ETHNIC UNIVERSALITY -
The Next Totalitarianism
Copyright © 2011 John O'Loughlin
1. The power, or force, of the will in relation, primarily, to appearances; the glory, or motion, of the spirit in relation, primarily, to quantities; the form, or heat, of the ego in relation, primarily, to qualities; the contentment, or light, of the soul in relation, primarily, to essences.
2. Therein lie the fourfold principles of life as they divide between not-self and self, soma and psyche, on the basis of power and glory, force and motion, in the one, and form and contentment, heat and light, in the other - life a struggle, as it were, between force and motion, will and spirit, in relation to female criteria primarily, and between heat and light, ego and soul, in relation to male criteria primarily, neither of which can abide the other, least of all in regard to what pertains, on a similar class basis, to the opposite side of the gender fence, the soul from the standpoint of the will or vice versa, the ego from the standpoint of the spirit or vice versa, since the one can only prevail at the other's expense.
3. Thus force can only prevail at the expense of light and vice versa, while motion can only prevail at the expense of heat and vice versa.
4. Wherever one finds force over light, power over contentment, will over soul, Devil the Mother is very much to the fore, as in metachemical sensuality, the per se context of force.
5. Wherever one finds motion over heat, glory over form, spirit over ego, Woman the Mother or, rather, the Clear Spirit of Purgatory is very much to the fore, as in chemical sensuality, the per se context of motion.
6. Wherever, by contrast, one finds heat over force, form over power, ego over will, Man the Father is very much to the fore, as in physical sensibility, the per se context of heat.
7. Wherever one finds light over motion, contentment over glory, soul over spirit, God the Father or, rather, the Holy Soul of Heaven is very much to the fore, as in metaphysical sensibility, the per se context of light.
8. Subatomically, things proceed from elemental particles to wavicles via molecular particles and wavicles, so that we can distinguish between four main devolutionary contexts, viz. most particle/least wavicle, more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle, less (relative to least) particle/more (relative to most) wavicle and least particle/most wavicle, and four main evolutionary contexts, viz. least wavicle/most particle, less (relative to least) wavicle/more (relative to most) particle, more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle, and most wavicle/least particle.
9. Strictly speaking, the primary female contexts are characterized by most particles/least wavicles and by more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, whereas the secondary male contexts, which require a female hegemony in sensuality, are characterized by less (relative to least) particles/more (relative to most) wavicles and by least particles/most wavicles, the former physically subordinate to the chemical female context of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, the latter metaphysically subordinate to the metachemical female context of most particles/least wavicles.
10. Contrariwise, the primary male contexts are characterized by more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and by most wavicles/least particles, whereas the secondary female contexts, which require a male hegemony in sensibility, are characterized by less (relative to least) wavicles/more (relative to most) particles and by least wavicles/most particles, the former chemically subordinate to the physical male context of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, the latter metachemically subordinate to the metaphysical male context of most wavicles/least particles.
11. The photon is the element par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of most particles/least wavicles obtains, whereas the proton tends to be the element in which least particles/most wavicles obtains.
12. The electron is the element par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles obtains, whereas the deuteron - if we exclude from this context the neutron - tends to be the element in which less (relative to least) particles/more (relative to most) wavicles obtains.
13. Contrariwise, the deuterino - if we exclude from this context the neutrino - is the element or, rather, elementino par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles obtains, whereas the electrino tends to be the elementino in which less (relative to least) wavicles/more (relative to most) particles obtains.
14. The protino is the elementino par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of most wavicles/least particles obtains, whereas the photino tends to be the elementino in which least wavicles/most particles obtains.
15. Elements appertain to sensuality, elementinos to sensibility, with the former tending to signify a larger particle, when compared with the latter, but a smaller wavicle. Therefore the predominance of the particle appertains to the metachemical and chemical elements par excellence of photons and electrons, both of which are negative, whereas the predominance or, better, preponderance of the wavicle appertains to the physical and metaphysical elementinos par excellence of deuterinos and protinos, both of which are positive.
16. It is my view that while photons and electrons are the elements of primary free soma par excellence, protons and deuterons are the elements of secondary free soma par excellence, the former accordingly affiliated to the female sex, the latter to the male sex.
17. Likewise I hold that while deuterinos and protinos are the elementinos of primary free psyche par excellence, electrinos and photinos are the elementinos of secondary free psyche par excellence, the former accordingly affiliated to the male sex, the latter to the female sex.
18. Photons are never more sensually negative than in the elemental particle context of metachemical will and never less sensually negative than in the elemental wavicle context of metachemical soul, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metachemical spirit and ego lying sensually in between.
19. Protons are never less sensually positive than in the elemental particle context of metaphysical will and never more sensually positive than in the elemental wavicle context of metaphysical soul, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metaphysical spirit and ego lying sensually in between.
20. Electrons are never more sensually negative than in the molecular particle context of chemical spirit and never less sensually negative than in the molecular wavicle context of chemical ego, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of chemical will and soul lying sensually in between.
21. Deuterons are never less sensually positive than in the molecular particle context of physical spirit and never more sensually positive than in the molecular wavicle context of physical ego, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of physical will and soul lying sensually in between.
22. Deuterinos are never more sensibly positive than in the molecular wavicle context of physical ego and never less sensibly positive than in the molecular particle context of physical spirit, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of physical will and soul lying sensibly in between.
23. Electrinos are never less sensibly negative than in the molecular wavicle context of chemical ego and never more sensibly negative than in the molecular particle context of chemical spirit, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of chemical will and soul lying sensibly in between.
24. Protinos are never more sensibly positive than in the elemental wavicle context of metaphysical soul and never less sensibly positive than in the elemental particle context of metaphysical will, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metaphysical spirit and ego lying sensibly in between.
25. Photinos are never less sensibly negative than in the elemental wavicle context of metachemical soul and never more sensibly negative than in the elemental particle context of metachemical will, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metachemical spirit and ego lying sensibly in between.
26. Since there is a straight correlation between elemental particles and appearances, molecular particles and quantities, molecular wavicles and qualities, and elemental wavicles and essences, it follows that the apparent element of sensual metachemistry will always be the focus of the per se order of will in photon elemental particles; that the quantitative element of sensual chemistry will always be the focus of the per se order of spirit in electron molecular particles; that the qualitative element or, rather, elementino of sensible physics will always be the focus of the per se order of ego in deuterino molecular wavicles; and that the essential element of sensible metaphysics will always be the focus of the per se order of soul in protino elemental wavicles.
27. By contrast, the apparent elementino of sensible metachemistry will always be the focus of the per se disorder of will in photino elemental particles; the quantitative elementino of sensible chemistry will always be the focus of the per se disorder of spirit in electrino molecular particles; the qualitative elementino or, rather, element of sensual physics will always be the focus of the per se disorder of ego in deuteron molecular wavicles; and that the essential element of sensual metaphysics will always be the focus of the per se disorder of soul in proton elemental wavicles.
28. The primary sex, which is female, is characterized, when free, by photon will and by electron spirit, which is to say, by somatic force and motion, neither of which are psychically conducive to anything other than force-subverted soul and motion-subverted ego, the former appertaining to what is called the id, or instinctual manifestation (unconscious) of soul, the latter to what is called the superego, or impulsive manifestation (superconscious) of ego.
29. The secondary sex, which is male, is characterized, when free, by deuterino ego and by protino soul, which is to say, by psychic heat and light, neither of which are somatically conducive to anything other than heat-subverted will and light-subverted spirit, the former appertaining to what has been called natwill, or the intellectual manifestation (natural) of will, the latter to what has been called subspirit, or the emotional manifestation (subnatural) of spirit.
30. Thus what obtains in sensuality in the subversion of light by force, of soul by will, and of heat by motion, of ego by spirit, is not repeated in sensibility; for light can no more defeat force than heat defeat motion but, rather, replaced by a situation in which force is subverted by heat, as will by ego, and motion subverted by light, as spirit by soul, making for the respective isolation of motion in the one context and of force in the other, neither of which can escape disorder, or disorientation, in consequence of the psychic aspects being brought to bear on their somatic counterparts of force and motion from the contrary standpoints of heat and light.
31. Consequently the male contexts of sensible freedom differ from the female contexts of sensual freedom, as psyche from soma, precisely in terms of the hegemony of either ego or soul as opposed to either will or spirit, heat or light as opposed to force or motion, with force subordinated to heat in the masculine, or physical, context of sensible freedom, and motion subordinated to light in the divine, or metaphysical, context of sensible freedom - males being either a combination, when sensibly free, of heat and force (masculine) or of light and motion (divine).
32. Certainly there is a correlation between heat and force on the one hand, and between light and motion on the other, the former pair combining a primary ego with a secondary will, the latter pair combining a primary soul with a secondary spirit - the emphasis in the one being on Man, in the other on Heaven, as befitting a distinction between physics and metaphysics.
33. In the female contexts of sensual freedom, by contrast, light is subordinated to force in the diabolic, or metachemical, context thereof, while heat is subordinated to motion in the feminine, or chemical, context thereof - females accordingly being either a combination, when sensually free, of force and light (diabolic) or of motion and heat (feminine).
34. One could say that, in contrast to males, the female context of freedom results in light being 'freaked out' by force and in heat being 'freaked out' by motion, the result being the domination of psyche by soma in terms of the instinctual subversion of soul as id and the impulsive subversion of ego as superego, with unconscious and superconscious corollaries to the prevalence of unnatural and supernatural factors appertaining to a primary will and a primary spirit, both the modified soul and ego of bound psyche being proportionately secondary.
35. In the male contexts of freedom, by contrast, force is, as it were, 'reined in' by heat and motion 'reined in' by light, the result being the dominion of psyche over soma in terms of the intellectual subversion of will as natwill and the emotional subversion of spirit as subspirit, with natural and subnatural corollaries to the prevalence of conscious and subconscious factors appertaining to a primary ego and a primary soul, both the modified will and spirit of bound soma being proportionately secondary.
36. The domination of sensual metaphysics by sensual metachemistry entails a situation in which most photon particles/least photon wavicles are hegemonic over least proton particles/most proton wavicles, whereas the domination of sensual physics by sensual chemistry entails a situation in which more (relative to most) electron particles/less (relative to least) electron wavicles are hegemonic over less (relative to least) deuteron particles/more (relative to most) deuteron wavicles.
37. The dominion of sensible physics over sensual chemistry entails a situation in which more (relative to most) deuterino wavicles/less (relative to least) deuterino particles are hegemonic over less (relative to least) electrino wavicles/more (relative to most) electrino particles, whereas the dominion of sensible metaphysics over sensible metachemistry entails a situation in which most protino wavicles/least protino particles are hegemonic over least photino wavicles/most photino particles.
38. Since the female hegemonies of metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, are rooted in elements as opposed to elementinos, one would think that female domination of males, as of society, was the norm and male dominion over females the exception, since elements correspond primarily to soma and secondarily to psyche, making for a situation in which matter takes precedence over mind, and force and motion, power and glory, will and spirit, are accordingly the primary factors, relegating ego and soul, form and contentment, heat and light to a secondary status of mere acquiescence in the particle-based status quo.
39. Yet this is not invariably the case, for we need not only to distinguish within any given civilization between its alpha and its omega, its sensuality and its sensibility, but between stages or types of civilization and the gradual emancipation of humanity precisely from situations in which sensuality predominates over sensibility and females are accordingly hegemonic.
40. If we take an overview of life, it could be argued that life devolves, on the female side, from metachemistry to chemistry, fire to water, and evolves, on the male side, from physics to metaphysics, vegetation (earth) to air, so that one can plot an overall sequence in which a devolutionary regression from appearances to quantities is juxtaposed with, and even overhauled by, an evolutionary progression from qualities to essences, as from will and spirit to ego and soul, or force and motion to heat and light.
41. Certainly such a sequence does not happen without an immense historical struggle between peoples and individuals, not least in respect of a gender struggle between objectivity and subjectivity, soma and psyche, matter and mind, primacy and supremacy, darkness and light, in which either the female side of life is triumphant in power and glory, force and motion, or the male side of life triumphs in form and contentment, heat and light, each triumph entailing the subordination of the vanquished gender to a position which, while for the most part distinct from that obtaining hegemonically with the victorious gender, is nevertheless complementary to it and not at loggerheads with it in terms of a revolt aimed at a contrary hegemony - something which does occur, though rather more as the exception than the rule, bearing in mind the need of societal stability and a certain sense of civilized continuity and ideological consistency.
42. Some civilizations go one way, others in the opposite direction, while yet others seek some compromise between the two, but all are caught up, without fail, in a gender war the outcome of which will entail the subordination of the opposite gender - whichever gender that may happen to be - to the more prevalent criteria in respect of freedom, sanity, justice, rights, etc., typifying the hegemonic gender.
43. One could argue, as I have in the recent past, that life devolves from a cosmic to a mundane level before evolving, in Man, from a human to a universal level, as from fire to water on the one hand, that of appearances and quantities, and from vegetation to air on the other hand, that of qualities and essences, but this is not simply from sensuality to sensibility, nature to nurture, but encompasses nature and nurture, sensuality and sensibility, in each of the broad categories of devolution and evolution, if with different ratios.
44. Therefore one might argue, on a particle/wavicle basis, that cosmic devolution would broadly reflect a situation of most nature/least nurture, mundane devolution a situation of more (relative to most) nature/less (relative to least) nurture; human evolution, by contrast, a situation of more (relative to most) nurture/less (relative to least) nature, and universal evolution a situation of most nurture/least nature, with the sensual prevailing over the sensible in the devolutionary contexts par excellence of the cosmic and the mundane, but the sensible prevailing over the sensual in the evolutionary contexts par excellence of the human and the universal.
45. Better than that, I shall argue in terms of devility and animality on the one hand, and of humanity and divinity on the other hand, the hand of an evolutionary progression in the face of, or contrary to, a devolutionary regression, and thus of positivity as against negativity, psyche as against soma.
46. Equally one could argue, selecting comparable terminology, for a devolution, on the female side of life, from tragic polyversality to comic impersonality, and for an evolution, on the male side of life, from logic(al) personality to beatific universality. But since that may seem somewhat abstract, I shall revert to a general distinction between the four main elements, viz. fire, water, vegetation, and air, and allow the aforementioned categories of devility, animality, humanity, and divinity to correlate with each of them on a basis analogous to that of the cosmic, the mundane, the human, and the universal, in which the ratio of sensuality to sensibility or vice versa differs according to whether devolutionary or evolutionary criteria are uppermost on either absolute or relative, noumenal or phenomenal, upper- or lower-class terms.
47. Therefore, contrary to the devolutionary regressions from devility to animality, polyversality to impersonality, in which nature predominates over nurture on either absolute or relative terms, the evolutionary progressions from humanity to divinity, personality to universality, are symptomatic of the preponderance of nurture over nature, and thus of mind over matter, of psyche over soma, on either relative or absolute terms, and one can reasonably infer that humanity differs from both devility and animality, the Cosmos and Nature, in that it is the starting point, though by no means ending point, of the triumph of nurture over nature, of mind over matter, and therefore of a sensible preponderance over sensuality.
48. In short, there is no humanity, properly so considered, until a sensible preponderance over sensuality has been established and is recognized to be its chief characteristic, the absence or want of which would suggest either animality or devility, and thus not Man, properly so considered, but some predecessor or forerunner of Man whose principal commitment was not to Man, still less to God, but either to Woman or to the Devil, viz. impersonality or polyversality (I shall not repeat the error of the ages of identifying universality with the Cosmos, so that God is erroneously conceived as appertaining to the cosmic First Mover!), and whose civilization, if one may use such a term, was accordingly more sensual than sensible.
49. Certainly the Old Testament provides us with evidence of a people who were both pre-human and sub-human in terms of their identification, on noumenal or absolute terms, with both the Cosmos and Nature rather than with Man, the focus, in effect, of the New Testament, in that Jehovah over Satan accords with cosmic nature in respect of the precedence of solar by stellar and the effective reign of stellar over solar, while Saul over David, as a convenient paradigm of the next stage of devolution, accords with mundane nature in respect of the precedence of fruit by blossom on trees and the effective reign of blossom over fruit, to the exclusion, in both cases, of human nature, whether in terms of eyes or ears, the so-called Risen Virgin or the so-called Father, neither of which would be intelligible, nor indeed feasible, without prior reference, in human nurture, to the reign of brain over womb, of the Son of Man over the Virgin Mary, contrasted to which they must signify a decadence or, at the very least, concession to sensuality as the exception to the human rule which, being sensible, must ever emphasize the Christian at the expense of the Heathen - in short, at the expense of the more Judaic Old Testament and everything that falls short, in pre- or sub-human, cosmic or mundane, terms of what properly appertains to humanity.
50. For humanity, to repeat, is characterized by the prevalence of sensibility, and only in humanity, albeit a God-sensitive humanity, can there be any hope for evolutionary progress beyond the world to the otherworldly divinity of 'Kingdom Come', and thus to a situation which is post-human in its resolve to achieve the utmost universality on the basis of most nurture/least nature, most wavicles/least particles, most church/least state, most psyche/least soma, most mind/least matter.
51. Thus the real starting point of civilization conceived as the rejection and refutation of devility and animality, of barbarity and philistinism, of cosmic polyversality and mundane impersonality, is human personality and the development of humanity towards divinity in enhanced civility and culture, towards that universality which follows from the relative triumph of nurture over nature in logic and the possibility of a more absolutist approach to and realization of such a triumph as its beatific outcome.
52. For Man is not and cannot be made the end of evolutionary progress! Nothing is more guaranteed to revolt the superior human being, the godly male, than the doctrine that Man is and must remain the measure of all things, and that all things must accordingly bow to Man, as to the ego of psychic physics!
53. Certainly this is desirable in relation to what precedes Man as the epitome of humanity, namely worship of and subjection to either Nature or the Cosmos. But as regards what succeeds him, what stands above him as the absolutely logical outcome of evolutionary progress, nothing could be more undesirable, from the standpoint of Truth, than that Man should strive to block, in his egocentric obsession with knowledge, the path to godliness and hold back the development of culture and civility to their full extents - something, alas, which the chief representatives of Man as a purely humanitarian phenomenon committed, through vegetative physics, to the world seem hell bent on doing, not least by invoking the assistance of Woman as an intermediary between the Devil and themselves!
54. But the man who is foolish enough to give Woman an inch soon discovers that she has taken herself a mile closer to the Devil and to all that is most inimical to the progress of God, not least in terms of the Devil passing Herself or being passed off as God and thereby precluding any possibility of genuine godliness through that universality which, far from being an aspect of or identical with the Cosmos, is its complete antithesis, even unto the degree of a universal rejection of the tragic pluralism of cosmic polyversality.
55. No, there are, it has to be said, men who are only too happy to resist the struggle towards God and who will sell out to the Devil via Woman if it suits their ungodly purposes to do so, granting the generality of women access to their traditional preserves in exchange for the right to exploit what is most superficially and criminally female in the netherworldly heights of cosmic polyversality!
56. Such men, whom some would choose to regard as Man per se, are less than keen on the globalization of civilization, of contemporary civilization; for they do not relate to the synthetic artificiality of contemporary post-modern civilization but, on the contrary, to the non-synthetic artificiality, rooted in analytical duality, in the dialectics of pluralism, of a civilization which some would regard as Western and some as Christian and some as Liberal and some as bourgeois but which, no matter how it is regarded, fights shy of globalization and its promise of cultural universality.
57. For such a universality, were it to come properly to pass, would eclipse them, would invalidate, at a sweep, their pretensions to civility and culture in the non-synthetic artificiality of the civilization which, no matter how decadent or degenerate it may now be, still exists in the background or to the rear of contemporary civilization as both its progenitor and, in some contexts, actual master, manipulating what is most commercially expedient from a standpoint that nonetheless lays claim to the virtues and moralities of a bygone age, even in respect of Christian values.
58. Without the non-synthetic artificiality of Western civilization as a largely Protestant-inspired secular and bourgeois manifestation of liberalism, there would have been no contemporary civilization, no People's civilization as a largely Socialist-inspired secular and proletarian manifestation of totalitarianism, and therefore People's civilization is the outcome, in its global ambitions, of what preceded it in the evolutionary development of Western civilization from a standpoint opposing and contrary to its devolutionary regression in Nature from the Cosmos and more Catholic, if not heathen, traditions.
59. But this evolution of the phenomenon Man in the face of Marian and Creatoresque traditions, whilst it may have led Western civilization beyond both non-synthetic and synthetic naturalism to a non-synthetic artificiality the chief attribute of which is the human personality of the liberal individual as he strives for economic betterment in a capitalistic world, was achieved at a tremendously high price, namely the price of the sacrifice of soul to egocentric knowledge and thus the rejection of that which, no matter how imperfectly, still clung, if tangentially, to the older traditions rooted in will and spirit, though especially spirit, as a goal and ideal towards which the more devout of the faithful could aspire, no matter how paradoxically in a world which falsely placed a premium on spirit and, hence, on spirituality as the actual ideal of religion, making the rejection of will by spirit more important than the injection of ego by soul.
60. Such a rejection of will by spirit took the religious form of the rejection of time by mass, but the injection of ego by soul, of volume by space, did not transpire to anything like the same extent in view of the monistic importance attaching to spirituality in Western religious tradition, making devolutionary regression from the alpha-most of noumena of more significance than evolutionary progression towards the omega-most of noumena, so that mass took precedence not only over time but effectively, if not officially, over volume and space as well, becoming the effective ne plus ultra of devotional commitment.
61. Yet the evolutionary development of volume in the face of mass and its rejection of time did not lead to space, at least not sensibly, but rather to a false progress in which the sensual manifestations of, first, volume and, then, space, volume perceived volumetrically and space perceived spatially, became, under Protestant-inspired secular fatalities, the principal characteristics of Western civilization in its modern, or bourgeois liberal, manifestation, with a corresponding religious degeneration from the sensibilities of time and mass in relation to the New Testament to the sensualities of volume and space in relation to the Old Testament, not least when the American offshoot of the civilization in question is taken into account and the relation of volume to space is reversed in favour of space and a sort of Jehovahesque hegemony in cosmic primacy supersedes in importance the mundane primacy to which Nonconformism subscribes in its feminine association with volume conceived or, rather, perceived (from an empirically objective standpoint) volumetrically.
62. Be that as it may, the development of contemporary civilization out of the degeneration into devolutionary regression of Western civilization in its liberal bourgeois secularity inevitably led to a rejection of space and volume in favour of time and mass, albeit not in the traditional Catholic or Medieval terms of sensibility, but as a sensual extrapolation from bourgeois precedent and, in some sense, a male revolt against what in the sensual manifestations of space and volume could only be described as a civilization characterized by female hegemonies, in Anglo-American fashion.
63. This male revolt led, in the clash of Communism and Fascism, to world war and the struggle for a New Order, whether global or European in character, and duly resulted in the rejuvenation and restoration of the West under American domination, with the achievement, one could say, of a People's liberalism through corporate capitalism, which has since taken globalization one stage further than either the Communists or the Nazis would have envisaged, a stage beyond both science and politics into economics and the so-called global economy of post-modern contemporary civilization.
64. But such a civilization is not and never was completely independent of Western civilization, neither in its traditional Catholic nor Protestant, medieval nor liberal, manifestations, and both synthetic naturalism and non-synthetic artificiality persist to the rear, as it were, of the synthetic artificiality of contemporary civilization, often in roles which suggest dominance rather than subservience, not least of all in the arts, where all modes of non-synthetic artificiality, from orchestrally-oriented classical music and painterly canvas art to figure sculpture and theatrical and book production play anything but modest roles in the cultural life of the age, no matter how irrelevant or even abhorrent such phenomena may be to a pop- or film-loving exemplar of what is truly contemporary in a civilization which, in its synthetic artificiality, is anything but bourgeois but, rather, based around the urban proletariat as the type par excellence of that 'humanity' which, in its global aspirations and potential for cultural universality, for what transcends mere personality, is nearer to God than is Man, being in effect the nearest thing to divinity which currently exists on the planet, eastern meditators notwithstanding!
65. But then Eastern civilization is no less distinct from global civilization than Western civilization and cannot be accorded preferential respect as though, in a choice between the two, the Eastern, in whatever of its various permutations, was the one to adopt. Global civilization transcends, and must necessarily continue to transcend, both Eastern and Western civilizations, as the urban proletariat transcend the bourgeoisie and aristocracy, not to mention peasantry and priesthood, of those societies which, in their rural foundations, fall short of a properly urban dimension and global aspiration.
66. But People's civilization, much as it may exist in both the West and the East, and even under the control, in varying degrees, of civilizations which fight shy of synthetic artificiality and still cling to their bourgeois or other roots, has not emerged into contemporary globalization on the male hegemonic terms that its initial developments or developers may have envisaged for it but, since the victory in World War II of the Western powers, whether or not synthetically artificial, over the Axis powers and the subsequent collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe following the end of the so-called Cold War, rather under female hegemonies of both space and volume, sequential time under spatial space in the noumenal context of space/time, and massive mass under volumetric volume in the phenomenal context of volume/mass, with the sort of triangular consequences which have been described often enough in my works in the past not to warrant further exegesis here; though a reminder as to the desirability, primarily from a male standpoint, of a democratically-achieved salvation from their sensual integrities to the sensibilities of the non-triangular structures previously identified by me with 'Kingdom Come' ... may not be without further merit at this point.
67. However, while globalization has indeed materialized at the partial expense of both Western and Eastern traditions, it was not achieved without the sacrifice, under Western pressures, of male freedom or, at any rate an aspiration towards male freedom, to female freedom, of psyche to soma, mind to matter, and the consequent eclipse of ideology by consumerism, whether with a materialist slant in the noumenal 'above' or with a realist slant in the phenomenal 'below', neither of which can be anything but dominatingly hegemonic over both idealism and naturalism, whatever adherents of the latter may like to think.
68. For if anything characterizes liberalism, whether bourgeois or people's, non-synthetically artificial or synthetically artificial, traditional or contemporary, it is the fact of its domination by female elements and consequent incompatibility with that psychic freedom which the Church, when genuine, is pledged to uphold to the greater advantage of form and contentment, ego and soul, knowledge and truth (joy).
69. Therefore democracy, as an expression of political pluralism, of ideological relativity, within a liberal framework, a framework, incidentally, by no means commensurate with a political per se but effectively a 'bovaryization' of politics from the standpoint of an economic hegemony, reveals itself as the enemy of religion and opponent of evolutionary progress towards a more virtuous, not to say moral, society.
70. Democracy sees itself, in typically empirical vein, as an end in itself, not as a means to a higher or better end, but rather as the guarantor of a society in which Man is the measure of all things and all things must bow to his criteria. Not, however, as in the Christian past, in relation to Christ, or the godly hype of Man and effective subversion of true godliness which, besides being metaphysical, appertains to the Father rather than to the Son, to psyche rather than to soma, but with naturalistic reference to a secular present in which, to all intents and purposes, female criteria are hegemonic on both realistic and materialistic terms over a largely somatic perception of Man.
71. Thus is humanity compromised by both animality and devility, and no progress towards divinity is seriously envisaged, such aspirations being regarded as irrelevant to the world and to the protection of worldly interests, and therefore as something to reject from a standpoint rooted in consumerism.
72. If, in the Christian past, humanity had some aspiration, no matter how paradoxically under the animalistic or, more correctly, anti-animalistic reality of spiritual hype, towards divinity, nowadays no such aspiration can be attributed to a humanity or, better, antihumanity not merely acquiescent in but, in the interests of economic enrichment, besotted by animality and devility, as by political and scientific relativity, to the effective exclusion of religion.
73. Obviously this is anything but a satisfactory situation! For contemporary civilization, notwithstanding the parts still played by traditional civilization, has now attained to a concern, under economics, with vocational advancement and differentiation which, as the pluralistic essence of liberalism, has replaced what used, in more openly totalitarian contexts, to be concerns with either race or class, neither of which have much to commend them to a post-fascist and post-communist society characterized by a liberal pluralism in respect, primarily, to vocation and the arrogation of science and politics to its economic ends.
74. For vocation is in some sense as important to a People's antihumanity characterized by liberal pluralism as race was to a People's devility characterized by fascist totalitarianism and class to a People's animality characterized by communist totalitarianism, neither of which could be taken all that seriously in a society which is post-ideological in its pluralistic concern with consumerism in the enterprise culture of the free market, a market not dependent on race or class but upon vocation, the basis of the ever-burgeoning plethora of artificial products.
75. Obviously there are still racial and class distinctions to be found in the world, but they are not characteristic of contemporary civilization as an expression of the synthetic artificiality of an urban proletariat. Rather, they are a legacy of Western and Eastern civilizations, both of which still play a controlling, if not dominating, role in the conduct of contemporary society which, for all its proletarian emphasis, is still subject to the bourgeoisie and other, even older, classes whose lifestyles or products are less synthetically artificial than non-synthetically artificial and even, in pre-bourgeois terms, synthetically or non-synthetically naturalistic.
76. Be that as it may, People's civilization in its liberal mode is, without doubt, not a class- or even race-based civilization, but a vocational civilization that esteems career above everything else and makes a virtue out of 'getting-on in the world' and becoming ever more affluent and economically self-dependent, even unto the extent of acquiring, one way or another, the prestigious status of a millionaire, which is to the contemporary world what sainthood was to the medieval one, and thus a confirmation of vocational success and, in some sense, attainment of the goal that a society based around economics inevitably aspires towards.
77. For money, as the lifeblood of economics, is the ideal of this phase of People's civilization, and money, as we all know, 'speaks all languages', thereby further facilitating that globalization which is the touchstone of contemporary credibility.
78. But money does not, of course, lead to the 'Kingdom of Heaven', to the 'kingdom within', still less to 'Kingdom Come' as the politically-based framework in which maximum encouragement can be granted to such a heavenly ideal, but is more of an obstacle to such an end, putting the welfare of the egocentric self above that of the psychocentric self, personality above universality, and even allowing form to be eclipsed by both power and glory as a superego-eccentrically fuelled concern with the not-self takes over, and materialistic or realistic matters come to take on more importance than anything idealistic or naturalistic, much less transcendentalist or humanist, given that the male not-self is not and never could be an end in itself but must always be subordinated to the female not-self which, in sensuality, the context of liberal pluralism par excellence, is ever hegemonic.
79. For, despite its claims to humanism and advocacy of human rights, of humane treatment of children, animals, criminals, etc., liberal pluralism leads, soon enough, to the dominance of humanity or, rather, antihumanity by devility and animality, since a humane approach to animals and devils is a meaningless, not to say contradictory, procedure which is bound to rebound on its perpetrator as the devil or animal gets the upper hand from unconcern with any reciprocal humanity.
80. No devil or animal has been turned into a human through a humane approach, and few males whose humanity it would, on grounds of sensibility, be difficult to call into question would be of any avail in dealing with animals or devils as they deserve and, in fact, as females more usually deal with them when free to be 'true' to themselves.
81. Clearly humanity can only go so far in dealing with animality and devility; though deal with them it assuredly must if it is not to be defeated and overrun by either, and obviously on less than humane terms. For 'humaneness' is something that works between equals in humanity, and where such equality is lacking, there can be only the inhumane treatment of unequals, which is to say, of animals and devils, or all who are characterized by an evolutionary want of more wavicles/less particles in either more particles/less wavicles or, worse again, most particles/least wavicles, and therefore show themselves chemically or metachemically adrift of physics in relation to the negativities of somatic freedoms which, far from adding up to anything virtuous, fly in the face of virtue from criminally vicious standpoints in weakness and ugliness.
82. Obviously, a humanity which is sensibly respectful of itself does not take kid gloves to animals and devils but treats them as they deserve, whether with effect to controlling them or, in the cases of persons who are simply environmentally or socially backward, reforming and improving them, so that they are saved from their effectively pre- and/or sub-human backgrounds and admitted to the ever-growing community of humans who really are humane to one another, and thus of humanity in the higher sense.
83. But vocational humanity is not, in its sensual antihumanity, of the essence of global civilization, of that synthetically artificial civilization which has been identified with the People and deemed truly contemporary, any more than the class animality of socialism or the race devility of fascism was or ever could be, since any aspiration towards globalization implies a monistic respect for airy universality and thus for metaphysical universality, which can only properly emerge on the basis of ethnicity, and with respect not to humanity primarily, but to divinity, the order of evolutionary progress which is commensurate with universality as an expression of a religious ideal, as the religious ideal par excellence, in which there is only one God because there could only ever really be one God that is true and, in truth, germane to universality, not two, three, four, or more gods the majority of which were manifestly less than properly divine because other than sensibly metaphysical!
84. No, the one true God the Father is sensibly metaphysical in respect of the ego that embraces, through transcendental meditation, the will to breathe of the Son of God in the lungs and identifies with the out-breath of the Holy Spirit of Heaven until it must recoil, in self-preservation, to self more profoundly and thereby achieve the redemption of metaphysical ego in Heaven the Holy Soul, the joyful justification of truth, the latter of which is ever of God the Father and thus not an end in itself but that which utilizes the means, in metaphysical not-self, to a soulful end in beatific joy.
85. Therefore globalization only comes 'good', only achieves its true perfection on the basis of divinity, of a divinity which transcends, though does not entirely exclude, humanity, animality, and devility or, more correctly, humanity, anti-animality and antidevility, granted that sensibility has the effect of turning the female elements around so that they express, in paradoxical psychic emphasis, not the Mother but the Antidaughter, not free soma but free psyche, and therefore not the Devil in metachemistry or Woman in chemistry but the Antidevil and the Antiwoman respectively, with a greater emphasis, in free psyche, on the constrained will and spirit of bound soma than would otherwise be the case.
86. For whereas free will has the effect, in sensuality, of 'freaking out' soul in terms of the id and free spirit of 'freaking out' ego in terms of the superego, in sensibility, by contrast, free will is 'reined in' by ego in terms of natwill and free spirit 'reined in' by soul in terms of subspirit, becoming bound to the prevailing psychic freedom which only stems from a male hegemony in which heat and light hold dominion over force and motion, primarily in terms of physics and metaphysics, secondarily in terms of chemistry and metachemistry.
87. But in metaphysical sensibility heat is not, falsely, a sort of end in itself, as with humanity, the personality of whose vegetative pluralism necessarily falls short of the universality of airy monism, but is conceived as requiring to be redeemed in and by the light ... of the soul, as the brain stem of the ego-self is eclipsed by the spinal cord of the soul-self following the recoil of ego from the threat to selfhood posed by the out-breath of the not-self which has issued, in subspiritual vein, from the subwill of the lungs, metaphysical motion from metaphysical force, neither of which have anything to do with free will and free spirit, least of all in their female per se, or primary, manifestations, but are the bound orders of 'thrice-bovaryized' will and 'twice-bovaryized' spirit, fourth-rate will and third-rate spirit, which constitute a sort of secondary godliness and heavenliness, in metaphysical not-self, to the primary orders of God and Heaven which obtain in the metaphysical self and only in the metaphysical self, that combination of second-rate ego and first-rate soul, a 'once-bovaryized' ego and the per se order of soul, in the brain stem and spinal cord of what could be called the upper-class, or noumenal, male of metaphysical sensibility.
88. Therefore divinity not only transcends humanity, as the soul transcends the ego, or God transcends Man, but it constitutes, in the sublime essence of its monistic transcendentalism, what is truly universal and capable of sustaining globalization on a genuinely universal basis, the only basis upon which it ultimately can be sustained, given the incompatibility of human personality with such an essential outcome, the product not of vegetation but of air.
89. For any male who meditates transcendentally is God the Father, and this one true God can only be sustained on the basis of commerce, through transcendental meditation, with the universal element, viz. the air, which, transmuted into breath, becomes the spiritual means for the redemption of ego in soul via the relevant order of will we have identified, correctly and definitively, with the Son of God, with what supersedes, in metaphysical not-self, the metaphysical self, and is accordingly secondary to a prime mover, viz. God the Father, as bound soma is secondary to free psyche.
90. Yet this is so only of males, and especially of those males who, being divine in their noumenal absolutism, their capacity not only for time-space subjectivity but the transcendence of sequential time in spaced space, are capable of meditation and accordingly metaphysical, characterized by most wavicles/least particles, and therefore by a predilection for the soul at the expense not only of the spirit but, more particularly, of the will, which is also controlled by the ego, though to a lesser extent, we have argued, than 'down below' in the masculine male context, notably physics, of voluminous volume, where ego is the most prevalent factor, as befitting phenomenal relativity.
91. Ultimately, true globalization presupposes universality, but universality can only be sustained on the basis of a uniform ethnicity, call it Social Transcendentalist, or Centrist, which acknowledges the significance of the metaphysical element, the air, in respect of universality and does so completely independently of that false, and traditional, identification with and subsuming of the concept 'universal' into the so-called Universe, meaning the Cosmos, as that which, in reality, is anything but universal but, rather, polyversal in the fiery pluralism of its starry appearances, and thus at the farthest environmental remove from divine oneness or the possibility of true essence, being the basis, in stellar primacy, not of metaphysical free psyche but of metachemical free soma, as primarily in respect to an element which corresponds to most particles/least wavicles and is therefore anything but divine. It is, in short, the seat of the Devil, of that which is germane to original crime and accordingly the fount of free will.
92. Such a reality, which I have tended in the past to call Devil the Mother, is fundamentally female, not male, and it is what characterizes all that is contrary to the precedence of soma by psyche, exemplifying, in sensuality, the precedence of psyche by soma and thus of wavicles by particles, of mind by matter, of light by force, of the Daughter by the Mother, of evil by crime, of immorality by vice.
93. Thus from the metachemical setting of the 'freaking out' of light by force, of soul by will, which is called the id or unconscious soul, life proceeds, in phenomenal devolutionary vein, to the chemical setting of the 'freaking out' of heat by motion, of ego by spirit, which is called the superego or superconscious ego, and from there it requires a revolutionary transvaluation of values and rejection of free will and spirit somatically hegemonic over bound psyche, to achieve the 'reining in' of force by heat (not light!), of will by ego, in natwill or natural will, and the 'reining in' of motion by light (not heat!), of spirit by soul, in subspirit or subnatural spirit, for ego and soul to be free and psychically hegemonic over bound soma, thereby passing from the dark to the light, as from matter to mind, crime and/or sin to grace and/or punishment, devility and/or animality to humanity and/or divinity, unnature and/or supernature to conscious and/or subconscious, as the emphasis switches from free soma to free psyche, as from fire and/or water to vegetation and/or air, fact and/or illusion to fiction and/or truth.
94. However, those who are too antihumanistic (I nearly said humanistic!), too given to liberal pluralism, will be unlikely to opt for centrist monism, as for the prospect of universality in a globalization which owes more to ethnicity than to vocation, more to air than to vegetation, more to divinity than to humanity, more to truth than to knowledge, more to God than to Man, more to essence than to quality, and in which contentment justly counts for more than form.
95. There is even about humanity, never mind the more sensual and secular antihumanity which smacks of antison (Antichrist), a paradoxical fatality to be attracted towards devility, in that both have a connection, albeit on different terms, with force, humanity in terms of the controlling of force from a standpoint based in heat, devility in terms of the controlling of light from a standpoint based in force, the extolling of heat, viz. ego, by the one contrasting with the extolling of force, viz. will, by the other.
96. Contrariwise, there is about animality, never mind the more sensible and ecclesiastic anti-animality which may be accorded a Marian status, a paradoxical fatality to be attracted towards divinity in that both have a connection, albeit on different terms, with motion, animality in terms of the controlling of heat from a standpoint based in motion, divinity in terms of the controlling of motion from a standpoint based in light, the extolling of motion, viz. spirit, by the one contrasting with the extolling of light, viz. soul, by the other.
97. Therefore while physical humanity exalts in ego, it does so with a certain sympathy towards will which, in metachemical devility, is free to exalt in itself at the expense, primarily (though not exclusively) of soul.
98. Contrariwise, while metaphysical divinity exalts in soul, it does so with a certain sympathy towards spirit which, in chemical animality, is free to exalt in itself at the expense, primarily (though not exclusively) of ego.
99. There is, then, a connection with force that is common, in diametrically antithetical ways, to physics and metachemistry, humanity and devility, whilst a connection with motion is common, in diametrically antithetical ways, to metaphysics and chemistry, divinity and animality.
100. Devility thrives on free will and bound soul, while humanity thrives on free ego and bound will. But the will, whether free or bound, is common to both. By contrast, divinity thrives on free soul and bound spirit, while animality thrives on free spirit and bound ego. But the spirit, whether bound or free, is common to both.
101. That is why, despite their differences, the Metachemical and the Physical have an understanding of one another, even unto the making of a sort of Faustian pact between humanity and devility, economics and science, vegetative pluralism and fiery pluralism, personality and polyversality, phenomenal subjectivity and noumenal objectivity. For the will is common to both.
102. But that is also why, despite their differences, the Metaphysical and the Chemical have an understanding of one another, even unto the making of a sort of Covenant between divinity and animality, religion and politics, airy monism and watery monism, universality and impersonality, noumenal subjectivity and phenomenal objectivity. For the spirit is common to both.
103. But it is not the same will that characterizes metachemistry as characterizes physics, any more than it is the same spirit that characterizes metaphysics and chemistry. Both the will and the spirit, not to mention the ego and the soul, change from element to element, and therefore the type of will or spirit or ego or soul that characterizes one element will differ from whatever is most characteristic of the other elements, be they fiery, watery, vegetative, or airy.
104. Because the humanistic and the Diabolic have something, namely will, in common with each other, albeit they approach it from very different standpoints in relation to the elements of physics and metachemistry, they have a respect for power which is uncharacteristic of those for whom power is something to deny rather than to utilize either from a somatic standpoint based in will or from a psychic standpoint based in ego. Consequently a context which denies power, or at the very least strives to marginalize or curtail it, tends not to appeal to them, insofar as their lives are based, one way or another, around its use.
105. Because, on the other hand, the Divine and the animalistic have something, namely spirit, in common with each other, albeit they approach it from very different standpoints in relation to the elements of metaphysics and chemistry, they have a respect for glory which is uncharacteristic of those for whom glory is something to deny rather than to utilize either from a psychic standpoint based in soul or from a somatic standpoint based in spirit. Consequently a context which denies glory, or at the very least strives to marginalize or curtail it, tends not to appeal to them, insofar as their lives are based, one way or another, around its use.
106. But free will still differs from free ego, as free soul from free spirit, since whereas free will and spirit are germane to soma, free ego and soul are their psychic counterparts, and the Diabolic are no more superior to the humanistic than the animalistic to the Divine. Rather could it be said that, in respect of somatic freedom, the Diabolic are objectively superior to the animalistic, since will is fundamentally metachemical and spirit chemical, the former noumenal and the latter phenomenal, whereas, in respect of psychic freedom, the Divine are subjectively superior to the humanistic, since soul is essentially metaphysical and ego physical, the former noumenal and the latter phenomenal.
107. But the Chemical won't aspire, as a rule, to the Metachemical, any more than the Physical will aspire to the Metaphysical, but rather the Chemical will turn away, as from a more criminal/evil reality, from the Metachemical, while the Physical will turn away, as from a more graceful/wise reality, from the Metaphysical.
108. Thus in the liberal pluralism of People's democracy, the Divine have need of the animalistic if they are to turn the tables, as it were, on both the humanistic - not least in respect, more correctly, of the antihumanity of physical sensuality - and the Diabolic; for those besotted with humanity to the exclusion of divinity will not voluntarily acquiesce in their own egocentric downfall, and therefore any possibility of a new order in society based around psychocentricity, the universality of the soul, requires the support, by and large, of those for whom egocentricity was never an ideal but, rather, an opponent to be outflanked by that which is common, if in different ways, to both the Divine and the animalistic, namely the spirit and its capacity for motion.
109. Therefore if 'Kingdom Come' is to come democratically to pass, in terms of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty through a paradoxical election with the potential to put an end to worldly sovereignty, it will not be without the assistance, in no small measure, of the animalistic, or those for whom the spiritualizing of ego was the mean and who have in common with the Divine a sympathy, if from very different standpoints, with motion.
110. In such fashion can force, whether in freedom or binding, be defeated and the power of will effectively consigned to the rubbish heap of history, from which it will be unlikely to arise ever again, to the advantage, needless to say, of the contentment of soul and all that is most essential, all that treats what is merely apparent with the contempt and rejection it deserves.
111. For as long as the will is sovereign, soul will remain an outcast crying in the wilderness of everything that is subjective and sensibly 'beyond the pale' of the world and its fatality, in secular humanity, for a quasi-heliotropic deference to devility. Only when those who are not really germane to this physical fatality of economics hand-in-glove with science opt to throw in their political weight on the side of divinity, and the new and final divinity which can only be associated with metaphysical universality, will religion be re-born from out the ashes of the past and soar to unprecedented heights of soulful subjectivity through the Social Transcendentalism, as it were, of that which recognizes the link between the impersonal monism of the chemical and the universal monism of the metaphysical, of that which the animalistic and the Divine have in common as they strive for a monistic resolution to the struggle with pluralism which creates the duality of the world, a duality in which the attraction of water by air is only matched by the attraction of vegetation by fire.
112. But in the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' to which Social Transcendentalism points, there would still be a duality of sorts, a post-worldly duality between the universal monism of transcendentalism on the top tier, the reformed personal pluralism of humanism on the middle tier, the reformed impersonal monism of nonconformism on the bottom tier, and the reformed polyversal pluralism of fundamentalism within the administrative aside to the Beyond in question, except that it would be between transcendentalism and fundamentalism in respect of God the Father and Antidevil the Antidaughter, and between humanism and nonconformism in respect of Man the Father and Antiwoman the Antidaughter, and therefore germane to the noumenal sensibilities of space and time in the transcendentalist/fundamentalist duality between universal monism and polyversal pluralism, and to the phenomenal sensibilities of volume and mass in the humanist/nonconformist duality between personal pluralism and impersonal monism.
113. Yet all sensibilities, whether of time in the administrative aside to the triadic Beyond, or of mass, volume, and space in the Beyond itself, would be subject to the lead of transcendentalism and thus to the overall hegemony of universal monism, a monism which recognizes only one God, viz. God the Father, and makes of His redemption in Heaven the Holy Soul the raison d'Ítre of truth.
114. Man the Father, Antiwoman the Antidaughter, and Antidevil the Antidaughter would not be hyped out of all proportion to their actual worth, still less subverted by the Son of Man, the Antimother of Antiwoman, or the Antimother of Antidevil, any more than God the Father would be subverted by the Son of God, but all manifestations of soma would, without exception, be subordinated to and informed by the psychic freedom of God the Father to an extent which made any other concept of God, or devotion to some adjunct thereof, untenable and effectively impossible.
115. For transcendentalism, to repeat, is characterized by universal monism, and Social Transcendentalism, as the ideological philosophy of the concept of religious sovereignty within a framework which would allow people of Catholic and Protestant denominational background to be reconciled to the same ethnicity, the same religious orientation, could not permit humanism, nonconformism, or fundamentalism to exist independently of this monistic universality appertaining to transcendentalism, but only as humanist, nonconformist, or fundamentalist 'bovaryizations', in effect, of the overriding transcendentalist mean which, relegating physics, chemistry, and metachemistry to a subordinate position in the hierarchy of elements, sought ever to protect and advance its metaphysical lead.
116. Thus the only reason for the existence of less than perfectly transcendentalist orientations in 'Kingdom Come' would be the limitations of those who were not 'up to' godliness and could not be accorded a per se order of transcendentalism due to the nature of their gender and/or social backgrounds, and who would, in any case, be more useful both to themselves and to others as subordinate components in the overall hierarchy of the triadic Beyond and administrative aside to what has come to be identified, not without reason, with the principal manifestations of 'Kingdom Come'.
117. But upper and lower divisions between the noumenal, whether objective or subjective, and the phenomenal, whether subjective or objective, would not be commensurate with class in the traditional sense of aristocrats, clergy, bourgeoisie, proletariat, or what have you, even if a noble/plebeian distinction between the different grades or tiers of contemporary urban people would be difficult, if not impossible, to deny.
118. For contemporary civilization, as characterized by synthetic artificiality, is a People's civilization par excellence, and the People will be no less 'people' in its sensible phase, should they elect for such a phase in the judgemental paradox of a vote for religious sovereignty, than they are in the sensual and largely secular present, where distinctions between noumenal and phenomenal, noble and plebeian, of course exist in relation to the largely Catholic/Protestant dichotomy between perpendicular triangularity and inverted triangularity, the sensual decadence of space/time and the heretical sensuality of volume/mass.
119. And by 'people' I of course mean those who live, and often work, in an urban environment and could accordingly be classified, whether noble or plebeian, noumenal or phenomenal, as more synthetically artificial than non-synthetically artificial or synthetically or even non-synthetically natural, if one happens to distinguish urban dwellers from both suburban/town and country dwellers in such fashion.
120. But our definition of the People cannot be fanatically proletarian, in the Marxist or Communist sense, since we are not concerned with the impersonality of class monism on the plebeian basis of blue-collar worker solidarity in some politically totalitarian state, any more than our principal concern is with the polyversality of racial pluralism in the sense of the domination of one race over other races in some scientifically totalitarian state, or with the personality or, at any rate, persona-enhancing tendencies of vocational pluralism in the sense of putting career above all else and conceiving of oneself first and foremost in terms of one's professional status in some economically totalitarian state, no matter how politically pluralist it may happen to appear or, indeed, require to be in order to provide the appropriate post-fascist and post-communist basis for what I hold, in the multinational economics of corporate capitalism, to be the penultimate manifestation of totalitarianism.
121. On the contrary, our concern can only be ethnic primarily, since it is with respect to the universality of ethnic monism on the basis of Social Transcendentalism in some religiously totalitarian church in which the People are brothers or sisters to one another, and thus neither professional rivals, class bigots, nor racists, but ethnically aligned in respect of their various elementally-conditioned approaches to religious truth, that we subordinate the ideals of personality, impersonality, and polyversality, viz. vocation, class, and race, and thus the State to the overriding universal interests of a true Church, a Church which is both universalist and transcendentalist, making transcendental meditation its highest ideal.
122. For truth cannot abide the insubordination of knowledge, strength, or beauty, much less risk being eclipsed by their negative counterparts in some somatically free society that dresses up its worship of fact in the apparel of truth and relegates subjectivity to an illusory subservience before the all-powerful and all-glorious thrones of force and motion.
123. Truth can only abide the subordination of beauty, and when truth is hegemonic even knowledge must subordinate itself and not play god, to the disadvantage of what properly appertains to godliness and would have no other god besides itself, with sufficient reason!
124. For when Man plays god, then God is reduced to knowledge in the vegetative pluralism of humanism, and no transcendentalism in the transcendence of ego by soul is possible to a creature for whom the dominion of ego over will in physical personality is cardinal, if taking is formally to prevail.
125. And when Woman plays god, then God is reduced less to strength than to weakness in the watery monism of realism, and no transcendentalism in the transcendence of ego by soul is possible to a creature for whom the domination of ego by spirit in chemical impersonality is cardinal, if giving is gloriously to prevail.
126. And when the Devil plays god, then God is reduced less to beauty than to ugliness in the fiery pluralism of materialism, and no transcendentalism in the transcendence of ego by soul is possible to a creature for whom the domination of soul by will in metachemical polyversality is cardinal, if doing is powerfully to prevail.
127. Only when God is properly acknowledged through the airy monism of transcendentalism is truth made manifest; for God is one for whom the dominion of soul over spirit in metaphysical universality is cardinal, if being is contentedly to prevail.
128. And when God is properly acknowledged through the practice of transcendental meditation by those who, as metaphysical males, are most entitled to being, one does not find the Devil but the Antidevil as the beautiful complement to truth in the fiery pluralism of fundamentalism, where no domination of soul by will is possible in view of the curtailment of will and spirit, but especially spirit, by bound soma to an anti-doingful end which paradoxically approaches truth through beauty.
129. And when Man is properly acknowledged, as an inferior to God, through the practice of transcendental (prayerful) cogitation by those who, as physical males, are most entitled to taking, one does not find Woman but the Antiwoman as the strong complement to knowledge in the watery monism of nonconformism, where no domination of ego by spirit is possible in view of the curtailment of will and spirit, but especially will, by bound soma to an anti-giving end which paradoxically approaches knowledge through strength.
130. For, in truth, not only beauty, but knowledge and strength are dependent, in no small measure, on the acknowledgement of truth, without which Man has no yardstick by which to measure himself but becomes, perversely, the humanistic measure of all things, even unto the subversive arrogation of truth by knowledge or even, more perversely, the antihumanistic exclusion of truth, and therefore godliness, from the total picture of life, so that it comes to resemble a soulless landscape dominated by the Devil, as by the technological praxis of science.
131. For, in knowledge, Man cannot hold up by himself, once he has turned his back on God or the possibility of godliness, without entering into a deal, sooner or later, with the Devil, ego with will, free heat with free force, since he is unable to go it alone with nowhere to go but must sell what remains of his soul to the Devil, humanity not being equipped to entertain aspirations towards divinity when once it has rejected light, or any theoretical compromise between itself and God, and turned so much against godliness that only God's greatest enemy, the Devil, can guarantee it protection or, at the very least, intermittent relief from the just retribution of divinity as the consequences of its humanistic denial fall upon antihumanity, which is the motion of animality, or free spirit.
132. Therefore the falsely masculine cling to the skirts of the Diabolic for fear that they should be obliged to come to terms, one way or another, with God's just retribution, whereas the genuinely masculine, who are still fearful of God and therefore theoretically faithful unto the possibility of godliness, remain open to the possibility of light as the redemption of heat and master of motion, remain open, in short, to the possibility of God and of divine deliverance from the world and all that would deny such deliverance in favour of that false relationship between Man and the Devil, antihumanity and devility, which far from conjoining pluralism with monism bespeaks a double pluralism the only outcome of which is the denial of monism on both phenomenal and, especially, noumenal terms.
133. Therefore if justice is to be done to those whose monism was denied by an overbearing humanity, an antihumanity besotted by secular pluralism, they will be encouraged and permitted by the relevant authorities and champions of progress to exploit the Achilles heel, so to speak, of economic totalitarianism and operate in democratic conjunction with all of good conscience who would wish to see an end to the world and the coming of the 'Kingdom of God', a 'Kingdom' which, in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, would set about bringing forth the light of soul from out the shadows of heat as the ego climbed above both the will and the spirit, force and motion, of metaphysical reality to soar into the contemplative heights of the soul, newly released from the prison of self in which it had slumbered during the twilight era of the ego and of the arrogant reign, conducted in dualistic partnership with the Devil, of Man.
134. It is by eclipsing the ego, whether freely hegemonic from the standpoint of heat or unfreely subordinate from the standpoint of motion, of spirit, that the soul will come into its own in the light of eternity, to illuminate the self and grant to life a dimension which the world either denies or fails to understand, a dimension of psychic freedom which towers above not only the ambiguous freedom of ego but also above and beyond the somatic freedoms, more characteristic of state totalitarianism, of spirit and will.
135. For only when the soul is free from subversion or denial will the light of heaven be revealed, to shine from the godly upon a mankind reformed by truth to extents whereby even the knowledge of humanity, the strength of animality or, rather, anti-animality, and the beauty of antidevility will not go untempered or untransmuted by its shining presence, becoming rather as sensible witnesses, through formal quality, antiglorious quantity, and antipowerful appearance, to the joyful essence of a contentment supreme, the contentment, in a word, of supreme being!
LONDON 2002 (Revised 2011)