Op. 71

 

ULTRANOTES FROM BEYOND

(The United Kingdom/Republic of Ireland)

 

Aphoristic Philosophy

 

Copyright 1997-2010 John O'Loughlin

____________

 

CONTENTS

 

Aphs. 1-600

____________

 

1.   To contrast the metachemical unclearness of evil with the chemical clearness of good, as one would contrast fire with water - the former noumenal and the latter phenomenal, as with regard to space-time materialism and to volume-mass realism on the objective, or female, side of life.

 

2.   To contrast the physical unholiness of folly with the metaphysical holiness of wisdom, as one would contrast vegetation with air - the former phenomenal and the latter noumenal, as with regard to mass-volume naturalism and to time-space idealism on the subjective, or male, side of life.

 

3.   That which is unclear, being evil, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as noumenal particles and wavicles of an objective disposition.

 

4.   That which is clear, being good, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as phenomenal particles and wavicles of an objective disposition.

 

5.   That which is unholy, being foolish, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether it is conceived in relation to form or content as phenomenal particles and wavicles of a subjective disposition.

 

6.   That which is holy, being wise, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether it is conceived in relation to form or content as noumenal particles and wavicles of a subjective disposition.

 

7.   Since power is perfect on the noumenal planes of space-time materialism and imperfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass realism, one should distinguish the primary vice of noumenal power in metachemical unclearness from the secondary vice of phenomenal power in chemical clearness - the former beautiful and the latter strong.

 

8.   Since glory is imperfect on the noumenal planes of space-time materialism and perfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass realism, one should distinguish the secondary virtue of noumenal glory in metachemical unclearness from the primary virtue of phenomenal glory in chemical clearness - the former loving and the latter proud.

 

9.   Since form is perfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and imperfect on the noumenal planes of time-space idealism, one should distinguish the primary vice of phenomenal form in physical unholiness from the secondary vice of noumenal form in metaphysical holiness - the former knowledgeable and the latter truthful.

 

10.  Since content is imperfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and perfect on the noumenal planes of time-space idealism, one should distinguish the secondary virtue of phenomenal content in physical unholiness from the primary virtue of noumenal content in metaphysical holiness - the former pleasurable and the latter joyful.

 

11.  Unholiness is no more evil, and thus a metachemical attribute, through materialism, of the Devil/Hell, than clearness is wise, and thus a metaphysical attribute, through idealism, of God/Heaven.

 

12.  Unholiness is simply foolish, and thus a physical attribute, through naturalism, of man/earth, while clearness is simply good, and thus a chemical attribute, through realism, of woman/purgatory.

 

13.  The 'unholy man' may be a fool, but he certainly isn't evil, since unholiness is the next best thing to holiness, as vegetation to air or physics to metaphysics.

 

14.  The 'clear woman' may be good, but she certainly isn't wise, since clearness is the next worst thing to unclearness, as water to fire or chemistry to metachemistry.

 

15.  The 'unclear woman' stands at an evil, and thus absolutely antithetical remove, from the 'holy man', as the noumenal objectivity of space-time materialism from the noumenal subjectivity of time-space idealism.

 

16.  The 'clear woman' stands at a good, and thus relatively antithetical remove, from the 'unholy man', as the phenomenal objectivity of volume-mass realism from the phenomenal subjectivity of mass-volume naturalism.

 

17.  That which is natural may be unholy ... in its vegetative phenomenality, but it can never be evil, like the fiery noumenality of materialism.

 

18.  That which is real may be good ... in its watery phenomenality, but it can never be wise, like the airy noumenality of idealism.

 

19.  'The fool', or foolish man, is closer to the wise man than are either 'the good' or 'the evil', the good woman or the evil woman, and consequently counts for more with him - as was, in fact, the case with Christ, Who preferred sinners to scribes and pharisees.

 

20.  Men, too, can be good or evil, and thus 'bent' away from what is either phenomenally masculine (lower to upper) or noumenally masculine (submasculine to supermasculine), sinful or graceful, in one degree or another of punishment and/or crime.

 

21.  Men that are 'bent' may well be just or cruel, depending on the order of their bentness, but they can never be stupid or kind - at any rate, not so long as they remain 'bent'.

 

22.  To be a bent man is to effectively function as a woman, and thus be objectively ranged against subjectivity either from the viewpoint of metachemical evil or of chemical good, materialism or realism.

 

23.  It is not inconceivable that the term 'gentleman', as especially applied in England to those categories of men who are conspicuously of 'the good' and/or 'the great' (this latter equivalent to 'the evil', or powerful) is synonymous with being 'bent', and thus less of a man than someone who effectively functions as a woman ... in due objective fashion.

 

24.  A society with an abundance of 'gentlemen', in the aforementioned sense, can only be one in which heathenistic values take precedence over Christian values, the secular over the ecclesiastical, as objectivity 'rides high', in due female fashion, at the expense of subjectivity.

 

25.  In such a society, the Kingdom (noumenal) and/or the State (phenomenal) will be genuine, while the Church (phenomenal) and/or the Centre (noumenal) will be 'pseudo', and thus deferentially subordinate to the prevailing secularity, with its emphasis on freedom.

 

26.  A society in which the secular institutions are free and the religious institutions 'pseudo' ... is a free society, or one which is primarily characterized by free will rather than by natural determinism.

 

27.  Free societies are much more likely to be 'once born' and heathenistic than 're-born' and Christian, given the female hegemony of objectivity which 'rides high' at the expense of subjectivity, tongue at the expense of phallus in the phenomenal context of watery (chemical) realism, eyes at the expense of ears in the noumenal context of fiery (metachemical) materialism.

 

28.  In Britain, however, 're-born' metachemistry is combined, via the 'Blood Royal', with 'once-born' chemistry, the monarchy with the parliamentary, and truly genuine, mode of democracy.

 

29.  America, on the other hand, is more characterized, through the 'Liberty Belle', by the 'once-born' metachemical hegemony of eyes over ears, which co-exists with 'once-born' physics in the guise of a republican democracy.

 

30.  By rights, a pseudo-democracy in a pseudo-State should be deferential, through republicanism, to the genuine Church, the Roman Catholic Church, but the American paradox is such that, rooted in Puritan-based colonial rebellion against Anglican-based British rule, the pseudo-State of democratic republicanism defers back to the metachemical hegemony of the eyes, symbolized by the 'Liberty Belle', and thus to what is in effect a pseudo-Kingdom rooted in a presidential executive having, amongst other things, ultimate control of the armed forces.  France, which fought alongside America in the War of Independence and later presented the 'Liberty Belle' to it, is effectively the same.

 

31.  Whatever the respective paradoxes of Britain and America, both countries, being objective, espouse freedom, not least of all in relation to 'freedom of speech' and a 'free press'.

 

32.  In theory, this may seem desirable, but, in practice, what it means is freedom for the objective, and hence female side of life, to affirm secular and fundamentally immoral values at the expense of everything religious and moral.

 

33.  The parliamentary democracy affirms 'freedom of speech' as its inalienable feminine right in a context where the tongue is free, and free to lord or, rather, lady it over the phallus (cynosure of the flesh), in due verbal fashion.

 

34.  The presidential Kingdom affirms 'freedom of the press' as its inalienable superfeminine right in a context where the eyes are free, and hence free to lord or, rather, lady it over the ears, in due photographic fashion.

 

35.  Whether the freedom is chemical or metachemical, watery or fiery, emotional or instinctual, the net result will be the entrenchment of free will at the expense of natural determinism, of female objectivity at the expense of male subjectivity, and the consequent domination of society by heathenistic values.

 

36.  Whether 'Britannia' rules the waves, the watery context of chemical realism, or the 'Liberty Belle' rules the stars, the fiery context of metachemical materialism, the only consequence for males is the subversion of nature by civilization in the one case, and of culture by barbarism in the other, as germane to the dominion of female objectivity.

 

37.  Frankly, Christ is no more the 'man-god' of the British than the Holy Ghost is the 'Spirit-Heaven' of the Americans.  The former people are dominated by a heathenistic form of Mary, viz. the parliamentary 'Britannia', while the latter people are dominated by the superheathenistic form or, rather, power of the Creator, viz. the presidential 'Liberty Belle'.

 

38.  Things have accordingly regressed from the purgatorial glory of 'Britannia' to the diabolical power of the 'Liberty Belle', as, on the positive side, from supreme water to supreme fire, the tongue to the eyes, pride to beauty, and, on the negative side, from primal water to primal fire, the moon to the stellar cosmos, humility (if not humiliation) to ugliness, and in neither case is there much scope for authentic commitments, uninfluenced by the prevailing norms, to the earthy form, necessarily crucified, of Christ or to the heavenly content, necessarily beatified, of the Holy Ghost.

 

39.  For form and content (in both phenomenal and noumenal terms) can only be twisted and corrupted, if not effectively eliminated, when power and glory hold sway in due objective fashion.

 

40.  As a rule, religions do not transplant; they simply become corrupted by countervailing pressures which typify the lands and climes to which they were brought.

 

41.  America may call itself Christian, but, in actuality, it is a Superheathen society both characterized and dominated by the 'Liberty Belle', its presiding deity.

 

42.  No genuine Christian would identify with stars or anything cosmic, but would have turned away from both fire and water in response to a Christ-motivated vegetative aspiration towards air.

 

43.  The fact that most Christians remain 'bogged down' in vegetation to the detriment, if not exclusion, of air ... does not invalidate the proposition that vegetation leads to air rather than to either water or fire.

 

44.  In fact, any attempt to reconcile vegetation to either water or fire, if not both water and fire, is anti-Christian and effectively heathenistic in a Protestant if not Oriental way.

 

45.  What prevents the Christian from becoming Superchristian, and thus properly spiritual through the metaphysical element of air, is his Biblical adherence to Creatoresque primitivity, which constrains him from 'going the whole religious hog', as it were, in due meditative vein.

 

46.  Thus Christianity is itself corrupted by delusory adherence to Creatoresque primitivity, which keeps things theistically subservient to the Cosmos and thereby bedevils attempts to further natural determinism at the expense of free will, the sort of free will which the Cosmos most blatantly exemplifies!

 

47.  Had Christianity been a perfect religion instead of a manifestly imperfect one, centred not in joy but in knowledge, not in the grace of noumenal content but in the sin of phenomenal form, the 'modern age' of rampant Superheathenism would probably never have materialized.

 

48.  Christian ambivalence, owing as much if not more to the Biblical divisions between Old and New Testaments as to the paradoxical teachings of Jesus Christ, has always made it possible for (some) people to pursue free will at the expense of natural determinism.

 

49.  So much so, that Christianity was fated to overcome itself and to languish, as it now does, in the shadows not only of Protestant-based Heathenism but of Orient-based Superheathenism - a Superheathenism characterized by the metachemical reign of the 'Liberty Belle'.

 

50.  Some would regard her and equivalent symbols as the 'Queen of Heaven', but there is no, nor ever could be any, 'Queen of Heaven', only a 'Queen of Hell', of which the stellar cosmos is epitome.

 

51.  The 'Goddess of Liberty' is indeed the representative symbol of the age, but such a goddess is not only evil in her light-shedding super-unnature (superbarbarism), she is illustrative of the fiery 'Queendom' of metachemical autocracy.

 

52.  Hence it is not even collective freedom such as 'Britannia' could be said to illustrate in relation to 'House of Commons' democracy, but individual freedom in relation to 'White House' autocracy, the presidential executive of an elected autocrat.

 

53.  Since freedom is rooted in power and glory, whether these be individual (and metachemical) or collective (and chemical), it has everything to do with evil and good, and nothing to do with folly and wisdom.

 

54.  Only that which is rooted or, rather, centred (in due subjective vein) in form and content ... has anything to do with folly and wisdom, whether in relation to the collectivity of the physical or to the individuality of the metaphysical.

 

55.  Such an actuality is the opposite of freedom, since it appertains not to free will but to natural determinism, not to the female (and objective) side of life but to its male (and subjective) side, and has reference, in consequence, to binding.

 

56.  And just as freedom can be collectivistic or individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, so binding can be collectivistic or individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, according to whether it pertains to vegetation or to air, the Church or the (coming) Centre of 'Kingdom Come'.

 

57.  When people revolt against binding, as they have done in the anti-Christian past, they do so in the name of freedom, and achieve liberation from the Old Order (of binding) via revolution, which is the violent methodology serving a free and hence disordered end.

 

58.  Liberation from binding is a female-oriented actuality which leads, via revolutionary upheaval, to state freedom, the republican state and/or kingdom that is independent of the Christian Church and immorally ranged, under the light-shedding objective guidance of the 'Liberty Belle' or equivalent symbols of freedom, against Christian morality and just about anything moral.

 

59.  It is this free state and/or kingdom which is responsible, in its disordered newness, for the 'false progress' of Heathen-to-Superheathen modernity, and which upholds the dominion, in consequence, of free will at the expense of natural determinism, of female liberation at the expense of male salvation.

 

60.  Freedom is characterized, as already noted, not by form and content(ment) but by power and glory, and is therefore a choice and/or struggle between evil and good, fire and water, barbarity and civility, the id (unego) and the soul (unconscious) for objective control of men's lives.

 

61.  People - and men in particular - can be delivered from freedom to binding, albeit to a new order of binding which will be Superchristian where the Old Order was Christian, and such deliverance is achievable via evolution, which is the peaceful methodology serving a bound and very structured end.

 

62.  If one is damned to freedom by revolution, then one is saved to binding by evolution, and such an evolution as I have in mind will necessitate recourse to democratic procedures, in order that the peoples of, in particular initially, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales ... may opt for religious sovereignty, and thus the right to religious self-determination in relation to the triadic Beyond of the Centre, which would be served and maintained by a pseudo-kingdom, the airy kingdom of a Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) in 'Kingdom Come'.

 

63.  Only Social Transcendentalism, the ideological philosophy of 'Kingdom Come', and hence of the genuine Centre, can provide the basis whereby the People may seek deliverance from worldly freedoms to the otherworldly bindings of the Centre, and thereupon embrace a structure in which form and content are uppermost in their lives, as they enter into the evolutionary salvation of the triadic Beyond in which folly and wisdom, vegetation and air, nature and culture, the ego and the mind would take hierarchical precedence over what was left to the female side of life in the watery goodness - and soul - of civilization.

 

64.  For civilization must be 'pegged down' if nature is to rise up as an adequate support for culture, the airy flower rising from the vegetative stem of something rooted in watery goodness.

 

65.  Thus, in ascending order, would mass, volume, and space be reconciled to Eternity, the context of the genuine Centre which is beyond the domination of time, or 'Father Time', although served and maintained from a basis of transmuted time via the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come'.

 

66.  For every 'plant' requires a sun to help it grow, and the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come' would be the 'sun' that helps the 'plant' of the triadic Beyond to grow throughout Eternity.

 

67.  Such a supernatural 'plant' would eventually grow beyond the earth to the space-centre contexts of a definitive Heaven, where it would exist at an absolutely antithetical remove from the stellar cosmos and all that pertained to stars in general.

 

68.  But by then 'man' would have been superseded, via a cyborg-like transition, by post-human life forms which were destined to take the evolutionary journey to its most bound end.

 

69.  When we think in terms of the planes of space, time, volume, and mass, the first two noumenal and the latter two phenomenal, it seems appropriate (contrary to my customary procedures of late) to equate space with transcendentalism, time with fundamentalism, volume with nonconformism, and mass with humanism, irrespective of whether in relation to the Beginning or the End, the sensual or the sensible manifestations, of the planes in question.

 

70.  Hence to distinguish the materialist transcendentalism, in metachemistry, of spatial space from the idealist transcendentalism, in metaphysics, of spaced space - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the supernoumenal plane of space.

 

71.  Hence to distinguish the idealist fundamentalism, in metaphysics, of sequential time from the materialist fundamentalism, in metachemistry, of repetitive time - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the subnoumenal plane of time.

 

72.  Hence to distinguish the realist nonconformism, in chemistry, of volumetric volume from the naturalist nonconformism, in physics, of voluminous volume - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the upper-phenomenal plane of volume.

 

73.  Hence to distinguish the naturalist humanism, in physics, of massive mass from the realist humanism, in chemistry, of massed mass - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the lower-phenomenal plane of mass.

 

74.  Since we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of a diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from space to time, one could characterize space-time objectivity in terms of a regression from materialist transcendentalism to materialist fundamentalism on the photon-photino axis of fiery metachemistry.

 

75.  Since we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of a diagonal ascent, in metaphysics, from time to space, one could characterize time-space subjectivity in terms of a progression from idealist fundamentalism to idealist transcendentalism on the proton-protino axis of airy metaphysics.

 

76.  Since we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of a diagonal descent, in chemistry, from volume to mass, one could characterize volume-mass objectivity in terms of a regression from realist nonconformism to realist humanism on the electron-electrino (if conventional) and/or positron-positrino (if radical) axis of watery chemistry.

 

77.  Since we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of a diagonal ascent, in physics, from mass to volume, one could characterize mass-volume subjectivity in terms of a progression from naturalist humanism to naturalist nonconformism on the neutron-neutrino (if conventional) and/or deuteron-deuterino (if radical) axis of vegetative physics.

 

78.  One could also turn each of the aforementioned connections around and speak of a diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from transcendentalist materialism, the materialism of space, to fundamentalist materialism, the materialism of time, while speaking, conversely, of a diagonal ascent, in metaphysics, from fundamentalist idealism, the idealism of time, to transcendentalist idealism, the idealism of space.

 

79.  Similarly, one could speak of a diagonal descent, in chemistry, from nonconformist realism, the realism of volume, to humanist realism, the realism of mass, while speaking, conversely, of a diagonal ascent, in physics, from humanist naturalism, the naturalism of mass, to nonconformist naturalism, the naturalism of volume.

 

80.  The emphasis in the latter two aphorisms would, I believe, be more scientific and/or political than economic and/or religious, since unlike transcendentalism, fundamentalism, nonconformism, and humanism, the terms materialism, idealism, realism, and naturalism have more applicability to the relationship between self and not-self, psychology and physiology, than to that between selfless and unself, therapy and psyche.

 

81.  In fact, I originally derived the concepts of materialism, idealism, realism, and naturalism from the respective elements of fire, air, water, and vegetation (earth), holding to the view that the elements proceeded, in due chronological order of devolutionary and/or evolutionary development, from fire to air via water and vegetation, and that materialism accordingly corresponded to fire as the most basic/least advanced element, realism corresponded to water as the more (relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced element, naturalism corresponded to vegetation as the less (relative to least) basic/more (relative to most) advanced element, and idealism corresponded to air as the least basic/most advanced element.

 

82.  In subatomic terms, this meant that the most basic/least advanced subdivision of an element, viz. elemental particle, corresponded to materialism; that the more (relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision, viz. molecular particle, corresponded to realism; that the less (relative to least) basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision, viz. molecular wavicle, corresponded to naturalism; and that the least basic/most advanced subdivision, viz. elemental wavicle, corresponded to idealism.

 

83.  Where an exact correspondence existed between the most basic/least advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and fire, then one had the materialist per se of photons (in sensuality) and/or photinos (in sensibility); where an exact correspondence existed between the more (relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and water, then one had the realist per se of electrons and/or electrinos (if conventional) or positrons and/or positrinos (if radical); where an exact correspondence existed between the less (relative to least) basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and vegetation, then one had the naturalist per se of neutrons and/or neutrinos (if conventional) or deuterons and/or deuterinos (if radical); and where an exact correspondence existed between the least basic/most advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and air, then one had the idealist per se of protons (in sensuality) and/or protinos (in sensibility).

 

84.  Hence each element had a subatomic correspondence which enabled us to describe it either in terms of materialism (if having an elemental particle per se), realism (if having a molecular particle per se), naturalism (if having a molecular wavicle per se), or idealism (if having an elemental wavicle per se).

 

85.  I therefore came to the conclusion that fire was the metachemical element of materialism, water the chemical element of realism, vegetation the physical element of naturalism, and air the metaphysical element of idealism.

 

86.  It also became clear to me that both fire and water, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in elemental and molecular terms, to the particle aspect of their respective elements, were objective, and thus of a female disposition, whereas both vegetation and air, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in molecular and elemental terms, to the wavicle aspect of their respective elements, were subjective, and thus of a male disposition.

 

87.  Hence not only were photons and electrons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) objective, and hence of a female disposition in their negative charge; they had a per se correspondence to fire and water.

 

88.  Hence not only were neutrons and protons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) subjective, and hence of a male disposition in their positive charge; they had a per se correspondence to vegetation and air.

 

89.  Of course, it is always tempting to regard water as subjective and vegetation as objective, but I don't believe that something relatively subjective could stem, like water, from the absolutely objective element of fire.  Nor, by a converse token, can I believe that something relatively objective could be the next best thing, like vegetation, to the absolutely subjective element of air.

 

90.  That which, as vegetation, is elementally contiguous with noumenal subjectivity could only be phenomenally subjective, while, conversely, that which, as water, is elementally contiguous with noumenal objectivity could only be phenomenally objective.

 

91.  Yet we find ourselves with the logical paradox that the two particle-based elements as defined by me, viz. fire and water, differ in relation to the position of the perfect attribute on the basis of a particle/wavicle distinction - power being perfect in fire but imperfect in water, glory being perfect in water but imperfect in fire.

 

92.  Likewise, the two wavicle-centred elements as defined by me, viz. vegetation and air, differ in relation to the position of the perfect attribute on the basis of a particle/wavicle distinction - form being perfect in vegetation but imperfect in air, content being perfect in air but imperfect in vegetation.

 

93.  Thus if water is objective, and hence particle-based, while vegetation is subjective, and hence wavicle-centred, how can the one have a wavicle-biased perfection in glory (pride) and the other a particle-biased perfection in form (knowledge)?

 

94.  It seems to me that the question begs an equally paradoxical answer, in that there is more gender interaction on the phenomenal planes of mass and volume than on the noumenal planes of time and space, in consequence of which vegetation is bent, through the countervailing objective influence of water, towards an objective fulcrum, so to speak, in form, whereas water is bent, through the countervailing subjective influence of vegetation, towards a subjective fulcrum, as it were, in glory.

 

95.  Yet neither of these fulcrums or focal-points of perfection would be particularly stable, in view of the countervailing dispositions of the elements in question, so their respective perfections are always going to be exposed to abandonment for the more complete, and intrinsically element-conditioned, perfections of power in the case of fire and of content(ment) in the case of air, the genders tending farther apart on the noumenal planes of time and space in relation to particle- and wavicle-biased orders of perfection that owe more to the respective particle-based and wavicle-centred orientations of their respective elements than ever they do to any phenomenal-like molecular interrelativity, and hence collectivistic interaction.

 

96.  Short of dismantling my philosophy in favour of a subjective theory for water and an objective theory for vegetation, this is the only explanation I have for the seemingly paradoxical fact that, in the cases of water and vegetation, the fulcrum of perfection does not exactly coincide with the subatomic structural origins of the elements in question.

 

97.  However that may be, I am convinced that nothing that was of a contrary gender disposition, as it were, to the noumenal elements of fire and air could exist in a devolutionary and/or evolutionary relationship of elemental contiguity with them.

 

98.  So I return to my original position that water stems from fire as a phenomenal order of objectivity from a noumenal order, whilst, conversely, air stems from vegetation as a noumenal order of subjectivity from a phenomenal order.

 

99.  There is accordingly, in general terms, a devolutionary regression from the unclear to the clear, as from fire to water, on the one hand, but an evolutionary progression from the unholy to the holy, as from vegetation to air, on the other hand.

 

100. Yet, in actuality, fire and water are both typified, in their objective dispositions towards power and glory, by unclearness and clearness, since unclearness stands to clearness on any objective plane as particle to wavicle, vice to virtue, barbarity to civility, and hence in more general terms as will to spirit.

 

101. With fire, however, the emphasis of perfection will be on power rather than glory, and thus on unclearness as opposed to clearness, barbarity as opposed to civility, vice as opposed to virtue, whereas with water, by contrast, the emphasis of perfection will be on glory rather than power, and thus on clearness as opposed to unclearness, civility as opposed to barbarity, virtue as opposed to vice.

 

102. Conversely, vegetation and air are both typified, in their respective subjective dispositions towards form and content, by unholiness and holiness, since unholiness stands to holiness on any subjective plane as particle to wavicle, vice to virtue, nature to culture, and hence in more general terms as will to spirit.

 

103. With vegetation, however, the emphasis of perfection will be on form rather than content, and thus on unholiness as opposed to holiness, nature as opposed to culture, vice as opposed to virtue, whereas with air, by contrast, the emphasis of perfection will be on content(ment) rather than form, and thus on holiness as opposed to unholiness, culture as opposed to nature, virtue as opposed to vice.

 

104. One should, however, distinguish what is applicable to the self and to the unself as psychological and psychical postulates from what applies to the not-self and to selflessness as physiological and ontological (therapeutic) postulates, since it does not necessarily follow that unholiness and holiness, for example, should be applied in either context.

 

105. In fact, I happen to believe that, in subjective contexts, unholiness and holiness are more applicable to the self, viz. ego, and to the unself, viz. mind, whereas nature and culture are more applicable to the not-self and to selflessness, say ears and airwaves or lungs and breath (in metaphysical idealism), since it is important to distinguish the psychological and psychical attributes on the one hand, that of the self and the unself, from the physiological and ontological attributes on the other hand, that of the not-self and selflessness.

 

106. Hence one should contrast the unholiness of stupidity (sin) in relation to the self and the holiness of kindness (grace) in relation to the unself with the naturalness of form (subjective will) in relation to the not-self and the culture of content (subjective spirit) in relation to selflessness ... where both the phenomenal (vegetative) and the noumenal (airy) manifestations of male subjectivity are concerned.

 

107. Conversely, I happen to believe that, in objective contexts, unclearness and clearness are more applicable to the self, viz. id, and to the unself, viz. soul, whereas barbarity and civility will be more applicable to the not-self and to selflessness, say eyes and sight-light or heart and blood (in metachemical materialism), since it is important to distinguish the psychological and psychical attributes on the one hand, that of the self and the unself, from the physiological and ontological attributes on the other hand, that of the not-self and selflessness.

 

108. Hence one should contrast the unclearness of cupidity (crime) in relation to the self and the clearness of cruelty (punishment) in relation to the unself with the barbarity of power (objective will) in relation to the not-self and the civility of glory (objective spirit) in relation to selflessness ... where both the noumenal (fiery) and the phenomenal (watery) manifestations of female objectivity are concerned.

 

109. Thus not only are cupidity and cruelty the objective equivalents of stupidity and kindness in relation to the self and to the unself, but power and glory are the objective equivalents of form and content in relation to the not-self and to selflessness.

 

110. If cupidity is unclear (criminally unjust) and cruelty clear (punishingly just) in relation to objective orders of the self (id) and the unself (soul), then stupidity is unholy (sinfully imprudent) and kindness holy (gracefully prudent) in relation to subjective orders of the self (ego) and the unself (mind).

 

111. Likewise, if power is barbarous (viciously evil) and glory civilized (virtuously good) in relation to objective orders of the not-self and selflessness, then form is natural (viciously foolish) and content cultural (virtuously wise) in relation to subjective orders of the not-self and selflessness.

 

112. To contrast, within the space-time axis of objective self/unself, the cupidity of beauty in metachemical unclearness with the cruelty of love in metachemical clearness - the former perfectly unjust (noumenally criminal) and the latter imperfectly just (noumenally punishing).

 

113. To contrast, within the space-time axis of objective not-self/selflessness, the power of the eyes and/or the heart in metachemical barbarity with the glory of sight-light and/or blood in metachemical civility - the former perfectly evil (noumenally vicious) and the latter imperfectly good (noumenally virtuous).

 

114. To contrast, within the volume-mass axis of objective self/unself, the cupidity of strength in chemical unclearness with the cruelty of pride in chemical clearness - the former imperfectly unjust (phenomenally criminal) and the latter perfectly just (phenomenally punishing).

 

115. To contrast, within the volume-mass axis of objective not-self/selflessness, the power of the tongue and/or the womb in chemical barbarity with the glory of speech and/or conception in chemical civility - the former imperfectly evil (phenomenally vicious) and the latter perfectly good (phenomenally virtuous).

 

116. To contrast, within the mass-volume axis of subjective self/unself, the stupidity of knowledge in physical unholiness with the kindness of pleasure in physical holiness - the former perfectly imprudent (phenomenally sinful) and the latter imperfectly prudent (phenomenally graceful).

 

117. To contrast, within the mass-volume axis of subjective not-self/selflessness, the form of the phallus and/or the brain in physical nature with the content of orgasm and/or cogitation in physical culture - the former perfectly foolish (phenomenally vicious) and the latter imperfectly wise (phenomenally virtuous).

 

118. To contrast, within the time-space axis of subjective self/unself, the stupidity of truth in metaphysical unholiness with the kindness of joy in metaphysical holiness - the former imperfectly imprudent (noumenally sinful) and the latter perfectly prudent (noumenally graceful).

 

119. To contrast, within the time-space axis of subjective not-self/selflessness, the form of the ears and/or the lungs in metaphysical nature with the content of the airwaves and/or the breath in metaphysical culture - the former imperfectly foolish (noumenally vicious) and the latter perfectly wise (noumenally virtuous).

 

120. What applies to the positive attributes of metachemical, chemical, physical, and metaphysical supremacy ... applies no less to their negative counterparts in relation to primacy.

 

121. Hence to contrast ugliness with hatred on the one hand, and the stellar cosmos with Venus on the other hand ... in relation to metachemical primacy.

 

122. Hence to contrast weakness with humility on the one hand, and the moon with the oceanic aspect of the earth on the other hand ... in relation to chemical primacy.

 

123. Hence to contrast ignorance with pain on the one hand, and the terrestrial aspect of the earth with Mars on the other hand ... in relation to physical primacy.

 

124. Hence to contrast falsity with woe on the one hand, and the sun with Saturn on the other hand ... in relation to metaphysical primacy.

 

125. Whereas supremacy has reference to elements and elementinos, primacy has reference, by contrast, to what I shall call anti-elements and anti-elementinos, their negative counterparts.

 

126. All elements and elementinos can, with this theory, be either negative or positive, since my usage of such terms is applicable to definitions of either primacy or supremacy, not to the more conventional notion of subatomic charges.

 

127. The latter concept I have always used as defining the nature of an element and/or elementino, i.e. whether it should be regarded as objective (if subatomically negative) or subjective (if subatomically positive).

 

128. Hence I have had no hesitation in equating negatively-charged subatomic elements like, for example, photons and electrons with objectivity, and hence femaleness, reserving to positively-charged subatomic elements like, for example, protons and (in relative terms) neutrons ... an equation with subjectivity, and hence maleness.

 

129. And yet, besides being negative or positive in this conventional subatomic way, elements and elementinos can, I believe, be primal or supreme, affiliated to negative contexts like, in primal terms, ugliness and hatred or, conversely, to positive contexts like, in supreme terms, beauty and love.

 

130. Thus for me it is the same type of element and/or elementino in a different guise which makes for either primal negativity or supreme positivity in relation to a given elemental axis, be it metachemical (as above), chemical, physical, or metaphysical.

 

131. The applicability of any given subatomic element and/or elementino to a specific axis is, however, conditional upon its 'gender charge', so to speak, in relation to objective (if negative) or subjective (if positive) dispositions.

 

132. Hence the applicability of negatively-charged photons/photinos and/or antiphotons/antiphotinos to the metachemical axis of space-time objectivity and/or anti-objectivity.

 

133. Hence the applicability of negatively-charged electrons/electrinos and/or anti-electrons/anti-electrinos to the chemical axis of volume-mass objectivity and/or anti-objectivity.

 

134. Hence the applicability of (in relative terms) positively-charged neutrons/neutrinos and/or antineutrons/antineutrinos to the physical axis of mass-volume subjectivity and/or antisubjectivity.

 

135. Hence the applicability of positively-charged protons/protinos and/or antiprotons/antiprotinos to the metaphysical axis of time-space subjectivity and/or antisubjectivity.

 

136. Anti-elements/anti-elementinos differ from elements/elementinos as primal objectivity or subjectivity, as the case may be, from supreme objectivity or subjectivity, whether in terms, necessarily noumenal, of cosmic from universal or, more phenomenally, of geologic from personal.

 

137. The objective axes of space-time and volume-mass, being female, will have a greater capacity for primal negativity than for supreme positivity, whereas the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space will have a correspondingly greater capacity for supreme positivity than for primal negativity.

 

138. In fact, primacy will be primary on the objective axes but secondary on the subjective ones, whereas supremacy will be primary on the subjective axes but secondary on the objective ones.

 

139. Thus the objective axes of space-time and volume-mass are more characterized by anti-elements/anti-elementinos than by elements/elementinos, even though the latter will still apply.

 

140. Thus the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space are more characterized by elements/elementinos than by anti-elements/anti-elementinos, even though the latter will still apply.

 

141. Just as it takes less to make a woman angry than to make a man angry, so it takes more to make a woman glad than to make a man glad.

 

142. For men and women have different charges, men generally positive in their subjectivity, and women no less generally negative in their objectivity (though of course neither gender is exclusively one thing or the other).

 

143. It is for this reason that there is more appearance and quantity, corresponding to fiery materialism and to watery realism, about women, but more quality and essence, corresponding to vegetative naturalism and to airy idealism, about men.

 

144. Where a woman talks, a man thinks, for talking is quantitative and thinking qualitative.  Yet there is also what may be called a female approach to thinking, viz. reading, and a male approach to talking, viz. writing - the former apparent and the latter essential.

 

145. Thus the genders could be said to be utilizing intellect on a noumenal basis when they read and/or write - the quasi-noumenality, more particularly, of materialistic thinking on the one hand, that of reading, and of idealistic speaking on the other hand, that of writing.

 

146. It could also be claimed that the genders draw further apart from each other through reading and writing, for they are no longer in the phenomenal contexts of quantity and quality, corresponding to watery tongue and to vegetative brain, but are in the noumenal contexts of appearance and essence, corresponding to fiery eyes and to airy lungs.

 

147. Not only is there a quickening of breath with writing, but ink is, in some sense, the oxygen of writing, quickly drying on the air as it is applied to the lung-like parchment of writing-paper from a vegetative source, viz. the pen.

 

148. In similar fashion, the genders draw together to mate but draw further apart in respect of the female commitment to children and the male commitment, by contrast, to career.

 

149. If talking and thinking are characteristic of the genders as they impact upon each other from either a feminine or a masculine standpoint, then reading and writing are no less characteristic of their maternal and vocational responsibilities as they go about their respective duties of rearing children and pursuing a career.

 

150. Certainly mothers spend a lot of time reading to their children, since the latter respond to the materialistic context of reading and are themselves increasingly prone, in later childhood, to read books, etc.

 

151. There are few careers that don't involve some degree of pen-pushing, as they say, and writing is crucial to people, more usually male, who have a career to pursue, be it in business or the Arts.

 

152. Of course, these days, things are less 'cut and dried' than formerly, but that is only a sign, somewhat paradoxically, of the Heathen/Superheathen, Anglo-American times, and not necessarily a manifestation of better things.

 

153. One could argue that there are many careers, these days, that are, in any case, fundamentally childish, and which call, in consequence of their materialistic bias, for female rather than male contributions.

 

154. With such careers, women are either 'liberated' from 'domestic servitude', as maternal responsibility is called, or choose to combine maternal and professional responsibilities, as the case may be.

 

155. In such fashion, women also become 'liberated' from marriage through divorce and/or a refusal to contemplate marriage in the first place, deeming it a bourgeois anachronism.

 

156. There is obviously a distinction between women who combine marital with professional duties and those, on the other hand, who refuse to entertain anything that would interfere with their careers.

 

157. If the latter eventually have children, they are more likely to have them outside of marriage and to bring them up on as 'free' a basis as possible, scorning the just punishment, in parental chastisement (of offspring), as a bourgeois anachronism.

 

158. Consequently the children - and girls in particular - of such unmarried mothers are likely to grow up freer than would otherwise be the case, and thus take for granted so many immoral and fundamentally barbarous proclivities germane to Superheathen modernity.

 

159. Their mothers, not having married, are more likely to be freer and openly promiscuous, in consequence, than would otherwise be the case, with greater scope for all manner of deceits and abuses, not to mention increased exposure to sexually-transmitted diseases.

 

160. Such Americanized women are patently less civilized than barbarous, sheltering under the Superheathen patronage of the 'Liberty Belle' and all that is scornful of traditional values, whether heathenistically civilized or, worse again from their point of view, naturalistically Christian.

 

161. For just as heathenistic civilization expresses a Protestant revolt against Catholic nature, so superheathenistic barbarism is expressive of an American-style cosmic-based revolt against heathenistic civilization, which continues, as in Britain, to espouse certain traditional values, if more from a secular than an ecclesiastical point of view.

 

162. Culturally, the distinction between civilized tradition (effectively bourgeois) and barbarous modernity (effectively proletarian) would take the forms, for example, of books vis--vis films, or of classical music vis--vis Jazz, or of painting vis--vis light art.

 

163. Whatever the exact case, a distinction indubitably exists not only in terms of, say, Britain and Ireland over Heathen and Christian alternatives, but in terms of Britain and America where Heathen and Superheathen alternatives are concerned, the former civilized (in the narrowly feminine, and hence watery, context of sensual realism) and the latter barbarous (in the fundamentally superfeminine, and hence fiery, context of sensual materialism).

 

164. Hence the thrust of Superheathen modernity comes not from Britain, still less from Ireland, but from the United States of America, which is the prime upholder of barbarous freedom not only at the expense of civilized freedom, the British and, in particular, English tradition, but in opposition to anything demonstrably identifiable with cultural binding.

 

165. For America cares little for and knows even less about genuine culture, given its profligate predilection towards cultural barbarity under the Superheathen patronage of the 'Liberty Belle'.

 

166. In fact America cares even less about genuine culture than Britain, the home, traditionally, of cultural civility under the Heathen patronage of 'Britannia'.

 

167. Even the cultural nature of Catholic Ireland is less than truly cultural, but still closer to genuine culture, for all its sinful shortcomings, than either the cultural civility, manifesting not least of all in garrulous plays, or the cultural barbarity, manifesting more often than not in violent films, of both Britain and America.

 

168. Cultural nature chiefly manifests in sculpture, as of the Virgin Mary and Christ, whereas cultural culture, or the cultural per se, takes the form, more usually, of music, particularly, I would argue, of folk music and that which, through traditional sources, avails of piping, not least of all in terms of uilleann pipes.

 

169. Music will always be the cultural art form par excellence, but there is a vast difference between the cultural culture of folk music at one end of the musical spectrum, so to speak, and the barbarous culture of Jazz at its other end - the former effectively Superchristian and the latter Superheathen.

 

170. In between - and lower down - one could distinguish the phenomenal modes of music from their noumenal counterparts on the basis of a feminine/masculine dichotomy between the civilized culture of Pop and the natural culture of Classical - the former effectively Heathen and the latter Christian.

 

171. Overall, this is effectively to distinguish the airiness of Folk from the fieriness of Jazz, while likewise distinguishing the vegetativeness of Classical from the wateriness of Pop, pretty much as, in religious terms, one would distinguish transcendentalism from fundamentalism on the one hand, and nonconformism from humanism on the other hand.

 

172. Thus not only do the brass-oriented fieriness of Jazz and the vocals-oriented wateriness of Pop stand, as objective types of music, on the same side of the gender fence, but they stand as a sort of Anglo-American testimony to musical freedom in respectively Superheathen and Heathen terms.

 

173. Conversely, not only do the strings-oriented vegetativeness of Classical and the pipes-oriented airiness of Folk stand, as subjective types of music, on the same side of the gender fence, but they stand as a sort of Euro-Gaelic testimony to musical binding in respectively Christian and Superchristian terms.

 

174. Hence to contrast the barbarous fieriness and civilized wateriness of Jazz and Pop with the natural vegetativeness and cultural airiness of Classical and Folk, as one would contrast metachemical materialism and chemical realism with physical naturalism and metaphysical idealism.

 

175. Obviously the terms 'Jazz', 'Pop', 'Classical', and 'Folk' have reference to general categories that embrace a number of related subdivisions, including the Blues, Rock, Romantic, and Trad.

 

176. Yet such subdivisions are still characterized by adherence to the elemental bias of the general category, and should not be regarded as constituting an independent elemental category in the manner of each of the principal musical divisions - viz. fire in the case of Jazz, water in the case of Pop, vegetation in the case of Classical, and air in the case of Folk.

 

177. It may be that some subdivisions of a given type of music are rather more negative, overall, than positive, and thus stand to the principal category in the manner of primal to supreme, as in the cases, for example, of Blues to Jazz or even of Romantic to Classical.

 

178. Such subdivisions would constitute modes of antimusic, whether in relation to the objective contexts of Jazz and Pop, or, alternatively, to the subjective contexts of Classical and Folk.

 

179. For antimusic will have less to do, overall, with love, pride, pleasure, or joy, than with hatred, humility, pain, or woe, as befitting its negative, and hence primal, disposition.

 

180. Whatever the exact case, musical freedom stands objectively aloof, in both negative and positive contexts, from musical binding, as that which most typifies the Superheathen/Heathen (un)nature of the age and its instinctual and emotional opposition, in consequence, to intellectual and spiritual orientations, such that more accord with Christian and Superchristian criteria.

 

181. The free musician does not care to read music (from scores) or learn by rote a traditional tune, but relies heavily upon memory for the basic structure of his compositions, which are then enlarged upon through improvisation.

 

182. Thus improvisation is crucial to the concept of musical freedom, whether the improvisation be instinctively conditioned, as more usually in the case of Jazz, or emotionally conditioned, as in the case more usually of Pop, where vocal and/or bodily freedom (depending on the context) is arguably more important than instrumental freedom.

 

183. Anything 'bound', as with regard to the reliance of classical music upon printed scores or of folk music upon inherited tradition, is anathema to the free musician, who disdainfully turns his back upon what he regards as either bourgeois or obsolete, if not both bourgeois and obsolete.

 

184. But Christian and Superchristian types of music persist, even in Britain and America, where they defy the freedom of female objectivity in loyalty to binding to male subjectivity.

 

185. Neither nature or culture, physics or metaphysics, naturalism or idealism, nor vegetation or air ... can be excluded from life, even though, in some countries, notably Britain and America, they have been marginalized by the prevailing elements of water and fire, realism and materialism, chemistry and metachemistry, civility and barbarity.

 

186. If, eventually, both Classical and (especially) Folk overhaul Pop and Jazz, as a progressive return is made to binding, it will not be on traditional terms but in a new and transmuted guise such that reflects environmental and technological progress.

 

187. Such a male-centred overhaul of Pop and Jazz would be properly commensurate with a Superchristian age, an age when not Classical but Folk, or some derivative thereof, was the prevailing type of music, to the detriment, if not effective exclusion, of Jazz.

 

188. For things are not going to revert to Christianity, nor even to Heathenism, when they are patently Superheathen, and thus Americanized, but can only progress, within noumenal parameters, to a subjective antithesis to Superheathen modernity in the guise of Superchristian futurity.

 

189. Thus life will pass, slowly but surely, from one noumenal extreme to another, dragging the phenomenal realms (of what is now recognizably the Heathen/Christian world of realism and naturalism) after it, as metaphysics replaces metachemistry as the true exemplar of evolutionary progress and, in a very literal sense, moral leadership.

 

190. For Superheathenism doesn't so much lead the world as rule it, as from a cosmic-oriented basis in metachemical materialism, and such a 'once-born' situation is commensurate not with binding but with freedom, the rule of noumenal objectivity and, to a lesser extent, phenomenal objectivity from what are patently female positions.

 

191. Just as 'Britannia' superseded a Christianity fallen into Marian decadence, so the 'Liberty Belle' will one day be superseded by a Superchristian retort which will offer the world what it has so far lacked - namely, true leadership.

 

192. Freedom may be at the 'cutting edge' of revolution, but it is not, and never could be, in the vanguard of evolution.  For evolution requires not freedom but binding, binding, above all, to an ultimate order such that advances religion to a new and altogether more genuine level of spirituality.

 

193. Just as there is something reactive about revolution, so evolution is active, active in the sense of furthering moral progress at the expense of the immorality of freedom.

 

194. One cannot repeat too often that whereas revolutions are designed, in their violent methodologies, to liberate people from an old order of binding, evolutionary progress is concerned with the deliverance of people from the disorder of freedom, so that they may be returned to a new order of binding, superior to anything that went before.

 

195. Just as one is damned (as a woman) to freedom by revolutionary liberation, so one is saved (as a man) from freedom to binding by evolutionary deliverance, as moral action replaces immoral reaction as the principal mode of conduct.

 

196. Freedom is a woman and binding a man, and though neither freedom nor binding can be totally hegemonic, not even on the noumenal planes of space and time (where absolutism of one kind or another is the elemental norm), societies can be known and judged according to whether freedom or binding is their principal characteristic.

 

197. Phenomenal societies, whether Heathen or Christian, will generally favour and achieve, in their molecular relativity, an imbalanced compromise between freedom and binding, woman and man, whereas their noumenal counterparts, of which America is a contemporary Superheathen example, will be much more disposed to emphasize freedom or binding, in keeping with their more absolutist dispositions.

 

198. Hence freedom or binding, rather than freedom and binding, is the rule for noumenal societies, which are less disposed to volume and mass than to time and space - at least officially and according to how they shape up culturally.

 

199. For all societies have to embrace some degree of pluralism, and the Social Transcendentalism to which I subscribe would not be above that in its commitment, through the advancement of religious sovereignty in the People, to the triadic Beyond of the deistic Centre.

 

200. Thus there can be no question of freedom being entirely excluded from the religious pluralism of the triadic Beyond, but, rather, constrained and maintained at a sensibly phenomenal level (water), wherein it will act as a foundation for both the phenomenal binding through vegetation and the noumenal binding through air of the higher tiers of the Beyond in question.

 

201. For, ultimately, you cannot turn (gender-change exceptions to the rule notwithstanding) women into men or men into women.  You can only constrain the freedom of the one and enhance the binding of the other, in keeping with the objective/subjective distinction between humanism on the one hand, and nonconformism and transcendentalism on the other, the former watery, and the latter respectively vegetative and airy.

 

202. Hence the noumenal binding of transcendentalism is not for everyone but only for those who, as supermen, prove themselves capable of it, in due cultural vein.

 

203. The triadic Beyond will still uphold some kind of civility and some kind of nature 'down below', on the phenomenal tiers of its overall structure, thereby allowing for the inevitable mass and volume shortfalls from space which would, I believe, typify persons of, in particular, Puritan and Anglican denominational backgrounds, in the event of their approaching the development of religious sovereignty, as must be expected, from a phenomenal standpoint.

 

204. For the triadic Beyond is disposed to accommodate people from both Protestant and Catholic traditions, the former on the phenomenal tiers and the latter on the noumenal one at the top, although, in practice, all tiers would be subsectioned in order to allow for both gender segregation and 'quasi' manifestations, within the prevailing element characterizing any given tier, of the other types of religious praxis.

 

205. Hence quasi-nonconformism and quasi-transcendentalism within the humanist tier at the bottom; quasi-humanism and quasi-transcendentalism within the nonconformist tier in the middle; and quasi-humanism and quasi-nonconformism within the transcendentalist tier at the top.

 

206. Some might argue that men who are into chemical substances for purposes of self-realization should simply be put-in with the women in the bottom subsection of each tier - either that or each subsection may have to be further subdivided to allow for continuing gender segregation?

 

207. Hence, they would argue, rather than confining intellectually- or spiritually-inclined women to the emotional, and hence chemical, subsection of each tier, subdivisions of the physical and the metaphysical subsections would allow them to be intellectual or spiritual independently of their male counterparts.

 

208. Frankly, I don't believe that one should allow for intellectual or spiritual commitments from women in the triadic Beyond, since that would liberalize it to a degree whereby unsegregated intellectuality and spirituality would be the next thing on the female agenda, with disastrously amoral consequences for all concerned!

 

209. Once you start de-structuring an ultimate order, things will quickly fall apart and degenerate from the bound to the free, thereby becoming the opposite of what they were intended to be.

 

210. It is better that the women be confined to the bottom subsection of each tier, wherein chemical realism, naturalism, or idealism would be the norm, and that any intellectual or spiritual predilections some of them may have, whether through delusions of grandeur or in consequence of bourgeois conditioning, should take place, if at all, within the subsection in question, not in further subdivisions of the masculine or supermasculine subsections!

 

211. Likewise, men with a drug habit that is commensurate with either water, vegetation, or air ... should be encouraged, in the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' (hopefully a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) to 'kick the habit' through exposure to intellectual alternatives rather than have it re-enforced through confinement in the bottom subsection of each tier, where they would be vulnerable, in any case, to female seduction.

 

212. Although it might seem fitting, if rather cynically so, to oblige male drug-users to share the same subsection of any given tier with women, in practice I fear that they would simply 'bog down' in chemical freedom to the detriment, if not exclusion, of physical and/or metaphysical binding.

 

213. Thus just as I do not believe in lowering men to a female level, so I cannot bring myself to believe in raising women to a male one.  Such liberalizing tendencies strike me as promiscuous and likely to lead, as they have down in bourgeois civilization, to a break-down of structure and a correlative escalation of freedom - the immoral enemy of everything bound.

 

214. Women may well be capable of intellectual and/or spiritual achievements and commitments, but not, as a rule, to anything like the same extent as men, since, quite apart from physiological conditioning factors, such subjective pursuits run contrary to their objective grain as women, and can only be of secondary relevance to them in consequence.

     

215. Although both sexes are subject to biological conditioning, such biological conditioning as women are subject to on the female side of life makes for free will, whereas such biological conditioning as men are subject to on the male side of life makes, by contrast, for natural determinism.

 

216. Such consequences of biological conditioning also of course 'cut it both ways', but not, as a rule, to anything like the same extent with each gender.

 

217. For the objective disposition of women will owe its origins to a vacuous precondition (as in stellar and/or lunar primacy), such that is predominantly behind their 'free' mode of biological conditioning, whereas the subjective disposition of men will owe its origins to a plenumous precondition (as in terrestrial and/or solar primacy), such that is preponderantly behind their 'bound' mode of biological conditioning.

 

218. Aldous Huxley was always quoting the poet Fulke Greville's line about being 'born under one law, [but] to another bound', and although 'one law' obviously has to do with freedom and 'another law' with binding, it is evident that men are more disposed than women, as a rule, to the law of binding, particularly with regard to sensibility.

 

219. Such, at any rate, would have been the case when Christian criteria were paramount, and men deferred to culture via nature rather than, as in heathenistic and superheathenistic societies, to either civility or barbarity pre-eminently, as has become increasingly the case since approximately the seventeenth century.

 

220. In 'free societies' like those of Britain (watery phenomenal) and America (fiery noumenal), it can hardly be said of most men that they are 'born under one law, [but] to another bound', particularly in view of the paucity of natural determinism that characterizes the championship of freedom both in relation to the twin objectivities of speech and the press.

 

221. Both the phenomenal and the noumenal kinds of freedom are 'born under one law', the law of feminine civility on the one hand, and the law of superfeminine barbarity on the other hand, and in neither case is there much respect for binding, or subjectively-conditioned constraints upon either freedom of speech or freedom of the camera-besotted press deriving, by contrast, from adherence to natural and/or cultural binding.

 

222. Even traditional institutions and manifestations of binding via natural determinism are - where they still exist - ridden roughshod over by the 'free spirits' of Heathen/Superheathen modernity, who do not recognize any law save that to which they were 'once born', compliments of either 'Britannia' or the 'Liberty Belle'.

 

223. For only the liberties of the tongue and the eyes mean anything to them - the one to dominate the flesh (with its phallic fulcrum) and exclude, as far as possible, the brain; the other to dominate the ears and exclude, as far as possible, the lungs.

 

224. Both the womb and the heart, on the other hand, are grudgingly tolerated as objective modes of sensibility that owe more to free will than ever they do to natural determinism, bearing in mind their female standings.

 

225. For natural determinism is a subjective thing, and neither the womb nor the heart are preponderantly subjective, only the brain and the lungs in sensibility and, to a lesser extent, the phallus and the ears in sensuality, neither of which exist independently of the tongue and the eyes, but are bound to their sensual dominion.

 

226. Thus the phallus is obliged to defer to the tongue, and the ears ... to the eyes, just as men must defer to women wherever freedom is the ruling law, the 'once-born' law of Heathen/Superheathen modernity.

 

227. In such circumstances it could be argued that men are enslaved by women, since they are bound to them and obliged to defer to their objective hegemony, manifesting freedom.

 

228. How different from the 're-born' Christian and/or Superchristian types of society in which men have been delivered from such an enslavement to the salvation of either the brain (if phenomenal) or the lungs (if noumenal), and women are accordingly 'pegged down' to the subordinate objectivities and constrained freedoms of the womb (if phenomenal) and/or the heart (if noumenal) in what amounts to a quasi-Christian and/or quasi-Superchristian deference, via sensibility, to the subjective hegemony of moral law, the law not of free will but of natural determinism.

 

229. Then it can be maintained, with no uncertainty, that men are 'born under one law, [but] to another bound', and women are accordingly obliged to defer to the 'bound law' to which men, more usually as Christians, moralistically subscribe in their self-respecting subjectivity.

 

230. When, on the other hand, men are deferring to freedom, whether directly as 'free spirits' or indirectly as compromised bound ones, such a 're-born' situation can hardly be said to apply, in consequence of which they are less Christian than effectively Heathen and/or Superheathen, as the case may be.

 

231. This is certainly the case for most Britons and Americans, who exist in societies dominated by objective factors in which, due to 'once-born' criteria, the female side of life 'pulls rank' on its male side, the latter sensually subordinate to it on due pseudo-Christian (if Anglican British) and/or Subchristian (if Judaic American) terms.

 

232. Now just as pseudo-Christianity was expressive of an Anglican revolt against Christianity, meaning Roman Catholicism, so pseudo-Christianity became the victim, in due course, of a parliament-inspired anti-Christian revolt by Puritans and Dissenters as the 'free churches', closer in elemental terms to water and fire than to vegetation, gravitated, following civil unrest, to a hegemonic position over the Established Church, shackled, as it was, to the monarch.

 

233. Thus even the pseudo-Christian Church is compromised by freedom to the extent that, in England, it is subjected to the figureheadship of the reigning monarch, that sensible objectivity, duly constrained, of the 'Blood Royal', which precludes vegetative binding to Christ, since pseudo-Christianity is effectively no less sensual in its bodily vegetativeness, a sinful vegetativeness without confessional contrition, than its anti-Christian antagonists are sensual with regard to a watery and/or fiery tongue.

 

234. Be that as it may, the anti-Christian or 'free churches' became victims, in the American context, of a Subchristian revolt, which is arguably closer to the Judaic model of fiery airiness in its musicality, since more germane to the ears than to the tongue, and such a context, being fundamentally subjective, is more bound than free.

 

235. However, American society is no less illustrative of a triangular situation than British society, the only difference being that its triangle is pyramidal rather than inverted, for no sooner is Subchristianity established as the male retort to anti-Christian precedent than it finds itself beset by the twin freedoms of anti-Subchristian Heathenism, the light-based Superheathen freedom of sensual transcendentalism on the one hand, and the blood-based Subheathen freedom (analogous in some respects to the 'Blood Royal') of sensible fundamentalism - the former expressing an affiliation to the eyes and the latter an affiliation to the heart.

 

236. But it is the Superheathen freedom of the light which is 'top dog' in America, and consequently the Subheathen freedom of the blood is of secondary importance, on the female side of life, to that which rules a metachemical roost, to the detriment, more especially, of the metaphysical 'fall guy', whose Subchristian subjectivity, in submasculinity, is deferentially bound to the anti-Subchristian hegemony of the Superheathen freedom in question.

 

237. Needless to say, such freedom is symbolized, in America, by the 'Liberty Belle', since that is what correlates with the superfeminine, and hence the Superheathen transcendentalism of the ruling law, the law of maximum freedom for the female side of life in what amounts to the hegemony of sensual materialism over sensual idealism.

 

238. Such a hegemony has a Biblical parallel, none too surprisingly, in the rule of Jehovah over Satan, the stellar 'First Mover' over the solar 'Fallen Angel', and we need not doubt that uncritical adherence to the Old Testament, the Testament par excellence of American society, will fuel the flames of self-righteous bigotry in relation to it.

 

239. For the adherent of Superheathen objectivity is no less likely to feel smugly superior, in his 'once-born' law of sensual freedom, to the adherent of Subchristian (Judaic) subjectivity, who is bound to that law, than the adherent of Heathen objectivity will feel smugly superior to the pseudo-Christian subjectivity which characterizes the deferential binding to his freedom, the 'free church' freedom of a watery departure from vegetative sin which governs a parliamentary roost.

 

240. In both cases, the female side of life, able with the subfeminine factors, both genuine and pseudo, to draw upon the full complement of relevant objective options, is free to dominate its male side, with secular implications, in respect of crime and punishment, for all concerned.

 

241. One cannot, I repeat cannot be properly Christian (or sensibly nonconformist), much less Superchristian (and sensibly transcendentalist) in either of these circumstances, which is why both Britain and America - despite people of Christian, or Catholic, resolve - are respectively Heathen and Superheathen countries, the one dedicated, through watery dominion, to freedom of speech, the other no-less dedicated, through fiery dominion, to freedom of the (camera-wielding) press.

 

242. Even Christians, or people of a Roman Catholic persuasion, who live in societies with a heathen and/or superheathen majority, are compromised by the prevailing laws of freedom and vulnerable, in consequence, to proclivities of a realistic and/or materialistic (un)nature which are anything but Christian.

 

243. Even Christians who happen to live in countries, like Eire, which are overwhelmingly Roman Catholic will be exposed to the ever-present threat of Heathen and/or Superheathen criteria, as and when they succumb, via the media, to Anglo-American influences.

 

244. Every day that passes, the Christian side of life loses more ground to the un-Christian, or heathenistic, side of it; for the Christian Church can only stand still and mark time, tied, as it is, to the primitive theocracy of the Old Testament, whereas the un-Christian State and/or Kingdom is all the time advancing its immoral agendas in regard to the maximization of freedom under the rule of 'once-born' law.

 

245. That is why the Superchristian pseudo-Kingdom must come democratically to pass, under the benevolent auspices of Social Transcendentalism, in order to advance the preponderantly moral agenda of the Centre with regard to the maximization of binding, within the triadic Beyond, under the rule of 're-born' law.

 

246. Such a Superchristian pseudo-Kingdom I have not hesitated to identify, particularly in relation to my projected Centrist idealism of a Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), with 'Kingdom Come', and I am convinced that it is the only solution to the problem of moral decline for Christians (not to mention many pseudo-Christians and anti-Christians) vis--vis the rampant immoral threats and dangers of secular freedom.

 

247. Only thus will the Gael become the 'saviour of idealism' (Connolly) in modern life, and for him a more joyful future lies in wait which will deliver him from the moral dilemma posed by the inability of Christianity to resist the secular encroachments upon religious binding which characterize the times.

 

248. Even Jews can be delivered from their deferentially 'once-born' binding to Superheathen freedom if they renounce the God-over-Devil delusion of the Old Testament and elect to 'turn their back' upon all Creator-worship, in order to achieve a 're-born' binding to the inner metaphysical self/unself via the inner metaphysical not-self and selflessness within the Centrist parameters of Social Transcendentalism.

 

249. For only a Superchristian binding can deliver them, or a significant proportion of their number, from official deference towards the Superheathen tyranny of stellar freedom within the pyramidal triangle, where Satan languishes under Jehovah's shadow, as David under Saul and/or Moses, or ears under eyes.

 

250. One can be delivered from ears to lungs, as from solar to Saturnalian in cosmic backdrop to this metaphysical mode of universality, but it will take a renunciation of deferential acquiescence in the hegemony of illusion, if sensible truth is to be achieved and upheld to a joyful end.

 

251. As for the Gaels, who of course are my principal concern, I have no doubt that the womb and the brain will play just as much, if not more, of a role in 'Kingdom Come' as the lungs, where the overall triadic structure of the Centre is concerned.

 

252. In fact, such a structure is unavoidable anyway whatever one's religious background, since idealism requires the support of both naturalism and realism if it is not to become merely a 'castle in the air' or 'pie in the sky', without proper foundation.

 

253. And neither would the triadic Beyond of a new water (and purgatory), a new vegetation (and earth), and a new airiness (and Heaven), be supportable without reference to the new fieriness (and Hell) of a pseudo-Kingdom, which would be empowered to administer to it, and ensure that it was both protected and advanced throughout all Eternity.

 

254. Paradoxically, the pseudo-Kingdom would be a sort of classless institution pandering to the first-, second-, and third-class citizens of the Centre, since the overall structure of the triadic Beyond would be such as to suggest that bottom-tier people would be third-class citizens in their humanist adherence to watery realism; that middle-tier people would be second-class citizens in their nonconformist adherence to vegetative naturalism; and that top-tier people would be first-class citizens in their transcendentalist adherence to airy idealism.

 

255. Hence it is the administrative aside (of the pseudo-Kingdom) that would be classless vis--vis the three-tier class structure of the Centre, in which people were effectively lower, middle, and upper class according to their overall position in the element-conditioned hierarchy of the triadic Beyond, both the lower and middle categories being phenomenal and the upper category alone noumenal, as befitting its idealistic nature in what would amount to the most perfect binding of joyful content(ment).

 

256. Thus, within the Gaelic context, people of Puritan, Anglican, and Catholic denominational background would find, under the unifying adoption of Social Transcendentalism, a tier of the Centre, duly subsectioned, that would mirror, in suitably modified terms, their respective elemental biases, be it for water, vegetation, or air.

 

257. Thus would the watery 'first' be 'last' (bottom), the watery-vegetative 'last' be 'first' (middle), and the vegetative-airy excluded (from the heathenistic triangle of so-called Protestant solidarity) be elevated (top), as people passed from the Heathen/Christian world of State/Church dialectical relativity to the triadic Beyond via the pseudo-Kingdom of 'Kingdom Come', a Gaelic federation, to repeat, of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.

 

258. Anglicans may, as a rule, be pseudo-Christian in their deferential binding to heathenistic freedom (within the inverted triangle of so-called Protestant solidarity), but they could not be described as anti-Christian, after the watery manner of Puritans.

 

259. For they are still, if only just, on the male side of the gender fence, the side, more specifically, of vegetative binding to masculine subjectivity, as symbolized by the Crucified Christ, and are consequently quite distinct, even in England, from 'the free'.

 

260. Anglicans may be constrained by monarchic allegiance (where applicable) from embracing the airy-vegetativeness of Roman Catholic binding, but they are not overly disposed to the watery disposition of the 'free churches' in what amounts to an anti-Christian standing of objective aloofness from the vegetative earth.

 

261. Such an objective aloofness, avowedly feminine, finds its political embodiment in parliament, that champion of 'free speech', which is accordingly affiliated to the free churches in defence, by and large, of anti-Christian (secular) values.

 

262. Hence the tongue 'pulls rank' over the flesh, as water over vegetation, in the 'once-born' context of parliamentary freedom, and the flesh, duly constrained in England by allegiance to the 'Blood Royal', is obliged to defer to the hegemony of heathenistic freedom.

 

263. Yet the focus of anti-Christianity and, indeed, of the Antichrist remains on the 'free churches', whose ministers are the living embodiment of that which is ranged, in watery objectivity, against the vegetative earth.

 

264. There is, and has long been, more freedom for women to become ministers in the 'free churches' than - at any rate, until comparatively recently - in the Anglican or Established one, which (fact) is not altogether surprising in view of their feminine bias towards watery objectivity, as, for instance, in the importance attached to baptism by Baptists.

 

265. When such a bias becomes passionate, as in Dissenter-type churches, we are, to all intents and purposes, more in the realm of the 'burning Cross' than of the 'scales-of-justice Cross', which effectively characterizes Puritan abstraction, the abstraction born of freedom from bodily vegetativeness.

 

266. Hence there is more of a Labour parallel, I would argue, than a Conservative one to the fiery-water of passionate objectivity, while down below, at the base of the inverted triangle, one may detect a Liberal parallel to the watery-vegetation that is the object, more usually, of dispassionate verbal attention from 'on high', viz. the Conservatives.

 

267. Thus do the 'red' and the 'blue' line up against the 'yellowish brown', if not 'brownish yellow', of the parliamentary 'fall guy', just as, outside of parliament, the Dissenter and Puritan churches line up, in their respective approaches to phenomenal freedom, against the Anglican Church, in what amounts to an anti-Christian/pseudo-Christian gender-conditioned dichotomy between free and bound (established) interests.

 

268. Just as there are what certain blunt-speaking sections of the British people would call two kinds of 'cunt' over one type of 'prick' in the phenomenal context of realistic civilization, with its inverted triangle, so there are what their American counterparts would probably call two kinds of 'motherfucker' over one type of 'sonofabitch' in the noumenal context of materialistic barbarism, with its pyramidal triangle.

 

269. At least one can detect a dichotomy, in the latter kind of triangle, between the superfeminine-to-subfeminine axis of space-time materialism and the submasculine idealist who gets to play 'fall guy', in sequential time, for those self-righteous individuals whose noumenally objective status sets them apart from the objects of their gender-based and even Bible-conditioned contempt.

 

270. Not only do those earmarked for 'sonofabitch' denigration get to play the noumenal equivalent of 'pricks', but they are readily identifiable as 'assholes' (bums) to the denigratory 'jerks' who dominate them from 'on high', like motherfuck*** avengers of the 'Liberty Belle'.

 

271. Be that as it may, we need not doubt that, politically considered, there is a sort of Republican/Democrat distinction between the noumenally objective and their subjective scapegoats, some of whom will appear to the former as 'reds under the bed' or otherwise subversive of the political status quo, though they would be the last to recognize the superfeminine 'beam' in their own eye when condemning the submasculine 'mote' in the eye of their political antagonist.

 

272. In fact, so self-righteously convinced are they of their ideological superiority to the submasculine 'fall guy', that they will not hesitate to attribute all manner of Satanic practices to him which show that where they are 'God fearing' in their loyalty to Jehovah, he is a 'God-denying' atheistic 'sonofabitch' who cannot be trusted with the running of a 'free society'.

 

273. Certainly not to the extent, I would wager, of sending laser cannons into space and maintaining the need for a 'star-wars' type scenario to keep America free from communist subversion and any other external threats to its much-vaunted liberty.

 

274. No doubt, communism isn't really the solution to the 'Liberty Belle' but only another symptom of the overall problem of Superheathen modernity, wherein the submasculine seeks to displace the superfeminine and/or subfeminine and rule (if rather more bindingly so) in her stead.

 

275. Either way, a 'once-born' situation is the Superheathen result, and if this is closer, in religious terms, to Judaism than to either Hinduism or Mohammedanism, it is still far from being even remotely Buddhist.  It will not have entirely escaped the superfeminine tyrant but simply have exposed her for what she is, and stigmatized as fascist anything that pertains to her libertarian will.

 

276. 'Rebirth' from sensuality to sensibility is not achieved simply by replacing one 'once-born' system with another, neither in parts of the world where it sort of works on a communistic basis nor in those parts, like America, where there are too many stars in the night sky.

 

277. 'Rebirth' requires a 'change of heart', a moral resolve on the part of people to 'change their ways' and 'turn their back' on the past, whatever that 'once-born' past may happen to have been.  It is not something that can be enforced, neither militarily nor ideologically through propaganda.

 

278. Neither does 'rebirth' follow from a revolution, except perhaps where there is need of a counter-revolution to get things back on an evolutionary track in relation to the desire for a new order of binding that will displace the disorder of freedom to which the 'once born' once subscribed, before becoming disillusioned with it.

 

279. People who find themselves in a predominantly free and objective society may well have to undergo some kind of counter-revolution to re-establish a desire for binding, but those who are habituated to a bound society will already be in a subjective position, and have only to step it up, voluntarily, to achieve their heavenly ends.

 

280. It is of course possible to be exposed to binding, if not actually bound, against one's (free) will, and this we call being enslaved, as and when persons with an objective disposition are encouraged to live with binding in relation to a moralistic society.

 

281. It is also possible to be exposed to freedom, if not actually free, against one's (bound) will, and this we call being dispossessed, as and when persons with a subjective disposition are encouraged to live with freedom in relation to an immoral society.

 

282. The Enslaved and the Dispossessed will generally be exceptions to the rule however, since the majority of people in any given type of society will normally be either free or bound, according to either their democratically or theocratically expressed wishes.

 

283. Those who were once free but subsequently find themselves living in a bound society may well consider themselves enslaved to the Bound, whereas those who were once bound but subsequently find themselves living in a free society may well consider themselves dispossessed by the Free.

 

284. Either way, there will be a gender antagonism between the Enslaved and the Bound on the one hand, and between the Dispossessed and the Free on the other hand, an antagonism which may or may not lead to freedom or to binding, depending on the context, for the minorities concerned.

 

285. A 'just society' will seek to ameliorate, as far as possible, the plight of the Dispossessed for the sake of the Free, whilst a 'wise society' will tolerate a certain degree of freedom for the sake of the Bound.

 

286. No society can be entirely free or entirely bound, given the gender basis for the dichotomy between freedom and binding, free will and natural determinism, but all societies will evince a bias towards one or the other, according to their ethnic bent.

 

287. Thus both Britain and America are 'free societies' to the extent that heathenistic criteria predominate with regard, in the one case, to 'freedom of speech' and, in the other case, to 'freedom of the press', but they also contain bound elements in relation to Christian sensibility, some of whom may well feel themselves to be of the Dispossessed.

 

288. Thus Ireland, to take but a single example of a Christian (Roman Catholic) country, is by and large a 'bound society' to the extent that Christian criteria preponderate with regard, for example, to 'binding to pregnancy' (as Marian requirement) and 'binding to Christ' (through the Mass), but it also contains free elements in relation to Heathen sensuality, some of whom may well feel themselves to be of the Enslaved.

 

289. Being enslaved in the above sense is not of course the same as being incarcerated, and neither is being dispossessed the same as being unemployed or otherwise incapacitated through redundancy, ill-health, accident, etc.

 

290. Anyone can be incarcerated, whether of an objective or of a subjective disposition overall, just as anyone can be unemployed and thus obliged, contrary to the imprisoned, to live with more freedom than he/she would ordinarily want.

 

291. The main difference, it seems to me, between the Incarcerated and the Unemployed is that whereas the former are obliged to live in binding (chains) against their will, usually as punishment for crime, the latter are obliged to live in freedom (want) against their will, as ungraceful surplus to sinful requirement.

 

292. Those who are obliged to live contrary to their will are thus by no means identical with those who find themselves living in societies in which the majority of people are illustrative of a contrary order of will, whether bound or free.

 

293. Considered morally, binding may be more desirable than freedom, but morality is a subjective consideration which will accordingly suit men more than women, as a rule, and thereby necessitate, at its 're-born' best, some Christian-type arrangement of society, contrary to Heathen practices.

 

294. For any fool can be deferentially bound to freedom in the 'kingdom without', but only that man who is 're-born' into subjective sensibility will be delivered (from such self-defeating deference) via binding to Christ and/or the Holy Spirit through his phenomenal self and/or noumenal self, which will accordingly be enhanced.

 

295. In the first instance, the perfect form of knowledge in vegetative sin; in the second instance, the perfect content(ment) of joy in airy grace - all the difference, in short, between the Church and the Centre of 'Kingdom Come', man and superman.

 

296. Sin is the death-in-life (of the earth) and grace the Life Eternal (of Heaven), the difference between the Crucified and the Resurrected, the ego and the mind of phenomenal subjectivity and noumenal subjectivity, with especial reference, in 'rebirth', to sensibility.

 

297. By contrast, crime is the Death Eternal (of Hell) and punishment the life-in-death (of purgatory), the difference between the Condemned and the Avenged, the id and the soul of noumenal objectivity and phenomenal objectivity, with especial reference, in 'once-born' contexts, to sensuality.

 

298. In fact, one could broaden the scope of this perspective to distinguish, in elemental terms, the fire of Eternal Death from the water of life-in-death on the one hand, that of female objectivity, while likewise distinguishing the vegetation of death-in-life from the air of Eternal Life on the other hand, that of male subjectivity.

 

299. Thus Eternal Death and life-in-death are metachemical and chemical actualities that have reference to materialism and realism, both of which are free proclivities, whereas death-in-life and Eternal Life are physical and metaphysical actualities that have reference to naturalism and idealism, both of which are bound proclivities.

 

300. Hence freedom is commensurate with death, whether absolutely, in the noumenal objectivity of space-time materialism, or relatively, in the phenomenal objectivity of volume-mass realism, both of which are free of life, through fire and water, and are thus dead.

 

301. By contrast, binding is commensurate with life, whether relatively, in the phenomenal subjectivity of mass-volume naturalism, or absolutely, in the noumenal subjectivity of time-space idealism, both of which are bound to life, through vegetation and air, and are thus alive.

 

302. Even life-in-death, the punishing freedom of the phenomenally objective, is still death, the living death of 'the good', whereas death-in-life, the sinful binding of the phenomenally subjective, is still life, the deathly life of 'the foolish', who are as far beneath Eternal Life, the noumenal life of 'the wise' ... as their objective counterparts are beneath Eternal Death, the noumenal death of 'the evil'.

 

303. Thus both (England-dominated) Britain and America are countries of death, the only difference being that whereas Britain's death is the life-in-death of phenomenal objectivity, corresponding to parliamentary freedom, America's death is the Eternal Death of noumenal objectivity, corresponding to freedom of the press.

 

304. In fact, one could cite 'Britannia' as symbolic of life-in-death, or command of water (not only in terms of tongue-based freedom of speech, but also in terms of navigable freedom of the seas, etc.), and the 'Liberty Belle' as symbolic of Eternal Death, or command of fire (not just in terms of photographic freedom, but also in regard to the conquest of space and siting of laser and/or spy satellites, etc.).

 

305. In neither country would there be all that much respect for life, neither phenomenally, in relation to death-in-life, nor noumenally, in relation to Eternal Life, since the one presupposes the Catholic Church while the other presupposes, in its full-blown manifestation, the Social Transcendentalist Centre of 'Kingdom Come', the pseudo-Kingdom of, initially, a Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), as taught by me.

 

306. The pyramidal triangle of American society (barbarity) is the structural illustration of Eternal Death, just as the inverted triangle of British society (civility) is the structural illustration of life-in-death.

 

307. America's obsession with the death penalty is ample evidence of its predilection for death, not least of all in terms of the way electrocuting, gassing, and poisoning (via lethal injection) seem to fit into, or equate with, the pyramidal triangle.

 

308. For just as American sport would seem to range from 'gridiron', or American so-called football, at the apex of the pyramidal triangle to baseball and basketball along its base, so that we get a sort of eyes-over-ears-to-heart parallel or, in negative terms, stellar-over-solar-to-Venusian parallel, so the American modes of corporal punishment would seem to take up equivalent positions, with electrocuting at the apex of the triangle in question, and gassing and poisoning along its base.

 

309. Thus there would seem to be a parallel between 'gridiron' and the electric chair, baseball and the gas chamber, and basketball and lethal injection, at least in terms of their respective applicabilities to the pyramidal triangle.

 

310. Doubtless fries, burgers and cola, corresponding to apex and base of the pyramidal triangle, are the culinary parallels to the above, along, in all probability, with synthesizers, brass and hand-percussion for the musical parallels to what is, after all, a death-driven system having its apex in the spatial space of the superfeminine, and its base in submasculine-to-subfeminine positions along the plane of time, the one sequential and the other repetitive, as in regard, for example, to ears and heart.

 

311. Be that as it may, America is a death-obsessed society presided over by the 'Liberty Belle', who symbolically sanctions the electrocution, it would seem, of certain of her wayward offspring via thunderbolt-like blasts from 'on high'.

 

312. It is the mentality of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' which prevails in America, a country par excellence of the Old Testament and of capital retribution, in consequence, for serious crime.

 

313. Were America more elementally identifiable with water, like Britain, than with fire, then it would probably not have the death penalty but only the punishing justice of life-in-death, or incarceration, under the maternal governance of 'Britannia'.  But America is, after all, American, not British, and is thus subject, due to a combination of climatic and historical factors, to fire more than to water or, at any rate, to a culture which reflects a superfeminine hegemony in the 'Liberty Belle', and is accordingly more disposed to identify with evil than with good, with metachemical power than with chemical glory.

 

314. Consequently there is scope in America for the death penalty in certain instances, and this scope is commensurate not with a punishing justice (though that does of course also obtain), but with a criminal injustice, the criminal injustice of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' which accords, all too superheathenistically, with Eternal Death.

 

315. Contrasted with the inflicting of retributive crime through execution or the punishment of crime through incarceration is, of course, the forgiveness of sin through verbal absolution (for confessional contrition) and the avoidance of sin through spiritual involution, this latter alone being commensurate with grace, and thus with that which accords with Eternal Life.

 

316. For the sinner is fated to experience only the temporal life of death-in-life, the bodily life of phenomenal subjectivity, whereas to experience Eternal Life one must be of the 'Elect of Spirit' and thus be above sin in what amounts to perfect grace, the joyful content(ment) of heavenly being in noumenal subjectivity.

 

317. Hitherto the Church has offered and protected the half-life of death-in-life, with its sinful fulcrum, as much in evidence in cerebral 're-born' contexts as in fleshy 'once-born' ones, where it takes the form of intellectual as opposed to carnal knowledge.

 

318. Sensible knowledge is of course preferable to sensual knowledge, as Christ to Pan, or the brain to the phallus, and it does signify the salvation of man from 'once born' to 're-born', but only in vegetativeness, not in relation to air!

 

319. For one is not saved to sensible God and the possibility thereof of sensible Heaven until and unless, as superman, one is into the spirit of the lungs through transcendental meditation, and this, as a rule, the Church has been loath to encourage.

 

320. Why?  Because the Church is phenomenal, not noumenal, and thus more of a vehicle for death-in-life than for Eternal Life as such (not to mention the 'once-born' Eternal Life of sensual God and Heaven in connection with the spirit of the ears which more accords with subman than with either man or superman).

 

321. The Church is rooted in the Creator-based primitivity of the Old Testament, and Christ is as far as things can go on the side of life, the life not of Heaven but of man, the knowledgeable shortfall as death-in-life from perfect content(ment), the sinful form of intellectual knowledge as opposed to the graceful content of spiritual feeling.

 

322. Hence prayer, the religious form of cogitation, and the forgiveness of sin through verbal absolution (on the part of priests) is as far as things can go in Christ.  For anything further - and higher - there is need of a new order of religion, an order led not by Christ, affiliated via the Jehovahesque 'Father' and the Marian 'Mother' to Eternal Death and to life-in-death respectively, but by his Superchristian successor, the effective Second Coming of Messianic 'god-kingship'.

 

323. For a spiritual transcendence of the intellect there is need, in short, of Social Transcendentalism and thus of 'Kingdom Come', with all that it implies in regard to the triadic Beyond of the genuine Centre.

 

324. Social Transcendentalism goes beyond Christianity to the extent that it upholds genuine spirituality through meditative praxis, and is thus committed to a graceful as opposed to a sinful fulcrum, a fulcrum of wisdom as against one of folly.

 

325. One can never be anything more than sensibly foolish in Christ, as and when one prays in due nonconformist vein through the vegetative rebirth of cerebral naturalism, whereas the sensibility that the Messianic architect of Social Transcendentalism affirms has more to do with sensible wisdom, the meditating wisdom, in short, of the superman.

 

326. And the superman, being deistically committed to the spirit via the Lung-God of his supernatural not-self, is atheistic with regard to all theistic gods, including the Bible-documented Jehovah, so-called 'Creator of the Universe'.

 

327. It is my belief that not only Jews but Christians can embrace Social Transcendentalism, whether spiritually in meditation, intellectually in cogitation, or emotionally in contemplation, since Social Transcendentalism allows, as already noted, for a triadic Centre in which woman, man, and superman co-exist in relation to the eternalized elements of water, vegetation, and air.

 

328. And such a triadic Centre, the focus of the practical implementation of religious sovereignty, would be served by the transmuted fire of the pseudo-Kingdom ... of 'Kingdom Come', whose ruling head would be the 'philosopher-king' and Messianic deliverer ... of the People (from 'sins and/or punishments of the world').

 

329. But the People must be granted the opportunity to vote for religious sovereignty, and thus elect to fob off 'sins and/or punishments of the world' upon the Messianic deliverer, if there is to be both a pseudo-Kingdom, the focus of Christ-like sacrifice of bearing such 'sins and/or punishments', and a three-tier Centre in due post-worldly and, hence, otherworldly course.

 

330. This electoral opportunity would be commensurate, so I believe, with Judgement, for Judgement is not only about punishing or removing the guilty and/or irrelevant; it is also, in my view, about people deciding whether or not to opt for religious sovereignty and thus be saved from 'worldly sin and/or punishment' to the otherworldly Beyond ... of 'Kingdom Come'.

 

331. And that means, in particular, what I have elsewhere described as a Gaelic federation, not just of Irish Gaels but, no less importantly, of Scotch and Welsh Gaels, who would be democratically opting for deliverance, as much as anything, from the netherworldly Behind ... of the United Kingdom which, in the event of negative Judgement, might well become a 'Kingdom Gone', so to speak, to those who had opted out of it.

 

332. For without Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, there would be no United Kingdom but only England on the one hand, and the Gaelic federation of a united Ireland together with Scotland and Wales on the other hand, the hand of Gaelic nationhood in 'Kingdom Come'.

 

333. I am most decidedly a Gaelic nationalist or, if you prefer, pan-nationalist, who regards himself as thinking beyond Irish nationality in what amounts to a cultural transcendence of natural criteria ... of country-as-nation.

 

334. For the Gael has long been 'sold short' from his rightfully high estate as a cultural being, and anything short of a Gaelic concept of nationhood, such that transcends the naturalistic, and hence sinfully vegetative, parameters of country-as-nation, will continue to deprive him of divine justice and idealistic deliverance, in consequence, not only from Christian shortfalls from airy grace, but from English-motivated constraints going back, originally, behind nature to civilized (parliamentary) and barbarous (monarchic) concepts of nation.

 

335. For the English, on the other hand, a Gaelic rejection, come Judgement, of the United Kingdom would provide the opportunity for a disestablished Church and the possibility, therewith, of an accommodation with Rome in the interests of a democratically-mandated English republicanism that would allow economics to escape from under the secular shadow of both political and scientific freedoms, as germane to Great Britain, and bask in the mundane glow of its own commitment to enhanced vegetative binding.

 

336. Thus would England achieve, via Catholic republicanism, the next best thing to the religious binding, through Social Transcendentalism, of the federated Gaels, as nature under culture, the phenomenal subjectivity of masculine vegetativeness under the noumenal subjectivity (in general terms) of supermasculine airiness.

 

337. Thus a natural concept of nationhood for England would find itself juxtaposed with a cultural concept of nationhood for the federated Gaels of the Social Transcendentalist Centres, while civilized and barbarous concepts of nationhood, owing more to State and Kingdom, would be democratically consigned, following Judgement, to the 'rubbish heap' of heathenistic history, along with political and scientific freedoms.

 

338. For unless things return to binding of either a vegetative (for England) or an airy (for the Gaels) order, freedom will continue to rule, in due objective, and hence female-oriented, fashion, to the detriment of economics and religion.

 

339. There has been enough power and glory and too little form and content(ment) on these islands since Great Britain and the United Kingdom came to pass.  Only a return to form (for England) and to content (for the Gaels) will allow the deeper values to ripen on the branches of a male-oriented subjectivity.

 

340. Such a male-oriented subjectivity will not speak of equality between men and women, or of anything so illogical, but will accept and develop the inequalities which exist between them in the name of both Christian (for England) and Superchristian (for the Gaels) developments.

 

341. In truth, men are not better than women, any more than women are better than men.  You cannot compare that which is opposite, like subjective and objective, but only contrast it.

 

342. Men and women are dissimilar, since affiliated to opposite sides of the gender fence, and should therefore be related to different criteria.

 

343. Since, in general terms, perfect glory is (im)morally preferable to perfect power, as water to fire, punishment to crime, or goodness to evil, we can say that phenomenal woman is better than noumenal woman, as proud emotionality than beautiful instinctuality.

 

344. Since, in general terms, perfect content is morally preferable to perfect form, as air to vegetation, grace to sin, or wisdom to folly, we can say that noumenal man is better than phenomenal man, as joyful spirituality than knowledgeable intellectuality.

 

345. We can also logically contend that noumenal woman is worse than phenomenal woman, as beautiful instinctuality than proud emotionality, and phenomenal man worse than noumenal man, as knowledgeable intellectuality than joyful spirituality, since comparisons for better or worse between one kind of objectivity and another or one kind of subjectivity and another are logically sustainable.

 

346. What we cannot do with any degree of logical justification is contend that phenomenal man, say, is better than phenomenal woman or that noumenal man, closer to God in both sensuality and sensibility, is better than noumenal woman, who is closer to the Devil in both sensuality and sensibility, any more than we can reverse this by contending that phenomenal woman is worse than phenomenal man or noumenal woman worse than noumenal man.

 

347. On the contrary, phenomenal man is as dissimilar, in mass-volume naturalism, from phenomenal woman ... as phenomenal woman, in volume-mass realism, from phenomenal man, while noumenal man is as dissimilar, in time-space idealism, from noumenal woman ... as noumenal woman, in space-time materialism, from noumenal man.

 

348. Vegetation is not better than water, any more than water is better than vegetation.  Neither, it seems to me, is air better than fire or fire better than air.  Vegetation and water, no less than air and fire, are opposites, and opposite they will forever remain.

 

349. Now you may, as a phenomenal man, prefer vegetation to water and, as a noumenal man, prefer air to fire, but you cannot maintain, with any logical justification, that vegetation is better than water and air better than fire or, conversely, that water is worse than vegetation and fire worse than air.

 

350. Similarly you may, as a phenomenal woman, prefer water to vegetation and, as a noumenal woman, prefer fire to air, but you cannot maintain, with any logical justification, that water is better than vegetation and fire better than air or, conversely, that vegetation is worse than water and air worse than fire.

 

351. One can certainly argue that air is better than vegetation and vegetation worse than air, while, on the objective side of the elemental divide, one should be able to argue that water is better than fire and fire worse than water.

 

352. For whereas air corresponds to Eternal Life, vegetation only corresponds to death-in-life, which is a sinful shortfall, through perfect form, from the perfect content of grace, as folly from wisdom.

 

353. And whereas water corresponds to life-in-death, fire only corresponds to Eternal Death, which is a criminal aloofness, through perfect power, from the perfect glory of punishment, as evil from goodness.

 

354. Thus just as wisdom is morally better than folly and folly morally worse than wisdom, so goodness is (im)morally better than evil and evil (im)morally worse than goodness.

 

355. You may prefer, as a female, to wear a dress to a skirt, but it is (im)morally better to wear a skirt than a dress and (im)morally worse to wear a dress than a skirt.

 

356. You may prefer, as a male, to wear trousers to a zippersuit, but it is morally better to wear a zippersuit to trousers and morally worse to wear trousers to a zippersuit.

 

357. While phenomenal objectivity is different from phenomenal subjectivity, as skirt from trousers, it is better than noumenal objectivity, just as goodness is better than evil, though only different from folly.

 

358. While noumenal subjectivity is different from noumenal objectivity, as zippersuit from dress, it is better than phenomenal subjectivity, just as wisdom is better than folly, though only different from evil.

 

359. The subjective, whether noumenal or phenomenal, may be preferable, from a male standpoint, to the objective, but it is not better than the objective.  It is simply different.

 

360. Likewise the objective, whether noumenal or phenomenal, may be preferable, from a female point of view, to the subjective, but it is not better than the subjective.  It is simply different.

 

361. Thus the Church is not better than the State, any more than the State is worse than the Church.  They are simply as different, in their subjective/objective distinctions, as phenomenal man and woman.

 

362. Likewise the Centre (of 'Kingdom Come') is or will not be better than the Kingdom, any more than the Kingdom is or will be worse than the Centre.  They are simply as different, in their subjective/objective distinctions, as noumenal man and woman.

 

363. Evolution is not better than devolution, any more than devolution is worse than evolution: it is simply different, since pertaining to that which is subjective - and male - as opposed to objective - and female.

 

364. I would hold the phenomenal devolution of the democratic State to be (im)morally better than, and hence ethically preferable to, the noumenal devolution of the autocratic Kingdom and, conversely, the noumenal devolution of the autocratic Kingdom to be (im)morally worse than the phenomenal devolution of the democratic State.

 

365. Similarly, I would hold the noumenal evolution of the meritocratic Centre (of our projected triadic Beyond) to be morally better than, and hence ethically preferable to, the phenomenal evolution of the plutocratic (in Christ) Church and, conversely, the phenomenal evolution of the plutocratic Church to be morally worse than the noumenal evolution of the meritocratic Centre.

 

366. In fact, it seems to me that things devolve in space-time materialism from autocracy to aristocracy, and in volume-mass realism from democracy to bureaucracy, as from, say, eyes to heart in relation to noumenal objectivity, and from tongue to womb in relation to phenomenal objectivity.

 

367. Conversely, it seems to me that things evolve in mass-volume naturalism from technocracy to plutocracy, and in time-space idealism from theocracy to meritocracy, as from, say, phallus to brain in relation to phenomenal subjectivity, and from ears to lungs in relation to noumenal subjectivity.

 

368. Hence to contrast the noumenal devolution in space-time materialism of autocracy to aristocracy with the noumenal evolution in time-space idealism of theocracy to meritocracy, as one would contrast the evil of metachemical objectivity with the wisdom of metaphysical subjectivity.

 

369. Hence to contrast the phenomenal devolution in volume-mass realism of democracy to bureaucracy with the phenomenal evolution in mass-volume naturalism of technocracy to plutocracy, as one would contrast the goodness of chemical objectivity with the folly of physical subjectivity.

 

370. If autocracy, theocracy, democracy, and technocracy are all on the sensual side of life as 'once-born' actualities, then it follows that bureaucracy, plutocracy, aristocracy, and meritocracy will pertain to the sensible side of life as their 're-born' counterparts.

 

371. Hence in a Christian-type 're-born' society, where there is more sensibility than sensuality, there will be more bureaucracy, plutocracy, aristocracy, or meritocracy, as the case may be, than autocracy, theocracy, democracy, or technocracy.

 

372. Certainly the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' would reflect the prevalence of bureaucratic tendencies in its first tier, of plutocratic tendencies in its second tier, and of meritocratic tendencies in its top tier, the tier of transcendentalism per se, since new orders of bureaucracy and plutocracy, together with the unprecedented championing of meritocracy as an official norm, would characterize its respective commitments to a feminine 'new purgatory', a masculine 'new earth', and, above all, a supermasculine 'New Heaven'.

 

373. But this would be because it was being served and administered from the standpoint of a pseudo-Kingdom whose principal representatives would be of pseudo-aristocratic disposition, in view of their pseudo-subfeminine commitment to the hegemony of meritocratic spirituality via Social Transcendentalism.

 

374. Hence not only would meritocratic spirituality not exist except in relation to the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', but it requires the service and backing of a pseudo-Kingdom in order to materialize at all in an official capacity, with plutocracy and bureaucracy duly subordinated to its hegemonic standing in relation to the Centre as a whole.

 

375. Hence a pseudo-aristocracy, the Social Transcendentalist aristocracy of the 'Sacred Heart' of the Second Coming, are the prerequisites not only of the Centre but of the pre-eminence of meritocratic spirituality in the Centre's third tier, the tier emphasizing, in its top subsection, meditative praxis.

 

376. Thus would religion be saved from theocracy, the Satanic/Davidian theocracy in relation to Judaism and the theocracy of the Father/St Joseph in relation to Christianity, the former of which has languished under the shadow of Jehovah/Mosaic autocracy and the latter of which under the shadow of the Father/St Joseph in relation to merely bureaucratic (Marian) and plutocratic (Christic) ends, ends that were accountable to the Father/St Joseph and duly subordinated to His will and reign as God.

 

377. For Christ, remember, was only the 'Son of God', not the Father/St Joseph as such, and thus someone who would not lead beyond the latter but keep one worshipfully deferential to Him in due theocratic vein, and this despite his professed commitment, via the vegetative brain, to the 'kingdom within', a kingdom at plutocratic variance, seemingly, with the theocratic 'kingdom without' of the Father/St Joseph.

 

378. But as the sphere of 'God' is lowered, with Christianity, from autocratic to theocratic planes, as from the cosmos/eyes to the sun/ears, so the sphere of 'the Devil' is lowered from theocratic to technocratic planes, with a consequence that the vegetative earth/flesh, as symbolized by Pan, is demonized and undermined the better to encourage a Christic 'rebirth' such that has its vegetative fulcrum in Mars/the brain.

 

379. Thus 'Pan' becomes 'Satan' and 'the earth' becomes 'hell', as does the flesh and sex, for those who, as Christians, accept a theocratic God and a technocratic Devil, the better to achieve, via a bureaucratic Mother, viz. the Virgin Mary, plutocratic 'rebirth' in Christ.

 

380. Hence nature and the earth, duly demonized, become fit prey for denigration and, in due degenerative course, for exploitation from a plutocratic standpoint, the standpoint of capitalist gain.

 

381. From being the subject of Satanic taboo, the vegetative earth and its personal corollary, the flesh, becomes the object, in the course of ongoing secularization, of capitalist exploitation, as do those who are most identifiable with it, due to their earthly and/or fleshy dispositions.

 

382. America differs from Europe in respect of the fact that its sphere of 'God' is once again autocratic, in due Old Testament vein, and its Devil accordingly theocratic, as the starry cosmos pulls rank on the sun, and the eyes on the ears in due Biblical, i.e. Jehovah-over-Satan and Moses-over-David, fashion.

 

383. In such fashion, it releases the vegetative earth/flesh from the kind of Christian-motivated repression that Europe tended to inflict upon it, but is all the more repressive towards the theocratic realm of the sun/ears in relation, for example, to anti-communist paranoia.

 

384. In fact, America is always searching for 'Reds' under the 'white', or autocratic, 'bed' ... to denigrate, and never more so than under a Republican administration, which remains closer to the superfeminine light of the 'Liberty Belle' than to the submasculine fire (metaphysical) of the Satanic/Davidian 'fall guy'.

 

385. It could be said, with some logical justification, that America is less Christian than Judaic, but, in actuality, it is less Judaic than effectively Hinduesque in its greater aloofness from the theocratic realm and un-Jewish paranoia with regard to the Satanic/Davidian 'beast'.

 

386. Perhaps this is because America is effectively an Aryan, not a Semitic, continent, and one, moreover, that is much more polytheistically open to the Cosmos in consequence of its partly environmentally-conditioned autocratic transcendentalism, as confirmed by the 'Stars and Stripes' of its national flag.

 

387. Certainly there is a tension within America between theocratic and autocratic interests, whether one interprets this in terms of a Semitic/Aryan struggle or of a Judaic/Hindu struggle or even, in political terms, of a Democratic/Republican struggle between subjectivity and objectivity on the noumenal planes of time and space.

 

388. Yet if the European 'Old World' is characterized by adherence, traditionally, to New Testament theocracy in the fundamentalist guise of the Father/St Joseph (though the possibility of substituting Old Testament autocracy for New Testament theocracy is always available and, to judge by history, readily availed of), then it is not without ironic significance that the American 'New World' is more characterized by adherence to Old Testament autocracy, in the transcendentalist guise of Jehovah/Moses.

 

389. But this Old Testament autocracy, given an Aryan twist, is more 'down' on the Satanic/Davidian 'fall guy' than would be commensurate, so I believe, with a Judaic disposition, in consequence of which America retains an almost uniquely anti-communist paranoia, in the modern world, that sets it polytheistically apart from Israel, and gives to its relations with the submasculine sphere an acerbity that most Jews would, I feel confident, be loathe to entertain.

 

390. Which is not to say that most Jews do not defer, in some degree, to Jehovah/Moses, but simply that Judaism is anything but as deeply rooted in the Cosmos as Hinduism and/or the American mongrel which derives some of its Aryan paranoia from Christianity and some from its own star-spangled continent as such, neither of which could be greatly congenial to a people who largely identify, when true to themselves, with the Satanic/Davidian 'fall guy' of fundamentalist theocracy.

 

391. And it is for this reason that there is the possibility, for Jews and suchlike peoples with a submasculine bias, of a rejection not only of their own fundamentalist theocracy but, more crucially, of transcendentalist autocracy and an acceptance, via my teachings, of transcendentalist meritocracy, in due process of electing for sensible 'rebirth' up the time-space axis of metaphysical idealism, the one that runs contrary, in evolutionary terms, to the space-time axis of metachemical materialism, of which the superfeminine, symbolized by the 'Liberty Belle', is apex.

 

392. Time-space subjectivity is of course the axis of what its vulgar denigrators would call 'bums' or 'assholes', while, conversely, space-time objectivity corresponds to what others of an equally coarse disposition would call 'wankers' or 'jerks'.

 

393. Transcendentalism, correlating with the plane of space, is effectively commensurate with what the utilizers of verbal expletives would or could describe as 'snogging', whether in relation to 'jerks' in spatial-space sensuality or to 'bums' in spaced-space sensibility, whereas fundamentalism, correlating with the plane of time, is effectively commensurate with what utilizers of verbal expletives would describe as 'frigging', whether in relation to 'bums' in sequential-time sensuality or to 'jerks' in repetitive-time sensibility.

 

394. Hence to contrast the descent (devolutionary salvation) in space-time objectivity of 'jerks' from 'spatial snogging' to 'repetitive frigging' ... with the ascent (evolutionary salvation) in time-space subjectivity of 'bums' from 'sequential frigging' to 'spaced snogging'.

 

395. Down below, via the phenomenal planes of volume and mass, volume-mass objectivity is of course the axis of what its vulgar denigrators would call 'cunts' or 'creeps', while, conversely, mass-volume subjectivity corresponds to what others of an equally coarse disposition would call 'pricks' or 'prats'.

 

396. Nonconformism, correlating with the plane of volume, is effectively commensurate with what the utilizers of verbal expletives would describe as 'sodding', whether in relation to 'cunts' in volumetric-volume sensuality or to 'pricks' in voluminous-volume sensibility, whereas humanism, correlating with the plane of mass, is effectively commensurate with what utilizers of verbal expletives would describe as 'fucking', whether in relation to 'pricks' in massive-mass sensuality or to 'cunts' in massed-mass sensibility.

 

397. Hence to contrast the descent (devolutionary salvation) in volume-mass objectivity of 'cunts' from 'volumetric sodding' to 'massed fucking' ... with the ascent (evolutionary salvation) in mass-volume subjectivity of 'pricks' from 'massive fucking' to 'voluminous sodding'.

 

398. Thus one may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in materialism, of 'big jerks' to 'little jerks' with the evolutionary salvation, in idealism, of 'little bums' to 'big bums', as things descend from 'spatial snogging' to 'repetitive frigging' in the one case, and ascend from 'sequential frigging' to 'spaced snogging' in the other case.

 

399. Likewise, one may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in realism, of 'big cunts' to 'little cunts' with the evolutionary salvation, in naturalism, of 'little pricks' to 'big pricks', as things descend from 'volumetric sodding' to 'massed fucking' in the one case, and ascend from 'massive fucking' to 'voluminous sodding' in the other case.

 

400. Reverting to conventional philosophical terminology, such as is more appropriate to my own disposition, we may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in metachemical objectivity, of sensual transcendentalism to sensible fundamentalism with the evolutionary salvation, in metaphysical subjectivity, of sensual fundamentalism to sensible transcendentalism, as things descend from spatial space to repetitive time in space-time materialism and ascend from sequential time to spaced space in time-space idealism.

 

401. Likewise, we may contrast the devolutionary salvation, in chemical objectivity, of sensual nonconformism to sensible humanism with the evolutionary salvation, in physical subjectivity, of sensual humanism to sensible nonconformism, as things descend from volumetric volume to massed mass in volume-mass realism and ascend from massive mass to voluminous volume in mass-volume naturalism.

 

402. I do not, myself, much approve of verbal expletives and monosyllabic denigrations of the opposite gender, whether in phenomenal or in noumenal terms, depending on the context, but such tendencies patently exist and are very much a fact of contemporary life, rooted, as it all too often is, in divergent aggression.

 

403. I believe I alluded, earlier in this text, to the 'motherfucker'/'sonofabitch' dichotomy that tends to characterize the American gender divide at the noumenal levels of space and time to which America primarily relates as a cultural manifestation of barbarous death, and such terms tend to prevail in parallel with the 'cunt'/'prick' ones more germane to the phenomenal relativity of, for example, Britain, with its civilized death.

 

404. We cannot be coy or evasive about such crude terms here, as book writers and publishers generally are, but must strive to understand them in the light of a post-filmic psychology which, with due comprehension, has the goal of their sensible transcendence in mind.

 

405. For that which, in book form, precedes film as a sort of bourgeois medium is not as honest or open to the full-gamut of understanding as that which, in disc or tape form, succeeds it, since 'the book', as a traditional medium of literary presentation, is limited in time and scope to the phenomenal parameters of the half-lies and half-truths, the fictions and facts, of the realistic/natualistic world.

 

406. In short, books rarely if ever transcend the vegetative parameters of masculine 'bullshit', which is not only a phenomenal shortfall from 'bullgas' or, at any rate, the 'sub-bullgas' to 'superbullgas' of time-space idealism, but a naturalistic half-truth that fights shy, in effectively Christian vein, of the truth, as upheld by the noumenally subjective submasculine and/or supermasculine 'Sons of God'.

 

407. The generality of books can, in fact, be divided between 'bullshit' and 'cowshit', the former structurally if not always thematically synonymous with a hardback parallel, and the latter structurally if not always thematically synonymous with a softback one, as, in effect, between Christian and Heathen, or Catholic and Protestant, or naturalist and realist, or elliptical and rectangular, or masculine and feminine, etc. etc., alternatives within the phenomenal parameters of 'the world'.

 

408. Softbacks are divisible into those which are purely verbal, and hence symbolically identifiable in due soft vegetative vein with 'cowshit', and those, by contrast, which contain either monochromatic or polychromatic photographs, the former symbolically illustrative of 'cowpiss' and the latter of 'cowpuss', as in watery and fiery parallels over a feminized mode of vegetation.

 

409. In contrast to this inverted triangle of a British or parliamentary/Protestant norm, we may posit the non-triangular hierarchy of hardbacks in terms of a distinction between those which are purely verbal, and hence symbolically identifiable with 'bullshit' on account of their hard vegetative structure, and those which contain either monochromatic or polychromatic photographs, the former symbolically illustrative of 'bullpiss' and the latter of 'bullgas', as in watery (below) and airy (above) parallels either side of a properly masculine order of vegetation.

 

410. I say 'airy' for the 'bullgas' of polychromatic hardbacks, but in point of fact such a parallel is rather more fiery, if on comparatively metaphysical terms, and hence effectively something falling back on the Father/St Joseph rather than stretching beyond vegetation in genuinely transcendental terms, and is thus specifically Catholic.

 

411. Roman Catholics are always 'sold short' of sensible spirituality as the Holy Spirit is twisted back, in fundamentalist vein, to the sensual spirituality of the 'once-born' Father/St Joseph, the Creator, etc., Who owes more to the Subchristian metaphysics of theocratic fundamentalism than ever He does to the Superchristian metaphysics of meritocratic transcendentalism.

 

412. In such fashion, the sun and/or the ears become the Creatoresque focal-point, in due negative and/or positive terms, of the Holy Spirit, which, subsumed into the Creator, has nothing to do with the supermasculine spirituality of spaced space and everything to do with the submasculine spirituality of sequential time, as in music.

 

413. For sensible spirituality, the spirituality of spaced space, is effectively 'beyond the pale' of the Roman Catholic Church, and the most airiness, or non-fiery 'bullgas', the Faithful ever tend to get from it is the censer-swinging perfume released into the atmosphere by officiating clerics, more as a testimony, in its fiery base, to the theocratic subsuming of the Holy Spirit into the metaphysical fire of the Father/St Joseph than to anything truly transcendental.

 

414. Thus reconciled to the theocratic 'sub-bullgas' of the Father/St Joseph, the Faithful are in no position to achieve or aspire towards metaphysical 'rebirth' in relation to meditative praxis, necessarily atheistic vis--vis Creatoresque theocracy, via meritocratic transcendentalism.

 

415. For meritocratic 'superbullgas' is alone commensurate, so I contend, with sensible spirituality, and thus with the meditative 'peace' that not only surpasses, or transcends, the vegetative realm of intellectual cogitation, with its prayerful understanding through nonconformist plutocracy, but which lies beyond, as salvation from, the 'once-born' airy realm of aural meditation (upon music) which appertains to theocratic fundamentalism.

 

416. Thus one is not saved to 're-born' metaphysics except through the meritocratic transcendentalism of respiratory meditation (upon the breath), which corresponds to the sensible spirituality of the superman, the ultimate noumenal man who is as far beyond the sensual spirituality, in 'once-born' vein, of the subman ... as the lungs are beyond the ears or, in negative terms, Saturn lies beyond the sun.

 

417. Thus there can be no Christian hypocrisy of linking the intellectual 'kingdom within' of Christ, through vegetative 'rebirth', to the spiritual 'kingdom without' of the Father via the Holy Ghost ... where Social Transcendentalism, the ideological philosophy of 'Kingdom Come', is concerned, but only an acknowledgement of the sensible truth of the spiritual 'kingdom within' of the supermasculine Superchrist, as it is raised up, under Messianic auspices, over both intellectual and emotional 'kingdoms within' in completion of what I have termed the triadic Beyond of the Centre.

 

418. The only kingdom 'without' the triadic Beyond ... would be the pseudo-Kingdom of 'Kingdom Come', the Gaelic federation of, hopefully, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales that, in its Social Transcendentalist Centrism, would develop the administrative structure whereby, in due pluralistic totalitarian vein, the triadic Beyond could be served and maintained in perpetuity, for all cultural Eternity.

 

419. The Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, is not of Eternity but only of the world in its vegetative shortfall, through the voluminous volume of Christ, from airy 'rebirth', and Christ for it leads not onwards and upwards to the sensible spirit of meditative praxis, but backwards and upwards to the sensual spirit of the Father/St Joseph in due plutocratic deference, via 'the (New Testament) word', to the 'once-born' hegemony of theocracy.

 

420. Theocracy may not be a lie, but it is far from being the ultimate truth.  Rather, theocracy is the 'once-born' truth of the 'kingdom without' that can too easily become identified with and substituted by the 'once-born' lie, or illusion, of the autocratic Jehovah.

 

421. For the Father and Jehovah are all too interchangeable to a people, like the Christian, who are accustomed to alternating between New and Old Testaments, the factual half-truth of the one and, in this context, the fictional half-lie of the other, as theocracy and autocracy are shuffled around to suit the amoral requirements of the worldly moment.

 

422. Thus does the Father and Satan change places as the latter is subordinated to the lie of the 'First Mover' as God, and something effectively closer to the 'Liberty Belle' of stellar primacy takes over the reins of religion in due autocratic fashion, science patently triumphant over religion, as sensual illusion replaces the sensual truth.

 

423. Suffice it to say that if the so-called Christian Bible is torn, in its relativity, between the half-lie of the Old Testament and the half-truth of the New Testament, then that which goes further back, in pre-Biblical fashion, is commensurate with the whole lie, the Talmudic and/or cosmic lie of the ancient scrolls and/or tablets of pre-Western times.

 

424. For in the pre-book era of the ancient so-called civilizations, the illusion was 'writ large' in due tablet and/or scrolled form, and such a beautiful illusion contrasts not only with the subsequent half-lie and half-truth of the Christian world, torn between feminine and masculine, water and vegetation, strength and knowledge, but with the truthful conclusion of that which surpasses the world in due tape and/or disc presentation of the Superchristian word, the 're-born' metaphysical truth, in short, of meritocratic transcendentalism, as far removed from the metachemical illusion of autocratic transcendentalism as it is (superhumanly) possible to be.

 

425. If the metachemical illusion, or whole lie, appertains, in its pre-book presentations, to barbarism, and the delusional half-lie and confusional half-truth, so to speak, of Christian relativity appertain to an amoral compromise between civilization and nature, chemistry and physics, then what may be called the metaphysical conclusion, or whole truth, appertains, by contrast, to culture in its post-book presentations, the sort of presentations, as I say, that require disc and/or tape formats in due antithetical disposition (Superchristian) to the tablets and/or scrolls of Superheathen antiquity.

 

426. For discs (including the Internet) and tapes are to the present what tablets and scrolls were to the past - noumenal presentations of 'the word' that transcend the phenomenal parameters of 'the book'.

 

427. The bourgeois publishing industry, which specializes in 'the book', cannot do justice to or embrace metaphysical truth, least of all in its meritocratic guise; for such an industry is rooted in the so-called 'book of books' or 'holy book', the Bible, and cannot entertain written material that rejects both the half-lie and the half-truth of Biblical compromise in due atheistic vein, turning away from fictions and facts, delusions and confusions, with the deistic will of metaphysical conclusion in the whole truth.

 

428. In point of fact, there is nothing particularly 'holy' about the Bible, which stands compromised between the watery clearness, if you will, of the Old Testament and the vegetative unholiness of the New Testament, ample testimony to the fictions and facts of the half-lie and half-truth, viz. strength and knowledge, which typify its amoral parameters.

 

429. Just as the illusory whole lie correlates, through metachemical evil, with fiery unclearness, so the delusory fiction of the half-lie correlates, through chemical goodness, with the watery clear - the difference, in sum, between the Eternal Death of barbarism, as of barbarity, and the life-in-death of civilization, as of civility.

 

430. Just as the 'confusionary' fact correlates, through physical folly, with vegetative unholiness, so the 'conclusionary' whole truth correlates, through metaphysical wisdom, with airy holiness - the difference, in sum, between the death-in-life of nature and the Eternal Life of culture.

 

431. One should distinguish the metachemical unclearness of the barbarous lie from the chemical clearness of the civilized half-lie, and these objective options (on the female side of life) from the subjective options (on its male side) of the physical unholiness of the natural half-truth and the metaphysical holiness of the cultural truth - the truth, more specifically, of 'Kingdom Come', which should embrace a federation, in culture, of the Gaels.

 

432. Thus holiness resides not in the vegetativeness of the physical word, still less in the wateriness of the chemical word or, least of all, the fieriness of the metachemical word, but only in the airiness of the metaphysical word, the word of words and truth of truths.

 

433. The vegetative word of the half-truth is as far short, in its knowledgeable facticity, of airy truth ... as sin of grace, or folly of wisdom, or man of superman, or death-in-life of Eternal Life.

 

434. One must pass beyond knowledge to get to truth, but in more than a retrogressive way such that leads, via theocracy, to sensual truth.  Rather, one must abandon sensual truth for sensible truth, opting to be saved from 'once-born' metaphysics to 're-born' metaphysics ... as one climbs the time-space axis of noumenal subjectivity from theocratic fundamentalism to meritocratic transcendentalism.

 

435. For the Christian half-truth of factual knowledge in the physical word is an end-in-itself as far as the 're-born' options go, not a means to the sensible truth of metaphysical 'rebirth', but a phenomenal dead-end that makes a god out of sensible man and a heaven out of the sensible earth, castigating the sensual man and earth as devil (Satanized Pan) and hell.

 

436. Such a half-truth is unholy even as it proclaims itself holy, and ungodly even as it proclaims its loyalty to God.  For it has nothing to commend itself to a genuinely heavenly 'rebirth' in the joy of joys which appertains to and characterizes sensible being.

 

437. Rather, it is a sensible taking, which demonizes sensual taking the better to aspire, via Christ, towards the sensual being of theocracy, rooted or, rather, centred (subjectively) in the Father/St Joseph of fiery/auditory metaphysics.

 

438. But this is precisely what one must be atheistic towards if one hopes to achieve deliverance from sensual being to the sensible being of gaseous/respiratory metaphysics, and thus climb away, in metaphysical salvation, from theocracy to meritocracy, the religion not of the Creator (as of Christian modification in relation to Judaic precedence) but of the ultimate creation, the superman, who is the refutation of man and redeemer of subman.

 

439. For one must be at least to some extent submasculine - and hence Subchristian - to have any chance of becoming, through conversion from metaphysical sensuality to metaphysical sensibility, genuinely supermasculine, and hence Superchristian, the transcendentalist alternative to Subchristian fundamentalism and retort to Christian nonconformism.

 

440. Those who achieve heavenly salvation from below, in sensible taking, will have abandoned Christ for the Father, Christianity for Subchristianity, while those who achieve heavenly salvation from above, in sensual being, will have abandoned Jehovah for Satan, passing, in due course, from the realm of metaphysical theocracy to the realm of metaphysical meritocracy, as from the sun to Saturn or, in positive terms, the ears to the lungs, St Joseph or David to the Second Coming or True World (Global) Messiah of Superchristianity, which is also Social Transcendentalist.

 

441. Thus both Jews and Christians will have to abandon their respective gods, viz. Jehovah and Christ, if there is to be any possibility, for them, of heavenly salvation in sensible being.

 

442. Whether one calls the theocratic sphere of sequential time Subjudaic or Subchristian (as I have been doing), its religious significance lies less in itself, given its 'once-born' limitations, than as a springboard to spiritual 'rebirth' in the spaced space of meritocratic transcendentalism.

 

443. It seems to me that most Christians and Jews do effectively relate more to the theocratic realm of sequential time, these days, than to either the plutocratic realm of voluminous volume or the autocratic realm of spatial space, given the media-fuelled drift towards religious fundamentalism which characterizes the age.

 

444. Christianity is both historical and living proof of the fact that when you make an ideal (god) out of what is in effect the penultimate level of sensibility, viz. intellectual knowledge, such an ideal gets hitched to the ultimate level of sensuality, viz. aural truth, which musically reigns over the physical word in due 'once-born' terms.

 

445. Hence the 'kingdom within' of the Son/Christ's word gets hitched to the 'kingdom without' of the Father/St Joseph, which ultimately subordinates vegetative nonconformism to its fundamentalist will in the interests of a theocratic hegemony, the sort of hegemony, paradoxically, which is arguably more in evidence these days than ever before.

 

446. Yet the half-truth of what properly pertains to Christianity still persists in existing, and it characterizes the conservatism of the plutocratic bias of vegetative nonconformism, even as it impinges upon the physical word and the inability or reluctance of hard-line Christians to come to terms with transcendentalist truth, the truth not of theocratic sensuality but of meritocratic sensibility.

 

447. In fact, so accustomed are such people to hyping-up the half-truth to the status of the whole truth ... that they can be depended upon to react against and reject any evidence of the latter which may come their way, fearful lest it expose their Christian limitations.

 

448. For they have substituted the half-truth of the man-god for the whole truth of the superman as 'Son of God', and cannot be expected to endorse any such truth when Christian relativity enjoins them, via the Bible, to also uphold the half-lie in the interests of world-perpetuating amorality.

 

449. For the world, remember, is torn between masculine and feminine elements, vegetation and water, and demands, in consequence, the collusion of factual confusion with fictional delusion, as in the juxtaposition of New and Old Testaments in the so-called Christian Bible.

 

450. Thus, in the interests of world-perpetuating amorality, the Christian bourgeoisie shy away from sensible truth, like Dracula from the (Super)cross, content, instead, to defer (where applicable) to sensual truth via the 'once-born' Father/St Joseph, while simultaneously upholding the phenomenal compromise between the half-truth of the New Testament and the half-lie of the Old Testament or, at any rate, of the Old Testament in relation to the New Testament.

 

451. For the Old Testament as Judaic Torah, or whatever would be independent of the New Testament, is no half-lie but the whole lie of Jehovah as God and Satan as the Devil, and such a lie extends monotheistically back behind the sensual truth of the Father/St Joseph to the stellar cosmos, wherein the 'First Mover' pulls rank over the 'Fallen Angel' in the interests, contrary to appearances, of Hell-perpetuating immorality, the immorality that, in the contemporary world, finds its symbolical analogue in the 'Liberty Belle' of metachemical Superheathenism.

 

452. Thus while the Christian religion understates the sphere of God in relation to Christ, the man-god, the Judaic religion overstates the sphere of God in relation to Jehovah, the 'First Mover', neither of which have anything to do with God even in the necessarily primitive and 'once-born' terms of sensual truth to which we are alluding.

 

453. On the contrary, they have to do with the sensible man and the sensual Devil, the 're-born' earth and the 'once-born' Hell, and it is an understanding of this which should allow, if it hasn't already done so, the majority of Christians and Jews to re-orientate their respective religious allegiances on the theocratic sphere of sequential time, the better to achieve salvation, via the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah, from such a fundamentalist allegiance to the meritocratic sphere of spaced space, in due transcendentalist course.

 

454. For the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah goes beyond Christ, remember, in his affirmation of the spiritual 'kingdom within' that can alone save from the spiritual 'kingdom without' to which the majority of latter-day Jews and Christians effectively, if not literally, subscribe, compliments of the fundamentalist rule of 'Father Time'.

 

455. It is as if Christians were increasingly abandoning classical music, with its strings and woodwind, for Jazz-Classical in a Christian-to-Subchristian regression from the ('re-born') Son to the ('once-born') Father, Christ to St Joseph, while Jews were increasingly abandoning Jazz (including the Blues) for Classical-Jazz in a Judaic-to-Subjudaic progression from Jehovah to Satan, Moses to David.

 

456. Thus while the Subchristian and the Subjudaic are not exactly identical, they are the Christian and Jewish approaches to the same thing, the metaphysical fundamentalism of sequential time, wherein the sun and the ears are the negative and positive reference-points, respectively, of religious devotion.

 

457. Instrumentally, the bottom line or root requirement is brass of a bronze coloration for both Jazz-Classical and Classical-Jazz, since such brass is what most corresponds to the solar sphere of theocratic fundamentalism, with its subjective extroversion, not least of all in relation to the saxophone, which contrasts with the objective extroversion of silver instruments like, in particular, the trumpet.

 

458. But the Subchristian and the Subjudaic can and, one day, must be saved from sequential time to spaced space, and thus to a Superchristian/Superjudaic disposition such that I equate with Social Transcendentalism and the supersession, through meritocratic metaphysics, of sensual spirituality by sensible spirituality, the spirituality not of music but of meditation (even if some music, in the form of piping, were to persist, in the background, as it were, to a more genuinely sensible resolve).

 

459. The position of the Father in relation to the Son, as of St Joseph, one could argue, in relation to Christ, is rather akin to constitutional monarchy vis--vis parliament, except that whereas the Christian context is 're-born' and the Subchristian one 'once born', the Heathen context, so to speak, is 'once born' and the Subheathen one (of the Blood Royal) 're-born', so that the overall situations are antithetical.

 

460. This explains the distinction, in the British Isles, between Catholics (as Christians) and Protestants (as heathenistic anti-Christians and/or pseudo-Christians), the former given to a 're-born' Church with a 'once-born' Father-figure, the pope, beyond it in due theocratic vein, the latter given to a 'once-born' State with a 're-born' Mother-figure, the monarch, behind it in due aristocratic fashion.

 

461. Hence whereas the Christian/Subchristian context affirms the juxtaposition of brain and ears, of Mars and the sun, the Heathen/Subheathen context affirms the juxtaposition, by contrast, of tongue and heart, of the moon and Venus.

 

462. In both cases it is the phenomenal contexts of the Catholic Church and the parliamentary State, of Christian and Heathen, which are paramount in their respective sovereignties, while the Subchristian Centre (of Roman Christendom), symbolized by the Vatican, and the Subheathen Kingdom (of the United Kingdom), symbolized by Buckingham Palace, correspond to their respective figureheads (of pope and monarch) and not literally to their leader or ruler, as the case may be, since both alike are tangential asides to the prevailing norm, the plutocratic norm of the Christian Church in 're-born' vegetation (brain) and the democratic norm of the parliamentary State in 'once-born' water (tongue).

 

463. For Christianity, remember, is only Christian by dint of adherence to Christ in due vegetative sensibility, while Parliamentarianism is only Heathen, or parliamentary, by dint of adherence to Antichrist in due watery sensuality, and neither the Subchristian Father nor the Subheathen Mother can ever be truly hegemonic, in consequence of the phenomenal status of both the Church and the State, which necessarily marginalizes the noumenal status of both the Centre and the Kingdom, pope and monarch, 'once-born' idealism (theocracy) and 're-born' materialism (aristocracy).

 

464. Hence the parliamentary/monarchic alignment of British and/or Gaelic Protestants is the mirror image, in heathenistic reverse, of the ecclesiastical/papal alignment of, in particular, Irish Catholics, who, together with Scotch and Welsh Catholics, are the Gaelic people most suited, by dint of their overlapping Subchristian commitments to the Father/St Joseph, for salvation to the properly Superchristian tier, in meritocratic metaphysics, of the triadic Beyond.

 

465. With their more objective (Puritan) and/or less subjective (Anglican) dispositions, stemming from a parliamentary hegemony, towards the Subheathen Mother-figure of the monarchy, the majority of British or, rather, Gaelic Protestants would be more suited to the bottom and middle tiers of the triadic Beyond, since those who were anti-Christian in Puritanism would, following a vote for religious sovereignty, have the prospect of pro-Superchristian humanism in a bureaucratic 'new purgatory', while those who were pseudo-Christian in Anglicanism would, following a vote for religious sovereignty, have the prospect of pro-Superchristian nonconformism in a plutocratic 'new earth', the tier directly beneath the meritocratic 'New Heaven' of those whose Christian-to-Subchristian orientation entitled them, as Catholics, to Superchristian transcendentalism, the top-tier ideal of the triadic Beyond.

 

466. The Gaelic peoples would no longer cling to their respective traditions, since neither the Church nor the State, respectively coupled to the 'once-born' papal Centre and the 're-born' monarchic Kingdom, would have any place in 'Kingdom Come', the Messianic pseudo-Kingdom ... of pseudo-aristocratic 'rebirth' that would administer, via the 'Sacred Heart' of the Second Coming, to the 're-born' Centre ... of the triadic Beyond, the Centre not of an infallible pope, but of a religiously-sovereign People.

 

467. Catholics and Protestants may still, at present, be divided in the aforementioned ways, but they can be united in and through Social Transcendentalism, which will leave both Christianity and Subchristianity, on the one hand, and Heathenism and Subheathenism, on the other hand, far behind, as it takes the respective peoples to the pseudo-Subheathen/Superchristian deliverance from their antagonistic traditions via the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come' - hopefully a Gaelic federation of Ireland together with Scotland and Wales - and very genuine Centre of the triadic Beyond.

 

468. Thus delivered ... through a majority mandate for religious sovereignty ... the People will no longer be Catholic or Protestant, republican or parliamentary, papal or monarchic, nationalist or loyalist, Irish or British, but Social Transcendentalist in one degree, shape, form or another of Gaelic nationhood ... for all Eternity.

 

469. Social Transcendentalism affirms the transcendentalism of the People become religiously sovereign, the meritocratic transcendentalism, in particular, of a Superchristian antithesis, through sensible wisdom, to the Superheathen evil of autocratic transcendentalism, the transcendentalism not of God/Heaven but of the Devil/Hell, with its superfeminine roots in the stellar cosmos.

 

470. Just as the monarchy acts as a barrier, for British and/or Gaelic Protestants, to the superfeminine evil of autocratic transcendentalism by dint of its correspondence to the subfeminine evil, or 're-born' materialism, of aristocratic fundamentalism, so the papacy acts as a barrier, for Irish and/or Gaelic Catholics, to the supermasculine wisdom of meritocratic transcendentalism by dint of its correspondence to the submasculine wisdom, or 'once-born' idealism, of theocratic fundamentalism.

 

471. British Protestants are no more encouraged to identify with the 'Liberty Belle' of 'once-born' materialism ... than, say, Irish Catholics ... with the Supercross of 're-born' idealism, since both the democratic State and the plutocratic Church are based on the phenomenal plane of volume, and only have a tangential connection, in consequence, with the noumenal plane of time, a connection which in neither case extends into space.

 

472. While for Irish Catholics the papacy (regrettably) precludes the sensible wisdom of meritocratic transcendentalism, and thus keeps religion anchored, via the Father/St Joseph, to theocracy, the monarchy spares British Protestants the sensual evil of autocratic transcendentalism, since religion or, rather, science is thereby anchored, via the 'Blood Royal', to aristocracy.

 

473. The only alternative to the latter is of course the 'once-born' or, rather, outer science of the 'Liberty Belle', the American autocracy of spy satellites, laser satellites, and other manifestations of a stellar primacy, and this, at any rate, the British are officially spared by adherence to the monarchy.

 

474. Only that which is superfeminine and Superheathen is absolutely antithetical to the supermasculine and Superchristian bias of Social Transcendentalism, and thus only that is absolutely 'beneath the pale' of what the latter can save and/or advance in due course.

 

475. The scientific cannot be saved to religion, only the theocratically religious and, to a lesser extent (relative to the lower tiers of the triadic Beyond) the democratically political and the technocratically economic - the former category corresponding to Catholics and the latter categories to Puritans and Anglicans.

 

476. But this is, of course, with regard to Catholics, Puritans, and Anglicans within each of the Gaelic countries, not to their English counterparts, who would remain outside the Centrist framework of the federated Gaels in what, I believe, could eventually become an English republic of Catholic bias, as already discussed.

 

477. Just as there would be those who, being unable to identify with the Gaels, would opt to move to England from Ireland, Scotland, or Wales, so there would be people in England who, strongly identifying with things Gaelic, opted to move to one or another of the aforementioned countries in the event of a Gaelic federation, or federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres, likely to come or actually coming to pass.  These would, however, be the exceptions to the rule in each case, and certain exceptions would have to be made for them.

 

478. Thus would the Gaels be divided from 'British' elements and the English from Gaelic elements, as things sorted themselves out in the best interests of the respective peoples, either before or following Judgement.

 

479. For Judgement is really, it seems to me, about the establishment of a Gaelic federation premised upon Social Transcendentalist Centrism, corresponding to 'Kingdom Come', and thus the People's decision, conducted on the basis of a sort of paradoxical but ultimate election, as to whether to vote for religious sovereignty, and the rights this would imply, or whether, on the contrary, to remain tied, in political sovereignty, to what I have elsewhere described as 'sins and/or punishments of the world'.

 

480. Politics and economics may be able to deal with and resolve problems appertaining to the worldly sphere of water and vegetation, but when the world is itself a problem, with intransigent positions, then only religion can deliver the People from the limitations and false hopes of politics and economics to the otherworldly sphere of 'Kingdom Come', with its triadic Beyond, in which a 're-born' water and vegetation would be subordinate to a 're-born' air, as humanism and nonconformism to transcendentalism.

 

481. Thus will the sensibly cultural element be meritocratically paramount not only over the sensibly natural element, air over vegetation, but over the sensibly civilized element of water, as the supermasculine takes it rightful place over both the masculine and the feminine in heavenly transcendence of what had formerly appertained, in due phenomenal relativity, to the world, but which were destined, in 'Kingdom Come', to become not so much otherworldly as post-worldly, in their post-dialectical relationship to each other under the lead of Heaven.

 

482. In sexual terms, this means that, far from being amorally heterosexual like the worldly, the post-worldly would effectively be lesbian and homosexual in their rejection of the world and post-dialectical deference to that which, being heavenly, transcends it, and for which the sexual analogue of plastic inflatables would not, I feel, be entirely inappropriate, irrelevant though it would of course be to the actual context of religious praxis.

 

483. Thus that which was marginal, if not criminally marginalized, in the worldly context would become more representatively reflective of the post-worldly one, as it took its post-dialectical place under the non-dialectical leadership of the otherworldly, or those who were entitled to the top tier of the triadic Beyond (duly subsectioned) in view of their greater susceptibility, via theocratic tradition, to idealism, and would thus be in the vanguard of the development, following Judgement, of sensible spirituality at the expense of sensual spirituality.

 

484. Such persons would have been saved, via the Second Coming, from theocratic fundamentalism to meritocratic transcendentalism, as, if you will, from 'sub-bullgas' to 'superbullgas', the Father to the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and would know the difference, in consequence, between the sensual spirituality of the ears and the sensible spirituality of the lungs, auditory idealism and respiratory idealism.

 

485. Thus Judgement not only exposes the limitations of the Old Order, it offers the possibility of its democratically-engineered replacement by a New Order which transcends those limitations and allows people to officially have access to that which is without limitations, and hence more sensibly infinite.

 

486. And even those who, to judge by their heathenistic traditions, would not want access to such 're-born' infinity ... will have the benefit of new orders of purgatory and earth 'down below', in the lower tiers of the triadic Beyond, which would deliver them from the dialectical frictions and worldly limitations of their past.

 

487. Thus will mass and volume, duly transmuted towards sensibility, be reconciled to space, the post-dialectical to the non-dialectical, as the world is democratically overcome and Heaven takes its pre-eminent place above post-worldly orders of purgatory and earth.

 

488. But this could not happen without the administrative service of a pseudo-Kingdom, commensurate with 'Kingdom Come', such that will reconcile a transmuted time, upheld by a pseudo-aristocracy and quasi-meritocracy, to the Eternity of the Centre, with its three-tier overall structure.

 

489. For this transmuted time would be no 'Father Time' but a sort of 'Mother Time', whose timeless love for the Centre would guarantee its eternal evolution in the Beyond.

 

490. For it takes sensibility to serve sensibility, and only that sensibility which is timeless in its 're-born' love can adequately serve the eternal sensibilities of mass, volume, and space in the triadic Beyond.

 

491. I have no doubt that the pseudo-Kingdom/quasi-Centre of 'Kingdom Come' will provide adequate service to the triadic Beyond, and thus to the Centre-proper.  It will present not so much the profane heart of fundamentalist materialism, more characteristic of British monarchs and American 'First Ladies', as the sacred heart of materialist fundamentalism ... to the realist humanism, naturalist nonconformism, and idealist transcendentalism of the Centre-proper, in which emotional pride rooted in the womb, intellectual pleasure centred in the brain, and spiritual joy centred in the lungs, will be eternally sacrosanct.

 

492. Fundamentalist materialism would be more germane, in metachemical 'rebirth', to particle sensibility than to wavicle sensibility, to the scientific (if elemental) and political (if molecular) aspect of metachemical administration than to anything specifically economic (and molecular) or religious (and elemental).

 

493. In this respect, there is always a particle/wavicle distinction between the scientific and political aspect of things on the one hand, that of elemental and molecular particles, and the economic and religious aspect of things on the other hand, that of molecular and elemental wavicles.

 

494. With this in mind, it may well be that the older religions, like Hinduism and Judaism, are more based in the particle than biased towards the wavicle, given their cosmic origins and stellar associations, whether polytheistically or monotheistically.

 

495. In which case, one could distinguish the Judaic Satan/David from the Christian or, more correctly, Subchristian Father/St Joseph on the basis of a dichotomy between fundamentalist idealism and idealist fundamentalism in relation to negative, or solar, and positive, or aural, contexts.

 

496. Which is not to exclude positivity from the one or negativity from the other but, rather, to emphasize that, with its Middle-Eastern background, there is probably more sun-conditioned negativity about Judaism or, in this context, what I have elsewhere called Subjudaism ... than ear-conditioned positivity (i.e. more Satan than David) and, conversely, more ear-conditioned positivity about Subchristianity, with its more temperate European background, than sun-conditioned negativity (i.e. more St Joseph than the Father).

 

497. Be that as it may, we need not doubt that both Subjudaism and Subchristianity are theocratic, if in different ways - the former with a bias, within its particle basis, toward Satan, and the latter with a bias, within its wavicle centre, towards St Joseph, so that we have an emphasis upon the negativity of fundamentalist idealism in the one case, and upon the positivity of idealist fundamentalism in the other case.

 

498. Thus there would, traditionally, be more falsity and woe than truth and joy in the Subjudaic kind of theocracy and, conversely, more truth and joy than falsity and woe in the Subchristian kind of theocracy, but only, in each case, in relation to 'once-born' metaphysics, and hence to spiritual sensuality and/or sensual spirituality.

 

499. Whether this would also apply, in the future, to the 're-born' metaphysics of a Superjudaic/Superchristian dichotomy between negative and positive alternatives in relation to meritocracy ... remains to be seen; though I, for one, am prepared to believe that there will be more overall positivity, in view of the likelihood of a more uniform environment, due to a combination of technological and cultural progress.

 

500. Negativity, having cosmic associations on the noumenal planes (of space and time) and geologic associations on the phenomenal planes (of mass and volume), is of course synonymous with primacy, whereas positivity, with its personal associations on the phenomenal planes and universal associations on the noumenal planes, is synonymous with supremacy.

 

501. Thus there is a kind of primal/supreme distinction between that which, being negative, is cosmic and/or geologic, and that which, being positive, is personal and/or universal.

 

502. The primal, like the supreme, can be either outer or inner, 'once born' or 're-born', of sensuality or of sensibility.

 

503. Hence we have as logical an entitlement to think of sensible primacy in connection with 're-born' negativity ... as to think of sensual supremacy in connection with 'once-born' positivity.

 

504. The primal, whether sensual or sensible, is always inorganic, whereas the supreme, whether sensual or sensible, will always be organic - the difference, in short, between the particles and wavicles of cosmic and/or geologic bodies, and the particles and wavicles of personal and/or universal bodies.

 

505. We may, in respect of their metaphysical essence, be able to attribute primal being to the sun sensually and to the planet Saturn sensibly, but only the ears and the lungs are entitled to attributions of supreme being, the former sensually and the latter sensibly.

 

506. Hence supreme being has nothing whatsoever to do with anything cosmic, much less geologic, but only with that which is metaphysically universal, and hence noumenally subjective in either sensual or sensible positive terms.

 

507. That which is metaphysically cosmic in noumenally subjective terms has to do with primal being, which is always negative in both sensual and sensible contexts.

 

508. Our own overall atomicity is torn between the negativity of cosmic and/or geologic primacy and the positivity of personal and/or universal supremacy, if with an intrinsic bias, in view of our organic constitutions, towards the latter.

 

509. Which isn't to claim that there are not times and even historical periods when the negativity of cosmic and/or geologic primacy is uppermost, and we recognize in them the hegemony of science and/or politics.

 

510. Such times and historical periods tend to owe more to the objective and particle aspect of things than to their subjective and wavicle aspect, and are accordingly more free than bound, not to mention, in general terms, more female than male.

 

511. I have no doubt that the twentieth century was, by and large, an age in which the emphasis was on primacy, and more usually in sensual than in sensible terms, in keeping with the 'once-born' hegemony of primal water and primal fire in due geologic (lunar) and cosmic (stellar) terms, as especially germane to Anglo-American influence.

 

512. Which is not to say that there was no place for supreme water and supreme fire in due personal (verbal) and universal (optical) terms.  But supremacy can only be subordinate to primacy in relation to politics and science, and never more so than in their outer, or 'once born', modes.

 

513. In politics, the relationship of supremacy to primacy is rather like less (relative to least) strength and pride vis--vis more (relative to most) weakness and humility, whilst in science it is rather like least beauty and love vis--vis most ugliness and hatred.

 

514. Such would also be the case in inner, or 're-born', modes of science and politics, except that sensibility is more characterized by the lead of economics and/or religion than by the rule of either one or other of the aforementioned objective disciplines.

 

515. This is because the greater refinement of sensibility engenders an enhanced wavicle capacity in relation to a smaller particle precondition in the elementino, or inner element.

 

516. If primacy has the advantage over supremacy in outer or sensual contexts, then supremacy has the capacity to subordinate primacy to itself in inner or sensible contexts, and most especially in connection with its subjective manifestations, with particular reference to supreme being.

 

517. Thus the more supremacy, in sensibility, the less primacy, with a consequence that one can transcend negativity to an extent that would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine in relation to sensuality.

 

518. One can conceive of a situation developing, in the future, wherein the urge to sensible supremacy is so pronounced ... that people would acquiesce in the use of science to reduce the threat of primacy, including the development and siting, in space, of special 'blocking' or 'filtering' devices to impede, if not divert, the influx of cosmic energies.

 

519. Thus would our capacity for supremacy be enhanced in proportion to the extent to which sources of primacy in the cosmos and/or Solar System (including the earth itself) were artificially impeded.

 

520. Yet this could not happen to any appreciable extent without the simultaneous transmutation of mankind, via social and genetic engineering, towards a post-human phase of evolution, during the process of which man was most decidedly 'overcome', to coin a Nietzschean turn-of-phrase.

 

521. For man should not be regarded, in overly humanistic vein, as an end-in-himself, the be-all-and-end-all of evolutionary development, but as a life form in continuous process of evolution who will, one day, overcome, or evolve beyond, himself, and thus become more than human.

 

522. And I don't just mean superman, in the sense of someone given to meditative praxis in the top tier of our projected triadic Beyond come 'the Kingdom', but something which is as much beyond (posterior to) man, in chronological terms, as apes and trees are and/or were before (anterior to) him, with the possibility, finally, of evolution to a position, set in space centres, which is antithetical not merely to animals and vegetation but to the starry bodies in general, a position corresponding to the Omega Point of consummate Eternity.

 

523. Such a definitive position of evolutionary development may be a very long way off at present, but we can set ourselves on route for it, so to speak, through adoption of an ultimate religion such that, in its Superchristian/Superjudaic implications, would be truly open to the Beyond, and thus to the concept of unlimited evolution towards consummate transcendence.

 

524. The religion I have in mind stems from the ideological philosophy of Social Transcendentalism, with its meritocratic deism, and it sets no bounds to the scope of evolutionary development other than those that would be commensurate, on the peaks of Eternity, with definitive transcendence.

 

525. If man is indeed something that should be overcome, as Nietzsche believed, then it will not be simply in terms of the superman, as a higher type of man, germane to Superchristianity, but, more importantly, of the transmutation of mankind in general, via a cyborg-like transition, towards that which is more than human, and not only in antithetical relation to apes, trees, and starry bodies, but also in relation to the evolutionary transmutations of the triadic Beyond, as it progresses through Eternity on simultaneously humanist, nonconformist, and transcendentalist terms.

 

526. Thus will the three-tier structure of the Centre-proper be subject to evolutionary transformations as, in general terms, woman, man, and superman are gradually transmuted, via a cyborg transition, along parallel lines by the technological, biological, and ontological administrators of the pseudo-Kingdom of 'Kingdom Come', whether in relation to a Gaelic federation (as described elsewhere) or, more likely by then, the entire population of a world which had slowly but surely evolved, via the ideological philosophy of Social Transcendentalism, towards millennial redemption.

 

527. One could therefore distinguish the successive evolutionary transmutations of the bottom tier from those of the middle tier of the triadic Beyond in terms of supergivings, supra-givings, and ultra-givings from supertakings, supra-takings, and ultra-takings, and both of these feminine and masculine orders of successive transmutation from the superbeings, supra-beings, and ultra-beings of its top, or supermasculine, tier.

 

528. Thus one would have a 'super' antithesis to apes, a 'supra' antithesis to trees, and an 'ultra' antithesis to minerals and/or starry bodies in all three tiers of the Centre, coupled to corresponding transmutations in the administrative aside (of the pseudo-Kingdom) from, say, superdoings and supra-doings to ultra-doings in simultaneous relation to technological, biological, and ontological concerns.

 

529. All such transmutations of post-human life would be designed to refine upon each tier's commitment to its own sphere of religious praxis, and thus bring evolving life closer to the maximization of its emotional, intellectual, or spiritual potential, as the case may be.

 

530. Thus not only being, but giving and taking would also be subject to modified enhancement by doing, itself subject to such enhancement, as a matter of millennial course.

 

531. Eventually, even giving and taking would become more being-like, though still distinct from being-proper on their respective tiers of the triadic Beyond.

 

532. Although we generalize between doing ... in relation to the noumenal objectivity of metachemistry, giving ... in relation to the phenomenal objectivity of chemistry, taking ... in relation to the phenomenal subjectivity of physics, and being ... in relation to the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysics, since doing is apparent, giving quantitative, taking qualitative, and being essential, we must also allow for the fact that all contexts are, in actuality, combinations of doing, giving, taking, and being in relation to the presiding element, be it fire, water, vegetation, or air.

 

533. More specifically, one should distinguish between the expressive taking and being of the metachemical self and unself in relation to the expressive doing and giving of the metachemical not-self and its selfless complement.

 

534. Similarly, one should distinguish between the compressive taking and being of the chemical self and unself in relation to the compressive doing and giving of the chemical not-self and its selfless complement.

 

535. Likewise, one should distinguish between the depressive taking and being of the physical self and unself in relation to the depressive doing and giving of the physical not-self and its selfless complement.

 

536. Finally, one should distinguish between the impressive taking and being of the metaphysical self and unself in relation to the impressive doing and giving of the metaphysical not-self and its selfless complement.

 

537. Thus one should be distinguishing, in effect, between four orders of doing, giving, taking, and being, only one of which will be in its per se manifestation in any given element, while the rest will be 'bovaryizations' of their respective wills.

 

538. For while doing is a manifestation of expressive will in relation to the noumenal objectivity of metachemical appearances, giving is a manifestation of compressive will in relation to the phenomenal objectivity of chemical quantities, taking a manifestation of depressive will in relation to the phenomenal subjectivity of physical qualities, and being a manifestation of impressive will in relation to the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysical essences.

 

539. Hence whereas doing is only in its per se manifestation in metachemical expression, it is 'once bovaryized' in chemical compression, 'twice bovaryized' in physical depression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in metaphysical impression.

 

540. Hence whereas giving is only in its per se manifestation in chemical compression, it is 'once bovaryized' in metachemical expression, 'twice bovaryized' in metaphysical impression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in physical depression.

 

541. Hence whereas taking is only in its per se manifestation in physical depression, it is 'once bovaryized' in metaphysical impression, 'twice bovaryized' in metachemical expression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in chemical compression.

 

542. Hence whereas being is only in its per se manifestation in metaphysical impression, it is 'once bovaryized' in physical depression, 'twice bovaryized' in chemical compression, and 'thrice bovaryized' in metachemical expression.

 

543. One can therefore distinguish between the first-rate doing of metachemical expression, the second-rate doing of chemical compression, the third-rate doing of physical depression, and the fourth-rate doing of metaphysical impression.

 

544. Likewise, one can distinguish between the first-rate giving of chemical compression, the second-rate giving of metachemical expression, the third-rate giving of metaphysical impression, and the fourth-rate giving of physical depression.

 

545. Similarly, one can distinguish between the first-rate taking of physical depression, the second-rate taking of metaphysical impression, the third-rate taking of metachemical expression, and the fourth-rate taking of chemical compression.

 

546. Finally, one can distinguish between the first-rate being of metaphysical impression, the second-rate being of physical depression, the third-rate being of chemical compression, and the fourth-rate being of metachemical expression.

 

547. Where there is most doing, as in metachemistry, there will be least being, less (relative to least) taking, and more (relative to most) giving.

 

548. Where there is most giving, as in chemistry, there will be least taking, less (relative to least) being, and more (relative to most) doing.

 

549. Where there is most taking, as in physics, there will be least giving, less (relative to least) doing, and more (relative to most) being.

 

550. Where there is most being, as in metaphysics, there will be least doing, less (relative to least) giving, and more (relative to most) taking.

 

551. Hence to contrast the most doing of the metachemical not-self with the least being of the metachemical unself, the less (relative to least) taking of the metachemical self, and the more (relative to most) giving of that which is metachemically selfless.

 

552. Hence to contrast the most giving of that which is chemically selfless with the least taking of the chemical self, the less (relative to least) being of the chemical unself, and the more (relative to most) doing of the chemical not-self.

 

553. Hence to contrast the most taking of the physical self with the least giving of that which is physically selfless, the less (relative to least) doing of the physical not-self, and the more (relative to most) being of the physical unself.

 

554. Hence to contrast the most being of the metaphysical unself with the least doing of the metaphysical not-self, the less (relative to least) giving of that which is metaphysically selfless, and the more (relative to most) taking of the metaphysical self.

 

555. To contrast, in all elemental contexts, the taking of the self with the doing of the not-self, and to further contrast the giving of that which is selfless with the being of the unself.

 

556. The self takes cognizance of the not-self, the not-self, in doing, engenders that which is selfless, and selflessness, in giving, encourages the unself to be.

 

557. The self is always, in one degree or another, intellectual, the not-self always instinctual, selflessness always spiritual, and the unself always emotional.

 

558. Hence there is a progression, in each elemental context, from ego to soul via id and spirit, as from taking to being via doing and giving.

 

559. In metachemistry, the beautiful self achieves unselfish love for itself by taking cognizance of the eyes and/or heart not-self and reacting against the selfless giving of optical and/or cardiac spirit, sight and/or blood, via expressive doing.

 

560. In chemistry, the strong self achieves unselfish pride for itself by taking cognizance of the tongue and/or womb not-self and reacting against the selfless giving of verbal and/or uterine spirit, speech and/or offspring, via compressive doing.

 

561. In physics, the knowledgeable self achieves unselfish pleasure for itself by taking cognizance of the phallus and/or brain not-self and reacting against the selfless taking of orgasmic and/or cerebral spirit, sperm and/or thought, via depressive doing.

 

562. In metaphysics, the truthful self achieves unselfish joy for itself by taking cognizance of the ears and/or lungs not-self and reacting against the selfless giving of auditory and/or respiratory spirit, sound and/or breath, via impressive doing.

 

563. Thus whereas the metachemical self is beautiful and the metachemical unself loving, the chemical self is strong and the chemical unself proud.

 

564. Whereas the physical self is knowledgeable and the physical unself pleasurable, the metaphysical self is truthful and the metaphysical unself joyful.

 

565. Likewise, whereas the metachemical not-self is devilish and that which is metachemically selfless ... hellish, the chemical not-self is feminine and that which is chemically selfless ... purgatorial.

 

566. Whereas the physical not-self is masculine and that which is physically selfless ... earthly, the metaphysical not-self is godly and that which is metaphysically selfless ... heavenly.

 

567. To contrast the unclear ego of beauty with the unclear id of the Devil, and the unclear spirit of Hell with the unclear soul of love.

 

568. To contrast the clear ego of strength with the clear id of woman, and the clear spirit of purgatory with the clear soul of pride.

 

569. To contrast the unholy ego of knowledge with the unholy id of man, and the unholy spirit of earth with the unholy soul of pleasure.

 

570. To contrast the holy ego of truth with the holy id of God, and the holy spirit of Heaven with the holy soul of joy.

 

571. That which is unclear contrasts with the clear as expression with compression, or evil with good, or fire with water, or crime with punishment.

 

572. That which is unholy contrasts with the holy as depression with impression, or folly with wisdom, or vegetation with air, or sin with grace.

 

573. The not-self, with its correspondence to the id, is a means for the self, corresponding to ego, towards the end ... of the unself, corresponding to soul, via the selfless, with its correspondence to spirit.

 

574. One begins with self and ends with unself, returning to self in order to plunge anew into the not-self so that self may be transmuted by the selfless and feel obliged to react, or rebound, from such a transmutation in the interests of self-preservation, achieving, thereby, a deeper experience of itself than would otherwise have been possible.

 

575. One extreme engenders another, and so the self, duly transmuted by spirit, rebounds from the spiritual extreme to the soulful extreme, before regaining its egocentric equilibrium as a precondition of subsequent engagement of the not-self and, through it, that which is selfless.

 

576. It is as if, to revert to Christian usage, something akin to the Son is always over both the Father and the Holy Spirit; though this would only literally apply to the metaphysical context where, through airy impression, there is indeed holiness, not to depressively physical, compressively chemical, or expressively metachemical contexts, in which spirit manifests in unholy, clear, or unclear terms, according to the elemental prevalence, respectively, of vegetation, water, or fire.

 

577. Furthermore, the Son is Himself divisible, in a manner of speaking, between an egocentric mean and the spiritual and soulful extremes which flank this mean in relation to selflessness, the one effectively superegocentric and the other subegocentric.

 

578. For, in metaphysical as in all other elemental contexts, one must distinguish between the self as conscious and the unself as either superconscious or subconscious, depending whether it is in its spiritual or its soulful manifestation.

 

579. Thus in no sense is the self, corresponding to the Son, the Christ-like cynosure of psyche, ever commensurate with either the not-self or the selfless, corresponding, in Christian terms, to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

 

580. On the contrary, the self is always distinct from both the not-self and that which is selfless, just as the Son is always distinct from both the Father and the Holy Spirit.

 

581. The 'Three-in-One' of the Son, as of the self, has reference to a division between ego, superego, and subego, or conscious, superconscious, and subconscious, corresponding to self in its ordinary mode and to the spiritualization and emotionalization of the self in the extraordinary modes of what, for convenience's sake, I have called the unself, as germane to its superconscious and subconscious extremes.

 

582. But this self, duly divisible along the aforementioned lines, is ever distinct from the not-self and that which is selfless, just as the Son, its religious equivalence, remains distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit, even as He is transported by the former and conditioned by the latter.

 

583. Yet the Christian Son/self is in practice less metaphysical than physical, since Christianity pertains, through prayer, to the cerebral sphere of vegetative 'rebirth', not to the pulmonary sphere of airy 'rebirth' wherein transcendental meditation would be the mode of religious praxis, a mode as genuinely holy, in its respiratory impressions through noumenal subjectivity, as prayer is unholy in its cogitative depressions through phenomenal subjectivity.

 

584. Of course, Christianity falls back, as we have seen, on 'once-born' metaphysics, corresponding to theocracy, but even there the self is distinct from both the not-self and selflessness, and we are dealing, in aural sensuality, with that which appertains to the 'kingdom without' and leaves much to be desired in relation to a metaphysical 'rebirth' such that, affirming the ultimate 'kingdom within', the noumenal 'kingdom' of respiratory sensibility, would have Superchristian, and hence meritocratic, implications, in keeping with its transcendent being.

 

585. Thus while theocracy does indeed embrace, in its metaphysical sensuality, a 'holy (order of) spirit', it is only in relation to the airwaves, not in relation to the breath, for which, by contrast, the metaphysical sensibility of meritocracy is required to bring religion to the ultimate 'kingdom within', in due Superchristian vein.

 

586. The metaphysical sensuality of theocracy is really something to be saved from rather than regarded as an end-in-itself, even though it lies beyond the physical sensibility of 're-born' vegetativeness through the cerebral word of Christ.

 

587. Thus if spirit is only holy in metaphysics, whether in 'once-born' or in 're-born' terms, it can only be unholy in physics, clear (on the opposite side of the gender fence) in chemistry, and unclear in metachemistry, as we abandon impression for depression, compression, and expression, or air for vegetation, water, and fire.

 

588. Only in metaphysical impression is spirit graceful, whereas in physical depression it is sinful, in chemical compression ... punishing, and in metachemical expression ... criminal, as we descend from wisdom to folly, before crossing the gender divide to goodness and, behind it, the evil of crime.

 

589. But spirit is only that which is pertinent to giving, whatever the elemental context.  There is also that which, as mind, is pertinent to taking, not to mention that which, as id, is pertinent to doing, and that which, as soul, is pertinent to being.

 

590. Giving, and hence spirit, has its per se manifestation in politics; taking, and hence mind, has its per se manifestation in economics; doing, and hence the instinct, has its per se manifestation in science; and being, and hence soul, has its per se manifestation in religion.

 

591. Hence we should distinguish the spirit of politics as an expressive or, rather, compressive illustration of civilization ... from the mind of economics as a depressive illustration of nature.

 

592. In similar vein, we should distinguish the id of science as an expressive illustration of barbarism ... from the soul of religion as an impressive illustration of culture.

 

593. For while civilization is compressive and nature depressive after the manner of water and vegetation, of politics and economics within the phenomenal realms of mass and volume, barbarism is expressive and culture impressive after the manner of fire and air, of science and religion within the noumenal realms of time and space.

 

594. There may even be a sense in which, since science corresponds to the most basic element and general first-mover of things, people and societies tend to reflect, on a gender-conditioned basis, the reaction of religion against science, of politics against religion, of economics against politics, and of science against economics, preparatory to the resumption of a religious reaction against science, and so on.

 

595. For societies, like the individuals of which they're composed, are all the time changing, alternating between one element and another, in a constant flux of interaction which is yet subject to structural stability and constancy.

 

596. We may not be able to eliminate any particular element from the overall equation, but we can certainly change the ratios of elements around, in accordance with the establishment of the most desirable type of society from any given standpoint, be it immoral (and female) or moral (and male), objective or subjective, barbarous/civil or natural/cultural.

 

597. Speaking as a philosopher, I can only subscribe to the morally most desirable arrangement of society, and that follows not from the collective to the individual but from the individual to the collective, shaping society in the image of what is best for the individual and, above all, for the best and highest individuals who, in their wisdom, are the best that society has to offer.

 

598. That society in which the good and/or foolish collective defers to the wise individual rather than the evil individual to the good and/or foolish collective ... is the only one which will ever amount to anything morally significant, for it is on the basis of its best individuals that a society should be judged.

 

599. Thus the best society will be that in which not woman and/or man but the superman is paramount, and wise individualism has accordingly supplanted good and/or foolish collectivism as the prevailing ideal.

 

600. Such a society is commensurate, so I maintain, with 'Kingdom Come', and it is with the intention of bringing such a society about that I have penned these lines and brought to a close what is, I believe, a well-nigh definitive testament of Social Transcendentalist will from one who regards himself, not without sufficient reason, as the king of philosophers, and hence the proverbial 'philosopher-king' whose 'reign' should last for ever.

                                                

                       

LONDON 1997-8 (Revised 1999-2010)

 

 

ULTRANOTES FROM BEYOND

 

 

Support independent publishing: Buy this e-book on Lulu.

 

AddThis Social Bookmark Button