THE MYTH OF EQUALITY
Copyright © 2001-2010 John O'Loughlin
1. To conceive, if rather poetically, of blue-eyed whites as the flower of the human race, green-eyed whites as its stalk, and brown-eyed whites as the roots of this Caucasian plant, as germane, by and large, to Europe, and northern Europe in particular.
2. Brown-eyed coloureds, whether Black or Asian, could be described, in like vein, as the soil of the human race, while those with almond eyes might well be its fire and/or sun.
3. On the other hand, persons with grey eyes could well qualify for an analogy with the sea and thus, in effect, with water.
4. Be that as it may, to speak of racial equality with regard to persons of similar eye coloration is one thing; to speak of it with regard to persons of dissimilar colours seems to me to fly in the face of reality and overlook the obvious - namely, that eye coloration is an indication of racial inequality, not the only one, by any means, but a significant and vital indication nevertheless!
5. People of mixed race - even within the broad spectrum of colours found in the white race - often have mixed eye coloration, like greenish blue or bluish green, and so on, while those who are most racially pure tend to reflect this in the unadulterated or uniform coloration of their eyes.
6. Generally it is right and proper that people of blue and even green eyes, as of combinations of each, should rise to the top of society and have positions of responsibility commensurate with their racial natures.
7 A world dominated by brown-eyed people would not be particularly high-minded but, on the contrary, too earthy and mundane for anything of truly cultural or religious significance to emerge.
8. The Germans,
together with the Irish and Scandinavians, are amongst the most
9. The Third Reich is only fully explicable on the basis of a blue-eyed racial highness, largely germane to Germany and kindred lands, which felt itself under threat from both internal and external races of a largely, if not exclusively, brown-eyed constitution and duly 'broke out' of the siege mentality under which it had existed, to wreak havoc on the races in question.
10. The Third Reich was not imperialism in the classic Western or even Eastern models of countries like France, England, Spain, and Russia, but, rather, a reaction of racial highness to the perceived threat posed by racially lower countries and peoples to its racial and national interests.
11. For blue-eyed races will not normally go out
of their way to involve themselves imperialistically with brown-eyed
farther afield, but prefer, as in the case
12. Nothing is more important to a higher race than the protection of its gene pool and racial characteristics from the threat of pollution and vitiation at the hands of racially lower peoples.
13. There is nothing higher on this planet, nor has there ever been, than the blue- and even green-eyed peoples who constitute what I elsewhere described as the flower of humanity, and from which the highest achievements in civilization and culture, but especially culture, tend to flow.
14. The world is well populated with brown-eyed peoples, but those regions which have produced blue and green eyes are not so prevalent, nor even as populous overall, and deserve such protection and encouragement as they can get, to ensure that higher racial material is not snuffed out by the general pattern of things, but can flourish and spread its enlightenment to kindred peoples in the interests of cultural progress.
1. Of course culture and race are two different things, even if two sides of the same abstract, or noumenal, coin - a coin on which the heads side, as it were, will always be characterized by culture and the tails side by race.
2. But race and culture nonetheless complement and even confirm each other, and no higher culture can be achieved except on the basis of a racial predisposition in the peoples concerned. In this respect, culture is quite unlike civilization, which requires not a racial but a generative precondition or basis, and applies, in any case, to the concrete realm of the phenomenal, with particular regard to the planes of volume and mass.
3. The planes of time and space, on the other hand, are precisely those on which culture and race have their principal thrones, and one can distinguish space from time on the basis of culture from race, duly dividing each between beauty and truth, and truth and beauty, as between clear and holy manifestations of culture and unholy and unclear manifestations of race.
4. The student familiar with my texts will know - or should know - that the antipodes of a given spectrum or, rather, plane tend to be mutually exclusive, and that movement from race to culture or from culture to race, as from sensuality to sensibility, tends to be in the diagonal bisecting of such contiguous planes as pertain, as here, either to space and time or, down below, to volume and mass.
5. Since one can rise or fall diagonally, as from time to space or from space to time, it follows that a diagonal rise from the one to the other will be commensurate with progress from race to culture, while a diagonal fall from the one to the other will be commensurate, by contrast, with a regression from culture to race. For not only are race and culture of time and space, but they are of it in diametrically antithetical ways, as between beauty and truth in the case of space, and truth and beauty in the case of time.
6. The distinction between beauty and truth is of course germane to a gender-based dichotomy between appearance and essence, will and soul, with the former female and the latter male, since noumenal, or upper-class, females are rooted in will and noumenal, or upper-class, males, by contrast, centred in soul, as, in elemental terms, between fire and air, metachemistry and metaphysics.
7. Culture is no more exclusively metaphysical than space, while race is no more exclusively metachemical than time. Beautiful culture is simply the female manifestation of culture and is therefore metachemical, whereas true culture is its male manifestation, and therefore metaphysical. True race, on the other hand, is simply the male manifestation of race and is therefore metaphysical, whereas beautiful race is its female manifestation, which happens to be metachemical.
8. Hence noumenal males (divine) can only rise, in keeping with their subjective bias for truth, or essence, from time to space, as from true race to true culture, while noumenal females (diabolic) have no option but to fall, in keeping with their objective bias for beauty, or appearance, from space to time, as from beautiful culture to beautiful race.
9. To rise from time to space is to progress from metaphysical sensuality to metaphysical sensibility, as, in organic terms, from the ears to the lungs, and is effectively to be saved from racial truth to cultural truth. To fall, on the other hand, from space to time is to regress from metachemical sensuality to metachemical sensibility, as, in organic terms, from the eyes to the heart, and is effectively to be damned from cultural beauty to racial beauty.
10. Hence the salvation of noumenal males, or gods, from time to space presupposes the damnation of noumenal females, or devils, from space to time. Those who were 'last' in true race become 'first' in true culture, while those who were 'first' in beautiful culture become 'last' in beautiful race. From being a plane below females in racial truth, males rise diagonally to being a plane above them in cultural truth. Conversely, from being a plane above males in cultural beauty, females fall diagonally to being a plane below them in racial beauty.
11. Having dealt briefly with space and time, culture and race, let us now turn to volume and mass, civilization and generation, their lower-class, or phenomenal, counterparts.
12. Since one can rise or fall diagonally, as from mass to volume or from volume to mass, it follows that a diagonal rise from the one to the other will be commensurate with progress from generation to civilization, while a diagonal fall from the one to the other will be commensurate, by contrast, with a regression from civilization to generation. For not only are generation and civilization of mass and volume, but they are of it in diametrically antithetical ways, as between strength and knowledge in the case of volume, and knowledge and strength in the case of mass.
13. The distinction between strength and knowledge is, of course, germane to a gender-based dichotomy between quantity and quality, spirit and ego, with the former female and the latter male, since phenomenal, or lower-class, females are rooted in spirit and phenomenal, or lower-class, males, by contrast, centred in ego, as, in elemental terms, between water and vegetation (earth), chemistry and physics.
14. Civilization is no more exclusively physical than volume, while generation is no more exclusively chemical than mass. Strong civilization is simply the female manifestation of civilization and is therefore chemical, whereas knowledgeable civilization is its male manifestation, and therefore physical. Knowledgeable generation, on the other hand, is simply the male manifestation of generation and is therefore physical, whereas strong generation is its female manifestation, which happens to be chemical.
15. Hence phenomenal males (masculine) can only rise, in keeping with their subjective bias for knowledge, or quality, from mass to volume, as from knowledgeable generation to knowledgeable civilization, while phenomenal females (feminine) have no option but to fall, in keeping with their objective bias for strength, or quantity, from volume to mass, as from strong civilization to strong generation.
16. To rise from mass to volume is to progress from physical sensuality to physical sensibility, as, in organic terms, from the phallus to the brain, and is effectively to be saved from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge. To fall, on the other hand, from volume to mass is to regress from chemical sensuality to chemical sensibility, as, in organic terms, from the tongue to the womb, and is effectively to be damned from civilized strength to generative strength.
17. Hence the salvation of phenomenal males, or men, from mass to volume presupposes the damnation of phenomenal females, or women, from volume to mass. Those who were 'last' in knowledgeable generation become 'first' in knowledgeable civilization, while those who were 'first' in strong civilization become 'last' in strong generation. From being a plane below females in generative knowledge, males rise diagonally to being a plane above them in civilized knowledge. Conversely, from being a plane above males in civilized strength, females fall diagonally to being a plane below them in generative strength.
1. To rise diagonally, as a male, from folly to wisdom, unholiness to holiness, unrighteousness to righteousness, physical and/or metaphysical sensuality to physical and/or metaphysical sensibility, sin to grace, whether on the relative terms of phenomenal subjectivity, as germane to mass-volume, or on the absolute terms of noumenal subjectivity, as germane to time-space, thereby being saved from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge and/or from racial truth to cultural truth.
2. To fall diagonally, as a female, from evil to good, clearness to unclearness, righteousness to unrighteousness, chemical and/or metachemical sensuality to chemical and/or metachemical sensibility, crime to punishment, whether on the relative terms of phenomenal objectivity, as germane to volume-mass, or on the absolute terms of noumenal objectivity, as germane to space-time, thereby being damned from civilized strength to generative strength and/or from cultural beauty to racial beauty.
3. That which rises diagonally in salvation does so from the curse of under-plane subservience of a secondary order of freedom (from self) to a primary order of freedom (in not-self), whereas that which falls diagonally in damnation does so from the blessing of over-plane hegemony to under-plane subservience of a secondary order of binding (in not-self) to a primary order of binding (to self).
4. Thus that which, on the male side of the gender divide, had been secondarily free in sensuality becomes primarily bound in sensibility, while that which, on the female side of the said divide, had been primarily free in sensuality becomes secondarily bound in sensibility.
5. For the female is ever a creature in which not-self takes precedence over self, the organs of, in particular, chemistry and metachemistry over the spinal column and brain stem, whereas the male, by contrast, is ever a creature in which self takes precedence over not-self, the spinal column and brain stem over the organs of, in particular, physics and metaphysics.
6. This is because while the female is rooted, through objectivity, in a vacuum, the male is centred, through subjectivity, in a plenum. Or, to reverse this, one could say that it is precisely the fact of the female's being rooted in a vacuum which makes for objectivity, or a tendency to diverge (sensuality) and/or converge (sensibility) in straight-line fashion, while it is equally the fact of the male's being centred in a plenum which makes for subjectivity, or a tendency to diverge (sensuality) and/or converge (sensibility) in curved-line fashion.
7. Hence freedom associated with a vacuum is always primary, while freedom associated with a plenum remains secondary; the one having especial connections with the not-self and the other with the self.
8. Contrariwise, binding associated with a plenum is always primary, while binding associated with a vacuum remains secondary; the one having especial connections with the self and the other with the not-self.
9. Thus the female form of freedom is ever primary and the male form merely secondary, while, conversely, the male form of binding is ever primary and the female form merely secondary.
10. Females achieve perfection in primary freedom, which is immoral in its sensuality, whereas males only achieve perfection in primary binding, which is moral in its sensibility. The one appertains to the righteousness of clearness, which is ever evil; the other to the righteousness of holiness, which is ever wise. Secondarily to each of these, the unrighteousness of unholiness is ever foolish, and the unrighteousness of unclearness ... ever good.
11. Good, therefore, can only be secondary to evil for a female, whether in the relative context of volume-mass or in the absolute context of space-time. For evil is a manifestation of civilized and/or cultural clearness, and is accordingly blessed with direct freedom (for the not-self), whereas good(ness) is a manifestation of generative and/or racial unclearness, and is accordingly afflicted with indirect binding (of the not-self).
12. Conversely, folly can only be secondary to wisdom for a male, whether in the relative context of mass-volume or in the absolute context of time-space. For folly is a manifestation of generative and/or racial unholiness, and is accordingly cursed with secondary freedom (from the self), whereas wisdom is a manifestation of civilized and/or cultural holiness, and is accordingly sanctified by primary binding (to the self).
13. Stable civilization and culture complexes do not ordinarily oscillate too perceptibly between alpha and omega, sensuality and sensibility, but tend, notwithstanding minor and incidental oscillations, to uphold civilization or culture on a given gender-biased platform, be it female, and sensual, or male, and sensible.
14. Hence the prevalence of civilized and/or cultured righteousness in relation to clearness tends to preclude the contrary prevalence of civilized and/or cultured righteousness in relation to holiness. Either the female has her way at the expense, by and large, of the male, as in the West traditionally, or the male has his way at the expense, by and large, of the female, as in the East traditionally. Regional exceptions to the rule notwithstanding, stable civilizations and cultures are either clear or holy, not both at once or, rather, by turns.
15. The existence of cultural clearness, or beauty, in the West has long tended to preclude the contrary existence, certainly on anything like an official or institutional level, of cultural holiness, or truth; for the West, like much of the East, particularly the Middle East, is rooted in both Graeco-Roman and Judaic traditions, and therefore upholds the Biblical concept of a cosmic First Mover (Jehovah), as germane to the Old Testament.
16. Ironically, the New Testament parallel to this is not the Father, but the Risen Virgin, whereby one is more concerned with organic supremacy, and hence eyes over ears, than with inorganic primacy, and hence stellar over solar bodies in the Cosmos. Be that as it may, cultural beauty still precludes the official coming to pass of cultural truth, and ensures that such truth as does exist or is affirmed remains 'beyond the pale' of theocratic or theological requirement.
17. For the believer in and devotee of cultural truth, which tends to manifest in the practice, intermittent or otherwise, of transcendental meditation, has no time for theocracy, theology, theosophy, or any other religious tradition rooted in theism. He is atheist, or against theism, to the extent that what he upholds is alien to a world in which cultural criteria are rooted in theocracy, with its organic beauty (Risen Virgin) or inorganic ugliness (Jehovah), and in righteous clearness via either the eyes or the stellar plane. For him God or, rather, godliness is not theistic but deistic, not external but internal, not rooted in the Cosmos but centred in the self, and, in any case, not metachemical, like 'first movers' tend to be, but metaphysical, and therefore germane to air rather than to fire. He is the Western outsider par excellence, for this doctrine of atheism vis-à-vis cosmic and even universal (organic) theism has long been known and upheld in the East, even if only by a noumenal elite.
18. Not altogether surprisingly, the nations which
are most characteristic of the West tend, like Britain and America, to
most free, whether in terms of civilization (
19. Both countries are typified by righteous clearness, in which female criteria are hegemonic over male criteria, as symbolically confirmed by the association of Britannia, 'ruler of the waves', with parliamentary Britain, and the Statue of Liberty, whether or not dubbed 'Liberty Belle', with America, which, though republican, tends to be more cultural than civilized in the extent to which freedom is equated with fire rather than water, as with regard to the camera-besotted media of film and the press rather than the voice-besotted media of radio and theatre.
20. Be that as it may, one could believe that freedom of speech was more characteristic of civilized Britain, and freedom of image, or the camera-besotted press, more characteristic of cultural America, but, whatever the case, neither country would strike one as championing the male forms of civilization and culture to any great extent, which is why they are bastions of secular freedom and the reign, in consequence, of females.
21. But if the West is largely characterized by freedom, and the East by binding, whether or not on ecclesiastical terms, is there not something almost geographically and even geopolitically inevitable about this, which makes it difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a time when either universal freedom or universal binding will obtain in the world.
22. For if the West is the opposite of the East, then different they will always remain, even if the influence of the one on the other is inescapable, whether in favour of the West, as at present, or in favour of the East, should that ever transpire. Certainly one cannot reasonably conceive of a world in which only freedom or only binding obtain, because neither term nor reality would make much sense if divorced from the other.
23. Freedom without binding, or vice versa, is as implausible a concept as left without right, or day without night, or female without male. It is unlikely, barring global catastrophe, that the world will ever be any one thing to the total exclusion of its opposite. All that is likely to happen, in the event of increased globalization, is that the West will become less free and the East less bound; for the West cannot cease to be the West any more than the East can cease being itself. The division between East and West predisposes one to an acceptance of a gender struggle between binding and freedom, male and female life principles; for sensibility and sensuality would seem fated to continue the battle of life as long as life itself continues in recognizably human form.
1. One hears much talk of Western godlessness from, not least, Eastern religious fanatics of one persuasion or another, but one has to be careful how one interprets the term 'God', and thus what one understands by religion. If one means 'God as Creator', in the sense of some cosmic First Mover credited by certain ancient texts, including the so-called Christian Bible, with the creation of the world and all or most of the creatures in it, then one is adhering to a very basic and, to my mind, primitive concept of God which, whether or not it has ceased to apply to the West, is only credible, it seems to me, in relation to a naturalistic and largely rural background.
2. It may be that the West is comparatively Godless in terms of adherence to such a primitive and basic notion of God as the term 'Creator' evokes, but if that were so - and there are conflicting opinions here - is that any great misfortune or shortcoming when considered not only in relation to Christian traditions of Christ-worship (wherein, even with distinctions between the Old Testament 'Creator', or Jehovah, and the New Testament 'Creator', or the Father, the Son is effectively a salvation from if not the eternal, then certainly a temporal manifestation of the Father and effective cynosure, in Christ, of worship), but, notwithstanding such traditions, to the sorts of environmental or climatic conditions in which such basic notions of God normally flourish.
3. When one lives closer to Nature in rural or mountainous lands it stands to reason that some acknowledgement of either Nature or that which is deemed responsible for Nature, like a variety of cosmic bodies, will be officially upheld and widely practised through conventional or traditional religious rites, even if less in terms of Nature-worship than of some sublimated extrapolation from Nature and/or the Cosmos which may or may not be given anthropomorphic associations.
4. But what of those countries or peoples which have moved beyond such primitive conditions and now command vast reserves of industrial, technological, scientific, and other know-how, having acquired a much more urban orientation in which man-made rather than nature-made things abound - can they be expected to relate to naturalistic concepts of God, and if not, what is wrong with their more humanistic and socialistic concerns?
5. For it seems that the more developed countries and peoples become, the more they abandon primitivistic religion in the interests of a sort of humanistic focus in which things made by man take precedence over whatever might have been fashioned by Nature or some outside force operating on Nature from the Cosmos. They are no longer surrounded by Nature to any appreciable extent, but have a uniquely humanized world to live in and develop. Small wonder if traditional concepts of God or religion fall by the roadside!
6. But humanism, even Christian humanism, is hardly the end of the road, nor is its secular counterpart, which takes a variety of socialistic forms. For urban civilization provides a bridge, it seems to me, from the Nature-bound past to a much more interiorized and even genuinely religious future, a future in which godliness is truly within, as one emerges from the 'black hole', as it were, of industrial development into a light which owes little or nothing to the Sun, still less to the Cosmos, but much if not everything to the soul and its capacity for inner light, as revealed through a variety of meditative devotions and chemical stimulants, not to mention intellectual and spiritual studies conducted via the use of personal computers and such like.
7. Of what relevance is the 'Garden without' to a person who has gone within and whose whole lifestyle is aided and abetted by environmental and technological transformations in society which, while rooted in sensuality, intimate of a sensible alternative and deeper resolution. For city life contrasts with Nature, nature-in-the-raw, as an environment in which more sensibility is possible by dint of the interior parallel to sensibility which living or being indoors much of the time inevitably provides.
8. Doubtless the West, and northern Europe in particular, owes not a little of its urban and technological sophistication to weather conditions which, in their various inclemencies, conduce towards an indoor lifestyle - something which could hardly be said of much of north Africa and the Middle East, to take but two regional examples. People do not ordinarily get as much chance to lounge around in the sunshine in northern Europe as they do in some places farther afield, and over the centuries a mentality has developed, in conjunction with Christianity, which places more emphasis on living indoors than outdoors, so that most indigenous Europeans more or less take their sedentary lifestyles under roofs and between walls for granted, only venturing out when they have to or as the leisurely exception to a general rule.
9. But how inextricably tied to sensibility this is, and how it contrasts with those countries and peoples which, for climatic as well as environmental reasons, were never given quite as much incentive to develop a civilized and urban alternative to Nature but, even with certain inclemencies, revelled in the outdoors and in the sensuality that hot climates entail. Even now the African or Arab or coloured person in general in Western cities is more likely to linger longer outdoors on a fine day than his European counterpart. And if he is not more sensible, he is certainly more sensual, and thus closer to nature, as they say, than those of us for whom city life and city lifestyles are the time-honoured norm.
10. Of course, the city is not only a vehicle for furthering sensibility in the extent to which indoor lifestyles proliferate; it can and does contain much sensuality, though arguably much less sensuality than rural areas or than those countries in which the sun is so much more prevalent. Sensuality is the basis of life for even the most sensible of persons, and few if any of us would be able to tolerate life without at least some daily contact with the scaled-down nature of, for instance, parks, gardens, indoor plants, pets, roadside trees, and so on. But this scaled-down and often transmuted nature is not to be confused with nature-in-the-raw, or Nature with a capital N, and no-one in his right, sensible mind would ever wish to return to a context closer to Nature in that rural or primitive sense. For he would ultimately risk returning to a primitive concept of God and mode of religion, a mode rooted in the notion of cosmic Creator and requiring worshipful subservience of a degree likely to evoke unpleasant political connotations with authoritarian monarchy!
11. No, the city at least prevents any such retrogressive step for those who are properly germane to it, and to that extent it is a guarantor of freedom from theocratic or other authoritarianisms and vehicle for enhanced sensibility, to the extent that people respond to the indoor summons on a positive note, scorning contact with the great outdoors on all but a tangential, or city-conditioned, basis.
12. But there is more than one kind of sensibility, and the city often tends to reflect this in the different types of architectural style which different usages and orientations dictate, ranging from the metachemically square to the metaphysically round via the chemically rectangular and the physically elliptical, as from noumenal objectivity to noumenal subjectivity via phenomenal objectivity and phenomenal subjectivity. Cities can be more one thing than another, and so they often tend to be, yet are also capable of being transmuted not only in terms of enhanced interiorization, but of one type of architectural parallel to sensibility at the expense of or in preference to another, depending on the nature of the city and even of the people who happen to inhabit it.
13. Cities are not fixed but infinitely transmutable in their development, and widespread disillusionment with one type of architectural bias does not invalidate the possibility of another but, rather, portends the likelihood of further change attendant upon a variety of ideological and functional preconditions. Ultimately, we get the city we deserve!
14. But whatever city we live in, the distinction between raw nature and urban civilization is indubitably one between sensuality and sensibility, the outer and the inner, and to that extent the development of any higher culture, be it Christian or post-Christian, is premised upon a civilized precondition, without which lifestyles will remain heathenistically given to the 'great outdoors'. And so, by a correlative token, will religion and thus the concept of God.
1. I like to think that the American rush to urbanize and industrialize and generally develop technology as quickly and efficiently as possible owes not a little to the Christian ancestry which most Americans inherited from the Old World and which made them especially determined, in consequence, not to be dwarfed and dominated by Nature but to set about rivalling it as vigorously as possible, in the interests of a sensible retort to the sensuality which even now is so much more prevalent in that vast continent than in Europe generally, and Western Europe in particular.
2. Thus the Americans, especially those of
European descent, were bequeathed a Christian conscience which sought
and sophisticated transformation of a continent still beset by
nature-in-the-raw to a degree which had long before ceased to
of Western Europe. Even with its
violence and sensuality, latter-day
3. If America now leads the world it is not because it has or ever returned to nature but, on the contrary, because, right from the start, it made war on Nature and brought civilization to a continent that had known only barbarism. This, incidentally, is generally true of imperialism and colonialism everywhere.
4. Freedom in the democratic and economic sense is incompatible with being too close to Nature, since naturalism correlates with primitivity not only in religious terms but also in political and economic terms. The struggle against Nature is effectively a struggle for civilization and the possibility, in consequence, of enhanced sensibility as confirmed by cultural sophistication attendant upon an indoor lifestyle.
5. To be free from religious or other tyranny is a mark of any higher civilization, since the tyrant constrains his subjects to sensuality, and thus prevents their sensible redemption or transmutation. He (though especially She) is something to be worshipped, and in all worshipful subservience there is a loss of self-respect and absence, in greater or lesser degree, of the possibility of holiness, which, as a male reality, is intimately, indeed inextricably, associated with closeness to self, meaning, needless to say, the brain stem and spinal column of what passes, in general parlance, for the central nervous system.
6. But holiness is only one side of a dual-sided sensible equation. The other is unclearness, and this is as much a female reality, whether in phenomenal or noumenal, lower- or upper-class, terms, as holiness is male, given the extent to which females are creatures primarily of the not-self, especially with regard to the objective organs of metachemical and chemical sensuality and sensibility, and only secondarily of the self, unlike their male counterparts.
7. There can be no holiness for males, in short, without a corresponding degree of unclearness for females, who are as much damned from the evil righteousness of clearness as sensible males are saved from the foolish unrighteousness of unholiness which, in sensuality, defers, in fairly worshipful vein, to clearness, pretty much as a religious primitive, trapped in racial unholiness, to some cosmic and/or stellar manifestation of cultural clearness.
8. Cultural clearness, which is upheld in the Jehovahesque Old Testament, is the principal enemy of and obstacle to the possibility of cultural holiness, which is beyond the civilized level of Christ and thus beyond - and above - prayerful devotion in what transpires to being a meditative praxis at once the epitome and guarantor of religious sanctity. He who prays rather than meditates knows nothing of genuine religion, and hence cultural holiness. He lives the half-wisdom, in Christ, of civilized holiness, as germane to vegetative sensibility, the sensibility of physical rebirth, and is but a lower-class shortfall from the airy sensibility, the sensibility of metaphysical rebirth, in which transcendental meditation has its divine throne. The man or, rather, effective god who meditates through consciousness of his breathing is beyond the scope of Biblical delusion and Creator-rooted religious primitivity. He scorns such a thing as unworthy of true enlightenment! For, to him, only the inner light has any claim on metaphysical holiness, the outer light, no matter how clear, being metachemically antithetical to the righteousness which is wise and of God in any ultimate sense, ultimate, that is to say, in relation to the supreme beingfulness of a sensible manifestation of organic supremacy having reference to metaphysical rebirth.
9. Thus the true Son, the Son of God who is metaphysically rather than physically sensible, who is indeed godly rather than manly in his upper-class male sensibility, counsels against not only the Father of metaphysical sensuality, Who is a secondary Father compared to the manly Father of physical sensuality and fulcrum of vegetative sin (in the phallus), but against both positive (Risen Virgin) and negative (Jehovah) manifestations of metachemical sensuality, since neither the organic nor the inorganic mode of cultural clearness can admit of the possibility or do anything to advance cultural holiness, least of all in relation to organic supremacy, which requires, on the contrary, the complete and utter repudiation of all cultural clearness and thus righteous evil, the immoral righteousness of sensual 'First Movers' who, in their noumenal objectivity, are really Devils, not Gods.
10. Freedom from worshipful subservience, and even enslavement, to cosmic and/or universal 'First Movers' in the cultural clearness of metachemical sensuality is one thing; binding to cosmic or, better, universal (organic) 'Last Movers' (or, better, 'Last Groovers') in the cultural holiness of metaphysical sensibility is quite another, and for this to come properly to pass as ultimate salvation for those males who would be 'up to it' and entitled to a sensibly transcendental destiny, those who relate to metachemical sensuality must be brought low, or damned, to metachemical sensibility in an unclear deference to holiness, as metaphysically-biased males climb from the unrighteousness of metaphysical sensuality in the Father to the righteousness of metaphysical sensibility in the Son, as and when they democratically opt for salvation from racial unholiness to cultural holiness through the Second Coming, and officially pass beyond aural sins to respiratory graces.
11. For freedom is assuredly not the end of the evolutionary or even devolutionary road but, rather, a half-way house between other-worship and self-binding, between the primitivity of false religion and the sublimity of true religion, and the sooner those who now have and revel in freedom, whether political or otherwise, realize this, the sooner will the possibility of salvation and/or damnation (according to gender) from sins and/or crimes of the world come to pass, and holy and/or unclear binding become the sensible solution, in 'Kingdom Come', to the dilemmas of contemporary secular freedom which, despite their social benefits, are always vulnerable to the ungodly seductions of tyrannical falsehoods, as well as to their own rhetorical aggrandizements.
1. Returning from general concepts of culture and civilization to more particular concepts, it is demonstrably the case that race and culture are no less part-and-parcel of the same coin, in this case noumenal, than generation and civilization are part-and-parcel of a phenomenal coin, which is to say, of a coin having associations, in lower-class vein, with the planes of mass and volume rather than with the planes of time and space, their upper-class counterparts.
2. Race and culture, whether sensual and immoral or sensible and moral, are only genuinely possible in relation to the noumenal planes of space and time, and accordingly presuppose an upper-class bias in which, not strength and knowledge, but beauty and truth are the antithetical or antipathetic rivals.
3. Generation and civilization, on the other hand, are only genuinely possible in relation to the phenomenal planes of volume and mass, and accordingly presuppose a lower-class bias in which, not beauty and truth, but strength and knowledge are the antithetical or antipathetic rivals.
4. Peoples who are extensively 'mongrelized', or of mixed racial antecedents, do not normally uphold race and culture to any appreciable extent but, placing a taboo on racism, racial consciousness, desires for racial purity, and so on, reject such realities in the interests of generation and civilization, to which they more readily and even logically subscribe. Thus they are not generally known or recognized as a 'culture people' but, on the contrary, as a 'civilized people', for whom culture is much less genuinely apparent or even essential.
5. For culture can be apparent or essential, evil or wise, beautiful or truthful, and adherence to the one, as we have argued, tends to marginalize, if not exclude, the other. Such is also so, of course, of civilization, which can be quantitative or qualitative, evil or wise, strong or knowledgeable, and, again, adherence to the one tends to marginalize if not exclude the other.
6. Evidence shows that while the British are, by and large, a generative/civilized people, the Irish, by contrast, are largely a racial/cultural people, and that both peoples mostly tend to identify, in this day and age, with the sensual manifestations of race/culture on the one hand, and of generation/civilization on the other hand, so that freedom rather than binding is the more prevalent 'cultural' norm in each 'civilization'.
7. I have identified this tendency, in the past, with triangular realities for each people, the British largely given to an inverted triangle in which strong civilization, duly divisible between dispassionate and passionate manifestations, tends to prevail over knowledgeable generation, like volumetric volume over massive mass, or, in political terms, Tories and Labourites over Liberals, and the Irish, by contrast, largely given to a pyramidal triangle in which beautiful culture, aided and abetted by an economic manifestation of beautiful race, tends to prevail over true race, pretty much like spatial space and repetitive time over sequential time, or, in religious terms, the Risen Virgin and the Sacred Heart of the Risen Christ over the Father ... in what strikes this writer as a sort of Catholic decadence that not only flies in the face of the phenomenal sensibility (brain over womb) of Catholic tradition, but testifies to a noumenal parallel, in space and time, to the Protestant reality of Puritans/Dissenters over Anglicans in the mass/volume phenomenality, as it were, of a society more characterized by tongue over phallus than by eyes over ears, and thus by heathenistic than by paganistic criteria of sensual alignment.
8. Be that as it may, the Irish/British dichotomy is very much, at this point in time, one in which sensual manifestations of culture and race compete with sensual manifestations of civilization and generation, as freedom has its day on both noumenal and phenomenal levels of evil and folly.
9. I offer to both peoples the prospect and indeed possibility, on a Messianic basis, the basis of a paradoxical election for religious sovereignty, of deliverance from sensuality to sensibility, and thus of salvation and/or damnation, according to gender, from the triangular realities of the present to the hierarchic structures of a 'Kingdom' in which a sensible manifestation of racial beauty, posterior to that of the so-called Risen Christ (in reality a sort of secondary Mother) will serve sensible manifestations not only of cultural truth but, lower down the triadic hierarchy, of civilized knowledge and generative strength, as mass, volume, and space take their eternal place beyond time in the unfolding of a non-triangular alternative to the heathenistic and even paganistic realities and structures of the secular present.
10. For if, as a noumenal male, you rise diagonally from sensual time to sensible space, as from racial truth to cultural truth, you must fall diagonally, as a noumenal female, from sensual space to sensible time, as from cultural beauty to racial beauty, thereby achieving contrary - and moral - orders of culture and race to what obtains in the paganistic present.
11. And if as, a phenomenal male, you rise diagonally from sensual mass to sensible volume, as from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge, you must fall diagonally, as a phenomenal female, from sensual volume to sensible mass, as from civilized strength to generative strength, thereby achieving contrary - and moral - orders of civilization and generation to what obtains in the heathenistic present.
12. Thus if noumenal males rise, in absolute salvation, from ears to lungs, noumenal females must fall, in absolute damnation, from eyes to heart, the one gender rising from racial truth to cultural truth, and the other gender falling from cultural beauty to racial beauty.
13. And if phenomenal males rise, in relative salvation, from phallus to brain, phenomenal females must fall, in relative damnation, from tongue to womb, the one gender rising from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge, and the other gender falling from civilized strength to generative strength.
14. Either way, salvation is from the folly of unholy unrighteousness to the wisdom of holy righteousness, whereas damnation is from the evil of clear righteousness to the goodness of unclear unrighteousness, in which morality obtains as a sensible alternative - and retort - to sensual immorality.
15. However, females, whether noumenal or phenomenal, upper-class or lower-class, will not remain resigned to the unrighteousness of sensible unclearness for long, if there is insufficient wisdom in place to maintain them in goodness as the female counterpart to male morality. They will return, soon enough, to the righteousness of sensual clearness and drag males back and down to the immorality of a foolish deference to evil.
16. This inevitably happens when moral endeavours strive to create or maintain a society built around sensibility, but with insufficient incentives for females to remain attached to a sensible bias; for moral endeavours are usually male-driven and only to the advantage, ultimately, of males.
17. You can officially uphold morality as a sensible civilized and/or cultural ideal, but you cannot expect people - least of all females - to rigorously adhere to it as though Christianity or equivalent 'reborn' religious dispensations could be adhered to twenty-four hours a day seven days a week right through every year. They can't, and any attempt to force the issue or create unreasonable expectations is doomed to failure. It plays into the hands of religious fanaticism, and that is a sure formula for the unleashing of hell, usually, though not invariably, in the guise of a scientific backlash, of which war is the most prevalent manifestation.
18. Despite the rhetoric, there are, unfortunately, no 'holy wars'; all wars are if not grossly unholy, then certainly grossly clear, in which folly and evil, though especially evil, become the order of the day. Fortunately, we have recently begun to treat certain acts of war or actions carried out under the umbrella of war as criminal and subject to indictment. We have yet to criminalize war itself, though I am cautiously optimistic that that day, too, will eventually come, even if it has to wait until the 'Kingdom' to which I alluded above.
1. The sort of people who subscribe to the concept of 'holy wars' are often partial to a concept of God which owes more than a little to scientific principles and realities, not least of all in relation to the Cosmos and any religious extrapolations thereof. In other words, so much does metachemical culture and race figure in the minds of peoples habituated to primitive concepts of God and religious practices, that they unwittingly find themselves hyping the martial and omnipotent significance of God in consequence of the dubiously divine criteria which apply to 'First Movers' and 'Creator Gods' anyway, much as though their religious delusions played into the hands not only of a scientific subversion of religion but the subversion of the concept 'God' by the Devil, so that many of the qualities attributed to this primitive deity or, rather, theity ... are in reality less divine than diabolic, given the metachemical bias of both sensual and sensible manifestations of noumenal objectivity.
2. This 'first mover' God, whether stellar or Venusian, sensually metachemical or sensibly so, is all too capable of being harnessed, whether metaphorically or otherwise, to a scientific disposition and to acts that owe less to godliness than to devilishness, and all because any concept of God rooted in the Cosmos and having associations with Creation is vulnerable to diabolic subversion in power-centred rhetoric.
3. The very term 'Almighty' applied to God indicates just how far from understanding, let alone practising, genuine godliness the devotees of such a primitive God really are; for, in reality, any more genuinely religious concept of God is inseparable not only from metaphysics, but from a context in which, due to metaphysical reality, power is the least of the factors which contribute to the total equation of divine procedure.
4. For above power in any correct realization of godliness must come glory, form, and, most characteristically of all, contentment, this latter being the very raison d'être of the process whereby, through transcendental meditation, a primary God, identifiable with the ego of metaphysical sensibility, utilizes a secondary God, identifiable with the will of such a context, in order to glide out via the 'wings' of a secondary order of Heaven, identifiable with the spirit of such a context, to the inevitability, in self-preservation, of recoil to a primary order of Heaven, identifiable with the soul of such a context, the goal and redemption of the primary God.
5. Thus, in a certain specifically metaphysical sense, and more in relation to sensibility (wisdom) than to sensuality (folly), a wise manifestation of God-the-Son utilizes a wise manifestation of God-the-Father in order to ride-out upon a holy manifestation of Heaven-the-Spirit before recoiling to self, in self-preservation, through a holy manifestation of Heaven-the-Soul, the ultimate raison d'être of the meditative process in question, and thus of the most genuinely religious context.
6. Inner metaphysical self into inner metaphysical not-self (the lungs) leads the inner metaphysical self to identify with the spiritual emanation from that not-self (the breath) up until that point where it must recoil, in self-preservation, to self more profoundly, which is precisely its soulful manifestation as revealed through the most sublimated joy of which the self is capable, and which enables that which had been primarily of God to enter a primary Heaven before returning, again and again, to its egocentric fulcrum in the Son, as it were, and plunging anew into the secondary godliness of the inner metaphysical not-self which, being of the will, is germane to the Father in the context in question.
7. But that 'Father', or secondary God, is of the nature, in metaphysics, of a fourth-rate order of power, the power of the lungs to breathe, and thus guarantor not only of a first-rate order of contentment for the heavenly self, the inner metaphysical soul, whose contentment is joyful, but complement to a third-rate order of spirit in the breath and associate of a second-rate order of ego in the inner metaphysical self, or that aspect of the brain - more specifically the brain stem and spinal column - which, bypassing the brain in general, is consciously committed to the entire process of transcendental meditation, as centred in the lungs.
8. How far one is here from primitive and fundamentally false notions of God as 'cosmic Creator', 'First Mover in the Cosmos', 'Almighty', and other such terms that owe more to metachemistry, and hence fire, than ever they do to metaphysics, and hence air, as well as more to science than to religion! It seems that mankind, to use that term in its broadest possible sense, begins by investing its religious capacity in science, and only gradually extricates it, if at all, from such a rudimentary affiliation to one in which not even politics and economics can claim ultimate jurisdiction over religion but only religion itself, by which time it is almost as though one had grown beyond religion, in its various theocratic guises, to that which atheistically repudiates all such traditions in the interests of its deistic insights and self-awareness as the ultimate wisdom and guarantor of soulful consummation.
9. For, ultimately, what we are talking about is the life of the soul, not just of any old soul, be it fourth-rate and loving (metachemical), third-rate and proud (chemical), or second-rate and pleasurable (physical), but that soul which, as the essence of life, can only come to light, so to speak, in association with the essential element, the element which is neither apparent, quantitative, nor qualitative but essential in its hiddenness and withdrawness from the naked eye. I am alluding, of course, to air, and air it is which, corresponding to the subnatural, permits that which is most genuinely soulful, and hence subconscious, to be, and not simply to be foolishly, as is invariably the case with the airwaves-utilizing sensuality of aural metaphysics but, in salvation from such folly, to be wisely, as the fruit of the metaphysics of respiratory sensibility, as it were, in which transcendental meditation has its holy throne, and thus the lungs rather than the ears.
10. For being is the nature or, rather, psyche of heaven (subconscious), and for this ultimate being to come to pass there must be the requisite, or metaphysical, modes of doing, giving, and taking, as of will, spirit, and ego, or power, glory, and form, in order to make possible to the soul its ultimate contentment in the Being-of-Beings, the joyful being of the Holy Soul, so to speak, of Heaven.
11. Therefore just as we can speak of 'holy being' in the soul of the inner metaphysical self, so we can speak of 'wise taking' in the ego of that same self, with 'wise doing' in the will of the inner metaphysical not-self (lungs) and 'holy giving' in the spirit of that same not-self (breath) complementing the self as secondary orders of God and Heaven to primary orders of God and Heaven, the former of which are there, in the context of transcendental meditation, to serve the latter or, more specifically, to enable the ego of inner metaphysics to achieve redemption for itself in the resurrection of self from ego to soul, God-the-Wise-Son to Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, and thus achieve its joyful beatitude in the Being-of-Beings, the Heaven-of-Heavens, and consummation of all religious striving.
1. Obviously the Being-of-Beings to which I refer above is not for everyone, but only those males who would be capable of metaphysical sensibility to any appreciable extent, and who are therefore already pretty metaphysical in their upper-class disposition, through noumenal subjectivity, for a godly bias, even if more in relation, at this point in time, to the foolish godliness of aural sensuality than to the wise godliness of respiratory sensibility, which is the salvation of the Metaphysical from sin to grace, as from the Eternal Father, a secondary order of the Father, to the Eternal Son, a primary order of the Son, which, as inner metaphysical ego, has its own complementary order of father, as described above.
2. What makes both the Father and the Son of the sensual/sensible metaphysical dichotomy in question Eternal is their affiliation to the noumenal planes of time (Father) and space (Son), so that they may be said to contrast, in this respect, with the temporal orders of the Father and the Son as germane to the phenomenal planes of mass (Father) and volume (Son), neither of whom have any bearing on godliness, but only manliness, as befitting their phenomenal natures in relation to the vegetativeness, so to speak, of physics.
3. Thus the Father and the Son of the sensual/sensible physical dichotomy between, as it were, the phallus and the brain are the temporal manifestations of sin and grace, with the former very much germane to a primary manifestation of the Father and the latter no-less germane to a secondary manifestation of the Son, neither of whom exist in relation to Heaven but solely to earth, so that we can differentiate between unholy and holy modes of both earthly spirit and soul as we distinguish physical sensuality from physical sensibility, with complementary subdivisions between foolish manifestations of both the Son and the Father on the one hand, and wise manifestations of both the Son and the Father on the other hand, each pairing of which has reference solely to man, not to God.
4. Thus there is no godliness where physics is concerned, neither in the ego-realm of the Son nor in the will-realm of the Father, and no heavenliness either, since what exists in relation to mass and volume, phallus and brain, does so in connection with the earth.
5. But the temporal Father, the vegetative context of the phallus, is very much the per se manifestation of the Father and thus of sin, while the temporal Son, the vegetative context of the brain, is merely a secondary manifestation of the Son, and hence of grace.
6. This Son, corresponding to the First Coming (Christ) saves from sin (to grace), but only relatively, in relation to the vegetative sensibility of prayer, and thus exists as second-fiddle, so to speak, to the temporal Father, whose carnal sinfulness is ever the fulcrum of the phenomenal context (physics) in question. Only through the Eternal Father, the noumenal Father having more relationship, in organic supremacy, to the ears than to the phallus, are Christian - and specifically Catholic - males brought closer to metaphysics. But then, paradoxically, in relation to a secondary order of the Father from whom it is necessary to be saved, if one wishes to achieve - unlike with Christ - a primary order of the Son, and thus the possibility of a fulcrum in grace through transcendental meditation.
7. Obviously one can only be saved, in this way, through the Second Coming, and hence through the exponent of 'Kingdom Come', which is conceived by the Son in question as lying beyond Christendom in a new order of society that would require a majority mandate for what its exponent calls religious sovereignty, and presumably via a paradoxical kind of general election in which it was agreed that, should such a mandate be forthcoming, then the electorate concerned would not only have rights in relation to what has been called a triadic Beyond, open to Protestants as well as Catholics, but be delivered from their political sovereignty and concomitants as from 'crimes and/or sins of the world' to the Beyond in question.
8. For you cannot be religiously sovereign and still have secular sovereignty in terms of political rights and duties, since they exist in relation to the world of secular values in which both crime and sin are the sensual norms, as confirmed by the triangular structures to which a majority of latter-day Catholics and Protestants now relate in their respective ways.
9. To be saved from sin to grace you need also to damn (females) from crime to punishment, and in achieving deliverance from each manifestation of freedom on both noumenal (Catholic) and phenomenal (Protestant) terms you are effectively opting for sensibility at the expense of sensuality, and thus for what has been called the triadic Beyond, in which punishment and grace would co-exist as the sensible alternatives, in goodness and wisdom, to the crimes and sins, evils and follies, of the sensual - and secular - present.
10. Thus because political sovereignty is intimately associated with the secular realities of a sensual bias and the objective hegemony (of females), it must be disowned, democratically and officially, when and if the time comes for the 'chosen peoples' (as outlined in previous texts) to have an option on religious sovereignty, and thus paradoxically use the democratic process to vote for what alone guarantees deliverance, whether in evolutionary or devolutionary terms, from the criminal and sinful realities of the present.
11. It would be like trading one sovereignty for another, and should the paradoxical come to pass, and people actually vote in sufficient numbers to guarantee a majority mandate for religious sovereignty and the rights appertaining to it in relation to the various types of sensibility, then 'judgement' would be done and the 'end of the world' would accordingly transpire ... as the triadic Beyond and administrative aside thereof was duly brought to pass in the form of 'Kingdom Come', that new and structurally ultimate order of society in which sensible manifestations of mass, volume, and space would be served from the most sensibly devolved manifestation of time, and new modes of both the phenomenal and the noumenal Sons as well as both the phenomenal and noumenal (administrative aside) Mothers accordingly ensued in the wake of the official abandonment, by the relevant peoples, of the Fathers and Daughters of the sinful and criminal present.
12. Now to have any chance of being saved and/or damned (according to gender) from the sensual present to a more (though not exclusively or fanatically) sensible future, one must be in a position whereby such deliverance (for better or worse) is possible, which is to say, not only politically sovereign and in a position to use that sovereignty, should the paradoxical election which I have equated with 'Judgement' subsequently transpire, but not hamstrung from rising or falling diagonally through either of the phenomenal (mass and volume) or noumenal (time and space) planes, according to both gender and denominational entitlement.
13. In previous texts I have specified the probability of and desirability for Irish Catholics and Protestants to opt for the deliverance in question, and also included their Scots and even Welsh counterparts, since it occurred to me that the formation of a new union, as between the Celtic or Gaelic countries, was not only desirable from the standpoint of religion and the bringing to pass of 'Kingdom Come', but also desirable from the standpoint of politics and the possibility of Irish unity and an end to the divisive and destructive frictions of the schismatic present. For a new union, premised upon a federation of the Gaels, would surely allow a majority of Unionists and Nationalists to 'save face' on the basis of a compromise between the two traditions that would not otherwise be possible, thereby catering, in the long run, to the interests of all.
14. I do not wish to drag this text down to political exegesis or philosophy, since there has been enough discussion of this subject in previous texts, and I wish, here, to concentrate on eligibility for deliverance of Catholics and Protestants to the triadic Beyond. Obviously, Anglicans, to name but one category of Protestant, cannot progress to this Beyond if they are constrained, as in England, by the Monarch as acting head of the Church and in no position, in consequence, to desert the inverted triangle of so-called Protestant solidarity, of which their place is at the foot, so to speak, of the triangle in question, and opt for deliverance, in salvation, from phallus to brain, thereby rising diagonally from mass to volume, as from massive sensuality to voluminous sensibility, in effectively pro-Catholic vein, with the corollary of Nonconformists having to fall diagonally from volume to mass, as from volumetric volume to massed mass, the tongue to the womb, in pro-Marian vein.
15. The fact of Anglicans being pegged to the foot of the inverted triangle of British civilization in this way through the reigning monarch who, despite being temporal head of the Established Church in England, has a sensibly fundamentalist position, as it were, behind and above this triangle due to an association with the Blood Royal and hence, by implication, the heart, obviously ensures that nothing subversive of the structure in question can arise, since there is nowhere for Anglicans to go when they are not in a position to be saved from phallus to brain, as from sensual physics to sensible physics, and effectively become Roman Catholic on a Christic basis, the sort of basis that requires a Marian corollary in the womb, and thus would necessitate the damnation of Nonconformists from sensual chemistry to sensible chemistry, tongue to womb, in due devolutionary fashion.
16. This is not going to happen in England, least
of all in the foreseeable future, which is another reason why, quite
cultural and racial reasons, I have confined my initial expectations
'Kingdom Come' to
17. Be that as it may, there can be no salvation of Anglicans (or vegetative equivalents) and damnation of Nonconformists (or watery equivalents), and hence, when Catholics and others have also been taken into account, no triadic Beyond, without sufficient independence of Anglicans from monarchic allegiance, and therefore England is not, and at this point in time could not, figure in the Messianic blueprint for 'Kingdom Come', but only the aforementioned Gaelic countries, with especial emphasis, in relation to Northern Ireland, on Ireland and Scotland.
18. Having dealt with the triadic Beyond more fully in certain previous texts, I shall not further elaborate on it here, except to remind the reader that each tier should be subdivided three ways, not only to allow for a gender distinction between chemical females and physical and/or metaphysical males but, as the latter option would indicate, between intellectual and emotional approaches within the overall Social Transcendentalist ideological context (as described in previous texts) to either nonconformism, humanism, or transcendentalism, depending on the tier, as applicable to a distinction between ego and soul as the male complement to female spirit and, as far as the metachemical bias of the administrative aside was concerned, to female will.
1. A society given to the institutional protection and advancement of sensibility across the elemental spectrum, so to speak, of both eternal and temporal options in the above Messianic fashion would be one in which the wise righteousness of cultural holiness took precedence not only over the good unrighteousness of racial unclearness, like a noumenal Son over a noumenal Mother, but also over the wise righteousness of civilized holiness and the good unrighteousness of generative unclearness, corresponding to a phenomenal Son and a phenomenal Mother, this last-mentioned context, effectively that of the womb, no less the per se manifestation of the Mother than the first-mentioned context, effectively that of the lungs, is the per se manifestation of the Son, and thus of that which offers a graceful fulcrum in transcendental meditation.
2. Such a society is beyond anything rooted in the evil righteousness of cultural clearness and the foolish unrighteousness of racial unholiness, corresponding to noumenal manifestations of the Daughter and the Father, not to mention anything rooted in the evil righteousness of civilized clearness and the foolish unrighteousness of generative unholiness, as germane to phenomenal manifestations of the Daughter and the Father, the last-mentioned context, effectively that of the phallus, being no less the per se manifestation of the Father than the first-mentioned context, effectively that of the eyes, is the per se manifestation of the Daughter, and thus of that which offers a criminal fulcrum in fundamentalist contemplation.
3. Thus metaphysical salvation from racial unholiness to cultural holiness, as from a secondary Father to a primary Son, presupposes metachemical damnation from cultural clearness to racial unclearness, as from a primary Daughter to a secondary Mother, while physical salvation from generative unholiness to civilized holiness, as from a primary Father to a secondary Son, presupposes chemical damnation from civilized clearness to generative unclearness, as from a secondary Daughter to a primary Mother.
4. Goodness will not stay long under wisdom, whether noumenal or phenomenal, absolute or relative, unless wisdom is sufficiently bound in self to oblige goodness to follow suit, albeit in relation to constraints upon the objectivity of metachemical and/or chemical not-self rather than in relation to enhanced subjectivity of metaphysical and/or physical self, as germane to what is properly male in both divine and masculine contexts.
5. Therefore unless there is a genuine resolve for wisdom, or the righteousness of cultural and/or civilized holiness, the likelihood of females being pegged to the good unrighteousness of racial and/or generative unclearness for very long is pretty slim, bearing in mind their preference for the evil righteousness of cultural and/or civilized clearness in the sensual hegemonies of metachemistry and chemistry - the one over metaphysics and the other over physics.
6. Like it or not, evil and folly 'will out' and have their day even in the best of societies, for we cannot be exclusively sensible, nor, fanatical exceptions to the rule notwithstanding, should we try to be so. Sensuality is everywhere the bedrock of sensibility, and therefore something that has to be allowed for and accepted even after you have officially set-up the institutional guarantors of sensibility and made morality your official ideal.
7. Therefore even 'Kingdom Come', should it democratically come to pass, will have to allow for and accept not merely the likelihood but the inevitability of backsliding from the ideal, or various sensible ideals, to a more sensual basis, since one cannot fly in the face of reality without paying a heavy price.
8. But one can certainly set about encouraging sensibility and making it harder for sensuality to prevail to anything like the same extent as in so-called open or free societies. Doubtless one of the most efficacious ways of doing so, especially where females are concerned, would be to encourage the voluntary consumption, within the religious structures of our projected triadic Beyond, of certain drugs whose influence was known to be likely to constrain objectivity and effectively bottle-up the sorts of freedoms accruing to a creature for whom not-self is primary and self secondary, so that females became more respectful of male subjectivity and any enhancement of it in relation both to intellectual and emotional, cognitive and meditative, endeavours on the part of males.
9. I have gone into this and kindred subjects before, so will not tire either myself or the reader with additional suggestions at this juncture, but I do not doubt that if a moral lead and mean is to persist in the otherworldly context of 'Kingdom Come', it will require more than good will on behalf of those taking part, since the reality of female moral intransigence and even opposition to prolonged sensibility will remain a potent factor to be reckoned with, long after any hypothetical resolve to institute a sensible new order had borne tangible fruit.
10. Therefore while one must hold out at least some hope of a better world to come, as premised upon a moral resolve to uphold cultural and civilized holiness over racial and generative unclearness, one cannot expect any dramatic change in the overall ratio of sensual to sensible factors in the foreseeable future, least of all while human beings still exist as human beings rather than in some hypothetical cyborg-to-post-human transmutation offering scope for enhanced sensibility, not to mention while cosmic energies are still unchallenged by, for instance, what in certain earlier texts I was apt to call 'blocking devices', or large filtering shields that could be set in space specifically with a view to reducing the kinds of incoming energies or rays or whatever that tend to condition humanity along lines owing more to the freedoms of sensuality than to the bindings of sensibility, not to mention more to the negativity of inorganic primacy than to the positivity of organic supremacy.
11. Certainly, progressive and radical steps could be taken to, if you like, subtly change the terms of life. But they would take time, much time, and are only likely to materialize, if at all, within an otherworldly context like 'Kingdom Come', whereby a definite omega-oriented, and hence sensible, resolve had become the official and therefore institutional norm.
12. So-called 'open societies', on the other hand, tend to be all-too-open to the Cosmos and to both religious decadence and space exploration conceived within the broadly objective parameters of an ongoing external curiosity. They are also given to freedom in a way which tends to place the emphasis on sensuality rather than sensibility, and to uphold, in consequence, culture and civilization on the female terms of righteous clearness, to which, willy-nilly, the unrighteous follies of racial and generative unholiness are obliged to bow, as to a blessed hegemony of not-self freedom of action for females over the cursed self-abasement of males.
13. Thus has it long been in the West and not only the West but much of the East, including the Middle East, as well, and thus will it continue to be until such time, if ever, as 'Kingdom Come' begins to make democratically-achieved headway into the secular - if not effectively paganistic and/or heathenistic - status quo, to the lasting advantage of those who, as males, would profit considerably from being saved from the curse of their under-plane freedom from self to an over-plane binding to self in which not evil but wise modes of culture and civilization prevailed for ever more - indeed, for all Eternity, in response to the will of He who proclaims himself Second Coming, and hence Son-of-Sons or God-of-Gods.
14. For there is no wise God-the-Son except in relation to transcendental meditation, and therefore no holy Heaven-the-Soul achieved by God-the-Son on the back, as it were, of both the wise God-the-Father and the holy Heaven-the-Spirit, as germane to the will of the lungs to breathe and the out-breath itself within the inner metaphysical context of respiratory sensibility. Only thus does supreme being achieve a heavenly resolution in the most consummate joy.
1. If it is true that in general terms things proceed, on the male side of life, from sin to grace, as from the Father to the Son, whether in terms of time-space metaphysics or, down below, of mass-volume physics, it must also be the case that, relative to each of these options, they proceed from a relevant manifestation of Nature to a complementary manifestation of Psyche, as from sensuality to sensibility, since sensibility owes more to psyche than to nature, without, however, excluding the latter.
2. But as well as this general progression from, say, the subnatural to the subconscious (metaphysics) or from the natural to the conscious (physics), there must also be a dichotomy in each context between Nature and Psyche, sin and grace, since we need not doubt that the relationship between the Will and the Spirit on the one hand, and between the Ego and the Soul on the other hand, owes not a little to the subatomic distinctions which we have already noted (in certain earlier texts) between elemental particles and molecular particles in relation to will and spirit, power and glory, and between molecular wavicles and elemental wavicles in relation to ego and soul, form and content(ment), in whichever Element, be it metachemical and arguably divisible between photons and photinos, chemical and arguably divisible between electrons and electrinos, physical and likely to be divisible between neutrons and neutrinos, or metaphysical and probably divisible between protons and protinos, or something to that effect.
3. Therefore it seems logical to link both the Will and the Spirit, whether in the context of sensuality or sensibility, with the sinfulness of Nature, in the male case either natural or subnatural, physical or metaphysical, and both the Ego and the Soul, whether in relation once again to folly and unholiness (sensuality) or to wisdom and holiness (sensibility), with the grace of Psyche, in the male case either conscious or subconscious, physical or metaphysical, and this in overall keeping with the subatomic distinction between particles and wavicles, as alluded to above.
4. In so doing we shall be led to draw a distinction between a maxi-sinfulness, as it were, of the Will and the Spirit in either the natural or the subnatural manifestations of sensual Nature, and a mini-gracefulness, so to speak, of the Ego and the Soul in either the conscious or the subconscious manifestations of sensual Psyche, while, contrariwise, drawing a parallel distinction between the mini-sinfulness of the Will and the Spirit in either the natural or the subnatural manifestations of sensible Nature, and the maxi-gracefulness of the Ego and the Soul in either the conscious or the subconscious manifestations of sensible Psyche.
5. Thus, in sensual metaphysics, we can distinguish the maxi-sinfulness of God-the-Foolish-Father and Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit from the mini-gracefulness of God-the-Foolish-Son and Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul, whilst, in sensible metaphysics, which is the salvation of the godly, we should be able to distinguish the mini-sinfulness of God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit from the maxi-gracefulness of God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul.
6. Likewise, in sensual physics, we can distinguish the maxi-sinfulness of Man-the-Foolish-Father and Earth-the-Unholy-Spirit from the mini-gracefulness of Man-the-Foolish-Son and Earth-the-Unholy-Soul, whilst, in sensible physics, which is the salvation of the manly, we should be able to distinguish the mini-sinfulness of Man-the-Wise-Father and Earth-the-Holy-Spirit from the maxi-gracefulness of Man-the-Wise-Son and Earth-the-Holy-Soul.
7. Therefore grace and holiness are no more strictly commensurate than sin and unholiness. Holiness is no less a sensible complement to wisdom than unholiness a sensual complement to folly. The fact is that, in physics and metaphysics, both the Will and the Spirit are germane to Nature, and therefore sinful, whereas both the Ego and the Soul, by contrast, are germane to Psyche, and therefore graceful.
8. The Spirit here, whether unholy or holy, sensual or sensible, is no less sinful than the Will: it is simply sinful in a different way, with regard to natural and/or subnatural quantities as opposed to appearances, as relevant to either physical or metaphysical manifestations of molecular particles and elemental particles respectively.
9. The Ego here, whether foolish or wise, sensual or sensible, is no less graceful than the Soul: it is simply graceful in a different way, with regard to conscious and/or subconscious qualities as opposed to essences, as relevant to either physical or metaphysical manifestations of molecular wavicles and elemental wavicles respectively.
10. But, of course, there will be more sinfulness in sensuality than in sensibility and, conversely, more gracefulness in sensibility than in sensuality, which is why I have distinguished 'maxi' from 'mini' manifestations of each, while still accepting that the massive mass of sensual physics will be the one with, due to its natural Nature, the principal manifestation of sinfulness for males, while the spaced space of sensible metaphysics will be that in which, due to its subconscious Psyche, the principal manifestation of grace is to be found.
11. But, either way, sin will always attach to the physical and metaphysical not-selves, whether in will or spirit, and grace to the physical and metaphysical selves, whether in ego or soul. Both the phallus and the brain, not to mention their spiritual corollaries in sperm and thought, are sinful contexts, as are the ears and the lungs, not to mention their spiritual corollaries in airwaves and breath. Only the self, whether physical or metaphysical, given primarily to consciousness or primarily to subconsciousness, is worthy of being equated with grace, irrespective of whether in relative (phenomenal) or absolute (noumenal) terms, and such grace is inseparable from the forgiveness of sin.
1. What is strictly male, and therefore subjective and secondary (to females), appertains to the natural and subnatural aspects, in vegetation and air, of Nature, and to the conscious and subconscious aspects, in ego and soul, of Psyche.
2. What is strictly female, and therefore objective and primary (in relation to males), appertains to the unnatural and supernatural aspects, in fire and water, of Nature, and to the unconscious and superconscious aspects, in soul and ego or, rather, in modified soul (id) and ego (superego), of Psyche.
3. Males have a much more developed ego and soul in relation to Psyche than females, who rarely rise above third- and fourth-rate orders of each (see earlier texts), but females have a much more developed or, at any rate, prominent will and spirit in relation to Nature than males who, by contrast, rarely rise above third- and fourth-rate orders of each (as already explained in certain earlier texts).
4. Consequently the genders approach life from contrary standpoints, and to evaluate the one gender according to criteria (once understood) applicable to the other ... is to fall into one of the greatest, and most prevalent, of errors, and an error, alas, of which contemporary Western society is far from innocent!
5. One cannot even evaluate females in terms of sin and grace, folly and unholiness or wisdom and holiness in each case, since such subjective attributes apply principally to males and only secondarily, if at all, to females. No, evaluation of females has to be conducted in terms of crime and punishment, evil and clearness or goodness and unclearness, with the latter pair very much the sensible alternative to the former.
6. Just so, one does not speak of Father and Son, still less of Heaven and Earth, in relation to females but, more properly, of Daughter and Mother, Hell and Purgatory in respect not of the subjective elements of vegetation and air, physics and metaphysics, but of the objective elements of fire and water, metachemistry and chemistry, which, like females, stem from and appertain to a vacuum as opposed to a plenum.
7. Being objective, females do not rise diagonally between the sensuality and sensibility of noumenal or phenomenal planes, but fall diagonally in what amounts, for them, to a devolutionary regression from sensuality to sensibility, space to time and/or volume to mass. Hence they fall, in such fashion, from the Daughter to the Mother, as from crime to punishment.
8. But just as there is both sin and grace in the male dichotomy between not-self and self, Nature and Psyche, so there is a comparable distinction between crime and punishment where females are concerned, since the objective not-self is ever criminal and the objective self, whether phenomenal or noumenal, ever punishing (of the criminality in question).
9. However, one can note a distinction, once again, between a maxi-criminality in the sensual not-self and a mini-punishingness in the sensual self, as between a mini-criminality in the sensible not-self and a maxi-punishingness in the sensible self.
10. In so doing, we will be led to draw a distinction between a maxi-criminality, as it were, of the Will and the Spirit in either the unnatural or the supernatural manifestations of sensual Nature, and a mini-punishingness, so to speak, of or, better, by the Soul and the Ego or, more correctly, by the Id and the Superego in either the unconscious or the superconscious manifestations of sensual Psyche, while, contrariwise, drawing a parallel distinction between a mini-criminality of the Will and the Spirit in either the unnatural or the supernatural manifestations of sensible Nature, and a maxi-punishingness by the Id and the Superego in either the unconscious or the superconscious manifestations of sensible Psyche.
11. Thus, in sensual metachemistry, we can distinguish the maxi-criminality of Devil-the-Evil-Daughter and Hell-the-Clear-Spirit from the mini-punishingness of Devil-the-Evil-Mother and Hell-the-Clear-Id, whilst, in sensible metachemistry, which is the damnation of the devilish, we should be able to distinguish the mini-criminality of Devil-the-Good-Daughter and Hell-the-Unclear-Spirit from the maxi-punishingness of Devil-the-Good-Mother and Hell-the-Unclear-Id.
12. Likewise, in sensual chemistry, we can distinguish the maxi-criminality of Woman-the-Evil-Daughter and Purgatory-the-Clear-Spirit from the mini-punishingness of Woman-the-Evil-Mother and Purgatory-the-Clear-Superego, whilst, in sensible chemistry, which is the damnation of the womanly, we should be able to distinguish the mini-criminality of Woman-the-Good-Daughter and Purgatory-the-Unclear-Spirit from the maxi-punishingness of Woman-the-Good-Mother and Purgatory-the-Unclear-Superego.
13. Therefore punishment and unclearness are no more strictly commensurate than criminality and clearness. Unclearness is no less a sensible complement to punishment than clearness a sensual complement to criminality. The fact is that, in metachemistry and chemistry, both the Will and the Spirit are germane to Nature, and therefore criminal, whereas both the Id, as instinctually modified Soul, and the Superego, as spiritually modified Ego, are germane to Psyche, and therefore punishing.
14. The Spirit here, whether clear or unclear, sensual or sensible, is no less criminal than the Will: it is simply criminal in a different way, with regard to unnatural and/or supernatural quantities as opposed to appearances, as relevant to either metachemical or chemical manifestations of molecular particles and elemental particles respectively.
15. The Ego (Superego) here, whether evil or good, sensual or sensible, is no less punishing than the Soul (Id): it is simply punishing in a different way, with regard to unconscious and/or superconscious qualities as opposed to essences, as relevant to either metachemical or chemical manifestations of molecular wavicles and elemental wavicles respectively.
16. But, of course, there will be more criminality in sensuality than in sensibility and, conversely, more punishment in sensibility than in sensuality, which is why I have distinguished 'maxi' from 'mini' manifestations of each, while still accepting that the spatial space of sensual metachemistry will be the one with, due to its unnatural Nature, the principal manifestation of criminality for females, while the massed mass of sensible chemistry will be that in which, due to its superconscious Psyche, the principal manifestation of punishment is to be found.
17. But, either way, crime will always attach to the metachemical and chemical not-selves, whether in will or spirit, and punishment to the metachemical and chemical selves, whether in id (instinctualized soul) or superego (spiritualized ego). Both the eyes and the heart, not to mention their spiritual corollaries in sight-light and blood, are criminal contexts, as are the tongue and the womb, not to mention their spiritual corollaries in saliva and amniotic fluid. Only the self, whether metachemical or chemical, given primarily to unconsciousness or primarily to superconsciousness, is worthy of being equated with punishment, irrespective of whether in absolute (noumenal) or relative (phenomenal) terms, and this, as we have seen, is inseparable from crime.
1. One thing we can be sure about is that males and females are not equal, or equivalent, creatures but organic opposites on both noumenal (diabolic and divine) and phenomenal (feminine and masculine) planes, since females stem from or operate in relation to a vacuum, the objectivity of which necessarily precludes genuine ego and soul, while males stem from or operate in relation to a plenum, the subjectivity of which renders will and spirit transmutably subordinate to ego and soul.
2. Hence while the one gender is selflessly objective and inclined to subordinate self to not-self, or Psyche to Nature, in respect of metachemistry and chemistry, or the objective elements par excellence, the other gender is selfishly subjective and inclined to subordinate not-self to self, Nature to Psyche, in respect of physics and metaphysics, or the subjective elements par excellence.
3. The objective predominance of the Will and the Spirit with females means that, in both metachemistry and chemistry, Nature tends to condition Psyche, making less for Soul and Ego than for their metachemical or chemical modifications in terms of Id and Superego, the one at once more instinctual and the other more spiritual.
4. Contrariwise, the subjective predominance of the Ego and the Soul with males means that, in both physics and metaphysics, Psyche tends to condition Nature, making less for Will and Spirit than for their physical and metaphysical modifications in terms of Mind and Subspirit, the one at once less instinctual and the other less spiritual.
5. It could be said that, transmuted exceptions to the rule notwithstanding, females only achieve a real sense of Ego and Soul in relation to males, and that these become aspects of their male makeup, while males likewise only achieve a real sense of Will and Spirit in relation to females, which then become aspects of their female makeup.
6. However that may be, it is incontrovertibly the case that females relate primarily to the Will and the Spirit in those unnatural and supernatural contexts which approximate to metachemical and chemical Nature and only secondarily to the Soul and the Ego, duly modified as Id and Superego, in those unconscious and superconscious contexts which approximate to metachemical and chemical Psyche, so that they are forever driven to subordinate self to not-self in due objective fashion.
7. Likewise, it is incontrovertibly the case that males relate primarily to the Ego and the Soul in those natural and subnatural contexts which approximate to physical and metaphysical Nature and only secondarily to the Will and the Spirit, duly modified as Mind and Subspirit, in those conscious and subconscious contexts which approximate to physical and metaphysical Psyche, so that they are forever driven to subordinate not-self to self in due subjective fashion.
8. Clearly, a society which treats males and females alike, as the same, is going to be in for a lot of disillusionment and confusion! For criteria conceived as relevant by the one gender will largely prove irrelevant to and even undermining of the other gender, and either an androgynous muddle or the disguised tyranny of one gender over the other will ensue, with unsavoury consequences!
9. Even the attempt to reduce mankind to one class flies in the face of reality and backfires on those foolish or ignorant enough to espouse and even, in certain tragic circumstances, to further a class-partisan point of view. No more than criteria applicable to one gender will suffice for both genders, can criteria applicable to one class suffice for both classes, whether noumenal or phenomenal, upper (in time and space) or lower (in volume and mass). For the reduction of society to one class, say the lower class, is likely to deprive mankind of beauty and truth in the interests of strength and knowledge, whether or not these are then hyped out of all proportion to their true worth, while the reduction of society to one gender, say the female gender, can deprive mankind of a moral lead, and thus the possibility of holiness on both civilized and, especially, cultural terms.
10. In reality, the division of mankind between two genders and two classes ensures that the full gamut of elemental reality is accounted for and that not only generation and civilization but, of higher significance still, race and culture are granted due recognition whether in sensuality or, preferably, in sensibility, where, as I have attempted to demonstrate, civilization and culture would be wise, and generation and race good, and therefore germane to a morally-oriented society in which truth and knowledge were characterized by holiness, and race and generation by unclearness, as females deferred to males in acknowledgement of a greater binding than that to which they were subject (in due operation of a damned good predicament and moral paradox) - the binding, in other words, of a saved wise elevation in which self-enhancement was the sensible - and righteous - order of the day.
11. For only through wisdom can those who are capable of genuine ego in civilized knowledge and genuine soul in cultural truth constrain those who are incapable of both manliness and godliness to the goodness of generative strength in the superego and of racial beauty in the id.
12. The absence of such constraints is - and always will be - testimony to a wont of true wisdom; for things will revert to a context in which Nature has the better of Psyche and evil and folly accordingly freely prevail under the secular, not to mention paganistic or heathenistic, banners of sensual culture/race and/or civilization/generation, with the clear righteous dominating the unholy unrighteous from the blessed advantage-point of objective freedom.
13. Such is, in effect, the nature of modern reality, and if there is to be any prospect of a less evil and foolish and even more good and wise outcome to historical development, then judgement will need to be done and those who are now effectively blessed or cursed with sensual freedom be saved or damned, according to gender (both literal and denominational, in response to a majority mandate for religious sovereignty), to the sensible bindings of a triadic Beyond and administrative aside in 'Kingdom Come'.
14. For there is no other way forward, and no other way, ultimately, in which the sanctity of the individual, but the male individual above all, can be both protected and maintained in the face of those collectivistic or socialistic moral aberrations which stem from a wont of both ego and, especially, soul, in due female vein, and banner forth the false doctrines of cultural, racial, social, and sexual equality under the scientific and political audacities of secular freedom, to the detriment of all that is wise and holy, as well as to the detriment, in female terms, of all that is good and unclear.
15. Only when the myth of equality has been consigned to the rubbish heap of history will the inequalitarian truth of 'Kingdom Come' actually stand a chance of coming to pass, to the lasting advantage of mankind, and not only of mankind with a masculine emphasis, as embodied in the concept of a sinful fulcrum, but, in a more comprehensive manner of speaking, of womankind, devilkind, and especially godkind, with the possibility of corresponding 'afterlife' experiences according with the nature or, rather, psychic nature of the various types of gender and/or class-based self, from metachemical and chemical to physical and metaphysical, beautiful and strong to knowledgeable and true, with the inevitable psychic corollaries of love, pride, pleasure, and joy.
LONDON 2001 (Revised 2002-10)