Op. 135



Metaphysical Philosophy as

Revised and Reformatted Weblogs by

John O'Loughlin of

Centretruths Digital Media


Copyright © 2011 John O'Loughlin




1.          Cultures of the Triangle

2.          Struggling for a Free Europe

3.          Correcting Schopenhauer

4.          'Bullshit' of the 'Bullshit Reductionists'

5.          Clockwise and Counter-clockwise Cycles of the Genders

6.          The Natures of Aristocracy, Meritocracy, Bureaucracy, and Technocracy

7.          Rulers and Leaders

8.          Wind-Up vis-a-vis Digital Watches

9.          Adolf and Eva

10.     Zombie Shoppers

11.     A Superfluous Man

12.     Thoughts on the Probable Ethnicity of the Electric Guitar

13.     A Dangerous Ideology

14.     A Certain Commonness

15.     The One True Solution

16.     The Problem with England

17.     Race

18.     Secular Deviationism of Republican Socialism

19.     Causes and Consequences of the First and Second World Wars

20.     Multi-tasking

21.     Worst of all Possible Worlds

22.     More than Catholic

23.     Lost to Christ

24.     Towards a Superchristian Destiny

25.     Real Root of all Evil

26.     The Rivalry of Knowledge and Truth

27.     Too Much Choice

28.     Victors' Justice

29.     Thoughts on Woman

30.     Thoughts on 'Moloch'

31.     The 'Kingdom of Heaven'

32.     Refuge of the Park

33.     Metaphysical Evolution

34.     Exposing the Crap




Much as one may applaud the Arab peoples' endeavour to throw off the yoke of authoritarianism which has ruled them, on and off,  for several centuries, the prospects for democracy in the Middle East, although better than ever before, have still to materialize in substantive terms, and one feels that the biggest obstacle outside autocracy of one sort or another is Islam itself and its reliance, from a pseudo-metachemical standpoint, upon authoritarian rule, not least in respect of those Judaic factors, both metachemical and pseudo-metaphysical, in back of the Islamic extrapolation. 

There is, about the Islamic world and the Middle East in particular, a culture rooted or rather fashioned in relation to perpendicular triangularity, a culture in which Jehovah and Satan, signifying metachemical and pseudo-metaphysical cosmic bodies, are integral to the rule of a triangular situation in which Allah is simply the pseudo-metachemical factor in a cosmic-based relationship which does not allow for any independence from the ruling factors, any more than the planet Venus, roughly corresponding to pseudo-metachemistry, could be independent of stellar and solar factors in back of it, and this despite the proximity of Saturn, a planet I have long identified with cosmic metaphysics.  That exists, but always within an environment - call it cosmic - dominated by the stellar and the solar to such an extent that, in that context, there is no possibility of Saturnian/Venusian independence from such a domination, any more than metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry at such a primitive stage of existence could be independent of cosmic metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics.

Now when you have a tradition that is beholden to Judaic precedent, to the older tradition of Jehovah and Satan, within a triangular framework in which Allah is not only the younger factor but the nearest one to cosmic sensibility (more specifically pseudo-sensuality) that necessarily gets drawn into perpendicular triangularity in the manner described, the prospects for democracy, though by no means remote, can only be hampered by the authoritarian or, in the Moslem case, pseudo-authoritarian qualities appertaining to Islam itself, which has long been an excuse or justification for the existence of state authoritarianism. I am not saying that Moslems should abandon Islam, because that would be difficult if not impossible in the circumstances of being part of a triangular set-up.  They are necessarily fated to remain Islamic while such triangularity, in which their 'God' has a specific place, persists, even within a framework more open to democracy.

No, the only people who can do anything about such triangularity are, it seems to me, the Israelis, and precisely because they are the roots of its existence in a tradition stretching back to Abraham in which Jehovah and Satan were the principal foci of religion - the one ostensibly as God and the other as Devil.  Now to me this was not really the case, since I am a firm believer that Jehovah corresponds to Devil the Mother hyped as God (the Father) as the 'best of a bad job' starting-point for civilization as generally understood in the Judeo-Christian and even Moslem traditions, while Satan corresponds to a pseudo-God 'done down' as Devil, so that in neither case do you have anything literally resembling God or Devil but, rather, Devil and pseudo-God, with, when Islam came to pass and was obliged to enter into triangular partnership with the Judaic tradition, a pseudo-Devil, or pseudo-Devil-the-pseudo-Mother, hyped as God added to the overall picture, so that their 'take' on God was at variance with the Judaic version, though just as much an expedience in which the nearest thing to anything godly was the pseudo-God 'done down' as Devil, and not the two types of metachemical deity, the one corresponding to Devil the Mother and the other, in its pseudo-metachemistry, to pseudo-Devil-the-pseudo-Mother, as already stated.

Be that as it may, the Jewish Israelis are not so much slaves to their Judaic traditions as some people might think, and even if Jews could be accused of dragging their heels in religious terms for several centuries, if not millennia, in consequence of their ancestors having been forced out of Ancient Israel by the Romans, they have at least inherited a predilection towards democracy from their experience in the European diaspora in particular which distinguishes modern Israel from the majority of its Arab - and Islamic - neighbours, a predilection, I mean, that could see them using the democratic process, at some future point in time, to achieve religious sovereignty under Social Theocracy and thus to reject not only metachemistry hyped as metaphysics but in effect pseudo-metaphysics 'done down' as metachemistry.  For if they were to democratically reject their religious traditions by opting for religious sovereignty and the rights accruing to that, which I have gone into often enough elsewhere in my writings, they would not only be free of religious autocracy themselves, but would effectively be liberating Moslems from the persistence of triangularity by removing the cornerstones, so to speak, of their deference to metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics in back of their own pseudo-metachemistry, their own 'pseudo-God' that is really a pseudo-Devil roped-in to a triangle dominated by the Devil (Devil the Mother) and contemptuous, as are Moslems, of the pseudo-God (pseudo-God-the-pseudo-Father) who, denigrated as Devil, is the one thing approximating to anything male, never mind godly, in a triangle dominated, on both genuine and pseudo terms, by female entities, corresponding to Stellar/Venusian bodies vis-a-vis a Solar 'fall guy' earmarked, by the sanctimonious of either tradition, for denigration, pretty much, in contemporary terms, like a 'red under the bed' of a sanctimonious Republican in the American context.

Now without a triangle to be a part of, and an inferior part of at that, there would be little justification for the continuance of Islam and little hindrance, in consequence, to the utilization, in Arabic states, of the democratic process to a religiously sovereign end, the kind of end that can alone lead to 'Kingdom Come' in which metaphysics is hegemonic over pseudo-metachemistry not as God over the pseudo-Devil but as Heaven over the pseudo-Devil, given the distinction that would exist in this context between free soul and bound will, male and pseudo-female, time and pseudo-space, light and pseudo-heat, photonic wavicles and pseudo-protonic pseudo-particles, the supercross and the pseudo-superstar, extreme right-wing and extreme pseudo-left-wing criteria, St George and a neutralized (pseudo) dragon, the lamb and the (neutralized) wolf and/or lion metaphors for the 'end game', theocracy and pseudo-autocracy, being and pseudo-doing, truth or, rather, joy and pseudo-hatred or, rather, pseudo-ugliness, since the principal fulcra of each position - metaphysical element and pseudo-metachemical pseudo-element - would be free psyche and pseudo-bound soma corresponding, as noted above, to free soul (Heaven) and bound will or, rather, pseudo-will (pseudo-devil), with a 3:1 ratio of free psyche to bound soma in metaphysical grace and wisdom, and a 1:3 ratio of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma (the product in each case of male or metaphysical hegemonic pressure) in pseudo-metachemical pseudo-punishment and pseudo-goodness, the pseudo-justice, to speak in all-embracing terms, under righteousness, the righteousness of the metaphysically Saved whose Eternal Life will reign over the pseudo-Infinite pseudo-Death of the pseudo-metachemical counter-Damned for all Eternity - Peace over pseudo-War without End.

Such is the universal prospect of 'Kingdom Come', but it won't come to pass if both the Jews and the Arabs remain locked-in to perpendicular triangularity in the manner described.  It is really for the Jews to start the ball rolling by acknowledging what is true and likely, in consequence, to conduce towards that goal of evolution, which requires the rejection and refutation of all religious traditions, not least those rooted in cosmic science, and the thingful notion of God as 'First Mover' or 'Creator' when, in point of fact, such thingfulness, having a stellar correlation, corresponds to Devil the Mother as, quite proper to metachemistry, an entity in which soma predominates over psyche, thingfulness over no-thingfulness, and not only predominates over it in the ratio (3:1) described, but precedes it, as in metaphorical terms, Mother preceding Daughter, or free soma the bound psyche which is its negative concomitant, the supersensuous, as it were, preceding the subconscious.  Calling that 'God' and considering it male may be to sugarcoat the bitter pill of overwhelming female dominance of cosmic (and to a lesser extent natural) contexts, but it does not advance 'true religion' as that which is not scientifically, much less politically or economically, 'bovaryized', but able to stand-up for itself on its own metaphysical terms independently of metachemistry, with a view to demonstrating that religion is not about God but about Heaven, and that God in metaphysics is merely Heaven viewed from the outside, not a separate entity, least of all along the lines of the Judaic, Christian, and Moslem 'gods'.

Was it not Nietzsche who said that 'all gods are dead'?  Unfortunately, while that may have been or seemed so for him, it is not reflected in the world around us, least of all where Moslems and Jews are concerned.  Hopefully, one day all the 'old gods' will be dead, or no longer relevant, but that will be not in consequence of atheistic communism, with its dialectical materialism and proletarian humanism coupled to a radical social democracy, but in consequence of Social Theocratic Centrism and the prospect of 'man overcoming' that it holds out to the world as the way not merely to the Superman but, no less importantly, to supra-human metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical communes that will exemplify, in their gender-differentiated manners, the free soul of Heaven the Holy Soul and the bound pseudo-will of pseudo-Devil-the-pseudo-Mother in what will be the ultimate societal arrangement approximating to the righteous and the pseudo-just, the lamb and the pseudo-lion and/or wolf that what is best and most forward-looking in traditional religion has always been in favour of, and precisely in order that the 'kingdom' may 'come'. 

The triangle that now precludes that can be defeated, but it will take the equivalent of a counter-cupidian thrust, democratically and peacefully, to ensure that such an eventuality actually transpires. For those who are most pseudo-metaphysical in the Judaic world are the generality of male Jews who, whether Satanic (sun-like in relation to the Cosmos) or Davidian (orange-like in relation to Nature), are alone capable of opting for a 'prodigal son-like' return to metaphysics at the expense of metachemistry and with the corollary of a hegemonic triumph over pseudo-metachemistry, so that the gender positions are reversed, but reversed not in Nature, as with Moslems, nor even in mankind, as with higher-order Catholics, but in relation to the coming era of Cyborgkind, and an absolute antithesis, in consequence, to cosmic fundamentalism and, more particularly, materialism as the stellar bedrock of female concretion.



Those Brits and Americans or whatever who like to claim that Nazism and the Nazis were tyrannical, autocratic, authoritarian, dictatorial, etc., tend to conveniently overlook the fact that nothing short of National Socialism in Germany, least of all the liberal pluralism of the Weimar Republic, would have got rid of the Communists and the international threat to German unity and nationhood (still, in the 1930s a comparatively young phenomenon) that the German Communists (KPD) posed, not least with the help, wittingly or unwittingly, of the Socialists (SPD), and all this against the backdrop not only of the Great War but of the Versailles Treaty and the subsequent reparations and strictures under which Germany was obliged to exist, including territorial losses.

There would also be Nazis who claimed that, quite apart from the gradual dismantlement of the restrictions imposed upon Germany by the Versailles Treaty,  they, or Nazi Germany, were fighting not only for their own nation’s freedom but, more generally, for the freedom of Europe – a concept difficult if not impossible to comprehend from a Jew-dominated WASP axial standpoint in the Western democracies of, in particular, Britain and America.  But there is, curiously, some truth in the idea that Nazism signified a struggle on behalf of European freedom – freedom, not least, from Jewish domination and the threat, real or potential, of a Communist takeover with or without, though allegedly with, Jewish connivance, given the kind of star over pseudo-cross parallelism to mainstream Judaism which one finds in Bolshevism, or Soviet-style Communism.

Hence the struggle to free Europe from the stranglehold of Jewish culture (film, theatre, cabaret, jazz), finance, ideology, religion, etc., is not, as history attests, a vain boast, since, even with the eventual victory of the Jew-dominated WASP nations, the Nazis largely succeeded in achieving their goals.

Now if, in the future, Social Theocracy, or the Centrism of a Social Theocratic/Social Transcendentalist state/church fusion in which the church aspect of society (Social Transcendentalist) were to be served from what I have tended, in the past, to call the ‘administrative aside’ of the state aspect thereof (Social Theocracy), following a majority mandate for religious sovereignty from the paradoxical utilization of the democratic process in certain nations or societies with, traditionally, a church-hegemonic axial bias, like Eire – now if, I say, such a politico-religious ideology could be anywhere near as successful in ‘finishing the job’ and freeing Europe of Bibles, prayer-books, hymnals, etc., the contents of which owe much, if not everything, to the ancient Hebrews, ancestors of the Jews, then it will not have come to pass – as it surely must – in vain, but will contribute to freeing Europe from the last bastion of Jewish dominion – the monotheistic Creator-ism and its Christian offshoots, all of which pander not to true religion but to a variety of falsehoods rooted, Judaically, in cosmic science and precluding, by their very existence, any prospect of progress towards a ‘God’-free society centred, metaphysically, in the cultivation of Heaven through synthetically-encouraged soulful self-realization – the sole prerogative, were it to transpire, of males and not of their female counterparts, who would have to have been ‘bottled up’ or ‘boxed in’ or otherwise neutralized, in pseudo-metachemical vein, for metaphysical freedom to properly obtain on the kind of synthetically-artificial terms we are alluding to in connection with global civilization and the prospect of true universality.

Hence the ‘lamb’ and, a plane down at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at what would be the apex of the church-hegemonic axis, the ‘pseudo-lion’ and/or ‘pseudo-wolf’ (neutralized lion and/or wolf) metaphors which, equivalent to the proverbial Saint (George) and pseudo-Dragon (neutralized dragon) metaphor, amount to a metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical, male/pseudo-female, time/pseudo-space, eternity/pseudo-infinity, righteousness/pseudo-justice distinction – the very distinction that Creator-ism rooted, as it is, in the free, or metachemical, female, sadly precludes from transpiring, since the hype of beauty and love as god and heaven in metachemical free soma precludes what is metaphysically proper to heaven and god (as a mere reflection of heaven) in the metaphysical free psyche of  joy and truth from coming to pass, as it surely must if there is to be a ‘Kingdom Come’ and an end, in consequence, to the rule of the world by the Devil, i.e. Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father in what is the root lie of the Judeo-Christian tradition that panders, through free will, to beauty at the truthful expense, one might say, of free soul.

Ridding Europe from the stranglehold of Jewish Creator-ism will only be achieved when the people democratically opt, through Social Theocracy, for religious sovereignty, and thereby empower their leaders to begin the process of freeing them from the Bible and other such Creator-oriented texts that, in the Old Testament, encourage the ‘increasing and multiplying’ as the prerogative of metachemical free will as it strives, through beauty (and even love) to achieve a surrogate plenum through maternity, the only consequence of which is to perpetuate the world and to keep males enslaved to it at the expense of otherworldly salvation, or deliverance to a metaphysical hegemony over pseudo-metachemistry, pretty much, to add yet another metaphor, like a chopper over a jump jet (pseudo-jet). 

But, of course, I am not alluding to males in general, least of all those who signify an equivocal hegemony of physics over pseudo-chemistry at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the foot (barring radical Social Democracy) of the state-hegemonic axis, but solely to the pseudo-physical under the equivocal hegemony of the (Marian) chemical, the ‘last’, in gender subordination, who will only become ‘first’, in unequivocal hegemonic dominion over their female counterparts, when they democratically opt for salvation through Social Theocracy, and Social Theocracy is then legally in a position to begin the long and difficult task of instituting what, to all intents and purposes, would amount to ‘Kingdom Come’, a society characterized not by the dominion of classful science, nor of occupational economics or sexual politics, but by ethnic religion, which requires not class, still less occupation or gender, but race as its ethnic precondition, without which there can be no accommodation of the metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical ‘heights’ that can alone make for the true freedom of males from female dominion.



Schopenhauer speaks, somewhat one-sidedly in my opinion, of the human body as the 'objectification of the Will'.  Having diagnosed the Will as metachemical, I would say that it (the body) is rather the objectification of the Will in the case of adult females, with a secondary (devolved) objectification of the Spirit which tends to come to fruition with the surrogate plenum (for a creature who is fundamentally vacuous) of maternity.

As for males, I would argue, contrary to Schopenhauer, that, being evolutionary rather than devolutionary in character, the male body is primarily the subjectification of the Ego and secondarily (evolved) the subjectification of the Soul, both of which appertain to psyche as opposed, like the Will and the Spirit, to soma, which is why one should not speak, echoing Schopenhauer, of the male body as the objectification of either the Ego or the Soul, since their respective attributes, Form and Contentment, are variously subjective and contrast, qualitatively and essentially, with the variously objective (apparent and quantitative) attributes of Will and Spirit, which are Power and Glory.

Thus the female body is primarily an expression (objectification) of Power and secondarily an expression (objectification) of Glory, whereas the male body is primarily an impression (subjectification) of Form and secondarily an impression (subjectification) of Contentment.  It is precisely the want or inherent absence of Form and Contentment in the female that makes for Power and Glory as contrary expressions (noumenal and phenomenal) of Will and Spirit.  And when this impacts upon the male, as it often does, his Form and Contentment are severely compromised; in fact, they become bound to a pseudo-Will and a pseudo-Spirit that, according with pseudo-free soma under female free somatic pressure, translate into pseudo-Power and pseudo-Glory, the pseudo-Power and pseudo-Glory of pseudo-metaphysical and pseudo-physical subordination to metachemistry and chemistry respectively in which the semblance of objectivity, which is actually pseudo-subjective, must needs continue to play 'second fiddle', both in terms of an inferior ratio of 'free' to 'bound' and the 'pseudo' nature of what is, after all, the product of female pressure and converse of male gender norms, to a female hegemony rooted in objectivity and, hence, through the objectification of Will and Spirit, the triumph of Power and Glory.

For 'Thine is the Power and the Glory' is not a prayer that accords with anything male and centred, in contrast to the above, in Form and Contentment, but, on the contrary, one that acknowledges the triumph (or reality) of female dominance over males world-without-end. It is, in fact, contrary to the spirit of Christ, who taught liberation from the world … of female dominion through the Form and Contentment that comes via 'turning the other cheek' and simply being 'true to oneself' as a male.



Hail ye 'bullshit reductionists' ... no I don't want to paraphrase Nietzsche.  Let's do it my way.

Those who constantly reduce everything they disagree with or consider erroneous to the anti-masculine status - all too prevalent in a female-dominated age like ours - of 'bullshit' are not only guilty of crass reductionism on a par with the proletarian humanist obsession with bourgeois humanism, not to mention, in that context, with the element of physics (equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-chemistry) at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, but evidently don't even do justice to that, since the pseudo-chemical corollary of physics, arguably more congenial to novelists than to essayists, could and, in my opinion, should also be considered, and on terms, approximately equivalent to the aforementioned epithet, of 'pseudo-cowpiss', given its pseudo-female status as a constrained (bound) rather than free objectivity under the masculine subjectivity of physics.

Then, of course, there is the chemical/pseudo-physical distinction back across the lower-order axial divide of what, in equivalent though disparate terms, could be called 'cowpiss' and 'pseudo-bullshit', whereof we are alluding to feminine objectivity and masculine or, rather, pseudo-masculine pseudo-subjectivity,  not to mention the metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical distinction, polar to physics/pseudo-chemistry, between, say, 'cowpuss' (or 'supercowpiss') and 'pseudo-bullgas' (or 'pseudo-superbullshit'), which is less feminine and pseudo-masculine than superfeminine (diabolic) and pseudo-supermasculine (pseudo-divine) in its noumenal, as opposed to phenomenal, orders of objectivity and pseudo-subjectivity. 

But let us be comprehensively exacting and not forget to mention, across the upper-order axial divide, the metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical distinction between 'bullgas' (or 'superbullshit') and 'pseudo-cowpuss' (or 'pseudo-supercowpiss') - this latter dichotomous pairing as polar, in its supermasculine (divine) noumenal subjectivity and pseudo-superfeminine (pseudo-diabolic) noumenal pseudo-objectivity, to the 'cowpiss' and 'pseudo-bullshit' of chemistry/pseudo-physics as is the former dichotomous pairing, viz. 'cowpuss' and 'pseudo-bullgas', to the aforementioned 'bullshit' and 'pseudo-cowpiss' of physics/pseudo-chemistry, which share with chemistry/pseudo-physics a mere phenomenal, or corporeal, standing.

Now, presumably, in an intelligent world rather than one governed or characterized by reductionist clowns, all of these denigrative terms would have if not an equal place then, at any rate, an unequal one in the overall scheme of things, and people would be less partial to brand anything they dislike or disagree with as 'bullshit' when, in point of fact, it might, like the novel, have more to do with 'pseudo-cowpiss' or even 'cowpiss', like pseudo-drama, or poetic 'pseudo-bullshit', not to mention dramatic 'cowpuss' or pseudo-poetic 'pseudo-bullgas' and, lest we overlook metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry, aphoristic 'bullgas' or pseudo-prosaic (short as opposed to novelistic long prose) 'pseudo-cowpuss'.

Bah! these practitioners of 'bullshit reductionism' are doubtless more guilty than anybody else of 'bullshit'! If there are others who 'piss me off', and still others who 'cheese (puss) me off', all I can say is these people 'brown me off', or something to that effect, except, of course, when what they are denigrating really is 'bullshit' and therefore approximates, in literary terms, to the essayistic prolixity of pseudo-philosophy, not to mention a certain male-oriented approach to association football, that quintessentially physical/pseudo-chemical sport down at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the foot, to all liberal intents and purposes, of the state-hegemonic axis.



Normally the female operates on a clockwise basis descending, in devolution, from the fulcrum of metachemistry in beautiful free will to the fulcrum of chemistry in proud free spirit, as from power to glory, via the 'once-bovaryized' free spirit of metachemical love, returning via the 'once-bovaryized' free will of chemical strength to her effective starting-point in the beauty of metachemical free will in a cyclical regression from the noumenal to the phenomenal, as from the objective ethereal (metachemistry) to the objective corporeal (chemistry), all of which has the effect of precipitating the male into a counter-clockwise ascent, in evolution, from the fulcrum of physics in knowledgeable free ego to the fulcrum of metaphysics in joyful free soul, as from form to contentment, via the 'once-bovaryized' free soul of physical pleasure, to return via the 'once-bovaryized' free ego (superego or, better, superconsciousness) of metaphysical truth to his effective starting-point in the knowledge of physical free ego in a cyclical progression from the phenomenal to the noumenal, as from the subjective corporeal (physics) to the subjective ethereal (metaphysics).

Hence counter-clockwise cycling in consequence of clockwise cyclical pressure from the free female is the male's evolutionary alternative to female devolution, even though both genders are subject, on a subordinate pseudo-gender basis, to the hegemonic sway of the opposite gender, as when pseudo-males defer to metachemical beauty/love and chemical strength/pride from pseudo-metaphysical and pseudo-physical standpoints in pseudo-truth/joy in the one case and pseudo-knowledge/pleasure in the other, in what could be described as a kind of dotted-line, or secondary, clockwise cycling that would contrast with any counter-clockwise secondary cycling of the female as pseudo-female vis-a-vis her male hegemonic partner in relation to a pseudo-strength/pride subordination to knowledge/pleasure in the one case, that of pseudo-chemistry under physics, and to a pseudo-beauty/love subordination to truth/joy in the other case, that of pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics, neither of which pseudo-female positions would bear any resemblance to the genuine beauty/love of metachemistry or strength/pride of chemistry - any more than the pseudo-truth/joy or pseudo-knowledge/pleasure of their pseudo-male counterparts, alluded to above, would bear any resemblance to the genuine truth/joy of metaphysics or knowledge/pleasure of physics.

Be that as it may, the idea, apparently deriving, if we are to believe Hollingdale, from Nietzsche, that the female is merely base and the male evil does not accord, it seems to me, with the above theory, but strikes me, as I believe I have written before elsewhere in my voluminous writings, as being the converse of the actual case, since it is precisely because of the evil free will (positive) of the metachemical female that the male is brought low from his idealistic perch or, better, transcendent ideals in metaphysics to the baser realm of physics wherein the knowledge of free ego can so easily be diverted, through chemical seduction, from the path of dispassionate knowledge into the pseudo-knowledge, or carnal knowledge, of pseudo-physical pseudo-free will in relation to coitus, thereby removing him even from the counter-clockwise cycle to which he is, perforce, more inherently partial as a male and duly subordinating him, as a pseudo-male, to the governance, as it were, of maternal pride and strength in chemistry, whereof the female is prime mover.

Therefore the beauty that wars on pseudo-truth/joy through love is soon to descend from metachemistry to chemistry and war on pseudo-knowledge/pleasure through strength in the interests, primarily, of maternal pride.  Short of neutralizing the female, there is no way that the legitimate male aspirations from the phenomenal to the noumenal, as from corporeal subjectivity in knowledge/pleasure to ethereal subjectivity in joy/truth, could bear permanent fruit and remain eternally beholden to truth through joy, to godliness through Heaven.  Until  - if ever - he elects to neutralize the female he will continue to remain her counter-clockwise plaything who can so ruthlessly be picked off by beauty and brought low not merely to knowledge but, via pseudo-truth/joy deferring to beauty/love, to a pseudo-pleasure and pseudo-knowledge deferential to pride and strength, and thus to the maternal resolution of the female in woman.

Men are not born of God, or in the image of God; neither are they born, through folly, in sin: they are born, through pseudo-evil, in the strength of Woman the Mother, and only aspire, from humble corporeal beginnings, towards that heavenly goal which, releasing them from 'the world', would be the resolution of all counter-clockwise cyclical striving were they not simultaneously subject to female predation in the interests of offspring.  That is the truth, and it owes nothing to the Nietzschean notion of base women and evil men, still less to the Biblical notion of the precedence of a ready-made (in the image of God!) metaphysical male whose Creator subsequently, at his request, makes a creature who seduces him from his Edenic innocence and brings him low, to walk the world as the proverbial slave of a slave which Baudelaire aptly describes man as, that same Baudelaire, hated by conventional religious types, who was one of the few men of his time - or indeed of any time - who also had a correct sense of moral evil and of the female's role in its perpetuation, a sense that owes nothing to the contemporary concept of evil as that which causes harm to others - as do storms and earthquakes - even though, in relation to joy and truth, or to an insufficiently evolved and independent joy and truth, that is exactly what beauty and love do, to the lasting detriment of the male who, having freed himself, no matter how imperfectly or intermittently, from pseudo-knowledge and pseudo-pleasure, must start the noble task, all over again, of ascending from knowledge and pleasure to joy and truth, the latter of which is simply the godly (outer) reflection of the former which, as Heaven, is the true end of male striving to overcome his humble mundane origins in woman and become divine, truly the God who or, rather, which (for it is after all psychically universal) resides in Heaven.



Since I am always writing about what I call the inter-cardinal axial compass these days, I should like to suggest some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-metaphysics under metachemistry at the north-west point of the said compass – namely pseudo-theocracy under autocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called aristocracy.

Likewise some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-chemistry under physics at the south-east point of the said compass – namely pseudo-democracy under plutocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called meritocracy.

Thus what I have tended to identify with state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria would be comprised, in overall terms, of a female polarity between autocracy and meritocracy, and a male polarity between aristocracy and plutocracy, as between metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry in the one case, that of primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, and pseudo-metaphysics and physics in the other case, that of secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria.

As for the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching, by contrast, from the south-west to the north-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass, I should like to suggest some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-physics under chemistry at the south-west point of the said compass – namely pseudo-plutocracy under democracy, the former of which can – and should – be called bureaucracy.

Likewise some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics at the north-east point of the said compass – namely pseudo-autocracy under theocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called technocracy.

Thus what I have tended to identify with church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria would be comprised, in overall terms, of a male polarity between bureaucracy and theocracy, and a female polarity between democracy and technocracy, as between pseudo-physics and metaphysics in the one case, that of primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria, and chemistry and pseudo-metachemistry in the other case, that of secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria.

Baudelaire saw woman as a paradoxical cross between a tyrant and a slave – in other words (mine), as a combination of autocrat and democrat, requiring of the subordinate male (pseudo-male) an aristocratic deference towards autocracy and/or a bureaucratic deference towards democracy.  Such deferences would aptly describe the nature, it seems to me, of a ‘sonofabitch’, as one who follows the female lead or, rather, rule in dotted-line clockwise terms.

Be that as it may, there are also what could be called pseudo-slaves and pseudo-tyrants where subordinate female (pseudo-female) positions to a male hegemony are concerned, and I venture to suggest that the pseudo-chemical deference to physics would imply a meritocratic (pseudo-democratic) deference to plutocracy on the pseudo-female’s part, while the pseudo-metachemical deference to metaphysics would imply a technocratic (pseudo-autocratic) deference to theocracy on her part, making each of them akin to what could be called, in keeping with the sentiment of the above, a ‘daughterofabastard’, or one who follows the male rule or, rather, lead in dotted-line counter-clockwise terms.



Hitler is a prime example of  the equivalent of Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father, i.e. of the age-old male accommodation, beginning with the ancient Hebrews and extending into the Judeo-Christian West, of female domination in order to sugarcoat the bitter pill, as it were, of such a cosmos-derived situation with a covering of male sweetness, whether in terms of autocracy hyped as theocracy, the Cosmos hyped as the Universe (if not as universal), metachemistry hyped as metaphysics, beauty as truth, or, indeed, where men like Hitler are concerned, a ruler hyped as a leader.

Let me say at once that true leaders are not like Hitler or indeed any number of other autocratic dictators; they do not have soldiers marching around in columns and squares in preparation for a new war, only later to propel them, like fattened sheep or pigs, into the slaughter of their imperial adventures.  On the contrary, they encourage people, and males in particular, to be true to themselves and cultivate their mind and/or soul through education and culture.  They are akin to teachers or artists or philosophers, and he who is or becomes via them his own leader, namely a progressive artist or writer, has no need of others to lead him, least of all towards the opposite of self-determination and self-cultivation.  Only the broad masses require leaders or, for that matter, rulers, depending on their national or ethnic dispositions – the former to encourage what could be called psychic expansion, the latter somatic expansion, as in body-building and warmongering aggression.

On the other hand, the perfect corollary of a ruler is a pseudo-leader, or someone who will encourage, especially in the male population, psychic contraction (obedience) to the rule of somatic expansion, contrary to the male grain.  Likewise, the perfect corollary of a leader is a pseudo-ruler, or somebody who will encourage, especially in the female population, somatic contraction (obedience) to the lead of psychic expansion, contrary to the female grain.  The one combination, that of rulers and pseudo-leaders, tends to make for aggressive state-hegemonic societies.  The other combination, that of leaders and pseudo-rulers, tends to encourage passive church-hegemonic societies.  Only the latter can have any inkling, through male-hegemonic divine criteria, of heaven.  The former, for all its religious boasts, simply results in the living embodiment of hell, which is the diabolic.



Wind-up watches are clockwise, like free females, whether as square-faced metachemical parallels or as round-faced pseudo-metaphysical parallels – the former female and the latter male or, rather, pseudo-male, as in the case of boxing-ring ‘sonsofbitches’, whose pseudo-subjectivity makes for pseudo-convergence (though not, I have logically argued, without divergent pressures, including the square shape of the boxing ring, ‘from above’, as from a metachemical female or female equivalent).

Digital watches, on the other hand, are counter-clockwise, like free males, in the right-sided digital increments of seconds and minutes vis-a-vis hours, as though in ascending motion, and are therefore antithetical to wind-up watches, whether as round-faced metaphysical parallels especially suited to males or as square-faced pseudo-metachemical parallels more suited, in their pseudo-objectivity and pseudo-divergence, to pseudo-females, as though indicative of a dotted-line deference, within counter-clockwise parameters, to what is properly male and therefore convergently subjective, symptomatic of evolutionary rather than of counter-devolutionary criteria.

Ideally, digital watches should be worn on the right wrist since, like anything sensibly male, they indicate a right-wing alternative to the fundamentally left-wing, because divergently objective, nature of conventional wind-up watches, especially, one could argue, square-faced ones, and such a right-wing alternative, favouring what is subjective, will always be associated with psyche as opposed to soma, mind as opposed to body, church as opposed to state, the centripetal as opposed to the centrifugal, evolution as opposed to devolution, and male as opposed to female values.

Further to the above, I should add that digital watches signify, with their right-sided digit momentum, rising as opposed, like conventional watches, falling time, and are therefore centred truthfully in time as opposed, like wind-ups, to a beautiful rootedness in space, from the clock-face of which the hands devolve in clockwise fashion.  Frankly, it is logically inconceivable that a self-respecting male could possibly prefer a wind-up watch to a digital one, and it would be a paradoxical kind of male who, having opted to sport a digital watch, made a habit of taking a clockwise walk through his local park, like any naive sonofabitch!

As a further footnote to the above, I should also add that watches of whichever sort can also be rectangular or elliptical, having a relative rather than an absolute design, and would be more suitable, one can only surmise, to lower-order types who shy away, in their corporeal dispositions, from ethereal criteria properly germane to space and time.



These days instead of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden surrounded by a wrathful God, we have Adolf and Eva in the Berghof in Berchestgarten surrounded by the heavenly mountains of the Obersalzberg in the fairly Nietzschean – some would say Old Testament-like – beginnings of … global civilization, with its machine-oriented and camera-fuelled post-humanist drive towards the cyborgization of human life.



I’ve always detested London for its soullessness – never more evident than in the West End in large stores.  One feels nothing in these places except a zombie-like complicity in product-oriented curiosity.  It may be no exaggeration to say that shoppers or browsers in shops are akin to the ‘living dead’, who can only be ‘resurrected’, via ‘Kingdom Come’, in relation to an entitlement to ‘dope’ of one kind or another, thus removing them from product-oriented optical curiosity to substance-oriented inner visions and self-transcendence – at least in the case of males.  Whew!  What a prospect!  What a task!  Completely against the contemporary grain.



I once wrote in, I think it was, ‘Between Truth and Illusion’ (1977) that there are no ‘superfluous men’.  I was wrong.  I forgot about myself.  As a solitary bohemian intellectual in lonely exile in north London I am one of the most superfluous of men, one who, having been rejected by both parents in their separate ways,  not only has no family (not that I want one of my own now), but no recognition for what I do and have done for several decades – namely my philosophy and writings generally, not to mention my music (understandable really, because an aside to my principal literary tasks), art, photography, literary transcripts, websites, etc. which have kept me preoccupied and relatively free of guilt.

Yes, I am hard-working and have achieved a lot, considering my disadvantaged circumstances, but compared to some prominent Jews like Stephen Fry or Alan Sugar or Michael Winner or … I am nothing, fated, despite my intellectual (logical) integrity and metaphysical (religious) genius to remain unknown and … superfluous to the world and to what rules over it from fundamentally netherworldly heights (in metachemistry and, for the pseudo-otherworldly ‘fall guy’ position or element, pseudo-metaphysics).  He who, as philosopher king, is true to his self or, at any rate, truly pro-religious and metaphysical is obliged to live ‘beyond the pale’ of the female-dominated status quo, with its false ‘God’-oriented religions, relatively superfluous to the commercial interests of pseudo-male ‘sonsofbitches’, but most especially superfluous to free females and their exploitation of beauty through free will.  From their respective standpoints, the messianic individual is truly superfluous and therefore someone to shun as irrelevant.  All they care about is the world and what rules over it ‘in back’.  All I, on the contrary, really care about is the ‘overcoming’ of the world and the repudiation of all that rules over it, ostensibly from godly heights, in the interests of whatever is most contrary to the Lie – namely the Truth, and germane, in consequence, to the kingdom-coming triumph of Heaven.  They may ignore me, but I have not ‘gone away’, nor do I intend to.  For it is only he who, in one system, is most superfluous that can become, in another, most indispensable, rather like Hitler.



Although it may appear axially church-hegemonic, as from south-west to north-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass, to an audience watching an electric guitarist on stage, the electric guitar is effectively a Protestant-derived musical instrument of, in the case of the great majority of players, a south-east (body) to north-west (fretboard and/or machine head) axial directionality commensurate with state-hegemonic criteria, as though played from right to left, the right hand more active in harmonic strumming and the left hand in pitchful improvisation - a distinction, in Britain, between parliamentary/puritan and monarchic/anglican criteria whereby phenomenal 'pricks' co-exist, in the same person, with metachemical 'jerks', the former effectively masculine and the latter superfeminine, given the male nature of physics (over pseudo-chemistry), as of harmony (over pseudo-melody), and the female nature of metachemistry (over pseudo-metaphysics), as of pitch (over pseudo-rhythm), pseudo-rhythm no less spaced out (by pitchful space) in sequential fashion vis-a-vis metachemical space than pseudo-melody is massed out (by harmonic mass) in voluminous fashion vis-a-vis physical mass. 

Although some guitarists seem to be balanced between pitch and harmony (never mind melody and rhythm), there are plenty who are either biased towards pitch or, alternatively, biased towards harmony, thereby assuming either a monarchic/anglican bias or a parliamentary/puritan one, which keeps them poles apart from one another in the musical equivalent of an English civil war dichotomy.  It is as though the pitch-orientated are left wing and the harmony-orientated right wing, with those who strike a balance between the two poles somehow liberal and even musically androgynous, as though neither female (metachemically superfeminine) nor male (physically masculine).

Playing the electric guitar in left-handed fashion, as from right-handed rhythmic harmony to left-handed melodic pitch, like Jimi Hendrix, would seem to be a kind of catholic exception to the general rule of state-hegemonic axial directionality, and may even partly explain why, as a youth, I tended to idolize Hendrix, since I was then in rebellion, as a catholic boy who had been sent to a protestant children's home, against protestant criteria from a fundamentally catholic standpoint.  But such a contrary method of playing the guitar would not be properly commensurate with church-hegemonic axial directionality, as from south-west (body) to north-east (head) points of the inter-cardinal axial compass, if only because the electric guitar is more usually played the other way around and stands out as a protestant-type of instrument more suited, in a secular age, to those whose axial aspirations - barring a radically social democratic nadir - are from south-east to north-west or, alternatively, would prefer to see themselves in terms of a parliamentary-monarchic polarity, with an ancestral tie, in England, to 'roundheads' or 'cavaliers' rather than to some centrist or watered-down combination of both.

In my youth, when I listened to a lot of rock music, I would have detected such a polarity in the guitar-playing of, for example, Pete Townshend and Alvin Lee, as between a bias towards harmony in the one case and a bias towards pitch in the other, rock music with either 'classical' or 'jazz' overtones, even if demonstrably distinct from either.

If there is a church-hegemonic axial alternative to the electric guitar, it could well be the so-called synth-axe or portable keyboard, but it would have to be played from left to right, as though from melody in the keyboard-based left hand to something approaching rhythm, or whatever it would be that was non-pitchful in the right hand, the hand that holds and manipulates a variety of buttons on the neck of the instrument.  In that respect, people like Jan Hammer and George Duke and even Chick Corea may well be more representative of church-hegemonic axial directionality, suited to persons of catholic descent, than the left-handed exception to the guitar-playing rule, like Hendrix - preferable as he would be to the plethora of right-handed guitarists, not least those whose musical bias seems to be in the left hand with melody infused with pitch (improvisation) rather than in the right one with harmony infused with rhythm (strumming) in what, with its bodily corporeality, is probably the most representative approach to the electric guitar.



The idea that all men are equal is a dangerous ideology since it reduces truth (assuming for the sake of argument it is still considered to exist) to what every tom-dick-and-harry thinks it is (the Protestant position), irrespective of how far removed from truth the results may be (not least of all axially).  When every person is considered equal, irrespective of gender, class, race, occupation, etc., there is no truth but only variations on error, if not the Lie.  One can only lead a people from above, presuming upon a genuine capacity for ideological truth, and such leadership is only possible through the repudiation of equality and the submission of the majority to what is ideologically true, whether they directly submit to it (as males) or indirectly (via pseudo-beauty) as females.

Democracy, by its very equalitarian nature, is detrimental to truth and thus to religion conceived in relation to metaphysics, and especially to a stage of metaphysics, beyond cosmic, natural, and human stages, that would be relevant, in its cyborgistic orientation, to contemporary globalization.

I have never even believed that all men, meaning mankind, are born equal, never mind how they develop subsequently. There are distinctions, even at birth, of gender, race, class, fortune, size, weight, eye coloration, health, etc., that belies the commonplace notion, owing not a little to the likes of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, that they are born equal.



There is a certain commonness to the majority of so-called coloured peoples – at least in respect of their more or less uniform eye coloration and dark skin.  They normally exemplify what could be called a common attitude to life … and sex … that is decidedly unChristian in its alpha-stemming if not alpha-oriented naturalism.  Bangladeshis, for example, tend to look alike, with eating habits that revolve around a particular approach to diet that, with its origins in a given environment and probable want of alternatives, is more or less common to all.  In that respect, as in so many others, they are closer to nature and more akin, in some respects, to animals or, at any rate, to those animals who retain a standard diet with little or no variation.  But this can, in certain respects, be an advantage, particularly if the diet is, as with Bangladeshis, nutritious.



In the current secular climate and with not a little Northern Irish input, there are those in Ireland who think that democracy (on a republican socialist basis) should be independent of the Catholic Church, thereby reducing society to the lowest-common-denominator of a Marxist-influenced secularity.  But they are fools.  The justification of Irish independence from Britain was premised, as de Valera well-knew, upon a majority Catholic population, not upon secular values more congenial, in any case, to the Protestant British.  What we need for the future is a new church, so to speak, a church to end all churches, which will save (and counter-damn) the relevant people as never before, thereby establishing ‘Kingdom Come’ or, at any rate, the nearest feasible equivalent to that in contemporary terms. 

I believe I have called this ultimate church ‘the centre’, and identified it with Social Theocracy … as the political front of Social Transcendentalism, the actual context, or ‘church’-equivalence, of what would be a religiously sovereign people in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty from the people via the exploitation (utilization) of the democratic process by the Social Theocratic Party and/or Movement to a religiously sovereign end, the end commensurate, so I have always believed, with a context analogous to ‘Kingdom Come’.

Secular republicanism, as opposed to the church-backed republicanism that was instrumental in both freeing Ireland from British imperialism and, under de Valera, consolidating Irish church-hegemonic axial criteria, is to be expected in the current WASP-dominated era of a dotted-line sell out to state-hegemonic axial criteria, with its rugby and soccer, but it is not the solution to Ireland’s problems and merely compounds them by being an extension, fuelled by the decades-long influence of British secularity upon northern Catholics, of that secular concession to British and American influence and pressures.  Without an axis of their own, Gaelic football to hurling-like in its traditionally church-hegemonic integrity, the majority Irish people would be even more vulnerable to Anglo-American pressures than at present.  The only solution to the dilemma that divides them between dotted-line WASP deviationism and secular republicanism, as a further descent down the state-hegemonic axis, is the resurrection of the church-hegemonic axis under Social Theocracy and the beginning of a process that will deliver the majority population from their lowly chemical/pseudo-physical gender estates as never before, saving the pseudo-physical ‘last’ to metaphysics and having the chemical ‘first’ counter-damned to pseudo-metachemistry in a stepped-up north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass that will not only be able to deliver the majority catholic population from the extrapolative straining-at-the-leash limitations of Catholic tradition but, in delivering them more gender categorically to their metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical polarities and destinies ‘on high’, eventually bring down the other axis – that secular fruit of schismatic heresy – for want of prey, the prey, more precisely, that the majority of Catholics, marooned in a chemical/pseudo-physical mundane phenomenality, now represent to the somatic licence and profiteering from said licence of the female-dominated predatory axis of Anglo-American WASP secularity.

Needless to say, this ultimate solution, embracing an ultimate ‘church’-like repudiation of all alpha-stemming churches, will require the overcoming, democratically, of the current republic, which is manifestly unsuited to the task of taking Ireland to the next level of evolution, being part of the contemporary problem in what is fundamentally an Anglo-Irish divide-and-rule stratagem that keeps the main Celtic traditions of Orange and Green divided and ruled by the White middle of the tricolour. Although born in the Irish Republic and an Irish citizen, this is not an emblem, much less a process, I can or would wish to identify with. 

Let it be said that if and when Social Theocracy succeeds in garnering a majority mandate for that ultimate sovereignty which I have identified with religious sovereignty, the sovereignty that would free the people from the last – and oldest – bastion of tyranny in the metachemical Lie of Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father as Judaic ‘Creator’ in back of the Marian and Christian extrapolations, then there would be no place for the Church-slavering republic and no place, in consequence, for republicans!  As Hitler demolished the Weimar Republic, with its Jewish domination and secular values so congenial to female exploitation, so must the future Leader (of his people) demolish the Irish Republic through the exploitation of the democratic process to a religiously sovereign end.  For only then will it be possible for the building of ‘kingdom come’ to begin on a thoroughgoing Social Theocratic basis ever deferential to Social Transcendentalism, to the service, in other words, of the religiously sovereign.  All else is futile worldly perpetuation and enslavement to the lie of a God ‘in back’ of the world, and while the Republic continues to exist and to uphold, by its very worldly nature, this Lie, the majority Irish people will never be free – not of the British, not of the world, not of ethnic division, not of liberal confusion, not of dotted-line state-hegemonic deviationism, not of Marxist secularity, and not, worst of all, of the world’s oldest tyranny that falsely wears a religious mask and was the product of Jewish subterfuge.



The problem with England is that it is slanted - one might say weighted - towards phenomenal (corporeal and/or mundane) lowness in plutocratic/pseudo-democratic terms because physics over pseudo-chemistry at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the foot (barring a radical social democratic nadir analogous to Marxist Communism) of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis is the only context for the English in which there is any sensibility coupled, in pseudo-chemistry, to what may be called pseudo-sensuality, as germane to a relatively neutralized female, and therefore their only genuine (relatively speaking) claim to sensibility, and hence a degree or type of culture, corresponds to the phenomenal lowness (as opposed to noumenal highness) of the plebeian corporeality alluded to above - as though in a parliamentary/puritan polarity with the monarchic/anglican noumenal highness which, in metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics at the north-west point of the aforesaid compass, rules the state-hegemonic axis from a standpoint rooted, metachemically, in noumenal sensuality, with barbarous (metachemical) and pseudo-philistine (pseudo-metaphysical) associations as opposed, like their physical/pseudo-chemical polarities, to pseudo-cultural and civil ones.

It is precisely because - and contrary to appearances - the more civilized aspects of the British axis happen to be pseudo-cultural and civil that the majority of British people attribute more significance to physics and pseudo-chemistry than to metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics, even though this means they remain biased, as a people, towards the corporeal lowness of the plutocratic/pseudo-democratic alliance in defiance of or, at any rate, preference to the autocratic/pseudo-theocratic upper-order positions to which they perforce remain subject, if in relation to a constitutional monarchy which has no power to interfere with the executive nature of the parliamentary 'below' (except indirectly through the House of Lords), to which the majority of British people subscribe, without, however, having the benefit of a Bill of Rights.  For Britain is not, like the United States, a republic, but a post-civil war compromise between noumenal ethereality, rooted metachemically in the objective (as in free somatic female objectivity), and phenomenal corporeality, centred physically in the subjective (as in free psychic male subjectivity), with, in consequence, contrary gender associations that cannot but be at ideological loggerheads, as were the 'cavaliers' and 'roundheads' of the English Civil War

The British, in short, are a people that cannot be led, only ruled. For their representatives (to the monarchy through the Lords) in the House of Commons (plebs) are not true leaders, only representatives of the general will of the people.  Nor would radical social democrats, seeking communistic independence of parliament and parliamentary accountability, through the Lords, to the Monarchy, be true leaders but, worse than representatives, only deceivers of the people who invite rule through the back door, as it were.  A true leader will only be found on the church-hegemonic axis to which British politics makes no concessions.  And he will messianically lead from above to what lies beyond ...



Thinking in terms of race, skin colour is only one of a number of factors that have to be taken into account.  Factors like colour of hair and eyes; shape and size of head; the way hair grows on the head and as moustache and/or beard (obviously in the case of males); the width and shape of the nose; whether hair grows, in the case of males, on the chest, back, shoulders, arms, etc., and if so how and to what extent; the size of the backside and thighs; weight and height, and so on … a whole host of factors which have to be considered even before one embarks upon an investigation of language, culture, religion, accent, character, temperament, etc.

People who judge others simply by the colour of their skin without taking all these other – and more – factors into account are grossly superficial, and their concept of race will be slanted accordingly.



The fatality of Republican Socialism, not least in the Republic of Ireland, as of ‘Liberty Leading the People’, that Delacroix painting which illustrates what might be called the ideological implications of the French Revolution, is that, characterized by a female hegemony of chemistry over pseudo-physics at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, as of politics (republican democracy) over pseudo-economics (socialism),  it does not and cannot remain bogged down, so to speak, in its own gender dichotomous phenomenality at the foot, effectively, of the church-hegemonic axis (stretching from south-west to north-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass), but, bad enough as that would be, inevitably becomes subject to a clockwise cycle of female dominion in terms of a return to metachemistry (female) over pseudo-metaphysics (pseudo-male) at the north-west point of the said compass, which, besides being fundamentally autocratic and therefore requiring some dictatorial ‘vanguard’ and so-called ‘leader of the people’, is the starting-point of the predominating ratio factor (3:1) in the free soma of beauty and love (as opposed to ugliness and hatred in bound psyche) to subsequently achieve a worldly resolution in the pride and strength of the predominating ratio factor (2 ½:1½) in the free soma (as opposed to humble and weak bound psyche) of chemistry, so that chemistry is not, in these secular and church-defying terms, the only female element in the cycle but, rather, the one implying a surrogate plenum of maternity that, although effectively an end-game for females, cannot allow them to remain resigned to a permanent sojourn in such a phenomenal position but, as noted above, will encourage them to return to the noumenal heights of metachemistry (and therefore beauty and love) as and when circumstances allow, thereby causing them to perpetuate the clockwise cycle that precludes any possibility of male salvation (deliverance from female dominion) through church-hegemonic axial criteria, the kind of criteria that will have to be ‘stepped up’ (resurrected) on revolutionary (social theocratic) terms if the pseudo-physical ‘last’ are to become, through salvation, the metaphysical ‘first’ and, by contrast, the chemical ‘first’, equivocally hegemonic over the pseudo-physical, become pseudo-metachemically ‘last’ in what would be the counter-damnation corollary, for females, of male salvation. 

That is the only way out of the clockwise cycle of female dominion for males, the long-suffering victims of such dominion, and it is only going to happen via messianic intervention and the subsequent ‘overcoming’ of the mainstream world of the chemical and pseudo-physical from a position, germane to the church-hegemonic axis, centred in the hegemony of metaphysics over pseudo-metachemistry, and thus of a structure that, once fully achieved, will resemble the proverbial Saint and neutralized Dragon or, to adopt an equivalent metaphor, the proverbial Lamb and neutralized Lion and/or Wolf that, so neutralized, is obliged to ‘lie down’, a plane down from metaphysics at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, with that which, in metaphysical dominion, signifies all that is most metaphysically righteous in its salvation from the world (of female dominion of chemistry over pseudo-physics).



When Britain and France declared war on Nazi Germany (though not subsequently on the Poland co-invading Soviet Union) on the 3rd September 1939, following the Nazi invasion of Poland on September 1st, they transformed (in theory) a local conflict (involving the ultimate dismantlement and revocation of the Versailles Treaty by Hitler over Danzig and the Corridor, with East Prussia cut off from the rest of Germany) into a European conflict that would eventually spill over into the Balkans and North Africa, as well as into the Soviet Union, that bastion of Communism which Hitler invaded in June 1941.  But this European conflict did not really become a world war until the bombing of Pearl Harbour by Japan in December 1941 which quickly brought America into the war and obliged Nazi Germany, an ally of Japan, to declare war on the United States, thereby condemning it to what would increasingly become a war on two fronts, to its ultimate detriment and final downfall.

In the First World War, Britain and France declared war on Germany, a country that had come to the defence of the Austro-Hungarian Empire after Archduke Franz Ferdinand had been assassinated by a Bosnian Serb terrorist, one Gavrilo Princip, who implicated the Serbian military, and Austria-Hungary accordingly responded to the outrage by declaring war on the Kingdom of Serbia, a country that had an agreement with Russia, which accordingly declared war on Austria-Hungary, obliging Germany to come to its assistance against Russia as part of the Triple Alliance.  But Britain and France?  Through closer ties between Russia and France which impacted upon Britain, they fought, as in the Second World War, alongside Russia against not only Germany but the country that had suffered the heinous crime of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.  They were on the side not only of Russia but of Serbia, the country from which, as a Bosnian Serb, the assassin had effectively emerged.  And when, with American and other outside assistance largely drawn from the British Empire, they finally forced Germany to an Armistice five long years later, the Versailles Treaty was what Germany had to swallow, with the most punitive restrictions and reparations ever imposed upon a defeated nation.  But this was the country that had come to the rescue of Austria-Hungary after Serbia’s ally Russia had declared war on that Empire! No wonder Hitler and his National Socialists eventually came to power in Germany!  They were the most determined of all the German parties to repudiate the crippling terms of the Versailles Treaty and put Germany back on its feet.  And they succeeded.  But subsequently, as we all know, they became embroiled in a struggle to the death with those nations, principally Britain, France, and Russia, who were against it in the Great War.  And once again might triumphed over right as Germany suffered a second and more devastating defeat at the hands of the allies and was dismembered, carved up into zones of occupation by Britain, France, America, and Russia.  There’s justice for you. For if the Versailles Treaty was bad enough, surely it is even worse to be occupied by allied powers and split into different zones, as between Communism in the Russian sphere of influence and Capitalism of one sort or another in the American, British, and French ones? For now it is not merely a question of reparations and restrictions; a wholesale process of de-Nazification and ideological cleansing and bringing to justice is set in train which will culminate in the division of Germany into East and West and put one part of it at loggerheads with the other.  Fortunately, that era is now safely in the historical past, having come to an end with the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989.  But even if Germany is now united, it is still occupied and exploited by the victorious allies,who, naturally enough, are keen to ensure that large swathes of German industry serve them before they serve anybody else.  For a Germany that exclusively served itself, like the Third Reich, would not be to anybody's advantage, least of all those who fought long and hard to protect their freedoms which, with one possible exception, are largely the product of female dominion.

Let us not forget that Germany, together with Austria, was and remains the land of Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms, Bruckner, Bruch, Wagner, Strauss, Mahler, Berg, Webern, Schoenberg, et al.  Which explains, in some measure, why Communism was defeated by National Socialism in Germany, the only ideology capable of standing up to Communism rather than simply co-existing with it and/or being overcome by it.  Later, it came back with a vengeance in the Soviet-dominated East of the country, but even that is now history and Germany stands once more united, the so-called economic powerhouse of Europe.



I don’t need a computer that multi-tasks.  Multi-tasking is for women, those alpha-stemming creatures who, according to a reputable source whose name eludes me, are ‘all antennae and no brains’.  I refuse, on principle, to multi-task.



The worst of all possible worlds and/or societies is one dominated, in WASPish vein, by females.  Contemporary ‘Western’ society is nothing if not pro-feminist and, hence, anti-male.  You can’t have it both ways.  Either females dominate males, in heathenistic vein, or, conversely, males dominate females in – dare I say it? – Christian or equivalent vein.  Today’s secular societies are nothing if not female-dominated.



I have long considered myself more than Catholic, not counter-catholic (protestant), but Social Theocratic, that is, one who is in favour of the ‘resurrection’ of the church-hegemonic axis on Social Theocratic terms.



Sons-of-bitches are lost to Christ, as to Christianity.  They would also be lost, as things stand, to Superchristianity, i.e. Social Theocracy and the ‘resurrection of the (secular) dead’ through religious sovereignty.



The more a man sucks up to women, the less Christian can he be.  The only way the Church (RC) has accommodated the masses to Christ is by having men confess to their sins, largely, I suspect, in relation to women.

The idea of women confessing to sins is, frankly, a contradiction in terms, since that gender is both evil and criminal, pseudo-evil and pseudo-criminal (specifically at the chemical world of mainstream catholicism) in its free soma and bound psyche, and sin, like folly, its pseudo-free somatic corollary, is less feminine than pseudo-masculine, or pseudo-physical, to put it in equivalent elemental (more specifically, pseudo-elemental) terms, with pseudo-bound psyche the product of female domination in chemistry.

Sucking on the ‘body of Christ’ is, on the other hand, more appropriate to women than to men, and could accordingly be construed as being more chemical than pseudo-physical – the opposite, in polar terms, of the ‘confession of sins’ to a priest which, as alluded to above, I believe to have more relevance to males than to females and to accordingly be more metaphysical (after a limited Christ-oriented fashion) than pseudo-metachemical, the pseudo-female (pseudo-superfeminine) corollary of a supermasculine disposition towards metaphysics.

But Catholic metaphysics is a rather limited affair, confined to the bound soma of the Crucifixion paradigm by dint of the extrapolative nature of Roman Catholicism as deriving, in a certain type of worldliness characterized by chemistry and pseudo-physics, from the Judaic root of the Christian tradition, and capable of doing no more, in consequence, than straining at the leash, so to speak, of that root, via its peculiar type of worldliness, towards metaphysics which, as noted above, can only be done to a bound-somatic extent, an extent well short of free psyche and therefore of that which, in joy and truth, or Heaven and God(liness), would have to be completely independent of any such Judaic root, or anchor (to cite another of my favourite metaphors), which, as a metachemical entity (albeit hyped as metaphysical, as Devil the Mother as God the Father, as the Cosmos as Universe, etc., etc.), is actually contrary to what is metaphysical, including the ‘Christ On High’ of the Crucifixion.

Therefore the rejection of the Alpha is crucial to the achievement of the Omega, at least in its full complement of a 3:1 ratio (approximating to super:sub, as germane to noumenal absolutism as against phenomenal relativity) of free psyche (joy and truth) to bound soma (woe and illusion), the former alone bright because positive and the latter dark because negative, the mere bound will (son of godliness) and bound spirit (holy spirit of heaven) corollary of free soul (heaven the holy soul) and free ego or, rather, nearest thing to free ego (god the father, or godfatherliness) which, in truth, is really a superconscious emanation of the supersensible soul, halo-like, which could have no independent existence from that which, as heavenly soul, precedes it and is responsible for its existence … pretty much as candle-flame for candlelight (to use a well-trodden metaphor), so that, just as there would be no candlelight without candle-flame, there could be no God(liness) without Heaven, no superconscious semblance of ego but actually emanation of soul in metaphysics without the supersensible soul whose essence is joy (not love!) and which has its seat, its origin, not in the delusory female-fuelled heart … of mankind, as of (worldly) humanism, but in the male-oriented spinal cord of a position which is more germane, if truth be told, to cyborgkind, mankind’s evolutionary successor.  But such a seat, or origin place, of the soul is not, on that account, God, or godly, since we have already settled that matter to our metaphysical satisfaction, but simply the systemic basis of Heaven or, better, the systemic basis of the Soul whose joyful essence, when released from physiological bondage, is heavenly, and thus pertinent to Heaven.

Hence spinal cord = soul, and the joy of the free soul, independent of physiological attachments, including those pertaining to the bodily self or, rather, not-self, the organs in general and so on, is commensurate with Heaven, which is the condition of free soul and not a place, still less an offshoot of God!

But all this is of course metaphysical and, hence, male, not at all female, whether metachemical or chemical, noumenally objective or phenomenally objective, from which the notion of God preceding Heaven, though it would, in point of fact, be Devil the Mother preceding Hell the Clear Spirit, makes perfect metachemical sense, and specifically in relation to beauty preceding love, or free will preceding the ‘once-bovaryized’ (compared to chemical spirit) free spirit which is the complementary aspect of metachemical free soma that predominates, on a 3:1 ratio basis, over the ugliness and hatred of the bound psyche of the Daughter of the Devil and the Clear Soul of Hell, as of bound ego and soul, or the nearest equivalents thereof.

When you have a civilization rooted in metachemistry, like the Judeo-Christian, then it is easy to see how the notion of God preceding Heaven took root, and why free will, the metachemical ‘first mover’ in things, is falsely identified with God, as of divinity.  Nothing, however, could be further from the truth, but then again, as Ionesco once remarked, the masses will never (at least voluntarily) demystify themselves, since it would be too painfully against their alpha-stemming and alpha-worshipping grain, whereof the dominance of males by females leading to families is the social and worldly norm.

I spit upon this norm, as I spit upon anything to do with the masses, including republican socialism, and look forward to the day when it will have been consigned to the rubbish bin of social history.  For only when males are free of female domination, of the gender which is soma before it is psyche, can there be any prospect of a fulfilment of Christianity in and with ‘Kingdom Come’.  And by Christianity I do of course mean Roman Catholicism as that which is axially germane to the prospect, with ‘Kingdom Come’, of a superchristian overhaul through Social Theocracy/Social Transcendentalism (roughly corresponding to a state/church distinction between the Centre-proper of the religiously sovereign and the administrative aside to it) in order that the relevant masses, chemical and pseudo-physical in their feminine/pseudo-masculine gender differentiation, may be delivered from their respective kinds of worldly estates to the otherworldly and pseudo-netherworldly estates which await them, through metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, ‘On High’, as and when the pseudo-physical ‘meek’ are saved (from chemical females) to metaphysical righteousness and the chemical ‘pseudo-vain’ counter-damned (in gender subordination to the metaphysical in pseudo-space under time, or pseudo-infinity under eternity) to pseudo-metachemical pseudo-justice, no mere monk and nun-like exception to the Christian rule this time but, from out of a mass-oriented society characterized by democracy, the generality of those deemed fit for such dissimilar fates that can – and should – be identified with our proverbial Saint and (neutralized) Dragon, or Lamb and (neutralized) Wolf and/or Lion, in a word, the pseudo-wolf and/or lion under the Lamb not so much of God as of Heaven the Holy Soul.



They say that money is the root of all evil, but it isn’t; women are.  The commonplace notion that money is the root of evil is simply a cliché, a cop-out.  They want to believe it, most men, because they don’t want to face up to the reality of women, at least in moralistic terms.  Even Nietzsche didn’t, if we are to believe Hollingdale, his translator.  He said that women were base and men evil, but I’ve always found that women, who are motivated by the twin evils of free will and free spirit, beauty and love, simply advance their cause, which ultimately revolves around the securing of a surrogate plenum through propagation and maternity, by appealing, through sexuality, to the baser instincts of men, who are products, after all, of woman, not, as the Bible would have us believe, of God.  For in the beginning was not God but Devil … the Mother, and hence a higher type of female entity which is the epitome of free will.



Knowledge mind, which is conscious, derives from ego in the brain; true mind, which is superconscious, derives from soul in the spinal cord. Consciousness is thought impure; superconsciousness is feeling (not emotion! which is tied up with heart and blood) pure. Knowledge and Truth are physical and metaphysical rivals, appertaining to separate axes, which tend to be mutually exclusive, like man and God or, better, godliness (as a symptom of Heaven, i.e., heavenly soul). Without ego in the brain there is no thought and, hence, consciousness; without soul in the spinal cord there is no feeling and, hence, superconsciousness. The superego is a kind of renegade ego that tends to be pro-feeling, i.e., pro-metaphysical, by dint of having a deeper location than the brain which, as the brain stem, is contiguous with the spinal cord, and therefore in the best possible position to be pro-soul, not to mention the conscience of the soul’s feelings and a kind of intuitive conduit between the soul and the ego. Unlike consciousness which, through thought, is ruled by the eyes, superconsciousness is characterized by feeling, by that supersensible sentience which is at the core of the Self as that which, located in the spinal cord, manifests the heavenly joy of soul – at least when one bothers to tune-in to it, as it were, and cease to be preoccupied with externals, even if the same cannot be said of the central nervous system, including the brain stem and spinal cord, through the demands which the body puts upon it. To retreat from the Self via the brain stem is to risk the egotism of the brain and, hence, subordination, like a subject populace to a sovereign, to the senses, particularly the eyes and what is seen through them, all of which are often confused with consciousness, just as the heart, that seat of the emotions, is confused with the soul.  But sense data are no more germane to consciousness, which can reflect, through thought, upon them, than emotions are germane to the superconscious, which is a product of the soul and not, like emotions, of the effect upon the blood that certain events and circumstances cause through what is a more direct connection than even the brain to the eyes – namely that of the heart and its more immediate relationship to the Cupidian axis.  The brain, on the other hand, is more like a phenomenal-to-noumenal axis than an inter-noumenal one having an objectivistic bias.  It’s relationship to the eyes is characterized rather more by a subjective acquiescence in objectivity which smacks of a kind of pact with a Faustian parallel that some have dubbed empirical. Be that as it may, the heart would only be confused with the soul by a person or people habituated to female dominance and indisposed, in consequence, to turning away from ‘the world’ after the fashion of a monkish recluse given to the cultivation of his deeper self through some form of transcendental meditation, wherein the experience of purer feelings is the reward for his patience.



One can have too much choice.  Choice can be a bad thing.  In fact, it could well be a euphemism for centrifugal divergence and, hence, a plethora of competing objectivities.  The more choice one has, the less easy it is to make up one’s mind; one becomes increasingly ambivalent and even ambiguous in one’s determinations or, rather, lack of them.  In the end, a plethora of choices leaves one undecided and confused.  Rather like the state of contemporary capitalist/consumer society.



The Allies imposed – inevitably – victors' justice on defeated Nazi Germany following the Second World War.  Such justice is humanistic and is broadly germane to the Judeo-Christian tradition.  It is not superhumanly straining on the leash away from such a tradition, rooted in sub- or pre-humanistic Middle Eastern criteria. For such a superhuman orientation, deriving in part from Nietzsche, would find the subhumanist pre-Christian factors incompatible with its superhumanist striving, and therefore would feel obligated, at some point, to oppose and, where possible, uproot and/or liquidate them.  Such is the legacy of thinkers like Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Spengler, et al, and it tends towards a ‘world overcoming’ mentality which becomes positively cyborgistic in its camera-based maschine kultur superhumanism. But National Socialism is not Social Transcendentalism.  That, on the contrary, would have to be primarily committed to uprooting religious obstacles to evolutionary progress, such obstacles being, by definition, anachronistic in their metachemical roots and deference to Creator-ism, with its concept of ‘God in the Beginning’, which rather conflicts with the Social Theocratic/Transcendentalist doctrine of Heaven in the End, with God a mere concomitant, like Heaven viewed from the outside rather than experienced from within. As I’ve said before, ‘God in the Beginning’ is a contradiction in terms that owes more to the need to sugar-coat the bitter pill of female dominion over the Cosmos stellar-wise than ever it does to a true concept of deity.  What we actually have is ‘Devil the Mother’ hyped as ‘God the Father’ as the best-of-a-bad-job starting-point of both the Judaic and, by association, Judeo-Christian traditions which, tarred by the ‘thingful’ brush accruing to what is fundamentally female in its somatic objectivity, holds with Marian and Christic ‘worldly’ extrapolations from the so-called Creator, Father, Jehovah, God, etc., ‘in back’ of itself.  Dominated by female criteria, which are rooted in a predominating soma over and preceding psyche, which is necessarily bound to the free soma, the Christian extrapolations could only be unequally ‘thingful’ and therefore serve as fit idols for a more worldly tribe, a tribe rooted not in the Middle East but, by and large, in Europe, and Western Europe in particular.



Women, to speak in general terms, are the natural enemies of intellect and of ‘things moving on’ in an increasingly omega-oriented transcendentalist and/or metaphysical direction.  They will oppose such an evolutionary procedure, proper to the church-hegemonic axis, wherever and whenever they can.  Therefore we transcendentalists must be all the more cunning and determined in our endeavours to ‘turn the tables’ on all alpha-stemming materialistic and naturalistic creatures once and for all! Self-doubt and self-division is the curse of having come from two genders, both of whom play a more or less equal part in one’s DNA if not, exactly, in one’s gender make-up, which has a bias – but only a bias – one way or the other. Can we males ever really ‘turn the tables’ on females and become divinely free of somatic intrusions and demands?  I have sympathy for the doubters and sceptics, who know well enough the power and influence of female beauty, but all I can say is that if we can’t, then we are well and truly screwed!  For then nothing will change and the world will continue to reproduce itself over and over and over again, irrespective of the consequences. To let a creature who is fundamentally autocratic into the democratic process seems to me a contradiction in terms that equates with the decadence of Western – meaning Protestant-dominated – civilization.  Since when, this civilization has gone to the barbarous dogs of a feminist alpha-stemming mode of secular globalization that is the contemporary – and inceptive – mode of globalization par excellence. The people – accustomed to female dominion – respect one god and one god alone: sex. Woman gains control over man by killing (neutralizing and rendering ‘pseudo’) his soul through her will and his ego through her spirit, so that he is reduced to satisfying, sooner or later, the female requirement of maternity (and a surrogate plenum) via sex as the proverbial ‘sonofabitch’. Conversely, men can only gain control over women by neutralizing (and rendering ‘pseudo’) her spirit through his ego and her will through his soul, thereby reducing her to a subordinate status deferential, indirectly via pseudo-free psyche and pseudo-bound soma, to his ego and/or soul, the products, in each case, of free psyche and bound soma (according with male gender reality), neither of which are greatly conducive to propagation. Life is only possible because of male weakness.  It is because males succumb to the power and glory of females, contentment sacrificed to power and form to glory, as soul to will and ego to spirit, that life as a fundamentally heathen (bitch-dominated) exercise in reproduction continues at all.  And yet, precisely because of their weakness before the double onslaught of female power and glory, beauty/love and strength/pride, men are the sex that likes to give the impression – nay, that needs to give the impression – of power and glory, or will and spirit.  And women play along with this pretence because it suits them for males to pretend to having qualities and attributes properly appertaining to women.  This I call the paradox of the sexes, whereby males assume dominating alpha roles and females allow themselves the luxury of seeming morally superior in their having to put up with and succumb to such roles.  What a lie!  It is not the male but the female who is fundamentally sexually aggressive, because she needs a surrogate plenum (through offspring) to deliver her from the vacuum to which she would otherwise be condemned. She must also vindicate her menstruation and umpteen other impositions and inconveniences unique to her gender.  She does not have ‘democratic’ choice in this matter, and deluded is the man who thinks otherwise!



‘Moloch’, directed by Aleksandr Sokurov, is even with its technical shortcomings truly king of films.  It is simply magnificent.  Credible, authentic, amusing, ironic, atmospheric, romantic, enlightening – in short, pure genius! O that Sokurov would direct a film about Nietzsche! A film to rival ‘Steppenwolf’.



In the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ Heaven is King.  That is, having a fulcrum in the Soul because metaphysical. God is merely Heaven perceived from the outside, as its penumbra or halo-like effulgence, a superconscious offshoot of that supersensibility which is the Soul, and therefore no more than candle-light to candleflame, essentially one and the same because without candleflame there is no candle-light, no God without Heaven.  Is that not the meaning of ‘God in Heaven’?  And is not Heaven and God essentially one and the same, the internal and external manifestations of the metaphysical soul?  The One! We who believe in Heaven do not believe in a God ‘in the beginning’, who ‘made the heavens and the earth’, etc.  We allow that whatever approximates to ‘Creator’ is more Devil the Mother than God the Father, even if, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, hyped as God … the Father as the ‘best of a bad job’ starting-point for civilization in relation to an overwhelming female domination of Cosmic and, subsequently, natural environmental contexts, fire and water-wise  We know that, stripped of its male sugar-coating, Devil the Mother precedes Hell the Clear Spirit, as the metachemical free will of Beauty the metachemical ‘once-bovaryized’ free spirit of Love, and that, in such a context, Hell is in the Devil, as Love in Beauty, in contrast to God being in Heaven, as Truth in Joy.  But we acknowledge that turning things around and breaking with the former pairing in the interests of the latter pairing, i.e. breaking with cosmic science in the interests of universal religion, will take time and not be achieved without an immense global struggle.  For life is – and has always been – for most people ‘a bitch’, and ‘turning the tables’ on that, even in this day and age, is easier said than done.  Nevertheless, we … Social Theocrats … live in hope that the female dominion of life can be ended, and life take on an entirely new pattern hitherto unprecedented, though crudely intimated of, one could argue, in the Christian Middle Ages. Knights in shining armour – the cyborgization, as it were, of the Medieval Age, when Christian (Roman Catholic) values favouring ‘rebirth’ (from phenomenal sensuality under a female hegemony to a male hegemonic noumenal sensibility) were to the fore, and aspirations towards Christ accordingly took on a certain superhuman or, rather, quasi-superhuman dimension not uncharacteristic of knights on horseback kitted out in a full suit of armour and thereby towering above the generality of persons. A superficial cyborgization, however, compared to what is to come … with the return of religious values in what Spengler would call ‘Second Religiosity’, when religion finally ‘comes out’ in no uncertain terms in relation not, as before, to Medieval Christendom but to ‘Kingdom Come’.



The more one walks the congested streets of north London, the more one comes to realize how essential parks are as an antidote to the tenement-like ‘over-built-upness’ of the urban conurbations – all those intensive manifestations of a ‘terrestrial city’ mentality that derives, in large part, from a parliamentary/puritan disposition to build and build until the environment resembles a pile - or several piles - of shit compounded by more shit and so on, to the greater form and pseudo-glory of the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass. I seek refuge from the tyranny of this intensive urbanization – as much to be found indoors as out – in the open spaces of whatever park lies nearest to hand or, rather, to legs, like a good Catholic who has had his fill of Protestant criteria, and dreams, from the comparative seclusion and sanctuary of the park, of higher things to come, things or, rather, eventualities that lie beyond nature rather than, like the city (and London in particular), contrary to her.



The godly rings of the heavenly Saturn in the cosmic metaphysics of least Heaven and most God. The godly wings of the heavenly seed-pods in the natural metaphysics of less Heaven and more God. The godly smile of the heavenly breath in the human metaphysics of more Heaven and less God. The godly light of the heavenly dope in the cyborg metaphysics (to come) of most Heaven and least God. Thus from the least evolved type of metaphysics in the Cosmos to the most evolved type of metaphysics in Cyborgkind via the less (relative to least) evolved type of metaphysics in nature and the more (relative to most) evolved type of metaphysics in humankind – the evolution of metaphysics, the context par excellence of true religion, through successive life stages as it emerges, ultimately, from being in the shadows of metachemistry, chemistry, and physics, or science, politics, and economics, to shining in the light of its definitive religious manifestation with ‘Kingdom Come’ and a society typified by the triumph of Heaven, leaving Hell, purgatory and the earth (the latter two as contrary manifestations of ‘the world’) on the rubbish heap of history.



Mahler apparently wanted people to ‘find God in Nature’ (pantheistically) in one of his symphonies (I forget which), the stupid sucking c**t!  This amounts to no more than the Marian bitch.  It’s not even the pseudo-Christ (pseudo-Son) in pseudo-physics under chemistry, who is at least a ‘sonofabitch’ rather than an outright made bitch (with child). Mind you, pseudo-physics under chemistry is more of what could be called the pseudo-Father than the pseudo-Son, meaning there is, in its 2½:1½ ratio aspect, relatively more bound psyche or, rather, pseudo-bound psyche (the product of female dominion) than pseudo-free soma, and therefore more sin than folly, more church than state.  But this ‘God in Nature’ crap is proof of how far from true religion Gustav Mahler actually was!  For in true religion, which is metaphysical rather than chemical or anything else, God counts for much less than Heaven, being merely proof of the prior existence of heavenly soul. Unfortunately, with Christianity, you never get beyond the subsensuousness, as it were, of the Crucifixional paradigm for bound metaphysical soma.  The free psyche, corresponding to the superconscious, is ‘beyond the pale’ of an extrapolative straining-on-the-leash towards metaphysics by what is grounded in pseudo-physics and rendered accountable, via the Marian dominance of chemistry, to metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics upstairs 'in back'.  It is the converse, in many respects, of those, like Freud, who go on about the subconscious without ever alluding to its supersensuous precondition in the absolutely predominating ratio aspect (3:1) of metachemistry, which is free soma.  But the supersensuous is as much the basis of subconsciousness in metaphysics as the superconscious (is) the basis of subsensuousness in metaphysics.  The absence of one or other of these preconditions spells one thing and one thing only: the fraudulent nature of an independent subconscious on the one hand and of an independent subsensuous on the other.  You can no more have the ‘Daughter of the Devil’, to take a single aspect of metachemical bound psyche, than the so-called ‘Son of God’, to take a single aspect of metaphysical bound soma, without their respective preconditions in ‘Devil the Mother’ and ‘God the Father’ or, more correctly where metaphysics is concerned, the unheard of (before me) term ‘Heaven the Holy Soul’, which is the fulcrum of the metaphysical element and therefore the true basis of metaphysical free psyche – something that the continuing worship of metachemical free soma (as God) precludes from being acknowledged.  And this basis or centre of free psyche in metaphysics is One with the godfatherly penumbra or halo-like effulgence which I have identified with superconsciousness, which stands to the supersensibility of the metaphysical soul as candle-light to candleflame, and therefore not independent of it but simply as its outer manifestation without the prior essence of which it would cease to exist. What do you get in Christianity, meaning principally Roman Catholicism, the nearest thing to anything truly religious in Western civilization?  A subsensuous resurrectional figure of a decidedly truncated and fraudulent metaphysics accountable to the supersensuous aspect of metachemistry, pretty much as illusion to beauty and, if we are to include the other aspects of each partial elemental position (though excluding free psyche from metaphysics and, contrary to Freud and his ilk, bound psyche from metachemistry), as woe to love.  Understandable, to be sure, but patently limited and simply religiously not good enough – merely one kind (the other being Protestant and more representatively Western from a contemporary standpoint) of religious anachronism in a global age. We must use the democratic process in certain countries to get rid of these anachronisms once and for all! But only, needless to say, in the interests of true religion and a full complement of metaphysical factors in consequence, coupled, be it not forgotten, to a subordinate pseudo-metachemistry equivalent, as a pseudo-female element, to a neutralized whore under hegemonic saintliness – the proverbial neutralized dragon under the saintly heel or, as some would prefer, neutralized lion and/or wolf under the triumphant lamb not so much of God as of … Heaven ...the Holy Soul.









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


Bookmark and Share