequently turn against the antinatural in the name of this new classicism, either Fascist or, on the later and more evolved level, Social Transcendentalist, with a supra-urban bias and a supra-natural sexuality. A direct link there may be between the supernatural and the supra-natural, but not between the natural and the supernatural! The antinatural must come in-between, and, to be sure, I find that my own political and, to a limited extent, sexual evolution passed through or, at any rate, paid tribute to the antinatural, if from an essentially supernatural point of view.

For although I was never a Communist, my 'Socialism' being supplemented by a Neo-Buddhist level of petty-bourgeois transcendentalism, a pro-communist phase came in-between a sort of negative Nietzschean Conservatism (lamenting the destruction of natural values, lamenting, like Spengler, the decline of the West), and a more intensely transcendental fascist phase, during which the national, in relation to Eire, came to supplant the international, and the ground was at last prepared for the subsequent leap from Irish Social Nationalism (not to be confused with bourgeois nationalism) to supra-national Social Transcendentalism, and the eclipse of Socialism by Centrism, the truly theocratic ideological position of what I like to think of as potentially an ultimate world religion - a revolt, in part, against Socialism.

So Capitalism plus Socialism does not equal Centrism, but, on the contrary, Centrism, signifying the Centrist (theocratic) trusteeship of the means of production for the Truth within a Social Transcendentalist context, emerges as a revolt, in part, against the public ownership of the means of production by the people. To the extent that the means of production are not owned by the people, the broad masses, Centrism has something in common with Capitalism. But no more than supernatural sex has in common with natural sex. If the plutocratic ownership of the means of production is natural, derived from the galactic-world-order of dominion by the strongest, then the meritocratic trusteeship of those means is supernatural, the bureaucratic ownership coming in-between as a kind of antinaturalism, that is to say ownership by the weak and/or stupid rather than, as with theocratic Centrism, trusteeship by the most intelligent. Capitalism and Socialism, like the natural and the antinatural in sex, can and do exist side-by-side, as in atomic Britain (a neutron control of bound-electron equivalents), but neither of them could co-exist with Centrism in a Social Transcendentalist society.

Likewise Catholicism and Protestantism can and do exist side-by-side in an open society, the one naturalistic and the other antinaturalistic, but neither of them could co-exist with Social Transcendentalism in a Centrist society. Neither, needless to say, could natural sex and antinatural sex co-exist with supra-natural sex in such a closed society, the upholder of a theocratic absolutism. The supernatural variety of sex can and does co-exist, in open-society contexts, with the natural and the antinatural, not to mention the anti-supernatural. But the supra-natural would be above and beyond the adult pale, and never again could adults, least of all women (become quasi-supermen) be regarded as sexual objects!

My own sexuality does not extend to the level of teenage juvenile pornography; I am quite resigned to a petty-bourgeois supernaturalism which, as already intimated, I did not get to from a natural base but, on the contrary, from a kind of indirect antinaturalism, or perverse supernaturalism, in which my voyeuristic attention was often focused on the rump of a given female model, and I might well have imagined myself climaxing into her rectum. This would have corresponded to my pro-Communist phase, though, being pro-Communist from a transcendental point of view, I was also pro-antinatural from a supernatural vantage-point, with regard to female models. I have never completely abandoned the theocratic, and it is inconceivable that I ever shall, even if I were to acquire myself a female companion in life and became partly naturalistic.