REVALUATIONS AND TRANSVALUATIONS
Copyright © 2004-2010 John O'Loughlin
1. I wrote in an earlier text, viz. Revolutionary Afterthoughts, of conservatism being right-wing and radicalism left, as the following extract will show: 'One could - and I'm confident many people would - identify conservatism with being right wing and radicalism with being left wing, and therefore it should be maintained that salvation from moral conservatism to moral radicalism, bound psyche to free psyche, is commensurate with a progression from the moral right to the moral left, as from the vicious morality of sin and (for females) pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality of Grace (and for females) pseudo-Punishment, all of which would diametrically contrast with damnation, on the descending axis, from immoral radicalism to immoral conservatism, free soma to bound soma, as being commensurate with a regression from the immoral left to the immoral right, as from the vicious immorality of Evil and (for males) pseudo-Folly to the virtuous immorality of good and (for males) pseudo-wisdom.' Frankly, I do not now believe that I was correct to do so, and for the following reasons.
2. Whether one is viciously or virtuously moral or immoral is a different issue, it now seems to me, from whether one is to be adjudged left or right; for one can be vicious or virtuous in either psyche or soma, and therefore moral or immoral according to whether one is adjudged to be psychic or somatic - something which, in any case, is not about being virtuous or vicious but, on the contrary, about being either left or right, left in psyche, right in soma, as the following paragraph will attempt to demonstrate.
3. The radical, we had established, are always free, but this is equally true of both types of hegemonic radicalism, viz. metachemical and metaphysical, and both types of subservient radicalism, viz. antimetaphysical and antimetachemical, except that the latter are free contrary to their respective gender actualities and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either soma for the antimetaphysical or psyche for the antimetachemical in consequence of the hegemonic gender's primary influence being either somatic in the case of metachemistry or psychic in the case of metaphysics.
4. But no mode of radical freedom exists independently of a subordinate mode of radical binding, whether in respect of psyche in the noumenally sensual context of metachemistry and antimetaphysics or of soma in the noumenally sensible context of metaphysics and antimetachemistry. For either the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate, as in the former context, or the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate, as in the latter context, and in neither is the State to be associated with anything other than soma or the Church with anything other than psyche.
5. In contrast to this, the conservative, we found, are always bound, but this is equally true of both types of nominally hegemonic conservatism, viz. chemical and physical, and both types of nominally subservient but - at the behest of their respective overall hegemonic gender parallels - subversive conservatism, viz. antiphysical and antichemical, except that the latter are bound contrary to their respective gender actualities and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either psyche for the antiphysical or soma for the antichemical in consequence of the nominally hegemonic gender's primary influence being either somatic in the case of chemistry or psychic in the case of physics.
6. But no mode of conservative binding exists independently of a subordinate mode of conservative freedom, whether in respect of soma in the phenomenally sensual context of chemistry and antiphysics or of psyche in the phenomenally sensible context of physics and antichemistry. For either the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate, as in the former context, or the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate, as in the latter context, and in neither is the Church to be associated with anything other than psyche or the State with anything other than soma.
7. Granted, then, an axial disparity between an ascent from conservatism to radicalism in the case of church-hegemonic society and a descent from radicalism to conservatism in the case of state-hegemonic society, this is not, contrary to the extract from Revolutionary Afterthoughts quoted above, equivalent to a progression from the moral right to the moral left on the one hand and to a regression from the immoral left to the immoral right on the other hand, despite the indubitable distinctions between vice and virtue which characterize the contrary fates in such diametrically antithetical terms, but is, rather, equivalent to a progression from the conservative left to the radical left in respect of church-hegemonic criteria and, conversely, to a regression from the radical right to the conservative right in respect of state-hegemonic criteria, so that what finally determines whether something is 'left' or 'right' is not its class status in relation to radicalism or conservatism, the free few or the bound many, but its moral or immoral significance in relation to psyche or soma.
8. Thus an axial ascent, within church-hegemonic society, from the vicious morality of the psychically bound to the virtuous morality of the psychically free is commensurate with a progression from the conservative left to the radical left, as from anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace, whereas an axial descent, within state-hegemonic society, from the vicious immorality of the somatically free to the virtuous immorality of the somatically bound is commensurate with a regression from the radical right to the conservative right, as from pro-notself to anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war.
9. Therefore in representatively hegemonic terms each axis is either of the Left or of the Right, psychically left in church-hegemonic terms or somatically right in state-hegemonic terms, but each of these principal positions is divisible between 'anti' and 'pro' manifestations of psyche or soma which distinguish the many from the few, the conservative from the radical, since those who are viciously and virtuously moral, or psychic, stand to those who are viciously and virtuously immoral, or somatic, as the conservative/radical Left to the radical/conservative Right.
10. One cannot, however, leave this axial disparity in representative terms, as between the hegemonic factors already described; for there are also subordinate factors to be considered, whether state subordinate in relation to the axis diagonally ascending from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility or church subordinate in relation to the axis diagonally descending from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility, both of which complicate the overall picture.
11. In the case of the diagonally ascending axis, it should be maintained that, correlative with the salvation of the moral from bound to free psyche, comes the counter-damnation of the pseudo-immoral from free to bound soma, and that this is commensurate with a counter-regression from the pseudo-radical right to the pseudo-conservative right, as from the 'pseudo' modes of pro-notself to anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war, whereas in the case of the diagonally descending axis it follows that, correlative with the damnation of the immoral from free to bound soma, comes the counter-salvation of the pseudo-moral from bound to free psyche, which is commensurate with a counter-progression from the pseudo-conservative left to the pseudo-radical left, as from the 'pseudo' modes of anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace.
12. Therefore in what could be called unrepresentatively subordinate terms each axis is either of the pseudo-Right or of the pseudo-Left, somatically right in state-subordinate terms or psychically left in church-subordinate terms, but each of these subordinate positions is divisible between 'pro' and 'anti' manifestations of soma or psyche which distinguish the many from the few, the conservative from the radical, since those who are viciously and virtuously pseudo-immoral, or somatic, stand to those who are viciously and virtuously pseudo-moral, or psychic, as the radical/conservative pseudo-Right to the conservative/radical pseudo-Left.
13. There is as considerable a difference, however, between the hegemonic and subordinate modes of church morality as between the hegemonic and subordinate modes of state immorality, and therefore one cannot suppose that the pseudo-Left, whether viciously or virtuously of psyche, are anything like as unfreely or freely psychic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally ascends from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility, or that the pseudo-Right, whether viciously or virtuously of soma, are anything like as freely or unfreely somatic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally descends from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility.
14. Moreover the pseudo-Left are as fated to remain in the shadow of the genuine Right in state-hegemonic society as the pseudo-Right in the shadow of the genuine Left in church-hegemonic society. And this applies equally to both genders, whether in relation to the primary and secondary manifestations of church subordination vis-à-vis their state-hegemonic counterparts on the diagonally descending axis or in relation to the primary and secondary manifestations of state subordination vis-à-vis their church-hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally ascends.
15. Therefore there is no sense in trying to hype or exaggerate the significance of either the pseudo-Left or the pseudo-Right vis-à-vis the more representatively Right or Left of each type of society, any more than there would be much sense in trying to exaggerate the significance of the pseudo-Left at the expense of the Left or of the pseudo-Right at the expense of the Right across the axial divide which distinguishes those led by morality in church-hegemonic fashion from those ruled by immorality in state-hegemonic fashion.
16. What really matters is not the standing of Left to pseudo-Left or of Right to pseudo-Right, or vice versa, but the deference of pseudo-Right to the Left, whether in sensuality or sensibility, and of pseudo-Left to the Right, likewise whether in vice or virtue, in the interests of axial stability and overall accountability; for there is no more a situation in which the Left can exist independently of the pseudo-Right than one in which the Right can exist independently of the pseudo-Left, radicalism and conservatism hanging together almost as two sides of the same phenomenal or noumenal coin even as one either progresses/counter-regresses or regresses/counter-progresses, according to axis, from the one to the other on both genuine and 'pseudo', hegemonic and subordinate, terms in both primary and secondary gender contexts.
17. Therefore along with the progressive axial ascent in male salvation from sin to grace of the antihumanistically antiphysical to the, as it were, transcendentalistically metaphysical and in female salvation from pseudo-crime to pseudo-punishment of the nonconformistically chemical to the antifundamentalistically antimetachemical, as from conservative Left to radical Left on both primary and secondary psychic terms, must go the counter-regressive axial ascent in male counter-damnation from folly to wisdom of the antinaturalistically antiphysical to the idealistically metaphysical and in female counter-damnation from pseudo-evil to pseudo-good of the realistically chemical to the antimaterialistically antimetachemical, as from pseudo-radical Right to pseudo-conservative Right on both primary and secondary somatic terms.
18. Conversely, along with the regressive axial descent in female damnation from evil to good of the materialistically metachemical to the antirealistically antichemical and in male damnation from pseudo-folly to pseudo-wisdom of the anti-idealistically antimetaphysical to the naturalistically physical, as from radical Right to conservative Right on both primary and secondary somatic terms, must go the counter-progressive axial descent in female counter-salvation from crime to punishment of the, as it were, fundamentalistically metachemical to the antinonconformistically antichemical and in male counter-salvation from pseudo-sin to pseudo-grace of the antitranscendentalistically antimetaphysical to the humanistically physical, as from pseudo-conservative Left to pseudo-radical Left on both primary and secondary psychic terms.
19. In the case of the ascending axis, therefore, that which is authentically Left will be accompanied by a pseudo-Right the somatic nature of which stands in state subordination to a church hegemony, whether the triumph of psyche over soma to which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, bound or free, conservative or radical, sensual or sensible, whereas in the case of the descending axis that which is authentically Right will be accompanied by a pseudo-Left the psychic nature or, rather, nurture of which stands in church subordination to a state hegemony, whether the triumph of soma over psyche to which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, free or bound, radical or conservative, sensual or sensible.
20. Obviously the overall distinction between church-hegemonic/state-subordinate society and state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society owes much if not everything to gender, since the former can only prevail under a male lead of society as a reflection of the male gender actuality of psyche both preceding and predominating over soma, whether on the absolute terms of most wavicles/least particles which characterizes the metaphysical male as a sensible upper-class noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles characterizing the antiphysical male as a sensual lower-class phenomenon, whereas the latter only prevails in consequence of a female rule of society as a reflection of the female gender actuality of soma both preceding and predominating over psyche, whether on the absolute terms of most particles/least wavicles which characterizes the metachemical female as a sensual upper-class noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles characterizing the antichemical female as a sensible lower-class phenomenon.
21. Ironically, whereas the absence of a noumenally sensible upper-class control of society in respect of the diagonally ascending axis would make for a heathenistic state of worldly freedom in which the hegemonic chemical sought their own freely somatic advantage at the expense of the antiphysical, feminine females conditioning society, after their own relative somatic bias, towards free soma and bound psyche in such fashion that the emphasis could only be on the former, the presence of a noumenally sensual upper-class control of society in respect of the diagonally descending axis is what makes for a heathenistic state of worldly binding in which the nominally hegemonic physical are unable to seek their own psychic advantage at the expense of the antichemical because the latter are able, at the behest of the overall metachemical hegemony, to subvert the masculine male conditioning of society, after their own relative psychic bias towards free psyche and bound soma, in such fashion that the emphasis does not fall on the former but on the latter, in paradoxically female fashion.
22. Consequently while the absence of a noumenally sensible control of society would be heathenistically bad for the phenomenally sensual, not least for males, it is the presence of a noumenally sensual control of society that is heathenistically good for the phenomenally sensible, with particular reference to females, since in all but a small minority of cases males are precluded from being anything like as psychically free as they would otherwise be, no matter how morally desirable such freedom may happen to seem from a physical standpoint, and are rendered psychically subordinate to a somatic emphasis and overall control of society which guarantees axial stability on state-hegemonic terms and ensures that the Church - and hence Christianity - will never be more than subordinate and effectively pseudo-moral, primarily concerned not with sin in antiphysics and grace in metaphysics but, in paradoxical vein, with crime in metachemistry and punishment in antichemistry, neither of which have any bearing on ecclesiastic authenticity whatsoever but testify, in counter-progressive fashion, to counter-salvation from the female manifestation of noumenal sensuality to its phenomenal counterpart in sensibility, the male psychic equivalents in antimetaphysical pseudo-sin and physical pseudo-grace being merely secondary in the overall female-dominated integrity of church subordination.
23. For you cannot be secondary in the State and primary in the Church in such circumstances. Such primacy, were it to materialize, would be independent of the antichemical subversion of physics at the behest of an overall metachemical controlling power and therefore contrary to the heathenistic integrity and interests of state-hegemonic society. It would, in fact, amount to a more pedantic approach to Christianity that made a God out of Man and elevated the Word, as an intellectual medium for the transmission of knowledge, out of all proportion to its actual worth, reducing religion from metaphysics to physics in such fashion that salvation or redemption, as you prefer, became falsely commensurate with intellectual knowledge rather than with the transcendence of ego in soul - something that can only happen in relation to metaphysics, and therefore in terms, for mankind, of a respiratory repudiation of cerebral knowledge from the standpoint of Truth and of pleasure from the standpoint of Joy, so that universality prevails at the expense of personality or, more correctly, personality is transcended by universality, as vegetation by air.
24. There are, however, several reasons why certain persons should prefer personality to universality, not least in relation to a lower-class disposition conditioned, in no small measure, by lowland criteria in a temperate region of the world which conduced towards what some might consider an unduly humanistic bias, but such reasons would not stand up to metaphysical logic where such logic was possible by dint of a more upper-class disposition stemming from or appertaining to airy environments that were comparatively otherworldly in consequence of a highland orientation that airily 'flew in the face' of temperate nature, with its verdant vegetation.
25. Truth is not susceptible to being other than what it is, and those who are capable of Truth will always 'see through' the lie of lesser or contrary allegiances, such as knowledge and strength or even beauty, not to mention weakness and ignorance or ugliness and illusion, posing as Truth. Even if they can be justified for a time, such allegiances cannot expect to prevail in lieu of Truth for ever; for time, in a manner of speaking, catches up with them and their pretensions and impostures are exposed, to stand nakedly bereft of credibility before the cool inner light of Truth, whose airy spirit should have no difficulty in blowing them away.
26. Granted that those who are reduced, as males, to being secondary in the State will continue to be secondary in the Church, which is no genuine church, it does not necessarily follow that, the hegemonic state being right wing and the subordinate church pseudo-Left, there is no such dichotomy within either the State or the Church; for of course there is, if with a bias favouring the Right in view of the extent to which soma prevails over psyche in consequence of female dominion.
27. Contrariwise, granted that those who are reduced, as females, to being secondary in the Church will continue to be secondary in the State, which is no genuine state, it does not necessarily follow that, the hegemonic church being left wing and the subordinate state pseudo-Right, there is no such dichotomy within either the Church or the State; for of course there is, if with a bias favouring the Left in view of the extent to which psyche prevails over soma in consequence of male dominion.
28. But when we speak of such a dichotomy in either the State or the Church we should be careful not to exaggerate it in relation to right/left or left/right polarity; for in neither case could there be any such polarity but, rather, a distinction between the primary and secondary manifestations of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria on the one hand, amounting to Right and quasi-Right in the political context and to quasi-pseudo-Left and pseudo-Left in the religious context, and between the primary and secondary manifestations of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria on the other hand, which amounts to Left and quasi-Left in the religious context and to pseudo-Right and quasi-pseudo-Right in the political context. For in all such contexts the dominion of the one gender over the other ensures that nothing truly independent - and therefore contrary to - the prevailing ethos can expect to exist.
29. Consequently in the case of the diagonally ascending axis of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate society it must follow that primary and secondary modes of bound or free psyche are as much of the Left as their somatic counterparts are of the pseudo-Right, nothing right wing, whether 'pseudo' or otherwise, having any more place in the hegemonic church than anything left wing, whether genuine or otherwise, could possibly have a legitimate place in the subordinate state, exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding.
30. Likewise in the case of the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society it must follow, in complete contrast to the above, that primary and secondary modes of free or bound soma are as much of the Right as their psychic counterparts are of the pseudo-Left, nothing left wing, whether 'pseudo' or otherwise, having any more place in the hegemonic state than anything right wing, whether genuine or otherwise, could possibly have a legitimate place in the subordinate church, exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding.
31. That said, it follows that neither type of society can really countenance deviations from its prevailing ethos, for the stability of each is premised upon the ability of the relevant upper-class free radicals to fashion the lower-class masses of bound conservatives after their own image, albeit in reverse psychic or somatic disposition, as the case may be, and thereby not only preclude worldly tyranny or anarchy, the former more likely to follow from untempered chemical hegemony over antiphysics in phenomenal sensuality, the latter from untempered physical hegemony over antichemistry in phenomenal sensibility, but simultaneously bolster and legitimize their own respective overworldly hegemonies - metachemistry over antimetaphysics in noumenal sensuality, metaphysics over antimetachemistry in noumenal sensibility - so that unrest or revolt on the part of the subservient gender is overruled, if not neutralized, in relation to the importance attaching to worldly stability in respect of either the antichemical subversion of physics from the standpoint of state-hegemonic criteria or the antiphysical subversion of chemistry from the standpoint of church-hegemonic criteria, neither of which lower-class paradoxes would be possible without the overall hegemonic control of their upper-class gender parallels.
32. Therefore although it may be harsh on the antimetaphysical and antimetachemical upended genders under the hegemonic control of metachemical rulers or metaphysical leaders, the metachemical/antimetaphysical complementarity constituting a 'vicious circle' in noumenal sensuality and the metaphysical/antimetachemical complementarity a 'virtuous circle' in noumenal sensibility, their paradoxical fates have to be weighed against the benefit to the world that comes from worldly stability in compromise as, in the one case, the physical hegemony over antichemistry is precluded from anarchically leading, in male vein, to an undue emphasis on psychic freedom through being somatically subverted from below at the behest of metachemical freedom diagonally backwards 'on high', and, in the other case, the chemical hegemony over antiphysics is precluded from tyrannically leading, in female vein, to an undue emphasis on somatic freedom through being psychically subverted from below at the behest of metaphysical freedom diagonally forwards 'on high', with a consequence that, in the one instance, Christian anarchy becomes rather more the exception to the heathenistic rule and, in the other instance, heathen tyranny rather more the exception to the Christianistic rule, so to speak, insofar as in neither phenomenal case is freedom more than subordinate to binding and consequently ever in the shadow of the antithetical modes of conservatism which become the lower-class counterparts to the prevailing modes of upper-class radicalism, be they somatic in metachemistry or psychic in metaphysics.
33. Considered dispassionately, as from the noumenal standpoint of an overview of the phenomenal world, you cannot encourage freedom in the masses, because, quite apart from the irrelevance of somatic freedom to antiphysical males and of psychic freedom to antichemical females, all large numbers of people have, like animals, to be herded or husbanded or otherwise corralled and shepherded in such fashion that they do least damage to one another and to themselves; for too many creatures wandering if not stampeding everywhichway can only lead to violence or confusion - something, alas, which does happen from time to time and in some societies or so-called civilizations more than others, whether because they have degenerated from axial sense or never really acquired any, with consequences that are all-too-predictably tyrannical or anarchic, as the case may be.
34. But if the masses are to be protected from the consequences of too much freedom of one sort or another, depending on the prevailing gender disposition of any given people, then it is necessary that freedom should remain the principal concern of the few, the radical elites whose duty it is to control the masses both in their own and one another's best interests, insofar as worldly stability can only be guaranteed on the basis of axial consistency in either church-hegemonic or state-hegemonic fashion, and such stability is crucial if overworldly stability is to be assured and the hegemonic positions of females over males in noumenal sensuality or of males over females in noumenal sensibility stand the test of eternal validation - something it can only do in conjunction with the worldly masses and not independently of them, since the time-under-space subservient gender will protest its paradoxical secondary radicalism - somatic in the case of the antimetaphysical, psychic in the case of the antimetachemical - if the primary radicalism which controls it cannot justify itself in relation to the stability of the many in respect of worldly compromise between the nominally hegemonic and subservient genders in volume and mass achieved at the behest of the overall controlling influence of the metachemical in the case of noumenal sensuality or of the metaphysical in the case of noumenal sensibility, antichemistry only turning the gender tables on physics by dint of metachemical primacy, antiphysics only doing likewise to chemistry by dint of metaphysical primacy or, more correctly, supremacy - the former rooted in soma, the latter centred in psyche.
35. Consequently the world is intensely problematic to the point of unworkable without these controlling agents, these ruling and/or leading authorities, and the paradoxical sufferings of that section of the few who are obliged to live at cross-purposes with their gender actualities under the hegemonic gender can be eternally justified only in relation to the benefits which accrue to the many in consequence of such 'world overcoming' as ensues from the overall hegemonic gender having its way at the expense of the nominally hegemonic gender via its lower-class gender parallel who establishes the axial link that binds the conservative to the radical, the bound to the free in reverse image of its Maker, be that Maker somatically evil or psychically graceful, of Devil the Mother or, in metaphysics, of God the Father, the under-plane corollary of the one being the Antison of Antigod and of the other being the Antidaughter of the Antidevil.
36. Be that as it may, radicalism, like conservatism, can be either left or right wing, but will only be Left when psychic and Right when somatic, the progression from the conservative left to the radical left having to be weighed not only against the regression from the radical right to the conservative right but, in each case, against their respective subordinate complements in either soma or psyche, whose affiliations, ever at open or closed variance with their own, will remain 'pseudo' in both radicalism and conservatism.
37. Where each of these primary and secondary positions are paradoxically equivalent, however, is in their status with respect to either vice or virtue. For vice is not simply somatically free and virtue psychically so, although that is arguably the principal case. That which is psychically bound is the vicious complement to whatever is somatically free and, conversely, the somatically bound has a virtuously free psychic complement.
38. But besides the need to know whether something is primarily or secondarily vicious or virtuous, hegemonic or subordinate, it could, with reason, be argued that the only really vicious positions are somatically free and the only really virtuous positions psychically free, so that anything that was psychically bound, whether in noumenal or phenomenal sensuality, would be less vicious per se than viciously neutral vis-à-vis its somatic complement, whereas whatever was somatically bound, whether in phenomenal or noumenal sensibility, would be less virtuous per se than virtuously neutral vis-à-vis its psychic complement.
39. For just as there is a state/church distinction between free soma and bound psyche in noumenal sensuality, whether in respect of metachemistry or antimetaphysics, so there may well be a vicious/viciously neutral distinction between these upper-class representatives of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative binding which would contrast with the virtuously neutral/virtuous distinction, in phenomenal sensibility, between the antichemical and physical manifestations of conservative binding and pseudo-radical freedom, the axial antithesis between free and bound soma not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous immorality but, rather, of vicious immorality and virtuously neutral immorality or, more correctly in relation to an approximately neutral position, amorality; that between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous pseudo-morality but, rather, of viciously neutral pseudo-amorality vis-à-vis virtuous pseudo-morality. For on this basis virtue is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the sphere of the State than vice from that of the Church, even if a neutrality that leans one way or the other, and is effectively amorally intermediate between immoral and moral alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free conditioning factors, whether primary or secondary.
40. Likewise just as there is a church/state distinction between bound psyche and free soma in phenomenal sensuality, whether in respect of antiphysics or chemistry, so there may well be a viciously neutral/vicious distinction between these lower-class representatives of conservative binding and pseudo-radical freedom which would contrast with the virtuous/virtuously neutral distinction, in noumenal sensibility, between the metaphysical and antimetachemical manifestations of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative binding, the axial antithesis between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous morality but, rather, of viciously neutral amorality and virtuous morality; that between free and bound soma not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous pseudo-immorality but, rather, of vicious pseudo-immorality vis-à-vis virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality. For on this basis vice is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the sphere of the Church than virtue from that of the State, even if a neutrality that leans one way or the other, being amorally intermediate between immoral and moral alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free conditioning factors, whether primary or secondary.
41. Consequently we must distinguish the viciously neutral amorality of antiphysical and chemical bound psyche from the vicious pseudo-immorality of antiphysical and chemical free soma in phenomenal sensuality, distinguishing each of these from the virtuous morality of metaphysical and antimetachemical free psyche and the virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality of metaphysical and antimetachemical bound soma in noumenal sensibility, so that as one progressively ascends, in church-hegemonic vein, from the viciously neutral amorality of sin and pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality of grace and pseudo-punishment, so one counter-regressively ascends, in state-subordinate vein, from the vicious pseudo-immorality of folly and pseudo-evil to the virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality of wisdom and pseudo-good.
42. Contrariwise we must distinguish the vicious immorality of metachemical and antimetaphysical free soma from the viciously neutral pseudo-amorality of metachemical and antimetaphysical bound psyche in noumenal sensuality, distinguishing each of these from the virtuously neutral amorality of antichemical and physical bound soma and the virtuous pseudo-morality of antichemical and physical free psyche in phenomenal sensibility, so that as one regressively descends, in state-hegemonic vein, from the vicious immorality of evil and pseudo-folly to the virtuously neutral amorality of good and pseudo-wisdom, so one counter-progressively descends, in church-subordinate vein, from the viciously neutral pseudo-amorality of crime and pseudo-sin to the virtuous pseudo-morality of punishment and pseudo-grace.
43. Taking the diagonally ascending axis of church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria first, it should be evident that the ascent, in progressive vein, from bound to free psyche, is equivalent to salvation from negative amorality to positive morality, anti-blessedness to pro-blessedness, whereas the counter-descent, in counter-regressive vein, from free to bound soma, is equivalent to counter-damnation from positive pseudo-immorality to negative pseudo-amorality, positive pseudo-cursedness to negative pseudo-cursedness, the 'pro' and 'anti' forms of pseudo-cursedness.
44. Where, on the other hand, the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria is concerned, it should be evident that the descent, in regressive vein, from free to bound soma, is equivalent to damnation from positive immorality to negative amorality, pro-cursedness to anti-cursedness, whereas the counter-ascent, in counter-progressive vein, from bound to free psyche, is equivalent to counter-salvation from negative pseudo-amorality to positive pseudo-morality, negative pseudo-blessedness to positive pseudo-blessedness, the 'anti' and 'pro' forms of pseudo-blessedness.
45. For whereas that which is positive is either somatically free or psychically free, that, by contrast, which is negative is either psychically bound or somatically bound, and therefore the biased amoral complement to either an immoral (if somatic) or a moral (if psychic) order of freedom.
46. Hence whilst it is logical, on the diagonally descending axis, that positive immorality and negative pseudo-amorality should live together as two sides of the same noumenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between metachemically primary and antimetaphysically secondary manifestations of each type of vice, it is just as demonstrably logical that negative amorality and positive pseudo-morality should live together as two sides of the same phenomenally sensible coin, a coin divisible between antichemically primary and physically secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
47. Likewise whilst it is demonstrably logical, on the diagonally ascending axis, that negative amorality and positive pseudo-immorality should live together as two sides of the same phenomenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between antiphysically primary and chemically secondary manifestations of each type of vice, it is just as logical that positive morality and negative pseudo-amorality should live together as two sides of the same noumenally sensible coin, a coin divisible between metaphysically primary and antimetachemically secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
48. Verily, vice and virtue are only absolute antitheses in respect of free soma and free psyche, but in no case is there a parallel axial antithesis between vicious immorality and virtuous morality, but either between vicious immorality and virtuous amorality in state-hegemonic society or between vicious amorality and virtuous morality in church-hegemonic society, vicious pseudo-amorality being the church-subordinate antithesis to virtuous pseudo-morality and vicious pseudo-immorality the state-subordinate antithesis to virtuous amorality.
49. Consequently morality and immorality will never be found in church/state juxtaposition but only either morality or immorality of one kind or another and its complementary mode of amorality, amorality leading to morality no less surely than immorality to amorality on both primary and secondary terms in either church-hegemonic and state-subordinate or state-hegemonic and church-subordinate societies, given the requisite distinctions between 'authentic' and 'pseudo' modes of each.
50. But in every case where there is a moral/amoral or an immoral/amoral complementarity, whether in such fashion or the other way round, there will be either a virtuous correspondence between positivity and negative neutrality or a vicious correspondence between negativity and positive neutrality; for in no axial position can there be two positives or two negatives in any given class/gender juxtaposition but only a distinction between free and bound or bound and free, the free always being positive, whether viciously or virtuously, and the bound ... negative, whether viciously or virtuously.
51. Hence the viciously immoral positivity of absolute somatic freedom has ever to be contrasted with the viciously pseudo-amoral negativity of absolute psychic binding in the noumenally sensual context of metachemistry and antimetaphysics, and both of these, in axial descent, with the virtuously amoral negativity of relative somatic binding and the virtuously pseudo-moral positivity of relative psychic freedom in the phenomenally sensible context of antichemistry and physics.
52. Hence the viciously amoral negativity of relative psychic binding has ever to be contrasted with the viciously pseudo-immoral positivity of relative somatic freedom in the phenomenally sensual context of antiphysics and chemistry, and both of these, in axial ascent, with the virtuously moral positivity of absolute psychic freedom and the virtuously pseudo-amoral negativity of absolute somatic binding in the noumenally sensible context of metaphysics and antimetachemistry.
53. I believe I have used such terms as 'concrete ethereal' and 'abstract ethereal' in the past - see, for example, Revelationary Afterthoughts - in order to distinguish the absolute nature of noumenal sensuality from the absolute nurture of noumenal sensibility, and would like to revert to them now in order to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which exists between these antithetical manifestations of noumenal absolutism which of course operate in relation to what has been described as the elemental bias of the contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a most particle/least wavicle absolutism in the case of noumenal sensuality or, conversely, for a most wavicle/least particle absolutism in the case of noumenal sensibility.
54. Hence not only was the concrete ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with noumenal sensuality, specifically with respect to its metachemical component, but that which was defined as concrete in an ethereal way had reference to a context typified by elemental particles in most particle/least wavicle mode in which there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of particles as against wavicles and therefore in favour of soma as against psyche, with the emphasis very much on somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding, which, as we now know, is merely the viciously pseudo-amoral corollary of immoral vice.
55. Contrariwise, not only was the abstract ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with noumenal sensibility, specifically with respect to its metaphysical component, but that which was defined as abstract in an ethereal way had reference to a context typified by elemental wavicles in most wavicle/least particle mode in which there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of wavicles as against particles and therefore in favour of psyche as against soma, with the emphasis very much on psychic freedom as opposed to somatic binding, which, as we now know, is merely the virtuously pseudo-amoral corollary of moral virtue.
56. Similarly I have used such terms as 'concrete corporeal' and 'abstract corporeal' in the past in order to distinguish the relative nature of phenomenal sensuality from the relative nurture of phenomenal sensibility, and would like to revert to them now in order to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which exists between these antithetical manifestations of phenomenal relativity which of course operate in relation to what has been described as the molecular bias of the contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a more (compared to most) particle/less (compared to least) wavicle relativity in the case of phenomenal sensuality or, conversely, for a more (compared to most) wavicle/less (compared to least) particle relativity in the case of phenomenal sensibility.
57. Hence not only was the concrete corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with phenomenal sensuality, specifically with respect to its chemical component, but that which was defined as concrete in a corporeal way had reference to a context typified by molecular particles in more (compared to most) particle/less (compared to least) wavicle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½ in favour of particles as against wavicles and therefore in favour of soma as against psyche, with the emphasis very much on somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding, which, as we now know, is merely the viciously amoral corollary of pseudo-immoral vice.
58. Contrariwise, not only was the abstract corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with phenomenal sensibility, specifically with respect to its physical component, but that which was defined as abstract in a corporeal way had reference to a context typified by molecular wavicles in more (compared to most) wavicle/less (compared to least) particle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½ in favour of wavicles as against particles and therefore in favour of psyche as against soma, with the emphasis very much on psychic freedom as opposed to somatic binding, which, as we now know, is merely the virtuously amoral corollary of pseudo-moral virtue.
59. Anyone familiar with the above theories might reasonably suppose that one could proceed from the concrete to the abstract ethereal via the concrete and abstract corporeal, as though from will to soul via spirit and ego or, alternatively, from power to contentment via glory and form, but such would not, in fact, be the case; for not only are the concrete ethereal and the abstract ethereal absolutely antithetical, and therefore incommensurate, but the phenomenal positions of the concrete and abstract corporeal will not, as a rule, be independent of axial controlling agents in the noumenal sphere and therefore won't typify the world, excepting in the unfortunate event of the context of phenomenal sensuality being overly heathen in respect of an untempered chemical hegemony over antiphysics or the context of phenomenal sensibility being overly Christian in respect of an untempered physical hegemony over antichemistry, so that the one was characterized by a molecular-particle bias and the other by a molecular-wavicle bias, as suggested above.
60. Such, however, is not how things generally pan-out in practice; for a context of phenomenal sensuality that was overly characterized by a molecular-particle bias would be heathenistically aloof, in the concrete corporeal, from the possibility of Christian or, better, Catholic redemption, whereas a context of phenomenal sensibility that was overly characterized by a molecular-wavicle bias would be Christianistically or, better, puritanically aloof, in the abstract corporeal, from the possibility of Heathen redemption which, no matter how seemingly bad from a pedantically Christian point of view, is precisely what makes for the goodness of bound soma, specifically with regard to the antichemical mode of phenomenal sensibility, and thus for axial consistency and continuity in respect of state-hegemonic criteria, which, no matter how undesirable from a more genuinely religious standpoint in which the Church was hegemonic, at least guarantees worldly stability in the context of phenomenal sensibility and thereby precludes the likelihood and, indeed, inevitability of anarchy in consequence of an unduly physical lead of society in the interests of a knowledgeable free psyche.
61. Obviously an undue emphasis on free psyche of a physical order is no more desirable from an antichemical standpoint than an undue emphasis on free soma of a chemical order from the standpoint of antiphysics, the revolt of males against such an emphasis almost bound to lead to tyrannical opposition on the part of the chemically hegemonic, whether literally female or not, since objective oppression directed against psyche must ever be contrasted, in sensibility, with subjective repression of soma.
62. Therefore neither phenomenal sensuality nor phenomenal sensibility can be left at the mercy of their respective hegemonic genders, for whom, in volume over mass, either the concrete corporeal relativity of a molecular-particle bias in the more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles of the chemical would spell free-somatic heathen doom to the antiphysical or, in phenomenal sensibility, the abstract corporeal relativity of a molecular-wavicle bias in the more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles of the physical would spell free-psychic Christian doom to the antichemical.
63. As we have seen, what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a diagonally ascending order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both worldly and overworldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal sensuality, the antiphysical partially turn the tables on the chemical at the behest of the metaphysical over the antimetachemical in noumenal sensibility, so that instead of a molecular-particle bias in overly heathen vein the lower-class male actuality of more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles in the relative precedence of soma by psyche is able to establish a molecular-wavicle bias commensurate with an emphasis on psyche, even if such an emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's actuality (in relation to the more - compared to most) particles/less - compared to least - wavicles of the relative precedence of psyche by soma) of bound psyche as the corollary of free soma, except that now it is not as the subordinate corollary of free soma but, with the psychic assistance of that which freely pertains to the overall metaphysical hegemony, effectively hegemonic over free soma in consequence of the antiphysical subversion of chemistry.
64. Contrariwise, what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a diagonally descending order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both overworldly and worldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal sensibility, the antichemical partially turn the tables on the physical at the behest of the metachemical over the antimetaphysical in noumenal sensuality, so that instead of a molecular-wavicle bias in pedantically Christian vein the lower-class female actuality of more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles in the relative precedence of psyche by soma is able to establish a molecular-particle bias commensurate with an emphasis on soma, even if such an emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's actuality (in relation to the more - compared to most - wavicles/less - compared to least - particles of the relative precedence of soma by psyche) of bound soma as the corollary of free psyche, except that now it is not as the subordinate corollary of free psyche but, with the somatic assistance of that which freely pertains to the overall metachemical hegemony, effectively hegemonic over free psyche in consequence of the antichemical subversion of physics.
65. Thus through the paradoxical subversions of the nominal phenomenal hegemonies at the behest of their noumenal gender counterparts, neither phenomenal sensuality nor phenomenal sensibility remain contexts that could be simply defined as either concrete or abstract corporeal but, notwithstanding the basic persistence of gender influence appertaining thereto, become respectively abstract corporeal in terms of bound psyche taking precedence over free soma and concrete corporeal in terms of bound soma taking precedence over free psyche, with axial consistency established between the de facto abstract corporeal and the de jure abstract ethereal in respect of church-hegemonic society, and between the de jure concrete ethereal and the de facto concrete corporeal in respect of state-hegemonic society, each of which has its own subordinate orders of state or church, as already discussed.
66. Hence as salvation proceeds from the relative wavicle aspects of the abstract corporeal to the absolute wavicle aspects of the abstract ethereal in respect of bound to free psyche in church-hegemonic society, thereby progressing from sin and pseudo-crime to grace and pseudo-punishment, so counter-damnation counter-recedes from the relative particle aspects of the abstract corporeal to the absolute particle aspects of the abstract ethereal in respect of free to bound soma in state-subordinate society, thereby counter-regressing from folly and pseudo-evil to wisdom and pseudo-good.
67. Contrariwise, as damnation recedes from the absolute particle aspects of the concrete ethereal to the relative particle aspects of the concrete corporeal in respect of free to bound soma in state-hegemonic society, thereby regressing from evil and pseudo-folly to good and pseudo-wisdom, so counter-salvation counter-proceeds from the absolute wavicle aspects of the concrete ethereal to the relative wavicle aspects of the concrete corporeal in respect of bound to free psyche in church-subordinate society, thereby counter-progressing from crime and pseudo-sin to punishment and pseudo-grace.
68. Hence there is about the diagonally ascending axis from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility a progressive/counter-regressive ascent from more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles to most wavicles/least particles, as from a 2½:1½ to a 3:1 ratio in favour of psyche at the expense of soma, in which antihumanism and transcendentalism take precedence over nonconformism and antifundamentalism in church-hegemonic terms and antinaturalism and idealism over realism and antimaterialism in state-subordinate terms.
69. Contrariwise, there is about the diagonally descending axis from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility a regressive/counter-progressive descent from most particles/least wavicles to more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles, as from a 3:1 to a 2½:1½ ratio in favour of soma at the expense of psyche, in which materialism and antirealism take precedence over anti-idealism and naturalism in state-hegemonic terms and fundamentalism and antinonconformism over antitranscendentalism and humanism in church-subordinate terms.
70. Just as, from a strictly somatic point of view, it could be said that females get a raw deal on the diagonally ascending axis, so, from a strictly psychic point of view, it has to be said that males get a raw deal on the diagonally descending axis; for in no society is it possible to treat males and females exactly alike, as though they were equal, when the basic somatic/psychic contradiction of the genders - the Biblical 'friction of the seeds' - is such that the female can only have her freedom (in reflection of the precedence of psyche by soma in either absolute or relative terms according to class) at the expense of the male in sensuality or the male only have his freedom (in reflection of the precedence of soma by psyche in either relative or absolute terms according to class) at the female's expense in sensibility.
71. Such antithetical types of freedom lead, as we have seen, to antithetical types of society in which either somatic freedom is triumphant in female vein or, on the diagonally ascending axis, psychic freedom triumphs in male vein, and each of these societies will tend to trumpet its own brand of freedom as though there could be only one freedom, so accustomed are they to either being ruled, in female-hegemonic vein, by a somatic concept of freedom which, from the standpoint of morality, is commensurate with what is worst in civilization and therefore alone reflective of vice in both barbarous and pseudo-philistine terms, or led, in male-hegemonic vein, by a psychic concept of freedom which, in contrast to immorality, is commensurate with what is best in civilization and therefore alone reflective of virtue in both cultural and pseudo-civil terms.
72. But the enemy of that which is centred in virtue in both cultural and pseudo-civil terms is of course the society rooted in vice in both barbarous and pseudo-philistine terms, and such a society is scarcely worthy of the name 'civilization', since ruled by Devil the Mother rather than led by God the Father, and therefore disposed to somatic freedom at the expense of psychic freedom and at the cost, more pertinently, of psychic binding, which can only stand in a church-subordinate relationship to what is, in fact, a state-hegemonic situation reflective of the precedence of psyche by soma.
73. Such an enemy of moral virtue, rooted shamelessly in immoral vice, does not and in all probability cannot exist independently of amoral virtue; for such somatic freedom as accrues to noumenal sensuality is only viable as long as it is antithetically partnered, one might say, by somatic binding in the phenomenally sensible realm at the worldly base of the diagonally descending axis, so that there is an inter-class relationship between evil and good on the one hand and between pseudo-folly and pseudo-wisdom on the other hand, the hand not of primary but of secondary state-hegemonic criteria on the male side of the gender divide.
74. Therefore even in state-hegemonic terms, the male is secondary to the female and no more than a quasi-right-wing shadow to the Right who has to accept criteria stemming from and appertaining to the precedence of psyche by soma. He is, to say the least, 'bent'; for no male can escape unscathed from the subversion of his gender in state-hegemonic society, and few if any such pseudo-foolish or pseudo-wise males, notwithstanding gender transmutation in relation to either evil or good, can escape the taint of somatic deviousness which betrays what is colloquially termed a 'sonofabitch', or someone who is always likely to betray his gender for somatic gain, whether in relation to noumenal sensuality or to phenomenal sensibility, and thus whether from the standpoint of what could be no-less colloquially described as an 'antibum' or a 'prick'.
75. I believe it was Sartre who, in Existentialism and Humanism, said that existence precedes essence, but, frankly, I don't think he was speaking from a male point of view but, rather, as someone whose Protestant-derived worldview owed more than a little to state-hegemonic criteria in which the precedence of psyche by soma is institutionalized in such fashion that males get turned from the path or possibility of righteousness in sync with their gender actuality (of psyche preceding and predominating over soma in one of two class ratios, as discussed above) to one of gender corruption in which they play second fiddle, as it were, to females or to what effectively appertains to female-hegemonic and/or subversive criteria, and no longer become worthy of respect as males to the extent that they are only too ready to oppose male liberation from a standpoint rooted in female dominion.
76. Thus do they reveal themselves as the heathenistic enemies of God the Father (not to mention his antimetachemical bride the Antidaughter of the Antidevil) for whom religion is largely a closed issue and science alone worthy of respect or furtherance, particularly that aspect of science which most conforms with materialistic free enterprise, not forgetting its anti-idealistic complement in antimetaphysics, and is able to prey upon the weak and ignorant masses of what, in church-hegemonic society, would be called the meek, all the more ruthlessly and successfully so in proportion to the extents to which they have been democratized and therefore divided between various competing political interests which no longer or, rather, cannot hold the People to any degree of flock-like homogeneity vis-à-vis ecclesiastic authority because fundamentally in opposition to any such homogeneity, having come, by whatever devious or circuitous path, from that which directly stems from the manifold divisiveness of somatic freedom in Devil the Mother and has its parliamentary resolution in somatic binding, not least in respect of allegiance to the reigning monarch, but which, in republican transmutation, still manages to further political heterogeneity and to further weaken the masses in the face of the kinds of noumenally sensual exploitation stemming from somatically free enterprise which rain down upon them on a weekly if not daily basis, rendering them less capable of psychic redemption in proportion as they become more somatically deferential and merely the passive playthings of wilful licence.
77. One has heard the Catholic Irish rather graciously and, I think, fairly described as a God's people, but, boy! are they up against it at the moment, what with all the metachemical and antimetaphysical distractions and impositions which owe little or nothing to God the Father, never mind the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, and much if not everything to Devil the Mother together with her pseudo-foolish 'fall guy' accomplice, the Antison of Antigod, and these days more than ever on a synthetically artificial basis commensurate with a sensually superficial manifestation of cyborgization.
78. I am no blind humanist, whether bourgeois or proletarian, to have anything against the cyborgization of life in relation to the development of globalization, but I certainly believe that the sooner its sensual manifestation is augmented and even overhauled by a sensible manifestation commensurate with 'Kingdom Come' (as defined in previous texts), the better it will be for the entire globe, not just the West or the East, and the more genuinely universal life will become.
79. For at the moment it is still pretty personal, even under a polyversal heterogeneity appertaining to the divide-and-rule principles of noumenal sensuality, and worse from a divine standpoint than its being either personal or polyversal is the extent to which the impersonal masses of what were formerly more homogeneously the meek are being exploited and deflected towards those very state-hegemonic distractions which make universality all but impossible, all but impossible because it requires a precondition that, having been influenced and exploited by external factors, is neither quasi-personal in political vein nor quasi-polyversal in scientific vein, but properly impersonal in social vein and therefore in line for the possibility - indeed inevitability - of theocratic universality.
80. Such universality has always been more the hope of the faithful in Christ or, at any rate, the Catholic Church, than an actual fulfilment; for no matter how much they may opt for the grace of verbal absolution the meek have ever had to contend with the shortcomings of their worldly predicament in the impersonality and, for that matter, antipersonality of phenomenal sensuality, coupled to the impositions of a distractive nature which stem, by and large, from the combined class efforts of the polyversal and what shall be called the anti-impersonal, the former hegemonic over what could be called the anti-universal, the latter subversive of the personal at the behest of an overall metachemical hegemony.
81. Therefore not simply impersonality leading to universality, or, indeed, personality stemming from polyversality, but, more gender specifically, antipersonality leading, for the antiphysical, to universality, coupled to impersonality leading, for the chemical, to antipolyversality, on both church-hegemonic and state-subordinate terms, in contrast to anti-impersonality stemming, for the antichemical, from polyversality, coupled to personality stemming, for the physical, from anti-universality, on both state-hegemonic and church-subordinate terms.
82. But it is very difficult, if not impossible, for antipersonality to lead to universality, not least in the church-hegemonic terms of antihumanism to transcendentalism, if impersonality is being preyed upon by polyversality to such an extent that it becomes quasi-polyversal and in turn makes it all the more likely, if not inevitable, that antipersonality, preyed upon by anti-universality, will become quasi-antiuniversal and therefore as ready to defer to illusion as its female counterpart to evil.
83. Unless there is a new order of universality, coupled to a new order of antipolyversality, it will not be possible to bring both the antipersonal and impersonal back into line with church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria, and that is what has to be done if those of phenomenal sensuality are to be both saved and counter-damned from their worldly predicament to one that offers them not merely hope for a universal/antipolyversal deal in 'Kingdom Come', but the actual realization of that hope in practical and theoretical fulfilment.
84. That is where the Second Coming or, as I prefer to phrase it, equivalent to a Second Coming fits-in to the overall picture; for it is only through the advocate and embodiment of religious sovereignty that the people of phenomenal sensuality can ever achieve, via a paradoxical utilization of the democratic process to a profoundly theocratic/anti-aristocratic end, rights in relation to religion which will deliver them from the world more expeditiously and, ultimately, efficaciously than would otherwise be possible, and precisely because it will lead to the kind of system and moral order, broadly identifiable with Social Theocracy, in which the development of religious sovereignty will be given the sorts of synthetically artificial encouragement that would be commensurate with the attainment, later if not sooner, of global universality and, hence, global peace in unity with what has been described as the virtuous circle of noumenal sensibility.
85. Therefore Social Theocracy is the solution to the problem not only of the world considered from a phenomenally sensual point of view, but to the problem of that which exploits the alpha world of the phenomenally sensual from the contrary state-hegemonic and church-subordinate standpoints of noumenal sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, in a sort of alpha-overworldly/omega-worldly axial conspiracy against the meek.
86. For nothing short of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty will enable the phenomenally sensual to be delivered both from themselves and their exploiters to a system that, centred in noumenal sensibility, will dedicate most if not all of its energies to transmuting them from their lowly status in antiphysics and chemistry to the high estates of metaphysics and antimetachemistry on terms which, deriving from and pertaining to synthetic artificiality, will portend the possibility if not inevitability of global universality/antipolyversality in God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, thereby remaining aloof from anything worldly, not to mention netherworldly, as it brings the otherworldly to its righteous culmination via the sensible cyborgization of life to an eternal end in the omega points of a space/time continuum that will constitute the virtuous circle of an ultimate yang and yin or, more correctly antiyin.
87. That, in a nutshell, is the goal. But it remains a possibility that I believe can be technologically and ideologically actualized in the decades and centuries to come, as was never possible in previous centuries, not least because of the want of sufficient global and technological sophistication. In fact, it would not be exaggerating to say that, certainly in the West, there has never really been any great commitment to God the Father, not to mention the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, in the virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry, and for the simple reason that such a noumenally sensible commitment has never really been possible for want of genuine transcendentalism/antifundamentalism in the face of other and more basic orientations.
88. For what, in a word, was Christianity, but the death not of God, as might at first appear to be the case, but the death if not literally of Devil the Mother then certainly of the worship of Devil the Mother on the Cross, that Devil who was taken, heathenistically, for God, and made the subject of pagan sacrifice, being allegedly wrathful and something to fear. Did not the sacrifice of man to some Devil hyped as God end with the sacrifice of Devil the Mother's Son on the Cross? And is not the Immaculate Conception theologically justified on the basis that Mary symbolizes not an agent of God, miraculously impregnated by God as cosmic Creator, but the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother who attests to the fact that there is nothing anterior in the Cosmos, nor even in nature or mankind, to Devil the Mother, and therefore nothing or no-one that could impregnate her from above (a metachemical position) and make her the vehicle of a conventional female conception? What was worshipped as the Son of God by Christians was in effect the Son of Devil the Mother who, by his sacrifice on the Cross, put an end to the need of mankind to sacrifice to Devil the Mother, as the Catholic West passed beyond both cosmic and natural religion.
89. Henceforth mankind would bear witness, in Christianity, not to the literal death of God - for something commensurate with Eternal Life can never die, nor can we accept that what died on the Cross was literally the Son of God - but to the effective death of worship of Devil the Mother, whose earthly personification gave birth to a Son who would die that mankind could live independently of pagan sacrifice by bearing Eucharistic witness to His own sacrifice through the bread and wine of His sacramental body and blood, partaking of the death of paganism through the worship of the Crucified.
90. Therefore Christianity does not bear witness to the death of God on the Cross but to the death of the worship of Devil the Mother which paves the way for the birth of man, for the Son of Man (or the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother) who, following the resurrection, becomes in theological estimation the Son of God who sits on the right-hand side of the so-called Father, meaning not God the Father (in the metaphorical sense of psyche preceding soma, father preceding son, as the male actuality par excellence) but Devil the Mother, so that His ascension is akin to an implicit metaphysical omega that exists independently of an explicit metachemical alpha that His sacrifice made it possible for Christian mankind to relegate to the historical background of religious significance.
91. All that mattered was that there was a Son of God 'on high' who - distinct even from the concept of a so-called Sacred Heart of the Risen Christ that, in antimetachemical bound soma, can and does get roped-in to a perpendicular triangularity of Catholic decadence in which some symbolic analogues of eyes and ears constitute its noumenally sensual components - would remain on the right-hand side of Devil the Mother until his return to earth, in the guise of the Second Coming, when He would proclaim the absence of God the Father from Heaven, of metaphysical free psyche, and of the need to establish God the Father not only at the expense of mankind but at the expense of any remaining allegiance to Devil the Mother hyped as God, so that it becomes evident that it was in fact the sacrificial rejection of Devil the Mother by the Son of the Immaculate Conception, or the earthly incarnation of Devil the Mother, that makes God the Father possible, even if, things being what they are, such a possibility can be no more than latent during the ensuing era of man, of mankind, that necessarily follows, in Western worldly vein, upon the heels, so to speak, of the cosmic and natural deaths of Devil the Mother (albeit Anglican Monarchism to some extent revived the natural form of the latter in the course of its affiliation with the apex of the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic criteria, one step back from Catholic mankind that was only precluded from embracing Judaic cosmic-kind in unequivocally Old Testament vein by the persisting relevance of the New Testament, in respect of Christendom).
92. Thus must the Resurrected remain theologically peripheral to the world in anticipation of the time when His return to earth in the guise of a Second Coming is feasible by dint not only of the ensuing era of man drawing towards a close, but of the technology which man has developed being sufficiently advanced that some more genuine aspiration towards God the Father, coupled to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil for females, becomes possible - something it never was in the transcendentally implicit past when, short even of transcendental meditation in Eastern Buddhist vein, the Catholic West made do with verbal absolution for penitential contrition as its phenomenally sensual instincts went their temperate worldly way in effectively lowlander vein, the welfare of the masses as opposed to a monk-like elite being of paramount concern to a religion rooted in the many in typically Western fashion.
93. Christianity, then, bears witness if not literally to the death of Devil the Mother - for cosmic bodies corresponding to metachemical sensuality, not to mention antimetaphysical sensuality, still persist - then certainly to the end of pagan worship thereof, even as such a noumenally sensual entity, with specific reference to metachemistry, continues to be broadly regarded, in Old Testament vein, as God. But it bears witness to the death of paganism on both totalitarian and, later, liberal terms, broadly commensurate with Catholicism and Protestantism, just as the birth of man follows on both liberal and, later, totalitarian terms, broadly commensurate with bourgeois and proletarian forms of humanism to which first the French Revolution and then the Russian Revolution paid their respective tributes, and, indeed, the death of man follows from this on both totalitarian and, subsequently, liberal terms, broadly commensurate with Fascism (Nazism) and Capitalism, of which America is the latter-day exemplar of the liberal death of man par excellence.
94. What must come next is the birth not of the Devil, as conventional champions of the 'death of God' theory would have us believe, but the birth, through cyborgization of a sensibly synthetic orientation, of God the Father, coupled to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, so that, via the Second Coming, the teacher and advocate of such a birth, it becomes possible, for virtually the first time in the West, to champion something that transcends not merely man but the Resurrection of Christ to Son-of-God status and thereby enters into global co-operation and competition with the East, overhauling such Buddhist transcendentalism as transcendental meditation signifies in a penultimate, or mankind, stage of metaphysical evolution, but also challenging and, hopefully, liberating that other and more alpha-stemming segment of the East from the still-extant adherences to Devil the Mother hyped as God (not to mention Antidevil the Antimother hyped as God from an antimetachemical standpoint which, bereft of metaphysical freedom to defer to, gets roped-in, somatically, to the cosmic mode of perpendicular triangularity characterizing civilizations unequivocally rooted in Old Testament criteria) which persist for want of that temperate environmental advantage, traditionally characterizing much of the West, that made a Christian alternative to space/time heathenistic norms dominated by noumenal sensuality religiously possible.
95. But if the death of man has had to pass through totalitarian and liberal stages, the latter of which is still extant, then it cannot come as a surprise for anyone to learn that the birth of God will also pass from a liberal to a totalitarian stage as it evolves from its initial pluralism in what, in previous texts, has been described as the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' to a more noumenally sensible culmination in which metaphysics and antimetachemistry will represent the Beyond in non-triadic terms, terms closer to a monadic duality between God the Father/Heaven the Holy Soul coupled in metaphysical bound soma to the Son of God/the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and the Antidaughter of the Antidevil/the Unclear Soul of Antihell coupled in antimetachemical bound soma to Antidevil the Antimother/Antihell the Unclear Spirit, which will signify the virtuous circle of Truth and Joy coupled to a truthful approach to beauty and a joyful approach to love, together with Beauty and Love coupled, in secondary free psyche, to a beautiful approach to truth and a loving approach to joy as constitutive of the antifundamentalist complement, in antimetachemistry, to the transcendentalism of that primary free psyche commensurate with Truth and Joy in the church-hegemonic aspects of metaphysics.
96. After the totalitarian stage of the birth of God/the Antidevil, one might speak, in space-centre vein, of the Eternal Life of God/the Antidevil as the complete antithesis, on either count, to the Eternal Death of the Devil/Antigod, the Eternal Death of that which cosmically burns in a stellar/solar, clear/unholy alliance of noumenal sensuality in which Devil the Mother/Hell the Clear Spirit coupled to the primary bound psyche of the Daughter of the Devil/the Clear Soul of Hell rules over the Antison of Antigod/the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven coupled, in secondary bound psyche, to Antigod the Antifather/Antiheaven the Unholy Soul, which signifies not a virtuous circle but a sort of vicious circle of Ugliness and Hatred coupled to an ugly approach to illusion and a hateful approach to woe, together with Illusion and Woe coupled, in secondary free soma, to an illusory approach to ugliness and a woeful approach to hatred as constituting the anti-idealist complement, in antimetaphysics, to the materialism of that primary free soma commensurate with Ugliness and Hatred in the state-hegemonic aspects of metachemistry.
97. Thus one could speak of an overall noumenal antithesis between Devil the Mother/the Antison of Antigod and God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil which would flank, on an alpha/omega basis, the death of the worship of Devil the Mother/the Antison of Antigod, the birth of man, or the worship of mankind, the death of man, or the worship of the machine, and the birth of the experience of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil which has still to come and will make possible the definitive realization, in space centres, of noumenal sensibility, being that which logically leads on to it in the course of the synthetically artificial evolution, in 'Kingdom Come', of both metaphysics and antimetachemistry.
98. But that is a grand overview, somewhat wishful at present, of both death and life, and before there can be any possibility of the birth of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, coupled to their respective somatic corollaries, the death of man must proceed apace and enter a new phase, in certain countries, which encourages the prospect of cyborg resurrection from out the worship of the machine characterizing contemporary civilization.
99. There are, as already described, two main views of man over and above the simple generic concept of mankind (as lying somewhat in between the animal kind and cyborgkind), not only in respect of birth and death, but in terms of man as a sort of end-in-himself, which is rather humanistic and therefore physical, and man not as an end-in-himself but, rather, as an antihumanistic means to a new and higher end, what in Catholic tradition would be regarded as God in respect of a sort of implicit transcendentalism that dare not speak its name openly from fear not only of contradicting the explicit materialism - I say nothing of subordinate fundamentalism - of the Old Testament in regard to Devil the Mother hyped as God, but of revealing its shortfall in regard to transcendental meditation as the mankind stage or manifestation of God the Father/Heaven the Holy Soul, etc., that would parallel Christianity, if from a Buddhist standpoint, as the religion, centred New Testament-wise in Christ, of a people given, environmentally and for other reasons, to a mankind stage of religious evolution that necessarily overhauled anything rooted, Old Testament-wise, in either nature or the Cosmos, but just as inevitably fell short of anything centred, Social Theocratically, in the Cyborg, conceived, from a somewhat Nietzschean standpoint, as man's logical successor.
100. Nevertheless, even if Catholic man is not capable, exceptions to the human rule notwithstanding, of attaining to God the Father on anything like an explicit and genuinely transcendentalist basis, albeit still within a penultimate context of godliness that not only falls short of the possibility of its ultimate manifestation in the coming age of cyborgization, but exists in the shadow, as it were, of man, whether in terms of his birth or death, he is still a far cry, traditionally, from being an end-in-himself, like those males for whom the world is its own reward and whom we have characterized as physical, whether on humanistic church-subordinate terms or on naturalistic state-hegemonic terms.
101. There is therefore, in this narrower sense, antiman and man, the antiphysical and the physical, but also, in each phenomenal context, woman and antiwoman, the chemical and the antichemical, neither of whom can be left out of the overall worldly dichotomy between the phenomenally sensual and their sensible counterparts.
102. There is also, as we have seen, that which controls antiman and woman, being germane to the metaphysical and antimetachemical contexts of noumenal sensibility, which we may call godly and antidevilish, thereby classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal sensuality.
103. But there is also, as noted, that which controls antiwoman and man, being germane to the metachemical and antimetaphysical context of noumenal sensuality, which we can call devilish and antigodly, thereby classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal sensibility.
104. Therefore in returning to our axial distinctions between the meek and the righteous, phenomenal sensuality and noumenal sensibility, on the one hand, and the vain and the just, noumenal sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, on the other hand, it becomes evident that we are dealing, outside simple species definitions, with more than simply man or antiman. We are also dealing with woman and antiwoman, the devilish and the antigodly, the godly and the antidevilish, all of whom differ from one another on a class or a gender basis within contexts either ruled by sensuality or led by sensibility.
105. The concept of 'mankind', as a crass generalization for a two-legged species capable of thought, becomes rather irrelevant in the face of such manifold distinctions, as does the notion of 'human being' vis-à-vis people who spend much of their time demonstrating that, quite apart from the existence of human beings, they are more like doings or givings or takings, not to mention antidoings, antigivings, antitakings, and even antibeings who will be more or less human depending on the extents to which they are also, or alternatively, devilish or antigodly, godly or antidevilish, womanly or antimanly, manly or antiwomanly, as the case may be.
106. Man as a kind distinct from animals and plants is no more homogeneous than the other kinds but is capable of being identified with a great many different roles and circumstances, and while there are some who will more literally approximate to what is human, or humanistic, there will be others who just as readily approximate to what is antihuman, or antihumanistic, not to mention to what is antinaturalistic rather than naturalistic within antiphysics as opposed to physics, thereby suggesting a closer affiliation with the death of man than with his birth or worship.
107. There is nothing special about being human, or humanistic, in the estimation of God, or godliness. The godly are only really interested in the antihumanistic, the antimanly, and then to the extent that they can be saved to transcendentalism; for the death of man is a precondition of the birth of God, while the antidevilish corollary of godliness would evince a similar interest in the salvation of the nonconformistic, the subverted womanly, to the extent that they could be saved, in secondary vein, to antifundamentalism, passing from the death of woman under antihumanist subversion to the birth of the Antidevil under a divine hegemony in transcendentalism.
108. But those who are neither antiphysical nor chemical, neither antimasculine nor feminine, but either antifeminine or masculine, antichemical or physical - what can the godly and/or antidevilish do for them? Nothing! For they appertain to a different axis from that which reflects church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria, being at the worldly base of the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria, and far from the few wishing to save the many, as from bound to free psyche, and to counter-damn them, as from free to bound soma, it is the many who would like to damn the few and render them less somatically free in consequence, perhaps even rendering some of them more psychically free in proportion as they become counter-saved from bound to free psyche and thus partake in the worship of the birth of both antiwoman and man in phenomenally sensible partnership, the former primary in both state and church, the latter, duly subverted from below, no more than secondary manifestations of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria who consequently have no option but to live the life of man as a sort of slave to antiwoman, who is in turn a slave to the devilish who rule a freely somatic metachemical roost at the expense of an antigodly 'fall guy'.
109. No, 'mankind' is too vague a word to do justice to these much more complex and multiform operations of disparate categories of persons, some of whom are more or less human than others. There are those who are of God and the Antidevil, there are those who, though of antiman and woman, can be saved, no matter how intermittently or impermanently, to God and the Antidevil; and there are those, by contrast, who are of antiwoman and man, and others who, though of the Devil and Antigod, can be damned, no matter how intermittently or impermanently, to antiwoman and man. Saved, in church-hegemonic vein, from bound to free psyche, and damned, in state-hegemonic vein, from free to bound soma. Not forgetting, of course, the counter-damnation, in state-subordinate vein, from free to bound soma and the counter-salvation, in church-subordinate vein, from bound to free psyche, as in relation to the somatic or psychic affiliates, as the case may be, of the hegemonic factors.
110. Therefore just as there are godly and antidevilish types at work trying to save antimasculine and feminine types, as from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility, so there are devilish and antigodly types at work trying to resist being damned by antifeminine and masculine types, as from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility. The axes effectively pull in opposite directions, the diagonally ascending one up from the many to the few, the diagonally descending one down from the few to the many, and therefore they are completely incommensurate and antithetical in virtually every respect.
111. And, in overall historical terms, it could be argued that the death, at least in cosmic terms, of Devil the Mother leading to the birth of man, on both liberal and totalitarian humanist terms, has closer associations with the diagonally descending axis than ever it does with its diagonally ascending counterpart, in connection with which it is more logical to distinguish between the death of man and the birth of God the Father, as and when, transcending mere implicit hope of and allusion to the latter, the Second Coming equivalent brings his teachings into the world to lead the antiphysical, coupled to their chemical counterparts, towards the possibility of a new metaphysical dispensation which, hegemonic over antimetachemistry, will resurrect the phenomenally sensual dead in such fashion that they become the recipients of a degree and kind of Eternal Life commensurate with the most evolved and therefore per se manifestation of God/the Antidevil in the cyborg supersession not simply of mankind's more (compared to most) evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable), but also, and no less importantly, of nature's less (compared to least) evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable) and the Cosmos's least evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable) - approaches that, with good reason, have always been in the shadow of either man, woman, or the Devil, as the case may be, and are not capable of a truly representative stance or status in consequence.
112. Be that as it may, the ascending and descending axes differ so antithetically that even in sex and sport, about which I shall now expatiate at some length, there are major differences, not least in respect of the relationship of psyche to soma or vice versa, and the extent to which sport, reflecting such relationships, can be either church hegemonic and state subordinate or, by contrast, state hegemonic and church subordinate.
113. For it has logically occurred to me that sport is no more simply one thing or another, of the State or of the Church, than sex, since there is always a subordinate somatic dimension to church-hegemonic society and a subordinate psychic dimension to state-hegemonic society, no matter how much psyche and soma may typify the respective alternatives. Therefore just as in Revolutionary Afterthoughts I distinguished the Irish games of hurling and Gaelic football from their British counterparts rugby and association football on the basis of an axial distinction between the many and the few of church-hegemonic society on the one hand and the few and the many of state-hegemonic society on the other hand, I did not, I believe, exclude soma from the former context or, indeed, psyche from the latter, and therefore it can be maintained that each of the sports is indicative, in their different ways, of both a church and a state dimension, if with a bias one way or the other according to the axis to which the sport would seem to conform.
114. Therefore we can no more limit hurling and Gaelic football to bound and free psyche respectively than rugby and association football to free and bound soma, even though such ascriptions would arguably conform to what most characterizes each of these particular kinds of sport, bearing in mind their association with church-hegemonic criteria in the case of the Irish games and with state-hegemonic criteria in the case of the British games. Clearly there is a state-subordinate dimension to both hurling and Gaelic football, not least in respect of points or goals scored under the crossbar, which complements, from below, the points scored over the bar between the extended uprights in arguably more representatively church-hegemonic vein, as when a bound (in the case of hurling) or a free (in the case of Gaelic) psychic parallel is indicated in respect of the greater height attaching to such points.
115. Contrariwise, there is evidently a church-subordinate dimension to both rugby and association football, not least in respect of points scored (more usually via spot kicks) between the extended uprights in the case of rugby or goals scored via the head in the case of football, which complements, from above, the points scored under the bar or to either side of the uprights in the form of tries in rugby and goals scored via the foot in football in arguably more representatively state-hegemonic vein, as when a free (in the case of rugby) or a bound (in the case of football) somatic parallel is indicated in respect of the lesser height and/or greater depth attaching to such tries and/or goals.
116. But just as we cannot limit such games to church or state, even if a bias towards one or the other will more usually typify their respective axial integrities, neither, it seems to me, can they be limited to only one gender or gender influence, as though simply significant of a male input from antiphysics to metaphysics on the ascending axis or of a female input from metachemistry to antichemistry on the descending one; for if the Irish games are not entirely male to the extent that they, or some equivalent thereof, are often played by females, then it would be foolish to suppose that the British games were entirely female when more usually played by males. Or, rather, it would be as presumptuous to suppose that there was no chemical or antimetachemical dimension to the Irish games as that there was no antimetaphysical or physical dimension to the British games, irrespective of the extents to which both pairs of axially antithetical games remained either church hegemonic or state hegemonic which, in any case, is something that can apply from the standpoint of either gender, if on different terms, since according with either a primary or a secondary approach to each.
117. Frankly I like to think that, in association football, low goals scored with the foot should be somatically distinguished from high goals scored with the foot, whether in consequence of having been hit on the volley or simply struck with a top corner or arching descent in mind, just as low goals scored with the head should be psychically distinguished from high goals scored with the head, more usually in consequence of the player having to jump rather than dive, and if such a distinction is between an antirealist and a naturalist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel in the case of booted goals and an antinonconformist and a humanist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of headed goals, then who am I to argue? I see no other interpretation to put on the methodology of football scoring than one that confirms either a bound somatic or a free psychic orientation on both antichemical and physical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take precedence, in bound soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the general nature of phenomenal sensibility as that which, stemming from noumenal sensuality, signifies the just retort of the many to the somatically free antics of the few.
118. Likewise, in respect of the latter, I see no reason not to think that, in rugby, tries scored either side of the uprights should be somatically distinguished from those scored inside the uprights, while points scored between the uprights in consequence of a drop kick should be psychically distinguished from those scored in such fashion from a spot kick, and if such a distinction is between a materialist and an anti-idealist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel in the case of tries and a fundamentalist and an antitranscendentalist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of drop and spot kicks, then who am I to argue? I see no other interpretation to put on the methodology of rugby scoring than one that confirms either a free somatic or a bound psychic orientation on both metachemical and antimetaphysical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take precedence, in free soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the general nature of noumenal sensuality as that which, issuing from an overall female hegemony, signifies the right of the somatically free to have their centrifugal way on both loosely and closely objective terms.
119. Be that as it may, distinctions in hurling similar to those of football between low and high points between the extended uprights and low and high goals under the crossbar should confirm an antiphysical/chemical distinction between church-hegemonic criteria in respect of antihumanism/nonconformism and state-subordinate criteria in respect of antinaturalism/realism, even if this may be the reverse of the Gaelic football distinctions between high and low points between the extended uprights and high and low goals under the crossbar as confirmation of a metaphysical/antimetachemical distinction between church-hegemonic criteria in respect of transcendentalism/antifundamentalism and state-subordinate criteria in respect of idealism/antimaterialism, in that the male positions would be higher than the female and therefore truly reflective of a hegemonic position.
120. Either way, whether with an emphasis on bound psyche at the expense of free soma in hurling or, from the standpoint of noumenal sensibility, on free psyche at the expense of bound soma in Gaelic football, points between the extended uprights would, I argue, be more representatively church-hegemonic than those scored beneath the crossbar, even if counting for less in the overall points register than goals, and therefore one can only conclude that, in contrast to the British games, the Irish ones attach greater significance, morally and culturally, to whatever is scored above the crossbar than to its more mundane and, in effect, state-subordinate counterpart beneath it.
121. Of course, there will be those who say that I have got the Irish games the wrong way around, since hurling is demonstrably higher - the application of hurley to slitter, or sliothar, generally requiring that play proceeds at a consistently greater height from the ground to football where any running or dribbling-like tendency is concerned - than Gaelic football which, as the name suggests, simply parallels association football from the standpoint of phenomenal sensuality as opposed to sensibility, and is therefore more of a People's game than hurling. However, much as I would respect such an argument, I frankly don't believe that to be the case; for Gaelic football is no more foot-low, like soccer so often is, than American so-called football, and is in that sense also something of a misnomer, as indeed is the term rugby football for a game that generally proceeds on the basis of carrying and running with the ball - necessarily elongated or oblong to facilitate grip - close to one's chest.
122. Besides, quite apart from the more elevated standing of Gaelic football than the latter part of the name would suggest, there is something phallic-like about a hurley that, no matter how high it may be wielded, suggests more of a mundane status in relation to the world, while points scored with it between the extended uprights are more likely to suggest a correlation with bound than free psyche in respect of the more pressing need to clasp the hurley with both hands, especially since points scored between the uprights in Gaelic football can be via the clenched fist of a raised arm, and there is surely nothing more ideologically or morally elevated than the clenched fist of a such an arm - something to which the more noumenally sensible are invariably drawn, as to a subjectively centripetal omega-point of ideological resolution.
123. However, I am prepared to concede that I could be wrong in my estimation of the relative standings of hurling and Gaelic football (though virtually every stick-wielding game one can think of seems to appertain to a lower plane than its stick-free counterpart, cricket to rugby, baseball to gridiron, hockey to football, etc.) even if, despite or perhaps because of my long exile from Ireland, I don't happen to believe so, largely, I suspect, because I am confident that Gaelic football is not only axially antithetical on an upper-class basis to rugby football, but that a like-antithesis between Australian rules football and American football can be adduced which might well be respectively more radically Left and Right again than these antithetical manifestations, within the comparatively narrow confines of the British Isles, of the radical Left and the radical Right, the freely psychic and the freely somatic.
124. But if games like these are divisible, over and above class distinctions, between psyche and soma, then so, of course, is sex, which is not just a matter of coitus, of somatic intercourse, but also has a long and even in some respects honourable tradition of oral sex behind it which, so I believe, would stand in a broadly psychic relationship to its somatic counterpart, whether arguably more prevalent or not.
125. Obviously that can be logically reduced to an antithetical distinction between church- and state-hegemonic criteria; for if the one is to be identified with psyche and the other with soma, then oral sex will always stand closer to the Church and coitus to the State, irrespective of whether in hegemonic or subordinate vein, depending, one could argue, on the axis to which it is affiliated in any given context.
126. But we should distinguish, in any event, between oral sex in respect of church-hegemonic criteria and its church-subordinate counterpart, as well as between coitus in respect of state-subordinate criteria and its state-hegemonic counterpart on each of the rival axes. For in such fashion we will come to the conclusion that whereas it could be said that oral sex takes precedence over coitus on the diagonally ascending axis, logic compels us to the view that coitus would take precedence over oral sex on the diagonally descending axis, the former characterized by a psychic emphasis, the latter by a somatic one.
127. Be that as it may, it would not be my view that oral and coitus took exactly the same forms on each of these axes, in view of the extents to which they conformed to either an overall male dominion in church-hegemonic society or to an overall female dominion in state-hegemonic society, the lower-class female and male positions of each duly subverted by the technically subordinate opposite gender at the behest of its parallel overall controlling one, whether in respect of rulership or leadership.
128. Therefore much as I incline to the assumption that coitus would more typify a society in which the State was hegemonic rather than subordinate, I cannot pretend that that only applies to heterosexual coitus, since it seems to me that, whilst embracing coitus of a broadly heterosexual nature, especially with respect to the use of contraception, such a society would be more partial, in consequence of female hegemonic and subversive criteria in metachemistry and antichemistry, to both lesbian and gay modes of homosexual coitus, with lesbianism epitomizing the height of sexual vanity and male homosexuality the just retort, largely though not exclusively from a secondary state-hegemonic standpoint, of somatically subverted males to the hegemonic or subversive power of females which is fundamentally responsible, all along, for deflecting them from psychic freedom in relation to their gender actuality to either free or bound somatic emphases, according to class, which exist in the shadow of their respective female counterparts.
129. Of course, one cannot categorically presume that lesbianism is simply the product of a metachemical hegemony and male homosexuality the physical retort to antichemical subversion on the part of somatically bound females, although this may appear to be the most logical conclusion. What I am convinced of is that both lesbianism and male homosexuality can be noumenal or phenomenal, absolute or relative, so that we can distinguish, class-wise, between a solitary approach to homosexual coitus which may or may not involve some form of penetrative sex and a couple-based approach to it in which there will be penetrative sex in one of both cases between the consenting couples. Hence coitus need not automatically imply coupling, least of all in respect of metachemical and antimetaphysical somatic criteria, where it will more usually take the form of masturbation, nor need we suppose that any such absolute approach to sex necessarily excluded lower-class people or, conversely and more bizarrely, that sexual coupling was exclusively lower class.
130. But whatever the context, whether noumenal or phenomenal, homosexual coitus will, together with modified heterosexual coitus, including recourse to anal penetration, more typify persons affiliated to the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic criteria by dint of the extent to which such an axis is reflective of female dominion, whilst oral sex, although secondary to such criteria, will take a more somatic form than its church-hegemonic counterpart in respect of recourse on either an absolute or a relative basis to cunnilingus or fellatio, female or male types of oral sex which, when not heterosexually balanced, can take either a lesbian or a gay form on both one- and two-sided terms.
131. But if the axis descending from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility attests to a distinction between free and bound forms of coitus in state-hegemonic vein and bound and free forms of oral sex in church-subordinate vein, then it is on its diagonally ascending counterpart that one would expect oral sex, suitably reinterpreted in relation to various types of kissing, to take on more significance than coitus in relation to church-hegemonic criteria, and for a similar distinction between a phenomenally sensual and a noumenally sensible approach to both oral and coitus to make their appearance, not least in respect of a progression from the relativity of couples to the absolutism of individuals, as from the many to the few.
132. Frankly, I do not doubt that oral sex, regarded in this more elevated light, would be more characteristic of church-hegemonic criteria, progressing, as it were, from the psychic binding of loving couples to the psychic freedom of individuals bestowing solitary or one-sided kisses in a much freer, less personal manner. Also I do not doubt that, in a society characterized by male hegemonic and subversive criteria in metaphysical and antiphysical terms, not only will kissing be the principal mode of oral sex and even of sex, but baser forms of oral sex will be effectively taboo, as taboo, in respect of somatic irrelevance, as cunnilingus and fellatio and, indeed, the whole spectrum of lesbian and gay homosexuality, whether oral or coital. For such manifestations of sexual perversion stem, in large measure, from female domination of society, and where that is institutionally and culturally taboo, then so will be all forms of sexual perversion and, not least, deviation.
133. Even heterosexual coitus will be comparatively independent of contraceptive perversion of sex from its original propagative essence in respect of the reproductive organs, since the male who subverts the female allows himself to be sucked-in by and to free soma from a standpoint centred in bound psyche, preferring that coitus should not become the focus of sexual attention but remain more the by-product, as it were, of oral stimulation in a loving relationship, even, in some sense, the exception to the general (kissing) rule.
134. Of course, times change and other criteria impose themselves, as in relation to AIDS, or are imposed upon any given society from without via imperial influence, not withstanding the extent to which the overall death of man factors-in to a general withdrawal from reproductive sex in favour of pleasure or pain in connection with the utilization of various gadgets or artificial stimulants; but I cannot pretend that, as a rule, the godly are partial to acquiescence in sexual perversion or deviation, and would wish to condone activities which fly in the face of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, including undue emphasis on coitus of one type or another at the expense of oral sex, as defined above.
135. Frankly, there is no way that a society built around the lead of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil could allow itself to be implicated in acquiescing in sexual perversion or deviation, of which not only bestiality and paedophilia, but rape and self-abusive recourse to pornography must be accounted among the more extreme departures from sex, whether straight or perverse, between consenting adults, but would be obliged to condemn any such acts outright and trust to the goodwill and sense of the People to reject and refrain from them.
136. For it is not for the elect of God the Father to condone what stems, whether directly or indirectly, from Devil the Mother, but to deliver the People, as far as lies in their power, from such corruptions, in order that they may be all the more capable, when the time is ripe, of living as and like God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, whether this means on a basis that transcends relative sex altogether or on a basis that, more positively, appertains to noumenal sensibility in whatever synthetically artificial transmutations of psychic freedom come radically to pass in the progressive evolution of Eternal Life beyond the alpha-world, or perhaps one should say antiworld of antiman, in the omega points of otherworldly redemption, where sex for reproductive purposes would become a thing of the past in view of the extents to which civilization had been or was becoming sensibly cyborgized and therefore even more orally hegemonic and coitally subordinate than would be metaphysically or antimetachemically the case at present (where applicable), as can only transpire in the noumenal sensibility of the most evolved manifestations of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil in the definitive heaven of joy/antihell of the loving approach to joy which constitute, in their pure and impure, male and female, approaches to supreme being, Heaven the Holy Soul/the Unclear Soul of Antihell, both of which, in the achievement of their evolutionary perfection, will be as much beyond sex as beyond sport of any description, and therefore blessedly at peace with themselves in the virtuous circle of a gender harmony that will last for ever.
LONDON 2004 (Revised 2004-10)