Op. 100

 

ESCHATOLOGY OR SCATOLOGY -

Judgement at the Crossroads

 

Aphoristic Philosophy

 

Copyright 2003-2010 John O'Loughlin

____________

 

CONTENTS

 

Aphs. 1-156

____________

 

1.   From time to time it becomes philosophically expedient to defer to the colourful slang or casual obscenities of life such that echo in the streets and rooms all around one, in order to encapsulate and expound the philosophical or moral implications of what, to their users, are incontrovertible evidence of a particular disposition, be it fiery, watery, earthy, or airy, which may or may not warrant censure or rebuke.  

 

2.   What follows, not for the first time in my work, is a determined effort to do justice to the full-gamut of descriptive and/or denigratory expressions which may - and hopefully will - lead to fresh insights and understandings likely to impact upon my philosophy in general.

 

3.   To contrast the fiery 'pus' (scum?) of 'frigg*** jerks' with the earthy 'shit' of 'sodd*** pricks', as one would contrast metachemical objectivity with physical subjectivity, or autocracy with democracy.

 

4.   To contrast the watery 'piss' of 'fuck*** cunts' with the airy 'gas' of 'snogg*** bums', as one would contrast chemical objectivity with metaphysical subjectivity, or bureaucracy with theocracy.

 

5.   This recourse to the colourful language of the masses is not, admittedly, in quite the best taste; but it goes some way towards highlighting a more logical approach to such categories which, frankly, with the majority of swearers are much less methodically employed and much more partisanly upheld, as when the word 'fucking' is used indiscriminately, as though in reflection of a specific class and/or gender standpoint which is characteristically more representative of certain types of societies or environments than others.

 

6.   But really, from a more sophisticated philosophical perspective, whereby one is determined to do logical justice to each and every context of life, it stands to reason that no single category can be wholly representative of every situation and that, as people speak, so they betray their limitations and/or affiliations.

 

7.   Frankly, use of words like 'pus', 'piss', 'shit', and 'gas' boils down to a colloquial 'take' on the Elements, as alluded to above, and reveals the manner in which fire, water, earth (vegetation), and air are regarded from different class and/or gender points of view when the object of their employment is to denigrate that which is deemed unrepresentative or unattractive, as the case may be.

 

8.   Of course, in the wider framework described above, I have purposely broadened the terms of reference in order to do justice to the Elemental totality of denigratory or descriptive possibilities, and the reader familiar with certain of my earlier attempts, expressed in a variety of mature texts, to standardize such verb-noun combinations in the interests of a more comprehensively exacting interpretation of their applicability may be aware that, hitherto, I have not spoken of 'fuck*** cunts' or 'sodd*** pricks' but, on the contrary, of 'sodd*** cunts' and 'fuck*** pricks'.

 

9.   Was I wrong, then, to employ such paradoxical terminology in relation to the respective Elemental contexts - chemical and physical - being described?  Clearly, the answer must be 'yes', but not wholly so.  For these terminological combinations cut both ways, if from different points of view.

 

10.  As described in my previous text, the distinction between the falling axis of autocracy-democracy and the rising axis of bureaucracy-theocracy, as in general terms between Britain and Ireland, is that of State and Church, with the Church subordinate to the State in the autocratic-democratic axis, but the State subordinate to the Church in the bureaucratic-theocratic axis.

 

11.  Thus when we examine the relevant expletive verb-noun pairings to each axis, we find that the autocratic-democratic axis, characterized by a state hegemony, has reference to the fiery 'pus' of 'frigg***jerks' on the one hand and to the earthy 'shit' of 'sodd*** pricks' on the other hand, whereas the bureaucratic-theocratic axis, characterized by a church hegemony, has reference to the watery 'piss' of 'fuck*** cunts' on the one hand and to the airy 'gas' of 'snogg*** bums' on the other hand.

 

12.  When we examine the terms of each axis more closely, we find that the autocratic-democratic axis has been characterized in relation to 'frigging' and 'sodding', which are in effect descriptions of anti-sexual behaviour, one might almost say of negative sexual behaviour, whereas the bureaucratic-theocratic axis has been characterized in relation to 'fucking' and 'snogging', which are effectively descriptions of positive sexual behaviour, of pro-sexual behaviour which does not skirt around the edges of sex but, rather, dives straight into it, in a life-affirming manner.

 

13.  Therefore it should be evident that whereas such terms as 'frigging' and 'sodding' are primarily identifiable with the State, or with a state hegemony along autocratic-democratic lines, terms like 'fucking' and 'snogging' can be identified with the Church, or with a church hegemony along bureaucratic-theocratic lines, since they are the more positive and life-affirming expletives which serve to highlight a pro-sexual attitude on both chemical and metaphysical, watery and airy, terms.

 

14.  Consequently the positivity of such pro-sex expletives as 'fucking' and 'snogging' must be contrasted with the negativity of such anti-sex expletives as 'frigging' and 'sodding', as one would contrast the positivity of the rising bureaucratic-theocratic axis of the Church with the negativity of the falling autocratic-democratic axis of the State.  But that is only in relation to the primary aspects of each axis, or to each axis regarded solely in relation to its primary functions.

 

15.  There is ever a secondary Church to be reckoned with where autocracy and democracy are concerned, and, by contrast, a secondary State to be considered in relation to bureaucracy and theocracy; for neither type of society can be exclusively one thing or the other but will combine Church and State to different extents and on differing terms.

 

16.  Thus while we might logically satisfy ourselves that the autocratic-democratic axis deserves to be primarily identified with 'frigg*** jerks' on the one hand and with 'sodd*** pricks' on the other, we cannot dismiss the secondary possibility of 'snogg*** jerks' in relation to the autocratic form of the Church and of 'fuck*** pricks' in relation to the democratic form of the Church, so that such paradoxical terms, used in connection with predominantly fiery and earthy contexts respectively, need to be considered in a subordinate, or secondary, relationship to the aforementioned primary terms which, with their anti-sexual implications, stand closer to the State, as to a society or civilization which is primarily of the State, whether along autocratic or democratic lines, and only secondarily of the Church.

 

17.  Conversely, while we might logically satisfy ourselves that the bureaucratic-theocratic axis deserves to be primarily identified with 'fuck*** cunts' on the one hand and with 'snogg*** bums' on the other, we cannot dismiss the secondary possibility of 'sodd*** cunts' in relation to the bureaucratic form of the State and of 'frigg*** bums' in relation to the theocratic form of the State, so that such paradoxical terms, used in connection with predominantly watery and airy contexts respectively, need to be considered in a subordinate, or secondary, relationship to the aforementioned primary terms which, with their pro-sexual implications, stand closer to the Church, as to a society or civilization which is primarily of the Church, whether along bureaucratic or theocratic lines, and only secondarily of the State.

 

18.  Clearly, whilst it would be logically consistent to identify the former type of civilization with Protestant Britain, which is primarily of the State and only secondarily of the Church, the theocracy of which is either autocratically or democratically subverted in fundamentalist and humanist vein, one would have to identify the latter type of civilization with Catholic Ireland, which is only secondarily of the State because primarily of the Church, the theocracy of which is bureaucratically subverted in nonconformist vein.

 

19.  But even Irish Protestants must be given the benefit of the doubt and identified with either autocratic or democratic subversions of theocracy which yet leave them primarily Anglicans or Puritans rather than primarily royalists or parliamentarians in British, and especially English, vein.  For Ireland, being largely Celtic, is a case apart from England, and one can believe that, in Ireland, God and the Church come first irrespective of whether one is Catholic or Protestant, just as the descriptions of people in terms of 'Catholic' or 'Protestant' tend to take precedence over their political counterparts in relation to either Royalism or Parliamentarianism.

 

20.  Be that as it may, I have no doubt that whereas 'jerks' are primarily 'frigging' and only secondarily 'snogging', their democratic inferiors are no-less primarily 'sodding' and only secondarily 'fucking' orders of 'prick', insofar as in each case the State takes precedence over the Church in respect of a civilization primarily characterized by anti-sexual attitudes and behaviour relative to an autocratic and/or democratic disposition in society as a whole.

 

21.  Likewise, if from a contrary standpoint, I have no doubt that whereas 'cunts' are primarily 'fucking' and only secondarily 'sodding', their theocratic superiors are no-less primarily 'snogging' and only secondarily 'frigging' orders of 'bum', insofar as in each case the Church takes precedence over the State in respect of a civilization primarily characterized by pro-sexual behaviour and attitudes relative to a bureaucratic and/or theocratic disposition in society as a whole.

 

22.  Granted a distinction, then, between the sex-affirming attitudes of Church hegemonic societies and the sex-denying attitudes of societies characterized by State hegemonies, it must follow that there is something better, spiritually and emotionally, about the former than the latter, which are more partial to instinctual and intellectual corruptions of sexuality in State-oriented vein, with 'frigging' and 'sodding' implications in respect of 'jerks' and 'pricks', neither of whom can be equated with a positive attitude to sex, while the 'positivity' of their secondary church counterparts must remain questionable in view of the extents to which such people are still 'jerks' or 'pricks' even when they approach their respective bents from a paradoxically fundamentalist or humanist point of view, and 'snoggingly' or 'fuckingly' inform their carnal appetites accordingly.

 

23.  But of course the secondary church paradox of a 'snogg*** jerk' will involve a quasi-masturbatory approach to sex which, whilst incontrovertibly preferable to or, rather, less bad than onanism as such, is unlikely to embrace much beyond oral sex, whether in terms of fellatio or, more especially in view of the female nature of the context in question, cunnilingus, and therefore to remain basically fundamentalist.

 

24.  Likewise the secondary church paradox of a 'fuck*** prick' will involve a quasi-sodomitic approach to sex which, whilst incontrovertibly preferable to sodomy as such, is unlikely to embrace much beyond coital pleasure, especially through recourse to male contraception, and therefore to remain basically humanist.

 

25.  For while the former type of people, more usually autocratic, are basically fiery and voyeuristic, the latter type will, in their democratic bent, be more earthy and hedonistic, given to pleasure as a raison d'tre, and therefore determined to keep sex pegged to the earth and not to become the basis of subsequent flowering in conceptual vein.

 

26.  However, even with such patently hedonistic limitations and constraints, I will not say they are dirt, or that their sexuality is pure dirt, analogous to a hard-line mode of 'shit'; for that is something one has to reserve for 'sodd*** pricks' and, most especially, for a more stupid species of 'sodd*** prick' who is not prepared to compromise with 'fuck*** pricks', as from a liberal democratic standpoint, but strives for and actually relates, in outright homosexual vein, to what could, in political terms, be described as a Social Democratic absolutism, with the implication of an atheistic rejection of any form of religious affiliation in the interests of a sort of Marxist dead-end of proletarian humanism.

 

27.  Thus the more absolute 'sodd*** prick', a Social Democrat, is not even prepared to compromise his political humanism with religious humanism, in a sort of parliamentary/puritan relativity, but sees freedom in terms of an end to such a relativity and an outright state totalitarianism, the sexual corollary of which would be less bisexual than overly homosexual and thus completely earthy, totally 'shitty' in its refusal to tolerate even a 'fucking' approach to being a 'prick' which at least endows pleasure - for that is, after all, the principal concern of 'pricks' - with a liberal dimension equivalent to heterosexual intercourse.

 

28.  It was in the penultimate decade of the last century, I believe, that an attempt was made in Britain to establish a Social Democratic alternative to the existing parliamentary/puritan liberal mean.  But such an attempt, initiated by the so-called 'gang of four' (Owen, Williams, Rogers, and Jenkins), came to naught and was eventually abandoned, though not before the Movement for Social Democracy split itself in two and some of the followers of the above-named 'gang' joined with the Liberal Party to form a Liberal Democratic Party, and thus become part of something which has continued to function within the liberal parliamentary framework as an alternative to the two other main parties.

 

29.  Whether or not the movement for Social Democracy would have taken Britain towards a totalitarian state, which on the evidence of their limited following and popularity must seem exceedingly unlikely even if other, more traditional factors, including the entrenched power of autocracy, are not taken into account, the implications of a Social Democracy are such as to leave no room for doubt that any compromise with 'fuck*** pricks' would be considered undesirable and that a more totalitarian approach to humanism, as to sexuality, must alone rank as properly Social Democratic.

 

30.  But this is the nadir of both the State and sex along the autocratic-democratic axis, a nadir that, taken to its logical conclusion, desires the eradication of constitutional autocracy and its correlative religious 'bovarization' of established-church fundamentalism, and an end to the parliamentary pluralism of liberal democracy and its correlative religious 'bovaryization' of so-called 'free church' humanism, so that there are neither soft-line 'frigg*** jerks' and 'snogg*** jerks' on the one hand, nor soft-line 'sodd*** pricks' and 'fuck*** pricks' on the other hand, but only hard-line 'sodd*** pricks' whose politics are as 'shitty' as their sexuality, and no-less unproductive!

 

31.  Fortunately for Britain, Social Democracy did not come to pass, and it is hard to see how it could, short of the break-up of the United Kingdom and an end to the Monarchy, as to the Celtic/Anglo-Saxon relativity which plays no small part, I believe, in keeping Britain pluralist and open to compromise.

 

32.  But even in the 'good sense' of its liberal pluralism, Britain - the land of sexual perversion par excellence according to a well-known if not always respected literary authority - is still a place where sexual perverts are free to pursue their respective 'frigging' or 'sodding' bents under the protective mandate of an autocratic-democratic axis, and where any form of positive or natural sex gets a comparatively raw deal, bearing in mind the extent to which such wholesome sex requires a bureaucratic-theocratic precondition if 'fucking' and 'snogging' criteria are to more openly and even conservatively prevail.

 

33.  Even the 'sodd*** pricks' of the parliamentary relativity are less, in logical terms, than au fait with sexual conservatism if we accept a 'fuck*** prick' paradox as being more germane to the religious corollary of parliamentary democracy in which an almost puritanical horror of conception, of fertility and fecundity, leads to a paradoxical emphasis on pleasure, for better or worse, with the use of contraception in heterosexual intercourse virtually de rigueur if the worst is not to come to the worst and earthy humanism be conceptually subverted in nonconformist, or Marian, watery vein.

 

34.  But if that is the more likely attitude of religious humanists, then their political counterparts can only, in the dubious privileges of a state hegemony, be of an ilk that logically fights shy even of heterosexual pleasure in one of two - or even a number of - ways, according as to whether their 'sodding' predilection takes an oscillatory Celtic or a middle-ground Anglo-Saxon form, the former arguably involving bisexuality, the latter the anal violation of women and sometimes - on the so-called far left - even outright homosexuality, in effectively Social Democratic mode.

 

35.  Certainly there is nothing about recourse to a rubber sheath that necessitates that one sticks to heterosexual intercourse, and it has not escaped my attention that perhaps the anti-conceptual confidence that comes from wearing such a sheath facilitates a move towards homosexuality, whether directly, in outright male terms, or indirectly, via the anal violation of women or some paradoxical bisexual oscillation more likely to suit liberals than either radicals or, in the case of heterosexual sodomy, conservatives.

 

36.  However that may be, anal violation, whether of women in respect of heterosexual conservatism or of men in respect of homosexual radicalism, is what accords, in parallel terms, with a democratic proclivity; for democracy, like its religious handmaiden, puritanism, which democratically subverts theocracy, is a corrupt form of politics, as is any form of politics, including autocracy, that parts company from a Church hegemony and proceeds to rule and/or govern on its own behalf, with 'frigging' or 'sodding' consequences, consequences which corrupt sexuality and thus a person's whole attitude to life and the bedrock of life in conception.

 

37.  Therefore it is not with irony or flippancy that I equate democracy with 'sodd*** pricks' whether of the left or the right or even something in between which strives to reconcile the conflicting bents, in paradoxically liberal vein, of conservatives and radicals - the latter always seemingly stretching things, or wanting to be seen as stretching things, towards an outright homosexual dead-end in Social Democracy. 

 

38.  For whatever the form of parliamentary democracy, the 'sodding' bent is still what most characterizes it, and it is a bent which has always to do with the sexual violation of a non-reproductive organ which, as the anus/rectum, has only one function, and that is to excrete faeces or, in common parlance, 'shit'.

 

39.  But when your ideal of freedom is earthy, or democratic, then a 'shitty' sexuality is its logical concomitant, whether or not you are aware of the fact or would consciously endorse anally-oriented behaviour.  It is 'shitty' on the conservative right, which remains paradoxically faithful to heterosexuality, 'shitty' on the radical left, which equates with a rather more homosexual approach to sodomy, and at least part 'shitty' in the liberal centre where, paradoxically, some kind of bisexuality suggests the likelihood if not of an oscillation between heterosexual and homosexual forms of anal violation, then an oscillation between pleasure-centred heterosexual coitus and anally-oriented homosexuality, so that a puritan-like dimension cannot be entirely ruled out of our logical equations.

 

40.  So much for parliamentary democracy and its sexual or, rather, anti-sexual parallels!  If the well-known notion of the British not being in favour of sex - the 'no sex, please, we're British' - is to be properly understood, it is not because the British are against the corrupter forms of sex, but precisely because of their 'frigging' and/or 'sodding' commitments along an autocratic-democratic axis to anti-sex, to negative sexual attitudes and behaviour, that they have such little respect, compared with most other nations, for positive and wholesome sexual behaviour in the manner of a 'fucking' and/or 'snogging' disposition, a disposition which, it if is to flourish unimpeded by political or other constraints, requires a bureaucratic-theocratic axis as its ideological precondition, one characterized not by the hegemony of one form or other of the State but, on the contrary, by the hegemony of one form or other of the Church.

 

41.  Thus the British uneasiness with sex, their reluctance to be open, in Continental fashion (including Ireland), about the more positive forms of sexuality, stems in large part from their ideological structure, their political system, and is therefore the systemic product not of moral superiority, as many of them would have us believe, but of a gross failure in morality stretching all the way back to the excommunication of Henry VIII and the subsequent corruptions of politics and religion which inexorably led to the State hegemonies of both autocratic and, subsequently, democratic freedoms and, as a corollary of that, to the autocratic and democratic subversions of the Church which led both to Anglican fundamentalism and to Puritan humanism, to the monarchic subversion of transcendentalism - for after all religion, when properly theocratic, is all about transcendentalism - in the one case and to the parliamentary subversion of it in the other case, neither of which forms of the Church can be anything but subordinate to the State in consequence.

 

42.  But in Ireland, by contrast, it is the State which, at least since independence, is by and large subordinate to the Church, principally in terms of Liberal Republicanism of a non-executive presidential order vis--vis Roman Catholicism, the bureaucratic form of the Church par excellence which has been correctly identified with 'Mother Church' by dint of its basis in Marian nonconformism (nonconformism vis--vis fundamentalist precedent tending to be the classical Western form of religion and basis of Christian independence from and rejection of Judaism) and tendency to subvert transcendentalism, and thus theocracy, accordingly.

 

43.  Therefore one would have to say that, in sexual parallel to the above, the 'sodd*** cunts' of a secondary State were subordinate to the 'fuck*** cunts' of the hegemonic Church, and in sexual terms this would imply a distinction between heterosexual coitus with a female contraceptive bias on the one hand, that of the State, and conceptually-oriented heterosexual coitus on the other hand, that of the Church.

 

44.  Whether the 'sodding' form of heterosexual coitus implies humiliating recourse to intrauterine devices (IUDs) or to the Pill, it would be the republican mode of coitus par excellence and thus the secondary form of heterosexuality as relative to the State.  It would exist in the shadow of unprotected heterosexual coitus, as in the shadow of the Roman Catholic Church, as something 'soddingly' life-denying or life-thwarting from a female point of view, and therefore inferior to the conceptually-oriented form of heterosexual coitus one would have to identify with 'fuck*** cunts'.

 

45.  Thus the bureaucratic subversion of theocracy germane to the Christian 'worldliness' of the Roman Catholic Church ensures that conception remains the bedrock of sex and justification for intercourse.  It is the Marian 'ideal' of the Madonna and Child which persists at the expense of theocratic otherworldliness in some freer transcendentalism and truer idealism, but it also persists to protect the world, at least of the Faithful, from democratic corruption and pleasure-centred sex, whether heterosexual or homosexual, and if the price of that has to be tolerance of female-oriented heterosexual contraceptive sex in respect of republicanism of a secondary state order, then that price is surely worth paying in view of the more freely anti-sexual nature of the democratic alternatives!

 

46.  But theocracy still exists within the relative framework of the Roman Catholic Church, and one may speculate that it does so 'snoggingly' in respect of the church order of 'bum' who would be a like-cut above any secondary state parallel of a 'frigging' order which one may surmise to have intimate associations if not with plastic inflatables, or so-called 'sex dolls', then arguably with anal masturbation.

 

47.  Laying a kiss upon someone non-lasciviously is certainly within the bounds of theocratic probity, and for a sexual parallel to theocracy one need look no further than kissing, whether on a heterosexual or, indeed, a homosexual basis, this latter likely to appeal to the more radically theocratic as a metaphysical expression of Social Theocracy and thus properly otherworldly kind of kissing which has long been practised in the Orient with the utmost discretion and noble intent.

 

48.  Doubtless expressions of brotherly affection between theocratic males would continue within the more radically theocratic framework of 'Kingdom Come', as habitually identified by me with Social Theocracy, though always on a discreet and honourable basis.  For there is a distinction, after all, between religious praxis in transcendentalism and any possible sexual parallel which would tend to prevail independently of one's religious devotions. 

 

49.  Transcendentalism is not about kissing, or 'snogging', even if that happens to be the sexual parallel to it, and the same would apply to its political or state corollary of what, in previous texts, has been termed the administrative aside to the triadic Beyond, where recourse to anal masturbation and the like would be a quite separate matter from the actual Social Theocratic administering of political, economic, or scientific expertise in the interests of enhanced religious fulfilment and the overall development of transcendentalism, not to mention, in the lower tiers of our projected triadic Beyond and their respective subsections (as already described in previous works) the overall development, within Social Transcendentalism, of modified fundamentalist, humanist, and nonconformist devotions.

 

50.  Actually, if one allows that fundamentalism is usually more alpha than omega, and therefore more sensual than sensible, more negative than positive, and nonconformism likewise, then any such modifications of fundamentalism and nonconformism would, in view of their female natures, be contrary to their free manifestations in sensuality and accordingly pertain not to doing but to antidoing in the one case and not to giving but to antigiving in the other case, so that one could logically speak of antifundamentalism and antinonconformism, the former as subordinate complement to transcendentalism, the latter as subordinate complement to humanism, albeit that, too, would be modified transcendentally in relation to Social Transcendentalism and therefore be less than germane to itself and correspondingly more deferential to the religious ideal of godliness per se.

 

51.  But since humanism is already sensible and a kind of omega alternative within 'the world' to nonconformism, it could not be described in antihumanist terms, but would simply be the modified taking that was expected to defer to the overall hegemony of being, as to transcendentalism, in pseudo-humanist vein.

 

52.  In this respect, the pattern of administrative aside and triadic Beyond, as germane to our projection of 'Kingdom Come', would more resemble a plurality of sensible factors in which the administrative aside would be characterized by a sort of antigiving antinonconformism of antibureaucratic strength designed to serve the taking pseudo-humanism, or modified humanism, of knowledge on the bottom tier of the triadic Beyond, while the antidoing antifundamentalism of beauty duly lined up under the beingful transcendentalism of truth, like an anti-autocracy under a pure theocracy, the latter of which would determine the overall shape and scope of the triadic Beyond in respect of psychic freedom.

 

53.  For such freedom would ensure that a beautiful approach to truth and a loving approach to joy were the psychic corollaries of truth and joy in the relationship of antifundamentalism to transcendentalism, anti-autocracy to theocracy, with a strong approach to knowledge and a proud approach to pleasure being the psychic corollaries of knowledge and pleasure in the relationship of antinonconformism to pseudo-humanism, antibureaucracy to pseudo-democracy or, rather, the pseudo-democratic 'take' on theocracy that would pertain to the bottom tier of the triadic Beyond in suitably phenomenal, or lower-class, terms.

 

54.  Only the transvaluation of bureaucracy in respect of antibureaucracy can guarantee, it seems to me, that the administrative aside to the triadic Beyond will be primarily of the Church rather than of the State and therefore identifiable with the serving rule of a 'God Kingship' rather than of either a 'Devil Kingship' or a secular monarchy likely to be incompatible with the lead of God.

 

55.  Therefore, in general terms, it is as though the transcendence of bureaucracy by theocracy would ensure an antibureaucratic transmutation of bureaucracy - analogous in sexual terms to the substitution of plastic inflatables for conceptual coitus - in keeping with the enhanced sensibility that would flow down from above, making for a strong support, in the administrative aside, to the triadic Beyond, the middle and bottom tiers of which would be characterized not by chemical sensibility, still less by metaphysical sensibility, but by the metachemical and physical sensibilities of beauty and knowledge.

 

56.  Hence a plurality of religious praxis in the triadic Beyond stretching from knowledge and beauty to truth, while the administrative aside was primarily characterized by strength, as by a determination to serve the 'good', the beautiful, and the true.

 

57.  But all would be subsumed into and led by truth, as by joy, and therefore not be independent forms of strength, knowledge, or beauty, but modified, or 'bovaryized', forms subject to transmutation by truth and ever subordinate, in consequence, to the lead of transcendentalism, which is of the essence of Social Theocracy. 

 

58.  For only truth over beauty in the upper-class, or noumenal, contexts of metaphysics and metachemistry or, rather, antimetachemistry, and knowledge over strength in the lower-class, or phenomenal, contexts of physics and chemistry or, rather, antichemistry (as germane to the administrative aside to the triadic Beyond) can guarantee, in male hegemonic vein, a psychic monism in which not beauty but a beautiful approach to truth defers to truth, and not strength but a strong approach to knowledge defers to knowledge, together with their respective spiritual and emotional concomitants.

 

59.  Therefore antichemistry must be behind the eternities of physics, antimetachemistry, and metaphysics, like an antibureaucracy behind pseudo-democracy, anti-autocracy, and theocracy, albeit, in all cases, that which was less than fully or properly theocratic would be deferentially subordinate to the prevailing ideal, the ultimate ideal of transcendentalism.

 

60.  Certainly I have shifted my ground slightly from how I had formerly conceived of the administrative aside and triadic Beyond (without, however, the denominational hierarchies that would place persons of Catholic descent above their Anglican counterparts and persons of Anglican descent above their Puritan counterparts being in any way altered), but that is only because subsequent moral insights or logical gains have made such a shift possible. 

 

61.  The truth, the truly eternal virtue of metaphysical sensibility, has remained intact and steadfast, as it could only be expected to, but other and lesser concerns, not least in respect of knowledge, are often subject to re-evaluation and modification in light of how the truth is conceived, and that has proved to be the case once again. 

 

62.  Only that which is properly germane to Eternity, the Truth, can remain unchanged in the flux of time.  Everything else - strength, knowledge, beauty - is subject to change and will continue to be changed as circumstances dictate, which is to say until they no longer exist independently of truth but have been subsumed into truth and effectively done away with as eternity replaces time.

 

63.  For even if you have to start with a plurality of factors, whatever their sensible scope, the end of evolutionary progress must be the one alone, the divine factor, which would have the right, in the religiously sovereign context of 'Kingdom Come', not only to subordinate everything else to itself, but to carry on modifying and transmuting strength, knowledge, and beauty until they were no longer recognizably different, but one and indivisible with Truth.

 

64.  Of course, we are not concerned with anything properly autocratic, even on constitutional terms, nor properly democratic, as in relation to the autocratic-democratic axis of State hegemonic civilization, whether in England or elsewhere, but with autocratic and democratic subversions of theocracy which, unlike the bureaucratic subversion of it more typifying 'Mother Church', have to do with the secondary forms of the Church which, in Ireland and even Celtic countries generally, typify Protestants and make them distinct from overly political types and affiliations.

 

65.  Therefore the transmutation of autocracy into anti-autocracy for Anglicans in respect of the middle tier of the triadic Beyond and the transmutation of democracy into if not antidemocracy then pseudo-democracy for Puritans in respect of the bottom tier of the triadic Beyond does not imply the transmutation of their political counterparts but, rather, only of the autocratic and/or democratic subversions of theocracy with which Irish Protestants - and Celtic Protestants in general - could be identified in shadow-church vein to the bureaucratic subversion of theocracy characterizing their Catholic counterparts, most of whom, released from bureaucratic constraint, would soar into the airy heights of the top tier of our projected triadic Beyond and thus achieve the nearest thing, where applicable, to a transcendentalist per se.

 

66.  Hence the pluralism of 'Kingdom Come' does not imply that the autocratic-democratic axis of British and, in particular, English civilization dissolves itself in order to fit in, albeit on subordinate terms, with such changes as might be in store for the bureaucratic-theocratic axis typifying Irish civilization but, rather, that only Irish Protestants and their Celtic counterparts in Scotland and possibly Wales could be expected to vote for religious sovereignty and, in the event of a majority mandate, take up predetermined positions in the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', insofar as their relationship to autocracy and/or democracy had been primarily religious and secondarily political, and this in spite of the state primacy accruing to autocratic and democratic affiliations in countries like England where, not God and the Church, but what could be called either the Devil and the State or Man and the State come first.

 

67.  Hence the possibility of an anti-autocratic accommodation of theocracy in beauty and love for Irish and Celtic Anglicans, together with the possibility of a pseudo-democratic accommodation of theocracy in knowledge and pleasure for Irish and Celtic Puritans should not be confounded with the fanciful notion of either an autocratic accommodation of theocracy or a democratic accommodation of theocracy, since state-hegemonic autocracy and democracy are two entirely different and separate issues which cannot be reconciled to a theocratic hegemony.

 

68.  But a transmuted autocratic subversion of theocracy that becomes an anti-autocratic deference to a freer theocracy within Ireland and such countries is certainly within the bounds of plausibility, as is a transmuted democratic subversion of theocracy that becomes a pseudo-democratic deference to such a freer theocracy within a framework of religious praxis that is served by an antibureaucratic deference to pure theocracy in what has been termed the administrative aside to the triadic Beyond.

 

69.  But in order for 'Kingdom Come' to actually come to pass, there must first be a paradoxical election, effectively pertaining to Judgement, which has the aim of bringing the world to the gates of the otherworldly context alluded to above, and for that to transpire a majority mandate for religious sovereignty would be necessary - something which is only likely to materialize in countries where, whether in Catholic or Protestant or some other form, God and the Church come first and a majority mandate for such a revolutionary sovereignty can reasonably be inferred and even expected.

 

70.  Clearly this would not be the case in royalist-parliamentary England, where the autocratic-democratic axis ensures that God and the Church, to the extent we may recognize anything religious in the autocratic and democratic 'bovaryizations' of theocracy, take a secondary place in the overall hierarchy of hegemonic values, and that far from God and the theocratic Church or even Woman and the bureaucratic Church, much less their fundamentalist or humanist counterparts, it is if not the Devil and the State then, in democratic freedom, Man and the State that come first, and would reduce everything to the aforementioned 'frigging' and/or 'sodding' corruptions.

 

71.  One cannot save or deliver from sensuality to enhanced sensibility a corrupt people, and therefore it can only be left to such a people to deliver themselves from corruption and make themselves more amenable to the possibility of theocratic liberation, whether in relation to theocracy per se or to some deference to it on the part of other factors which, duly transmuted, will no longer prove subversive of and detrimental to anything sensibly transcendentalist.

 

72.  But one can deliver from sensuality a Church people, a Christian people, a people who are primarily bureaucratic-theocratic, as in the case of Irish Catholics, and only secondarily, if on religious grounds, autocratic-democratic, as in the case of Irish Protestants.  This people and other such peoples can certainly be saved from sensuality to sensibility, as from crime and sin to punishment and grace, and it is for them to decide for themselves whether or not to endorse the concept of religious sovereignty and, in the event of a paradoxical election, vote accordingly, abandoning both primary bureaucracy and secondary autocracy and/or democracy for the prospect of 'Kingdom Come', in which the Church will exist on a Social Transcendentalist basis led by an enhanced, or freer, theocracy truly reflective of metaphysical sensibility to an ultimate degree.

 

73.  For if bureaucracy is sinful, then theocracy is its graceful redemption, as things proceed from weakness and humility (if not humiliation following the exposure of weakness) to truth and joy, Woman and Purgatory to God and Heaven, water to air, the world of the 'general bad' to the otherworld, so to speak, of the 'particular good', the objective Many to the subjective One. 

 

74.  Likewise the subversions of theocracy from autocratic and democratic points of view can be delivered from ugliness and hatred to beauty and love, as from the Devil and Hell to the Antidevil and Antihell, the netherworld of the primary 'particular bad' to the otherworld of the secondary 'particular good', whilst its democratic counterpart can be delivered from ignorance and pain to knowledge and pleasure, as from Antiman and the Anti-earth to Man and the Earth, the world of the secondary 'general bad' to the otherworld of the primary 'general good', albeit a good that, duly transmuted, defers to the 'particular good' of truth and joy, God and Heaven.

 

75.  In general terms, it could be argued that the deliverance from bureaucracy to theocracy is equivalent to a leap from massive mass to spaced space, as from sin to grace, whereas the deliverance from the autocratic subversion of theocracy to an anti-autocratic deference to theocracy is from spatial space to a repetitive time deferential to spaced space, and the deliverance from the democratic subversion of theocracy to a pseudo-democratic deference to theocracy is from massed mass to voluminous volume, neither of the latter being quite axial progressions but simply transmutations of basically autocratic and democratic positions in relation to religion.

 

76.  For the autocratic-democratic axis proper does not permit of any such transvaluations, bearing in mind that it pertains to a different civilization, a different type of society, which has to be evaluated primarily in terms of the State and only secondarily in terms of the Church, and if one were to generalize on axial terms it would more likely entail the notion of a descent from Time to Volume rather than an ascent, as in the case of the bureaucratic-theocratic axis, from Mass to Space.

 

77.  Be that as it may, such a descent would have more applicability to crime and punishment than to sin and grace, and we have already seen that the shift from autocratic to democratic criteria within the context of state-hegemonic societies implies a shift from 'frigg*** jerks' to 'sodd*** pricks', as from 'pus' to 'shit', and thus ties-in with negative attitudes to sex which result in the criminal and punishing corruptions of sexuality in relation to such a system.

 

78.  But the shift from bureaucratic to theocratic criteria within the context of church-hegemonic societies implies a shift, by contrast, from 'fuck*** cunts' to 'snogg*** bums', as from 'piss' to 'gas', and thus ties-in with the redemptive elevation of sexuality from sin to grace.

 

79.  Therefore where the former type of society obtains, there can be no Social Theocracy but only a Social Democracy if the worst comes to the worst and things degenerate from autocratic-democratic compromise to outright democratic totalitarianism - the sort of  totalitarianism whose sexual parallel is explicitly homosexual, and not merely bisexual or anally heterosexual.

 

80.  Such a society, if it 'goes to the dogs', will end up in a 'shitty' dead-end of proletarian humanism and be incapable of metaphysical progress, having regressed to a nadir of democratic stupidity in which the notion of 'sodd*** pricks' has to be interpreted solely in homosexual terms.

 

81.  Of course, all 'pricks' are stupid in one degree or another; for they are symptomatic of an axial descent from autocracy to democracy, the criminal wickedness of the 'particular bad' to the punishing stupidity of the 'general good', and end-up in a state-hegemonic cul-de-sac of their own devising, where man plays God and defies the Devil.

 

82.  But hope of God stems from bureaucracy, stems, one might say, from woman, and in the axial ascent from bureaucracy to theocracy, the sinful cursedness of the 'general bad' to the graceful blessedness of the 'particular good', the 'goodness' of God, there is no 'shitty' dead-end of democratic delusion but an open-ended gaseousness which stretches into eternity and the perfection of being in the transcendentalism of 'Kingdom Come'.

 

83.  In such fashion can the limitations of 'Mother Church', the Catholic Church, be transcended, and precisely by utilizing the democratic relativity of the secondary state, the liberal republican state, to a primary church end, the church not of a Marian cursedness but of a Messianic blessedness, not of sin but of grace, not of the world but of the otherworld, not of death-in-life but of Eternal Life, so that progress from the 'general bad' to the 'particular good' can be democratically endorsed and achieve, if the People so choose, a majority mandate, and not because the People, the electorate in question, are primarily of the State and thus inveterately democratic, but rather because they are sufficiently of the Church to be desirous of deliverance from sin to grace, cursedness to blessedness, folly to wisdom, and thus of a higher destiny than the world, a destiny which stretches beyond the world to the otherworldly heights of 'Kingdom Come', in which God will reign supreme and therefore subsume all that is less than God into godliness and, more importantly, heavenliness, no matter how long it may take for this to happen to any appreciable extent, bearing in mind the complexities and pluralities which have to be 'ironed out'.

 

84.  For, ultimately, the triumph of God/Heaven implies the transmutation of woman/purgatory and, in secondary vein, the Devil/Hell and man/earth towards a godly/heavenly end, and for this to happen woman/purgatory must become antiwoman/antipurgatory, and the Devil/Hell the Antidevil/Antihell, and man/earth pseudo-man/pseudo-earth, so that strength will take its place beneath, though to one side of, knowledge and knowledge, duly reformed, its place beneath a beauty which is deferential to truth and therefore secondarily graceful in psychic vein.

 

85.  All such transmutations will take time, even in eternity, and will lead to excisions as well as incisions, to separations as well as amalgamations, to a whole range of cyborg-oriented developments which will impact upon evolving and/or counter-devolving life and progressively change it for ever - as described in all the previous texts which have a bearing on 'Kingdom Come'.

 

86.  For man is, in Nietzschean parlance, something to overcome, and only in God, in the most evolved and therefore per se manifestation of God, will it be possible to engineer his 'overcoming' in such fashion that only the Cyborg prevails and the Cyborg becomes the meaning not merely of the earth but, more significantly, of Heaven, of the attainment by evolving life to its maximum of joy through maximized truth in a synthetically artificial context in which the self, the brain stem and spinal cord, is granted a more than mortal support/sustain service for the benefit of its immortal aspirations.

 

87.  Eventually, on this basis of life transmutation legitimized by religious sovereignty, there will be stable populations that do not arbitrarily increase and are not subject to or dependent upon sex, with all its attendant perils, for reproduction, still less for pleasure alone. 

 

88.  Such cyborg-oriented populations will simply be fine-tuned ever forwards and upwards towards the omega point of perfect God/Heaven in space centres, and all the problems which currently and have traditionally beset man will be things of the past, never to be resurrected in the future. 

 

89.  The sinfulness of woman-oriented mankind will be transcended by the gracefulness of God, of the Cyborg, and neither the criminality of the Devil nor the punishingness of man-oriented humanity will persist into eternity for ever or even to any appreciable extent at all, but be subject to ongoing modification in the interests of enhanced grace and joyfulness for all concerned.

 

90.  Therefore the autocratic-democratic axis is doomed; for it does not lead on and up but effectively back and down, down to the nadir of a 'shitty' stupidity.  Only the bureaucratic-theocratic axis can be significantly progressed; for this is the axis of life, whether of death-in-life or of Eternal Life, not the axis of the negation of life, whether in Eternal Death or life-in-death, to which both the 'frigg*** jerks' of autocratic 'pus' and the 'sodd*** pricks' of democratic 'shit' are subjected and perforce condemned through their own wickedness and stupidity.

 

91.  They may fight on to protect their vested interests, the interests of aristocracy on the one hand and of plutocracy on the other, but they are doomed to fighting a loosing battle; for they are the born or re-born enemies of life and can only perish in the death of their own crime and punishment.

 

92.  They have shut themselves out from life, and now they fear life as a threat to their death, the Eternal Death of 'frigg*** jerks' and the life-in-death of 'sodd*** pricks', and seek to 'save' themselves by spreading their death far and wide, by taking the battle pro-actively to the 'enemy', or anyone who is not equally or even partially democratic.  

 

93.  But the morale of life is that life cannot be defeated by death but triumphs over death to rise again re-born into eternity, the Eternal Life which is master and fate of all who would honour God and themselves and turn from the world to heavenly redemption in 'Kingdom Come'.

 

94.  Life can use democracy, even liberal democracy, to its own higher ends, the ends of metaphysical salvation in God and Heaven, and an end to both sin and crime alike.  But such a divine destiny can only transpire where the desire for grace, for an end to sin, is paramount, not in connection with the punishment of crime and an obsession with crime and punishment which bespeaks the autocratic-democratic axis of all that is inimical to life. 

 

95.  There must be at least some underlying sense of bureaucracy-theocracy, of sin to grace, before the endorsement of a society centred in grace and an end to sin can be countenanced.  For the wages of sin is death, death-in-life, and where life is deemed precious because society is based in life and not in death, then the desire for Eternal Life will be all the greater, and eternity will truly come to pass.

 

96.  But the life-in-death of the hard-line democratic, the 'sodd*** pricks' of a 'shitty' disposition, can only fear the Eternal Death, the death-in-death, so to speak, of the 'frigg*** jerks' of a scummy disposition whose autocracy either rules or has ruled the roost in criminal vein and would set things back to a world, a netherworld, characterized not by form but by power, not by ego but by will, not by knowledge but by ugliness, not by man but by the Devil.

 

97.  Such 'sodd*** pricks' have reason to fear the Devil.  But the longer they persist in fearing the 'frigg*** jerks' whose crime would demolish their world, the less possibility there is of an accommodation with God and an end to their punishing disposition, not least in respect of an ethos that, in state hegemonic vein, puts work above play in the interests, falsely conceived, of self-enrichment. 

 

98.  It may even be the case that the one reinforces the other and that as long as the autocratic-democratic axis persists there will be crime and punishment, not an end to crime or a cessation of punishment, but the persistence of crime and punishment world without 'shitty' end.

 

99.  This is not, in truth, a world worth fighting for or defending against the perceived threat of life, including a greater respect, through church hegemonic criteria, for play.  It is, rather, one that needs to come to an accommodation with bureaucracy and theocracy as soon as it can, in order to put an end to the vicious rule of crime and its virtuous punishment and step closer to the possibility of the virtuous transcendence of sin through grace, as of corporeal play through ethereal play.

 

100. For only theocracy, and the freeing of theocracy from both bureaucratic and, secondarily, autocratic and/or democratic constraints and subversions can lead the world towards a brighter future in which not only is there little or no sin but little or no crime and punishment as well, and heavenly criteria accordingly stand triumphant over the world, as over death.

 

101. The axis of death, of autocracy-democracy, is by and large, though not exclusively, White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) in the contemporary world, and the axis of life, of bureaucracy-theocracy, effectively all that is not White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, including White Celtic Catholic and even, in paradoxical vein, White Celtic Protestant, though their subversion of theocracy along autocratic (Anglican) and/or democratic (Puritan) lines does mean that, even when they are more of the Church than the State, their church affiliation is what stands closer to the axis of death than to that of life, even though they may approach such an axis on the paradoxical terms of life and thus within parameters that are either 'snogging' or 'fucking', albeit in relation to 'jerks' and 'pricks'.

 

102. Nevertheless, even then one can discern a distinction between these twisted Celts of an autocratic-democratic affiliation and their Anglo-Saxon neighbours in countries like England, and if such a distinction is possible to discern between Protestant Celts and their Anglo-Saxon counterparts, how much more discernible is it in respect of Catholic Celts and Protestant Anglo-Saxons!

 

103. Verily, he who underestimates race makes a grave mistake in this life!  As grave a mistake, it could be said, as that made by anyone who underestimates gender or even class.  But the underestimaters are more usually the denigrators of higher values and the reducers of life to the lowest-common-equalitarian-denominator, including death.

 

104. Not so long ago I wrote a text called Valuations of a Social Transcendentalist, and it was divided between evaluations, revaluations, and transvaluations.  What it did not deal with - and advisably - were devaluations; for the devaluators are precisely the detractors of life who revel in death, whether from a democratic or, most especially, an autocratic standpoint. 

 

105. The devaluers will not have it said that certain things defy equalitarian reductionism and are either ineluctable or too profound to be understood by simple souls.  They refuse to accept the contravention of their negative principles by higher values or ineluctable realities which defy rational explanation.  They would have everything 'brought low' until what goes for one goes for all, and what suits one should be found suitable to everyone.

 

106. Thus has democracy poisoned life and made an authority out of the lowly and allowed ignorance to walk unashamed in the guise of knowledge and even - God forbid! - truth.  Instead of elevating life to a higher plane, these lowly democratic 'shits' have made it their business to reduce life to the understanding of man and the governance of man, so that what suffices for and as the 'general good' suffices for all, irrespective of how inapplicable and, indeed, harmful it may be to those whose blood or skin or hair or eyes or heart or soul, or what have you, does not accord with the overall stupidity of the 'sodd*** pricks' who strive to remake the world in their own 'shitty' image.

 

107. By making an ideal out of man they alienate the godly, not to mention the womanly and the devilish.  They alienate everyone but themselves, the partisans of their racial or ethnic ideal, and in alienating those who differ from themselves they poison and corrupt life and transform it into a sickly mirror of their own distorted concepts.  For no matter how apparent their victory over autocracy and, incidentally, over both bureaucracy and theocracy, the actuality of opposition to their values persists and undermines even their questionable confidence as to its final worth. 

 

108. They may kid themselves that 'fuck*** cunts' are the worst things going, but the reality of their position as 'sodd*** pricks' leaves much to be desired, not least in respect of the fear of 'frigg*** jerks' whose criminality still autocratically persists and is, by any objective evaluation, the worst thing going, the sensual 'first mover' and very Devil Herself! 

 

109. At least 'fuck*** cunts' can live in hope of a better world to come, a world characterized by the 'gas' of 'snogg*** bums'.  But 'sodd*** pricks'?  No, their punishment is not better than sin; it is simply contrary to crime and a 'shitty' dead-end that can lead nowhere better, least of all if it turns unequivocally 'shitty' in state-totalitarian vein under the misguided aspirations of Social Democracy!

 

110. Democracy is, to be sure, preferable to autocracy, as man to the Devil; but it is a low kind of ideal which makes the notion of an absolute earthiness commensurate with heaven, the ideal of a low kind of class or race which, in opposing autocracy, becomes ever more democratic and mired in the 'shitty' bog of a homosexual dead-end in which the more radical type of 'sodd*** prick' is 'king', and able to flaunt his homosexuality as the logical goal of sexual development, much as his musical counterpart will perform on a solid-bodied electric guitar for the dubious satisfaction of devotees of hard rock and/or heavy metal, or his computing counterpart prefer a single-bay tower/thin-film-transistor (TFT) package to anything else.

 

111. This is not the sort of paradise on earth with which a self-respecting human being would wish to identify or lend any encouragement to, and it is doubtful that even many democrats are attracted by it, bearing in mind that the greater proportion of such people are liberal and more flexible in their approach to sodomy, not least in respect of anal heterosexuality.

 

112. But if democratic, in parliamentary vein, they remain, then they are, by logical extrapolation, identifiably 'sodd*** pricks' and fundamentally 'shitty' characters who might be preferable to 'frigg*** jerks' but are in no way preferable to 'fuck*** cunts', not because there is not something superficially more attractive about the 'general good' than about the 'general bad' in the incompatible terms in which such worldly alternatives exist, but because, however superior they may consider themselves to be, they have made an ideal out of the earth and turned their back on heaven and reduced life to a life-in-death sodomitic dead-end which, unlike their bureaucratic counterparts on the other side of the world, the female or watery side of it, does not exist in relation to the 'particular good' of theocratic salvation and does not live in hope of the resurrection to a more perfect theocracy in 'Kingdom Come', but rejects and defies the notion of world overcoming from a basis of Hell-overcoming worldliness which, with fear of the 'particular bad' as its motivation, leaves little or no place for anything truly heavenly.

 

113. That, more than anything else, is what condemns democracy, and even when the advantages of the physical 'general good' are weighed against the disadvantages of the chemical 'general bad', still the latter live in partnership with the metaphysical 'particular good' and can hope for better things to come, whereas the former can only fear the worse things behind them even when they are obliged to live in partnership with it, as with the metachemical 'particular bad', and struggle cynically with the fascinations of crime, as with the 'pus' of 'frigg*** jerks'.

 

114. But, in truth, the advantages which 'sodd*** pricks' have over their worldly neighbours pale to insignificance when once one considers that 'sodding' implies a state hegemony and an anti-sexual attitude commensurate with sexual corruption, whereas the 'fucking' of 'fuck*** cunts' implies a church hegemony and a pro-sexual attitude commensurate with sexual conservatism, a conservatism that does not culminate in the life-denying radicalism of a 'sodding' dead-end but is ever open to the possibility of liberation from 'fucking', as from sin, in the graceful radicalism of a 'snogging' eternity in which the 'bum' is king.

 

115. In short, the death-dealing and death-revelling denigrators of life are way off the track; they are not even perversely 'fucking' or 'snogging' like their church counterparts in the arguably more Celtic manifestations of Christian fundamentalism and humanism, but overly 'frigging' and 'sodding' and therefore everything they do and say has been corrupted by their political affiliations to the autocratic-democratic axis and rendered despicable or, at the very least, suspect, turned into an argument against life and an apologetics of death, including the death, not least, of plutocratic greed and materialism.

 

116. For it is easier, we have been reliably informed, for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the 'Kingdom of Heaven', and since we identify such a 'Kingdom' with 'Kingdom Come', there can be no doubt that anyone overly identifiable with democracy will be ineligible for theocracy which, as we have seen, requires a bureaucratic precondition in 'Mother Church', and could not emerge Messianically triumphant without such a precondition, and therefore axis of bureaucracy-theocracy, being representatively in place - something that could not be claimed for those affiliated, in democratic vein, to the descending axis of autocracy-democracy which descends, or can descend, all the way down to the most 'shitty' earth-grubbing dirt of which it were possible to conceive, the dirt, needless to say, of a Social Democratic totalitarianism.

 

117. There is therefore nothing intrinsically meritorious or morally desirable about democratic freedom as such; for it is not a progressive ideal that enriches life but a death-obsessed solution to the problem, from a democratic standpoint, of autocratic tyranny, the crimes of which, including a tendency to make others physically work for one, exist to be punished and effectively reduced to proportions which allow the false modesty of plutocracy to have its death-exploiting way. 

 

118. To say that democracy leads anywhere on this basis would be equivalent to saying that punishment should become the ultimate ideal and that the 'shittyness' of a homosexual disposition therefore achieve universal sanction, something which, even without plutocratic exploitation of that very modesty which revels in democratic punishment, only a clown or a madman would seriously endorse!

 

119. But then those whose favoured disposition is 'sodding' are arguably less than sane from a mainstream sexual point of view; for they have reduced life, and the expression of life through sex, to dirt, to their own overly earthy 'shittyness', and in such a reduction is life demeaned and ultimately negated, rendered null and void in the life-in-death partisanship of plutocracy-serving liberal democracy and, more so, in plutocracy-rejecting democracy, or Social Democracy, which is more like an antilife-in-death than life-in-death as such.

 

120. Of course, such people can claim that life-in-death is preferable to the Eternal Death, the death-in-death criminality of autocracy, with its aristocratic acquiescence in the crimes of a centrifugal centralization.  But that is a poor excuse for making an ideal, in de-centralizing vein, out of the devolutionary nature of democracy!  For such an ideal stands on shaky legs even before the death-in-life reality of bureaucracy, which may appear superficially inferior to it but is still rooted in life and capable of holding out hope of better things to come for the Faithful as and when they gravitate to theocracy, whether in relation to bureaucracy, or with the coming of the 'Kingdom', that purer theocracy which has been called Social Theocracy and would radically elevate life beyond the world of death-in-life to the otherworld of Eternal Life, a cyborg-oriented eternity that, ultimately, would not be subject to death at all, but stand in eternal testimony to its overcoming, as to the overcoming of man and his obsession with death.

 

121. And as a corollary to such an elevation of theocracy would come the transmutation of bureaucracy into antibureaucracy, as the administrative aside of 'God Kingship' to the triadic Beyond of the Centre proper, the foci of religious praxis in 'Kingdom Come', so that even 'fucking' would achieve something of an airy transvaluation in respect of plastic inflatables, or so-called 'sex dolls', for those who required them, and 'snogging' be further enhanced and transcendentalized to a degree inconceivable on a  bureaucratic-theocratic axial basis, a basis transcending the corporeal impersonality of sin and rendered truly universal.

 

122. But that is another matter, and before any prospect of 'Kingdom Come' is possible there must first be the bureaucratic-theocratic hope for and expectation of it, which could not be anticipated in respect of those for whom autocracy-democracy is the principal axial affiliation and all thought of 'Kingdom Come' is either democratically subverted to suit the earthy ambitions of plutocrats and/or antiplutocrats (social democrats) or dismissed out-of-hand as a figment of some superstitious imagination and anachronistic disposition which is anti-worker in character and therefore contrary to 'social progress'.

 

123. But, then, what would state democrats understand of church bureaucracy when they have no relationship to 'Mother Church' but at most only - and then rather intermittently - relations to some democratic subversion of theocracy that encourages faith in democratic values and its corollary of plutocracy, and thus of a 'heaven on earth' of the 'general good' conceived in respect of liberal democracy or, where the rejecters of plutocracy are concerned, of social democracy and an end to the exploitation of man by man, as to the pluralism of political devolution, in the overly male-oriented centralization of a pseudo-evolutionary state totalitarianism.

 

124. Well, it should be apparent that the latter type of people would less be about 'Kingdom Come' than putting an end to liberal democracy and its plutocratic death-revelling exploitation of the masses which would be less a 'heaven on earth', a life-in-death than the political corollary of antilife-on-earth, namely 'antiheaven-on earth', and the rule, to all intents and purposes, of an Antichrist to keep the People pegged to earth in the most unequivocally 'shitty' terms, terms one can only conclude to have intimate associations with outright homosexuality in the dirt of anal coitus.

 

125. For if there is earthiness, and nothing more, in the sheath-utilizing heterosexual coitus of 'fuck*** pricks', whose puritanical opposition to conception drives them into the arms of masculine pleasure and what  could be called a sort of life-in-antideath, there is not even earthiness in the anal violation of 'sodd*** pricks', whether allegedly heterosexual or homosexual, but dirt purely and simply, the 'shitty' life-in-death lowness and dead-endedness of a species of man whose sole aim in life is political homosexuality and who goes about achieving this at the expense of the earth and anything that might grow out of and ennoble it by justifying its existence to a higher power and/or being.

 

126. But the pleasure-in-anal violation of the heterosexually conservative 'sodd*** pricks' must be distinguished, all the same, from the antipleasure-in-anal violation, the antilife-in-death, of the homosexually radical 'sodd*** pricks', whether of the parliamentary left or, beyond parliament, in the state totalitarianism of a social democratic resolve, the sort of Antichristic resolve which would reduce the world to the purest dirt and ultimately most barren working-class wasteland imaginable, a wasteland that would make even certain forms of 'shit' appear productive and life-affirming!

 

127. No, it is abundantly obvious that these more radical idiots are simply a symptom of democratic 'shittyness' in general and not a solution to it; for they would reduce things still further, even below any earthy-dirty relativity that still clings, no matter how paradoxically, to liberal democracy and prevents it from falling into the sodomitic cesspit of political absolutism.

 

128. The life-in-antideath affirmers of the earth are still, it must not be forgotten, far from honourable or respectable in their life-subverting pleasure-seeking 'fuck*** prick' recourse to male-oriented contraceptive heterosexuality, but they are less bad, less low, in their liberal/puritan relativity, than the 'sodd*** pricks' of the democratic socialist or social democratic Left who would reduce the world to antilife-in-death homosexuality and make even the life-in-death anally-oriented heterosexuality of the conservative Right, or those who would paradoxically appear to be conserving heterosexuality within a state-hegemonic context, appear a plutocratic crime against the People.  Such abysmally low 'shits' are frankly beneath contempt, and they should be exposed and judged accordingly!

 

129. For you can come back from the earth, even from the liberal bisexual 'take' on it which does not invariably entertain the dirt of anal violation.  But from the dirt as such there is no return, no possibility of redemption, and therefore only a more complete death than that typifying the life-in-death of their liberal counterparts.

 

130. But for those who are not so 'down to earth' that they cannot return from the 'pit of shit' into which they have so ignominiously dug themselves, there is the prospect, ever open from the sinful 'piss' of bureaucracy, of the redemption not merely of the earth in water but of earthy-water in air, and of theocratic liberation from the world in the heaven-revelling gaseousness of the Beyond, of the triadic Beyond, of 'Kingdom Come', and thus of the social theocratic solution to liberal theocracy which lifts things ever higher, towards ever more godly and heavenly peaks of eternity.

 

131. And because 'Mother Church' yearns for such a transcendence of its nonconformist limitations in bureaucracy, it is ever open to the prospect of salvation and an end to the world of death-in-life which keeps the Faithful on their sinful knees and precludes the attainment of that grace which is no mere liberally ecclesiastic antideath-in-life reward for confessional contrition, but the Eternal Life of otherworldly redemption. 

 

132. Verily, 'fuck*** cunts' can rise relatively above their 'pissy' limitations and achieve that gaseous redemption which is the reward of 'snogg*** bums'.  But those who transcend the bureaucratic-theocratic axis altogether ... achieve something more, and for them there is no way back to 'Mother Church' but only the infinite progress of 'Father Centre', the purer gas of 'Kingdom Come' which applies to a context in which, in Social Theocratic vein, 'snogg*** bums' are the rule and 'fuck*** cunts' the exception.

 

133. For until that becomes the case there can be no Heaven in Space, no definitive heaven, but only a paradoxical heaven in mass, heaven in the watery aspect of the world which must continue to bow before sin as before a 'fuck*** cunt' mean which is to bureaucracy what the punishing mean of 'sodd*** pricks' is to democracy, world without end.

 

134. He who corresponds to a Second Coming, to a Messianic destiny, to God in some provisional sense of representing, in his teachings, religious sovereignty to the world, cannot be in favour of the world, whether with a bureaucratic sinful bias or a democratic punishing bias; for he is primarily concerned, in his Messianic resolve, with theocratic grace, and his 'Kingdom' is accordingly not of this world of sin and punishment, still less of the netherworld of autocratic crime, but primarily of the otherworld of 'Kingdom Come' which would take theocratic grace to a new level of timeless bliss such that was independent of worldly criteria, and thus of bureaucratic restrictions.

 

135. This otherworld of a more evolved theocratic grace can only come to pass via Social Theocracy, which is to heaven what Social Democracy is to the earth, only a lot higher and finer, in every sense of the word.  For it is not about the reduction of earth to dirt, of pleasure to antipleasure, but about the elevation of air to heaven, of happiness, or antihappiness, to bliss. 

 

136. Thus it is as far removed, in People's terms, from the 'shit' of Social Democracy as it is possible for anything nobler to be; for far from closing down in a dead-end of homosexual personality, or antipersonality, it opens up to an endless life of unisexual universality, in which not 'sodding' but 'snogging' is the sexual metaphor for everything that unfolds to the greater contentment of God-in-Heaven.

 

137. But for Social Theocracy to stand any chance of coming to pass, in such otherworldly vein, the world will have to allow a paradoxical election, on the part of the People, for religious sovereignty, and the possibility of rights in respect of 'Kingdom Come' which such a sovereignty would confer.  

 

138. Now such a paradoxical election would only be more likely to come successfully to pass in a context of democracy which, with 'sodd*** cunt' implications, was more deferential to bureaucracy than to one that wasn't, and which was therefore of a secondary state order of democracy which had been designed with the primary church order of bureaucracy in mind, so that the interests and aspirations of 'fuck*** cunts' took precedence both over itself and anything likely to undermine the status quo from a politically irrelevant or ethnically extraneous point-of-view.

 

139. Now since the 'fuck*** cunts' of church bureaucracy are all the time praying for deliverance from their sins in respect of the grace of church theocracy, it stands to reason that the secondary state can become the ideal vehicle whereby such an aspiration may be brought to a more conclusive heavenly realization, and precisely by allowing for the paradoxical election whereby a primary church people opts for religious sovereignty and the prospect of deliverance from their sins by utilizing the secondary state to that end, thereby determining whether or not the world is to be overcome in the interests of otherworldy redemption in 'Kingdom Come'.

 

140. For it is only in a context which affirms religious sovereignty that steps can be taken to approach life from an eternal perspective and establish the necessary framework whereby sin can be transcended by grace on a much more permanent and lasting basis, a basis owing little to prayer and a lot to a synthetically artificial mode of transcendental meditation that will tie-in with the overall cyborgization of life for which religious sovereignty would pave the way, ensuring that both man and woman were 'overcome' in and through God, and that Heaven accordingly became the true end of life for all eternity.

 

141. Therefore it is primarily in relation to a secondary state order of republicanism affiliated to a primary church order of catholicism, as of secondary corporeal work to primary corporeal play, that such a paradoxical election, which I have long equated with Judgement, can stand any chance of viably coming to pass, and with it the possibility of a new order of life commensurate with Eternity. 

 

142. For the thrust of bureaucracy is towards theocracy, the bureaucratic-theocratic axis confirming this on worldly, or religiously liberal, terms, and only within the framework of such an axis, even with peripheral factors to bear in mind, can one reasonably expect a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, for the fulfilment of bureaucratic hope, through 'Mother Church', in the theocratic redemption of 'Father Centre', as pertaining to what has been described as the triadic Beyond within the overall context of 'Kingdom Come', in which an antibureaucratic transmutation of bureaucracy would stand as administrative aside to the Beyond in question, and therefore in a sort of secondary state-like relationship to the primacy of the church-like entity we have identified with 'Father Centre', as with a possible federation of Social Theocratic Centres.

 

143. Of course, there will be those who, whether from vested interests or out of laziness and hostility to the new, will argue that such a Social Theocracy is too utopian, too fanciful, too idealistic, and no less radically Left in respect of theocracy than its democratic counterpart in respect of democracy, and that you cannot just turn against the world and uproot theocracy from its bureaucratic moorings as though it were of small account. 

 

144. Doubtless, there is some truth to that kind of argument, and no-one need suppose that 'Kingdom Come' can be brought to pass overnight and all in one go, as though a majority mandate for religious sovereignty would guarantee immediate deliverance from sin and eternal salvation in heavenly bliss. 

 

145. I have never made that claim, and I would be the first to concede that, even with the green light, the process of setting up and developing such a 'Kingdom', in which a primary ethereal order of play came to supersede its corporeal counterpart, would be slow and arduous, with no drastic steps being taken against the religious status quo before the new religion or civilization was up and running and could prove itself and justify the removal or scaling-down of anything old. 

 

146. For if you destroy before you build, you make the building of the new all the harder and put more pressure on yourself to make it work - something it is less likely to do if approached with the revolutionary burden of a barbarous reputation for iconoclastic destruction bearing down on it!

 

147. No, and much as the new must first prove itself worthy to supersede the old, it is not envisaged as being utopian or overly partisan, but has been structured, in respect of our projected triadic Beyond, along lines guaranteed to do justice to the totality of factors which have to be embraced if both Catholics and Protestants alike are to be saved, or delivered, to the Beyond in question, so that, quite unlike the pseudo-evolutionary centralizing totalitarianism of Social Democracy vis--vis a largely de-centralized pluralistic democratic tradition, Social Theocracy might appear pseudo-devolutionary in respect of its de-centralizing pluralism vis--vis both Protestant and, especially, Catholic centralized theocratic traditions, if only until such time as things could be tightened up again and a truly evolutionary drive towards the omega point of ultimate godliness/heavenliness eventually get under way, as and when circumstances permitted.

 

148. I have discussed that and similar matters in previous texts, so will not dwell on the point here, except to say that in a time when democrats of one persuasion or another are globally on the march, and doing their level-best to reduce every people on the planet to some kind of work-obsessed 'sodd*** prick' dead-end, whether ethereal or neo-corporeal, it would be a foolish or overly complacent sort of theocrat who was happy to stand still and allow the storms of democratic clamour to outmanoeuvre him and if not blow him away, then bury him beneath their dead-weight of earthy opinion, blotting out the sky in the smoke and dust of their rude advance as they carry away all life before them in an insane quest of global death.

 

149. There is no way that one can stand complacently, in the contemporary world, as a theocrat rooted in bureaucracy and pretend that one's own system and values are not under threat from this avalanche of 'shit' and of 'shitty' opinion which bears down on everything before it and would engulf it in a darkness worse than night! 

 

150. What started out as a solution to the overbearing might of autocracy and its absolute primary exploitation of corporeal work in certain countries which, due to historical circumstances, were insufficiently deferential to the corporeal play of 'Mother Church' and too internally fractious for their own good, turned into a snowballing monster of its own which has no respect for higher values because little or no understanding of them, not having developed along bureaucratic-theocratic lines, but persisted in its autocratic-democratic tracks in respect of different primary approaches to work.

 

151. But that does not mean to say it will leave bureaucratic-theocratic peoples alone.  For even if it keeps to its own tracks, which in the circumstances of its ideological limitations it is more likely to do, this arrogant monster of sexual and other perversities will be loathe to acknowledge the existence of alternative tracks, of tracks which run playfully contrary to it and would challenge its claim to universal supremacy and 'show it up' for its own monstrous limitations, including the 'sodding' if not, when push comes to shove, 'frigging' worship of death and, as a social corollary to that, work, whether in primary ethereal plutocratic terms or primary neo-corporeal neo-autocratic terms such that equate with, among other things, Social Democracy's neo-centralizing state totalitarianism. 

 

152. It is determined to persist in its own democratization of the entire globe in the interests, by and large, of the plutocratic exploitation of the resources of all peoples; for it is a fundamentally corrupt ideology which, much as it may take itself for granted, is always suspicious of everyone and everything else, even when they are manifestly not autocratic and patently criminal, but either sinfully bureaucratic or gracefully theocratic.

 

153. Therefore it cannot be presumed that this perverse ideology of democratic profanity, which liberally revels in plutocracy-inspired ethereal work, will leave the godly or god-aspiring or even woman-idolizing alone if only they sit still and shut their eyes and pretend that nothing is happening.  To sit still, in such an age, is to court certain disaster! 

 

154. For this low and godless ideology of a profane people will only be defeated when those who are in favour of theocracy and the free development of theocracy stand-up for themselves and refuse to sit on the fence of a bureaucratic-theocratic compromise, but show both themselves and the world in general that they, too, have an ideological goal and a radically progressive capacity to realize and further it in the interests of global peace and harmony achieved through play of the highest order, of a true universality in which the brotherhood of man - always a democratically and therefore sexually dubious proposition - will be rivalled and transcended by the brotherhood of all those who, ever godly, would take theocracy to its logical conclusion in the most evolved and therefore per se manifestations of God and Heaven, in which truth and the vindication of truth in joy will reign forever supreme.

 

155. Therefore it cannot be the 'sodd*** pricks' who have the final say as to the destiny of this planet; for such a say would reduce everything in life to the physical 'shit' of a work-oriented death from which it would never recover, as all that made life precious was reviled and demeaned from a standpoint rooted in the molecular-wavicle punishment of ethereal work if not, in certain more radical instances, the elemental-particle neo-criminality of neo-corporeal work, and the virtual neo-slavery of workaholics. 

 

156. Only the elemental-wavicle 'snogg*** bums', by radically turning against the molecular-particle 'fucking' limitations of their religious traditions, can bring metaphysical 'gas' to the gates of paradise and open the way towards a better future in which not woman-based death-in-life, still less man-centred life-in-death, but God-centred Eternal Life is sovereign, and the world is led by God into Heaven as into life's true destiny in the universal play of a theocracy supreme, the Social Theocracy of 'Kingdom Come'.

 

                               

LONDON 2003 (Revised 2004-10)

 

 

ESCHATOLOGY OR SCATOLOGY

 

 

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

 

Bookmark and Share