101. Interesting how the '60s distinctions and frictions between Mods and Rockers in England suggests a kind of Fascist/Communist dichotomy, Mods given to a Parker-jacket supernaturalism, Rockers to a leather-jacket antinaturalism; Mods partial to synthetic-looking mohair suits, Rockers generally clad in denims; Mods wearing their hair short, indicative of a modernist supernaturalism, Rockers generally wearing it long, suggestive of neo-primitivism; and, of course, Mods partial to scooters, Rockers to motorbikes: scooters streamlined and comparatively lightweight, motorbikes utilitarian and comparatively heavyweight - a kind of idealistic/materialistic dichotomy between these two types of People's vehicles.

 

102. On the subject of vehicles, it might be worth distinguishing People's modes of road transportation from bourgeois and/or petty-bourgeois modes, as in the case of trousers, art, politics, etc., so that we acquire an overall evolutionary/class perspective relative to the various ideological distinctions. Certainly it would seem that family cars, in their four-seater relativity, reflect an atomic, and hence bourgeois, integrity commensurate with democratic criteria, and I fancy that most such cars, vintage and modern, approximate to a Liberal mould of relative balance, whether in terms of seating distinctions between rear and front, passenger and driver, or in terms of a kind of idealistic/materialistic distinction between inner and outer, enclosed interior and external body. Yet if relative cars correspond to a Liberal equivalent, then it would seem that a petty-bourgeois split into two distinct kinds of absolutism will provide us with Labour and radical Conservative equivalents, paralleling, say, the division in 'modern art' between one sort of abstraction and another - Expressionist on the extreme (painterly) left, Impressionist on the extreme (painterly) right, with a materialistic/idealistic dichotomy the absolutist consequence. Such a split is reflected, I believe, in the distinction between two-seater open-topped sports cars on the extreme left and, in complete contrast to this, two-seater 'encapsulated' bubble cars on the extreme right, the former low-lying (one is almost tempted to say 'flat') and materialistic, the latter curvilinear and idealistic, a kind of apparent/essential dichotomy between the two, as though the one were all external and the other all internal, the sports car all body and the bubble car all mind or, at any rate, seating compartment. As cars, both of them pertain to a traditional genre, like painterly art or parliament, but as extreme manifestations of a traditional (bourgeois) genre they reflect absolute criteria, not least of all in terms of the parallel one-level seating arrangements. Of course, no less than painting stretches way back to a pre-Liberal era, cars effectively stretch back to grand-bourgeois origins in private horse-and-carriage transportation, horses being to the roofed-in carriage what (sculptural) frames were to paintings, viz. a carry-over from aristocratic precedent, the use of horses independently of carriages a comparatively autocratic mode of transportation preceding the 'democratic' modes of carriage and car, the latter deriving its name from the former and dispensing with horses, just as modern art, including the modern Liberal variety, sees fit, in its absolutist predilection, to dispense with frames. But if autocratic subnaturalism precedes democratic naturalism, then theocratic supernaturalism succeeds it. Which brings us back to People's modes of transportation, principally scooters and motorbikes - the former approximating to a Fascist equivalent, the latter to a Communist one, a kind of supernatural/antinatural, God/Devil dichotomy between the two categories, as in regard to essence and appearance, inner and outer, idealism and materialism, smooth and rough, wavicles and particles.

 

103. Scooters (stemming from Italy, home of Fascism) suggest essence, the position of the rider's legs inside the body design ... as in a car, in contrast to the straddling posture required for riding a motorbike, legs either side of the engine body in an arrangement suggesting a bias for appearances. Scooters encourage a vertical body posture, motorbikes a less than vertical one - indeed the posture adopted by some riders could be described as near-horizontal or, at any rate, of an oblique slant probably commensurate with a particle- rather than wavicle-biased masculinity. Furthermore, the wheels of scooters are of narrow diameter and hub-heavy, suggestive of a centralized bias stemming from right-wing cars, whereas the wheels of motorbikes are of greater diameter, with long spokes radiating out from a relatively small hub to the metallic rim which, as in the case of sports cars with spoked wheels, suggests a peripheral, or ring-like, bias commensurate, so I would contend, with a more radical (in relation to sports cars) democratic bent - indeed, in the case of motorbikes nothing short of a People's democratic equivalence on the level of materialistic and/or idealistic Socialism. But this brings us to our next contention - namely that a distinction should exist between Marxist motorbikes and Transcendental Socialist motorbikes, as things move from the materialistic to the idealistic plane, the radical democratic mode of transportation being modified and, to some extent, centralized, where idealistic criteria obtain, in accordance with the demands of a more evolved Socialism. Thus while motorbikes still exist on the centralized level of a People's democracy, they are somewhat smoother and more civilized in appearance, the wheels a little less ring-like, the hub slightly larger and the overall wheel diameter slightly narrower, the engine body no longer a naked absolute materialism, but partly covered by streamlined fibreglass panniers which reflect a smooth, glossy surface indicative of the idealistic, or essential, element germane to Transcendental Socialism. Furthermore the seat(s) will be modified in a more streamlined, not to say synthetic, manner, with a high back-rest for added comfort and protection to the passenger riding pillion (if any), whilst a tier-like distinction between front and rear seats may well apply, as befitting a more relative ideological disposition. Certainly this Transcendental Socialist motorbike will appear somewhat more civilized than the Marxist variety, and one fancies that the rider(s) will reflect a similar degree of progress in his own appearance, a smoother type of leather jacket or PVC-type zipper suit the sartorial norm, the helmet of the 'encapsulated' visor-bearing type, boots smooth and high - quite a contrast, all things considered, to the typical 'greaser' or 'rocker' look, with its coarse opaque leather, open helmet, and thick leather boots beneath denim jeans! Certainly the British working class, ever partial to motorbikes, would seem to be more partial, these days, to the Transcendental Socialist variety of motorbike than to its Marxist, and in many ways comparatively barbarous, precursor; though plenty of the latter are still to be seen. As regards the Extreme Right, a similar progression from scooters can, I believe, be noted, which would correspond to a Fascist/Centrist distinction, in the recent appearance of the trike, a bike-like three-wheeler that runs on electricity and carries one passenger, himself the driver/rider (insofar as his mode of steering is a sort of handlebar) who sits, legs together, inside the open body of the trike, itself a marvel of fibreglass streamlining. Beyond petrol engines, and consequently quiet and clean of use, the trike suggests a transcendental break with the past that may well presage an even more transcendentally encapsulated mode of (superfolkish) transportation still to-come.

 

104. Could it be, I wonder, that, with its three concentrically-biased wheels, the conventional three-wheeler is to superdemocracy what the trike would appear to be in relation to supertheocratic criteria - the Liberal Democratic equivalent preceding, on a lower ideological level, the Social Transcendentalist equivalent ... of the trike or, at any rate, of trike-like projects? Personally, I am quite prepared to believe it, since there would seem to be a parallel of sorts between three-wheeled cars and that marvel of concentric technology which bears the altogether distinct and transcendent name ... 'trike'!

 

105. Nothing can escape the status of an ideological equivalent, nor should anything. For in the closed society to come, one must know how to distinguish between the relevant and the alien and/or obsolete. Only through such knowledge will one be able to get rid of everything irrelevant and/or obsolescent. Only through such knowledge will one be able to standardize, over a period of time, Social Transcendentalist society along the highest, most uniform lines.

 

106. Thus even on the subject of, say, milk, one will know that class distinctions can be inferred to exist between the different kinds of milk and their container presentation thereof, bottled milk being Liberal and therefore bourgeois in construction, reflecting an atomic balance between idealism and materialism in the glass realism (transparent but hard) of the bottle; cartoned milk being Democratic Socialist and therefore left-wing petty bourgeois in construction, the carton an opaque reflection of Labour materialism; while milk in a plastic transparent bottle, or container, would be radical Conservative and therefore right-wing petty bourgeois, reflecting, in the supernatural artificiality of the plastic bottle, an idealistic absolutism, albeit one implicated, like the materialist carton, in the democratic tradition, for which read 'milk', whether pasteurised or homogenised. Unlikely, then, that such 'bourgeois milk' would survive long into the closed societies of the future; though we are once again obliged to posit, as in other contexts, two kinds and levels of People's milk, both of which are somewhat artificial, or synthetic, by comparison: a lower, or particle, kind stemming, in a manner of speaking, from cartoned milk, and a higher, or wavicle, kind stemming from milk in plastic bottles, each of which corresponds to Communist and Fascist equivalents. Taking the lower kind first, we are of course alluding to powdered milk, particularly that which comes in opaque containers (tins, cans, or whatever), and if a Marxist/Transcendental Socialist distinction is to be inferred, then it can only apply to that between the coarser powdered milk in tins and a smoother powdered milk in jars, the latter on a more evolved level and symptomatic, it seems to me, of a redeemed materialism commensurate with theocratic criteria. As regards the higher kind of People's milk, which is of course milk of the condensed variety (suggestive of a supernatural intensification and purification of the natural, with a corresponding reduction in materialism, at least with regard to the quantity of milk made available to the customer in any given container), we may distinguish, I believe, between Fascist and Centrist levels of such supernatural milk, the former coming in tins, the latter in compact plastic bottle-like containers ... more unequivocally supernatural in construction, sterilized as well as evaporated, an ideological alternative to smooth skimmed milk of the Transcendental Socialist, or jarred, variety, and doubtless more relevant to a Social Transcendentalist Centre than to a Transcendental Socialist State. I need hardly say what would or should be irrelevant to both!

 

107. Interesting how most cars on the road in Britain tend to be of the Liberal four-seater variety, with two-seaters, whether of the Labour Left or of the Conservative Right, very much the exception to the rule. Does this indicate, I wonder, an inherent bias for Liberalism in a majority of the British people? Possibly not, but certainly a majority of the middle class or car-driving fraternity would seem to be partial to middle-of-the-road criteria. How else to explain the preponderance of four-seaters?

 

108. One thing I didn't write about earlier, when discussing cars, is the distinction that has comparatively recently arisen between four-seaters with four doors and four-seaters with two, the latter suggesting a more absolutist predilection which may well be commensurate with Liberal Democratic criteria or, at any rate, with some kind of compromise between the strictly Liberal and the strictly Democratic Socialist. Another thing which didn't occur to me at the time is that, although bubble cars would appear to be the most idealistic or interiorized of cars, and therefore the ones best suited to accord with a radical right-wing equivalent, they are no more plentiful on roads in Britain than conventional three-wheelers, a fact which obliges one to consider more typical examples of absolutist cars that, while being less idealistic, are nonetheless distinct from the materialistic open-topped cars of the extreme left, and therefore serve, to all intents and purposes, as an idealistic roofed-in radical Conservative alternative, like, for example, Porsches and Ferraris. Which would suggest that sports cars are not only a thing of the Left but can also, under certain conditions, appertain to the Right, albeit, paradoxically, in terms of a left-wing bias. But if we return to what precedes or may be presumed to precede such enclosed two-seaters, we would find a more moderate, traditional Conservative equivalence in the most capacious and luxurious of enclosed four-seaters, like Rolls Royces and Bensons - large cars forming an alternative, or opposition, on their own more relatively idealistic terms to open-topped four-seaters or low-lying cars that, in relation to modern open-topped sports cars, suggest a traditional Labour equivalent, still materialistic by dint of the roofless body-oriented framework, but more relative, and hence democratic, than their latter-day two-seater successors, like the Triumph Spitfire. Yet even these must be divisible, one fancies, into left- and right-wing equivalents corresponding to radical and moderate criteria, with the latter having an optional rather than an obligatory open top, while sporting hub-centred wheels in contrast to spokes. However, one need not doubt that there would exist as much 'political' friction between the driver of an open-topped two-seater and the driver of a close-topped two-seater, as between the rider of a motorbike and the rider of a scooter, though never more so than when the enclosed two-seater was genuinely idealistic (right wing) and the open-topped two-seater genuinely materialistic (left wing).

 

109. An agnostic stands to an atheist as a Democratic Socialist to a Communist: a relative, and hence moderate, version of a similar God-denying phenomenon. Not as antinatural as the latter, he will give God (whether in the guise of Christ or the Father) the benefit of the doubt.

 

110. In the subnatural/natural world order, women stand to men as moons to planets: lesser bodies that shine with a borrowed light - the light, namely, of a man's spirituality, including his tastes and opinions. When a man and a woman marry they are, in effect, contracting into propagation; for there is no real point in marrying unless one is intending to produce children. But when they come, children are equivalent to suns in the atomic scheme of natural/subnatural behaviour, and, in accordance with relative criteria, the parents revolve around, i.e. attend to the needs of, their children ... like planets around the sun in a solar system. Such a cosmically-sanctioned procedure is only relevant so long as subnatural/natural open-society criteria obtain, but not afterwards! For a supernatural world order would require free-electron procedures commensurate with a more evolved or transcendental society, one which completely transcends atomic blueprints, both cosmic and organic. The family would have no place in such a spiritually-oriented society, propagation being largely a supernatural phenomenon connected with sperm banks and artificial insemination, children being collectively raised at the Centre's expense in special child centres, independent of parental association and transcending the relativity between kindergarten and home. However, in returning to the present century, one finds that an increasing number of people marry without having children in mind, a factor testifying to a post-atomic antinatural bias commensurate with decadent relativistic criteria. In short, symptomatic of sexual materialism. Perhaps, on the other hand, the growing propensity of many couples to produce only one child is indicative of a sexual idealism not unconnected with absolutist predilections in an incipiently absolute age? Could it be, I wonder, that two or more children from a given couple has a relatively Liberal ring about it, which is all very well from a bourgeois point-of-view, but effectively irrelevant from both radical petty-bourgeois and People's angles?

 

111. A few suggestions for the future transformation of certain existing and/or traditional institutions into centres: postal centre (post office); conception centre (maternity hospital); medical centre (general hospital); surgical centre (specialist hospital); military centre (army barracks); police centre (police station); dental centre (dental surgery); welfare centre (unemployment benefit office).

 

112. One's fate is other people's destinies; one's destiny ... other people's fates. Destiny is what we will upon ourselves; fate ... what other people will upon us. Generally speaking, destiny is benign, fate malign.

 

113. Shaw is quoted as having opined that the best form of political arrangement would be a benevolent dictatorship. I have to agree with him, but I should like to qualify 'benevolent' by associating it with a Fascist style of leadership, in contrast to what I perceive as a malevolent dictatorship, or one of the Extreme Left. Not that Hitler was particularly benevolent, any more than he was particularly fascist (if by Fascism we understand a more theocratic style of dictatorship originating in Italy). It is one thing to take the People's political sovereignty from them and function as a dictator; it is quite another thing to take their political sovereignty from them on the basis that one will endow them with religious sovereignty in due course, as part of an electoral deal which can only be in the best interests of a people desirous and capable of theocratic sovereignty (like, hopefully, the Irish). Then one becomes a Christ-like figure ... bearing 'sins of the world', or materialistic responsibilities (including the judicial and economic) upon one's shoulders ... in order that the People in question may go free of such responsibilities, or 'worldly sins', in the interests of their spiritual betterment, achieved under Centrist guidance, in the transcendent centres that the benevolent dictator would authorize, once the power entrusted to him by the sovereign People had been used to good effect against traditional religious institutions. Yet an inherently religious people like the Catholic Irish will stubbornly cling to those traditional institutions until such time as a higher, truer religious path becomes available to them and they can perceive the advantages in adopting it at the expense of their republican sovereignty, which is, in all but a tiny minority of cases, tangential or subordinate to their true bias. Of course, neither Hitler nor Mussolini endowed their respective peoples with religious sovereignty, Hitler's dictatorship being National Socialist in character, Mussolini's more purely Fascist and thus determined to protect and bolster vested clerical interests. The result, particularly in Hitler's case, was a quasi-autocratic dictatorship which, whilst intimating of theocratic possibility, fell woefully short of a true theocratic breakthrough, and which can therefore hardly be described as benevolent! Rather, it seems that the German people existed more for the sake of Hitler than vice versa, as would be the case where the People were still sovereign or had exchanged democratic sovereignty for its theocratic successor in what I have elsewhere described as a People's theocracy, where the dictatorial powers entrusted to the divinely-inspired Leader would be put to the spiritual service of the People, and a benevolent dictatorship becomes the inevitable corollary, a dictatorship destined to wither, however, into the collective leadership of the Centre, as People's theocracy properly emerges from the comparative chaos of revolutionary ferment, and the politico-religious disciples and/or successors to the inceptive Leader take over from him the task of running a Social Transcendentalist society along already-established lines. He may in effect be quasi-autocratic, serving in a ruling manner through decrees, but they will be quasi-democratic in their collective political responsibilities to the People. Dictatorship will wither into inner-party democracy, an individualistic service into a collective service, and the service, in particular, of the religiously sovereign People's true spiritual interests.

 

114. To suppose that Social Transcendentalism emerged from Transcendental Socialism, as though one had just switched the words around, would be a gross error! No more does Social Transcendentalism emerge from Transcendental Socialism than ... scooters or trikes from motorbikes or PVC from leather or condensed milk from skimmed milk, etc. Nothing can emerge from Transcendental Socialism because it is a closed ideology complete in itself, appertaining to the furthest and most attenuated reach of the democratic spectrum, rather than to the inception of a genuinely theocratic spectrum. A Transcendental Socialist cannot throw Marx or Lenin completely overboard and proceed to steer his society in a God-building direction. He is stuck with them and will remain stuck with them until such time as his atheistic society is fated to be consigned to the rubbish heap of world history. One cannot transform dialectical materialism, the world-view of the Antichrist, into post-dialectical idealism. The move towards a pure Centrism can only come from a Social Transcendentalist precondition, and Social Transcendentalism owes more to Fascism than ever it does to Communism. No less than Transcendental Socialism is a kind of Supercommunism in relation to Communism-proper, so Social Transcendentalism is a kind of Superfascism in relation to Fascism-proper. For they each transcend the extremist traditions of Communism and Fascism on their own respective terms - Transcendental Socialism a pseudo-civilized/quasi-barbarous antithesis to the Christian/Liberal civilization of the aligned West, Social Transcendentalism the inceptive ideology of a new and final civilization, destined for world-wide applicability. And, to be sure, there is a parallel of sorts between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, both of which emerged, on different terms, from the womb of Graeco-Roman civilization, though each of which appertained to a spectrum of evolution separate from that which preceded them. But this evolutionary progression from Graeco-Roman civilization to Eastern Orthodox/Roman Catholic civilization, and from Anglo-American civilization to Transcendental Socialist/Social Transcendentalist civilization is only a kind of macrocosmic parallel to a progression, within man, from the old brain to the subconscious, and from the new brain to the superconscious, which is equivalent to saying, on more abstract terms, from proton particles to wavicles, and from electron particles to wavicles, with Eastern Orthodoxy and its latter-day antithetical equivalent, Transcendental Socialism, taking transitional positions in-between each progression, with a bias for the particle, or materialistic, side. Yet civilizations do not, any more than changes within the psyche, spring-up independently of environmental factors, but are to varying extents indebted to or conditioned by them, both in their natural and artificial manifestations. For it can be contended - and not without ample justification in light of my own work - that the further man evolves, whether in terms of the macrocosmic civilization or of the microcosmic psyche, the freer he becomes from materialistic conditioning factors and the more, by a correlative degree, do his psycho-civilized aspirations acquire a transcendentally idealistic character that owes little or nothing to the natural environment but which serves, on the contrary, to modify that environment and, in addition, create a completely new environment which mirrors, on the material plane, such aspirations. At this most extreme stage of his evolution, he effectively becomes a spirit in the material world, modifying and recreating it as though from a purely transcendent vantage-point. No longer man but Superman, he must fashion the world in a supernatural, or synthetic, image of himself, and thereby redeem it, transforming it into an intimation, on the material plane, of the heavenly Beyond.

 

115. In the realm of art, the progression from the old brain to the subconscious and from the new brain to the superconscious ... is paralleled by a progression from sculpture to painting on the one hand, and from sculptural light art to holograms on the other hand. Again, parallel to this, one could speak of a progression from dreams to visions and from ratiocination to contemplation in respect of the brain/mind dichotomy itself, which would further confirm an overall proton/electron division with alternations, as it were, between their respective particle and wavicle sides. Dreams pertain to the old brain no less than visions to the subconscious, being a subconscious projection into consciousness of dream-related material. In both contexts, a kind of madness compared with the sanity of new-brain ratiocination, which only became a conscious Western ideal in the eighteenth century, from which we must evolve, in due place and time, towards the supersanity, as it were, of hallucinogenic enlightenment, if the new brain is to be transcended by and through the superconscious in the name of electron-wavicle idealism. So, considered historically, one could contend that madness leads to supermadness, or an unconscious desire to exorcise dreams through natural visions, while sanity leads to supersanity, or a consciously-expressed desire to escape from 'wilful' ratiocination into the passive contemplation of artificially-induced visions. All of which would parallel, in approximate evolutionary stages, a progression from the Kingdom to the Church, as from proton particles to wavicles, followed by a similar progression from the State to the Centre, or from electron particles to wavicles, in due course of evolutionary time. Thus if dreams are especially relevant to the autocratic Kingdom, or an age of old-brain materialism, then visions would be especially relevant to the Catholic Church, or an age of subconscious idealism. Likewise, if ratiocination is especially relevant to the Republican State, or an age of new-brain materialism, then the contemplation of artificially-induced visionary experience should be especially relevant to the Social Transcendentalist Centre, or the coming age of superconscious idealism. But what of realism? Realism is that atomic (church/state) dualism, particularly relevant to a Christian/Liberal society, that fights shy of extremes, whether of the materialistic or the idealistic varieties, past or future. Realism corresponds to the ego/brain compromise of humanistic man. Given neither to one part of the brain or another nor to one part of the mind or another, realism wants the best of all worlds, providing that, dovetailed into ego and brain, they conform to a uniquely middle-of-the-road psycho-physical position. The ego is no less afraid of trips than of visions. The brain is no less opposed to excessive dreaming than to excessive ratiocination. The ego-mind will have its visions in painting and its trips on television. The brain-mind will sleep in moderation and think only when obliged to, though not, as a rule, very profoundly!

 

116. Since brain, whether old, middle, or new, is of a particle bias in relation to mind, whether subconscious, conscious, or superconscious, it is, ipso facto, objective, in contrast to the subjectivity of the mind's wavicle bias. Thus, in alluding to dreaming or thinking, we are dealing with an objective experience, whereas visions and trips appertain to the subjective. But there are two kinds of objectivity no less than two kinds of subjectivity, and these may be defined as the external mode and the internal mode, depending on whether we are referring to the proton-biased old brain and/or subconscious or, on the contrary, to the electron-biased new brain and/or superconscious. Protons confer an external status, electrons an internal one. The evolutionary Kingdom/Church progression from old-brain dreaming to subconscious visions is therefore equivalent to a progression from the external objective to the external subjective, while the later State/Centre progression from new-brain ratiocination to superconscious contemplation is equivalent to a progression from the internal objective to the internal subjective, the former materialistic and the latter idealistic. Appearance precedes essence, but is duly eclipsed by it.

 

117. Objectivity, whether of the external or internal varieties, appertains to the Left, subjectivity to the Right - a straight dichotomy between brain and mind, materialism and idealism. When there is no such dichotomy or, rather, when brain and mind are conceived on moderate terms, as mid-brain and ego-mind, we have neither Left nor Right but Centre (not to be confused with Social Transcendentalism, which is radically Cent(e)rist rather than moderately Centrist), and this applies as much to the Protestant Church as to the Liberal Parliament - a uniquely atomic compromise germane to a strictly Christian civilization which, of necessity, fights shy of particle and wavicle extremes. It was precisely the Centrist nature of Protestantism and Liberalism that led from the right-wing, or Catholic, Church to the left-wing, or Republican, State. Yet the Protestant/Liberal compromise precludes, by its very centrist nature, allegiance to either a genuine church or state, since it signifies a dovetailed combination of the two which, as in the context of the ego-mind/mid-brain in relation to the subconscious and the new brain, constitutes a uniquely atomic centrality. Neither properly subjective nor properly objective, the Protestant/Liberal society adheres to its own worldly compromise in pseudo-subjective religion and pseudo-objective politics, the former egocentric and the latter brain-centred.

 

118. Against feminism, which posits an equality of the sexes irrespective of professional, moral, or spiritual considerations, I posit an equality of the sexes based on the extent to which women are being masculinized, i.e. adopting civic, commercial, or professional responsibilities, and generally dressing and looking (with short hair, absence of make-up, etc.) more like men, so that it becomes illogical to regard them as women and to discriminate against them in consequence. This I call 'masculinism', which implies an equality owing its justification to the idealism of a woman taking upon herself a lifestyle and occupational responsibility similar to that of a man. Pertaining to an absolutist evaluation of men and women, such equality indicates a People's level of sexual categorization that suggests, on account of its implicit idealism, a Centrist ideological equivalent commensurate with closed-society supertheocratic criteria. Not simply men and women but, in effect, Supermen and quasi-Supermen. The notion, on the other hand, that men and women are equal irrespective of how they dress, think, act, or live, derives its case from purely materialistic factors relating to human bodies and must therefore be accorded a Communist status, as befitting a materialistic absolutism. Thus 'masculinism' and 'feminism' confront each other across an idealistic/materialistic divide, the former high and the latter low - God and Devil at approximately Messianic and Antichristic stages respectively.

 

119. It makes a lot of difference whether one listens to music through speakers or headphones. In fact, all the difference between a democratic and a theocratic equivalent. For speakers are to recorded music what cars are to road transportation - a bourgeois and/or petty-bourgeois mode of conveying recorded sound which should be clearly distinguished from People's modes, in the use of headphones of one kind or another. Doubtless speakers fall into different 'democratic' categories, such as Liberal Democratic, Labour, and Conservative, and I fancy that the larger types of cabinet, having two or more speakers, can be accorded a Liberal status by dint of their inherent relativity, whereas Labour and Conservative cabinets would have to approximate to an absolutist status, either literally in terms of just one speaker to each cabinet or with, to all appearances, a flat one-piece cabinet front. Certainly, Labour and Conservative cabinets ought to be smaller than the Liberal Democratic variety, albeit of quite different shape - the Labour cabinet squat and hence materialistic, the Conservative cabinet slender and hence idealistic, the former more suited to the floor, the latter probably used to best advantage when appended to the wall, each of them flanking what one can only suppose to be a Liberal Democratic norm of cabinets raised on legs. However that may be, cabinets of whatever type approximate, in their square or oblong construction, to a democratic appearance-oriented norm that, while typical of an open society, would become untypical (to the point of exclusion) of a People's society, particularly of Social Transcendentalist provenance where, needless to say, only headphones would truly apply. Of course headphones, no less than radical speakers, are divisible into two distinct categories, viz. a Fascist and/or Centrist category on the idealistic side, and a Communist and/or Transcendental Socialist category on the materialistic side, depending whether they are of the micro or the conventional type; whether, in short, they chiefly pertain to cassette-recorders or to record-players. In the former instance they will be small, light, concentrically orientated in the foam-covered phones, and of a largely plastic or synthetic construction, the overall style designed to convey a wavicle bias appropriate to superidealism. In the latter instance, the headphones will be comparatively large, heavy, ring-like in the ear padding around the phones, and also of a largely synthetic construction, though there may be more metal and/or leather in the overall composition of these particle-biased kinds of headphones, particularly on the more unequivocally Communist level, i.e. the earlier level which precedes, as it were, a Transcendental Socialist streamlining and, in consequence, slight contraction of materialism. Certainly an analogy with the squat, round kinds of rolls comes to mind with these 'Antichristic' headphones, no less than the 'Messianic' type evoke an analogue favouring the elongated, slender kinds of rolls already discussed.

 

120. Such analogues apply equally well to electric shavers: the squat, compact ones suggestive of a Communist equivalent, the slender and longer ones suggesting a Fascist equivalent, both of which kinds, irrespective of individual variations on the cutting/trimming levels, are beyond naturalistic modes of shaving and therefore, in contrast to safety razors, would seem to be People's modes of shaving that indicate an artificial or supernatural integrity. As in other contexts, ordinary hand razors can doubtless be categorized along lines approximating to Liberal Democratic, Labour, and Conservative distinctions, and I fancy that while the double-edged variety will be Liberal Democratic, the single-blade varieties approximate, by contrast, to Labour and Conservative equivalents - with metallic razors appertaining to the former and disposable plastic razors to the latter, in a sort of moderately antinatural and supernatural status commensurate, in each case, with radical petty-bourgeois absolutes. Probably most 'democratic' shavers (here I use the term in a personal sense) employ one or other of the synthetically-produced kinds of canned shaving cream, but there are doubtless some who, whether from class prejudice or ingrained habit, mix their own shaving potion in a naturalistic fashion, suggestive of a Liberal or even of a traditional Conservative bias. Either way, a relativity between cream and blade is established which indicates an atomic compromise germane to democratic criteria, particularly within a Protestant/Liberal framework. Not so with the absolutist 'theocratic' shaves of the electric shavers; though I fancy that the Centrist type of person would be more disposed to the application of aftershave lotion than his Communist counterpart, thereby establishing a sort of Social Transcendentalist equivalence in which the particle aspect of shaving, viz. that which pertains to the electric shaver, is subordinated to its wavicle aspect, viz. that which involves aftershave lotion, and a new civilized ideal - the converse of the 'democratic', with its shaving-cream introduction - duly ensues. I ought also to add that the truly 'theocratic' type of shaver will run on batteries rather than off the mains, batteries being less anti-supernatural than supernatural, and hence comparatively benign, allowing for greater transcendental freedom than can be achieved with leads. In short, there is something evil about electricity, but good about batteries.

 

121. Worship is a religion for fools; self-realization a religion of the wise.

 

122. All higher art indirectly appeals, in varying degrees, to the element of self-realization in man through self-transcendence. When we listen to music or read a book or contemplate a painting, the body is stilled, transcended, and we live in and for the mind. Now while this indirect method of self-realization is inferior (because dependent on external phenomena) to the direct and internal method, it is nonetheless preferable to activities which appeal to the body, the lower self in both its physical and psychic manifestations, and therefore enslave us to self-indulgence. A civilization that finds its ideal in a balance between self-indulgence and self-transcendence will not take such moralizing too seriously. But a civilization that upholds the true ideal of self-realization will find even self-transcendence unacceptable, insofar as it is the converse side of an atomic, egocentric coin rooted in self-indulgence and therefore no more than 'the best of a bad job', so to speak. No, a truly ideal civilization will prefer to cultivate the self directly, through innermost contemplation and meditation, and accordingly dispense with all art not conducive to the furtherance of this transcendent ideal of the utmost spiritual purism. Such 'art' as it upholds will appeal rather more to self-realization than to self-transcendence, being akin to the state of inner contemplation. Of course, this also in some degree applies to certain kinds of 'modern art', meaning extreme right-wing petty-bourgeois abstraction; works, for example, by Mark Rothko and Ben Nicholson which, though on canvas or something analogous and therefore pertaining to a democratic tradition in art, intimate of theocratic possibility, inducing, by their highly simplistic abstraction, a quasi-state of self-realization, forcing the 'viewer' back upon himself and his own deeper resources. All such 'art', though particularly that which (like holography) is inherently theocratic, attempts to transcend art by approximating as closely as possible to pure spirit, a fact of necessity that must make it appear boring and sham from the traditional viewpoint of 'democratic' art, which, on the contrary, appeals to self-transcendence through one or another degree and one or another kind of representational egocentricity, and is consequently but the complementary opposite of self-indulgence. Such 'democratic' art will often appear brilliant and reflect a most sophisticated technique, the combination of which can hardly fail to induce self-transcendence. But the 'art' that stems from the higher types of abstraction, and which should have special relevance to the supertheocratic societies of the Centrist future, has no such intention, but is solely designed to facilitate self-realization by directly appealing to the meditation state, by paralleling it, in other words, as far as possible. Art ends where self-realization begins. Self-realization is facilitated by superart.

 

123. When we contrast People's levels of culture or religion with bourgeois levels, we are encouraged to distinguish between the direct and the indirect approach to self-realization, or even to contend that self-transcendence isn't so much a negative form of self-realization ... as a negative complement to self-indulgence, and consequently something that falls woefully short of even an indirect appeal to self-realization. In short, a world closed-in upon itself, alternating between brain and ego, body and mind, and therefore having little or nothing to do with the superconscious. But when, by contrast, we confine ourselves to People's levels, we find that self-realization can take indirect or direct forms, depending on whether tripping or meditating is the order of the day. To be sure, there is a lot of difference between the contemplation of artificially-induced visionary experience and the direct cultivation of pure spirit through transcendental meditation. In the first case we are dealing with internal appearances; in the second case with internal essences. However, appearance must precede essence in the unfolding of People's civilization, and consequently the indirect form of self-realization should precede the direct form, as in a kind of Catholic/Puritan distinction that will be repeated on more intensive terms at the artificially-engineered levels of the brain and new-brain collectivizations in the ensuing post-Human Millennium. Thus tripper into meditator followed, in the post-Human Millennium, by hypertripper into hypermeditator, the latter of which will directly precede transcendence and the consequent attainment of pure spirit to space where, as electron-electron attractions, it will converge and expand towards the Omega Point, the definitive 'globe' of pure spirit, which is synonymous with ultimate divinity, i.e. the Holy Spirit.

 

124. Sense in which racing cars approximate to a literal Communist equivalent analogous, in their militant absolutism, to Socialist Realism in canvas art. By which I mean that racing cars are a mode of car no less than Socialist Realism is a mode of art, and are therefore aligned, on a tangential basis, with a democratic tradition. If motorbikes of one kind or another are Marxist or Transcendental Socialist equivalents in the 'Western', or idealistic, sense to which such designations usually apply in my work, then the racing car would appear to be more literally or realistically Communist on account of its absolutist materialism of an open-topped, one-seater construction - a militantly democratic equivalent paralleling the proletarian absolutism of Socialist Realism. Paradoxically, however, it is in the West rather than the East that racing-car driving finds its chief practitioners.

 

125. Another parallel to racing cars would be recorded music, particularly heavy rock and/or metal, played on stereo with the use of speakers rather than headphones, so that the transmission and reception of sound assumes an apparent as opposed to an essential status (falling short of the headphone absolutism that, in its interiorization of sound, indicates a theocratic dimension), suggestive therefore of an extreme, or peripheral, democratic equivalent that could, once again, be described as realistically Communist or, better still, literally Marxist. Certainly there is something radically materialistic about playing heavy rock as loudly as possible via speakers, and I fancy that the same applies to racing-car driving which, in its intensive noise on the ring-like circuits of the track, suggests a materialistic evil stemming from a left-wing democratic tradition rather than intimating of a theocratic possibility, and which is accordingly beneath redemption, an end-in-itself, as hostile to idealism as to realism and therefore nowhere near being a Transcendental Socialist equivalent ... wherein even the Marxist ingredient is in some degree transmuted, i.e. endowed, no matter how paradoxically, with an idealistic dimension, and motorbikes (not to mention leather jackets) are the ideological consequence.

 

126. It has been said of Irish thought, and by no less a scholar than Richard Kearney in The Irish Mind, that it is against logocentrism, or the largely Western concept of the interdependence of antitheses which makes for an atomic dualism of, say, good and evil, truth and illusion, or pleasure and pain. Rather, the Irish seem to prefer - and the modern Irish not least of all - a decentralizing bias that implies a refutation of dualism and an acknowledgement, no matter how indirectly, of some more absolutist frame-of-reference wherein evil is independent of good and good independent of evil. Yet this shouldn't be interpreted as implying that Irish thought and, as a corollary of this, Irish conduct are against centralism; for the early Irish, in particular the Boyne people, were highly centralized in their religious affiliation with the unity behind all dualism, the central-star roots of cosmic evolution in the Galaxy. Rather, it implies a revolt against atomic centrality, so dear to the Protestant/Liberal British, and a desire, no matter how obliquely expressed, for a higher, more absolutist centrality which, in traditional terminology, could be described as of the Holy Ghost rather than of Christ, i.e. a free-electron centrality of the Good which necessarily transcends the good/evil dichotomy of the worldly atomists by dint of the fact that this manifestation of the Good, like its pagan antithesis the Evil, is inherently absolutist and thus beyond all logocentric dualism, a new and altogether superior kind of Good commensurate, so I believe, with the definitive, or omega, centrality of the Social Transcendentalist Centre, wherein a People's theocracy is the ideological concomitance achieved under a maximum centralized leadership, and the People are accordingly spiritually sovereign. 'Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold' wrote Yeats in The Second Coming, and one might be forgiven for detecting a 'falling apart' from the 'centre' in the gradual emergence and development of the Irish Republic, which first of all 'fell' from the U.K. 'centre' of Great Britain and Ireland, and which continues to 'fall', on its own terms, from what remains of the logocentric, atomic legacy of British imperialism in Ireland. Yet only, however, up to a certain point, by dint of the restraining influence of the Roman Catholic Church, whose existence precludes a radical and irredeemable 'fall' into the Marxist materialism of a socialist republic. Instead, one finds an extreme dualism between church and state that, in some degree, parallels the Catholic/Republican dualism of the French while being distinct from it to the extent that the Church has more influence and power in Ireland than in Voltairean France - a reflection, in part, of the majority Irish people's inherent religious bias. Consequently republicanism is unlikely to be regarded, by such a people, as an ideal in itself, but, rather, as a necessary evil, a political framework inherited from the struggle against British imperialism which, willy-nilly, the Irish are stuck with, in the interests of their political freedom. Of course, such freedom is very important. For if the majority Irish are not to remain enslaved to Catholicism for ever, they must utilize their political freedom and endorse, in due democratic time, the teachings and intentions of Social Transcendentalism, in order that the Centre may be born from the womb of the Liberal Republic and impart to them the religious sovereignty which, with its emphasis on centre-guided self-realization, should be so much more important to such a people than political sovereignty, being the next logical evolutionary step beyond it. Having acquired democratic sovereignty through the Republic, the true Irish should use such sovereignty as a springboard to the ultimate sovereignty of the spirit. Thus the Republic will be truly vindicated, as electron particles make way for electron wavicles in due process of evolutionary change. For it is inconceivable that a 'republican' people should be viewed as peasants, and it is therefore most unlikely that they would wish, as nominal proletarians, to remain under the dominion of the Catholic Church when the opportunity to embrace the Social Transcendentalist Centre becomes available to them, bringing with it the omega religion of a transcendent freedom.

 

127. Interesting how, in the alpha of evolution, things proceed in threes and in three layers, so to speak, as dualism emerges from the unitary roots of cosmic evolution in the central star of the Galaxy. Thus central star/peripheral stars/planets, the latter two originating in the former to the extent they were once a part of it that exploded out, or 'fell', in Biblical parlance, becoming, in due process, smaller stars which, in turn, became suns and planets ... as the smallest ones cooled or hardened and thus gave rise to a sort of magnetic tension of cosmic equilibrium vis--vis both suns and central star combined. Thus the cosmic roots of the atom in a very lopsided, absolutist atomic structure favouring protons.... Which continues through subnatural and natural creation in terms of the planet as a microcosmic, though slightly expanded, version of the Galaxy, with threefold distinctions between fiery centre of the earth, mineral crust, and organic soil; followed by similar threefold distinctions between sap, bark, and leaves within the overall atomic framework of trees; followed by yet other threefold distinctions between blood, bone, and flesh within the overall framework of apes, who are no less a kind of animal than trees are a kind of plant, and from whom man is believed to have evolved, as a further extension of the blood-bone-flesh triplicity within the overall framework of the human body, still tied to the animal world in all essential matters and therefore a reflection, on higher terms, of the basic subatomic pattern, which finds its social equivalence in the division of men into royals, nobles, and populace, corresponding to blood, bone, and flesh, with the priestly caste corresponding to marrow in the bone - the Lords spiritual as opposed to temporal - and the soldiery to muscle in the flesh, a rather more militant or powerful manifestation of the populace, or peasantry. Naturally, such a feudal ordering of society also corresponds to the divisions between fiery centre of the earth, mineral crust, and organic soil, society corresponding to the overall integrity of these phenomena in the planet itself, not to mention to the divisions between sap, bark, and leaves in the overall integrity of trees - royals, nobility, and populace. However, it should be remarked that the individual also reflects such a feudal, or subatomic, society in the totality of his body, though his body would not be of much use to him were it not governed by the brain, specifically the old brain - any more than the planet would be of much use to itself were it not governed, in large measure, by the sun and thus constrained to revolve around this peripheral star within the overall framework of the Solar System. Would it be stretching the analogy too far to contend that what the sun is to the earth, the brain is to the body, viz. a monarchic equivalent that presides over the inherent blood-bone-flesh triplicity of the body? No, I do not believe so!

 

128. Now if, in deriving the monarchic principle from the sun, we are led to derive the papal principle from the central star of the Galaxy, then we would have a 'divine' equivalent for the subconscious, which may be said to exist in as superior, albeit unseen, a relation to the old brain as the central star of the Galaxy to the sun and, indeed, to the totality of stars within the Galaxy, a Godfather equivalence in relation to 'fallen angels', or devils. Certainly it would seem that the papacy corresponds to or symbolizes the Father, the Catholic Church being very Father orientated and thus, as mentioned earlier in this book, highly disposed to the subconscious, with its visionary essence. Hence an autocratic society, intelligible as a Kingdom, reflects the overall construction of the human body (with blood, bone, and flesh governed by the old brain) no less than the overall construction of the Galaxy, and may be said to derive, in large measure, from each, though particularly, I would argue, from the former, which is closer, after all, to man than (is) the Cosmos. Therefore the relation of Kingdom to Church, or of old brain to subconscious, parallels the relation of Satan to the Creator on the microcosmic level, or the sun to the central star of the Galaxy on the macrocosmic level, and we may consequently infer that the monarchy corresponds to the former, i.e. the Devil, and the papacy to the latter, i.e. God, as materialism and idealism confront each other across an autocratic divide of proton particles and wavicles, old brain and subconscious, temporal and eternal, with subatomic society, akin to the planet, constrained to the dual sovereignty of monarch and pope, whilst acknowledging the overall moral superiority of the latter. Now we need not doubt that the distinction between kings and popes reflects, on a wider level, the galactic distinction between peripheral stars and central star, so that the Catholic civilization of the Middle Ages may be taken to reflect the Galaxy, or a galaxy, with many kings and one pope, the kings each having a particular society, or planetary equivalent, to rule over (just as individual stars have their own solar systems), but constrained, for the duration of subatomic criteria, to an acknowledgement of the central authority, situated in the Vatican. Now this fact would explain, in no small degree, the paradox between political strife and spiritual unity, no less apparent in early Irish civilization where, in accordance with the more unequivocally-absolutist nature of pagan society, a relatively undifferentiated distinction existed between the King of Tara and the kings of the provinces and/or tribal formations, the former corresponding to the spiritual authority of the One behind all dualism, the latter to individual societies. Now the King of Tara had no more jurisdiction over the wars and feudings which regularly ensued between the various kingdoms ... than the papacy of later times had jurisdiction to prevent or alter the outcome of wars between one monarch and another. That, after all, is not the responsibility of the spiritual authority, any more than the central star of the Galaxy can intervene in the frictional conduct of the many peripheral stars which circle around it in fulfilment of their respective cosmic years. The unitary idealism of God is ever separate from the fragmentary materialism of the devils.

 

129. Only when the papacy feels especially threatened, as by the rise of Protestant heresy, will it feel obliged to abandon its idealism to the extent of ensuring and bolstering, through active counsel, the loyalty of Catholic monarchs. For Protestantism is against the papacy and, by implication, the Father, a truly humanistic rebellion against papal authority that can only undermine the foundations of the Church to the inevitable detriment of the papacy and overall integrity of the subatomic world order. Protestantism is naturalism, the atomic balance, in Christ, between the Father and the Holy Ghost, the focus having shifted from the alpha extremism of an old-brain/subconscious dichotomy to the humanistic middle-ground, as it were, of brain/ego dualism, with a corresponding progression from monarch and pope to prime minister and archbishop. No longer a hierarchy focused on and derived from the 'otherworldly' galactic cosmos, the Protestant revolt leads, in its civilized flowering, to a humanist commonalty based in this world, with realism rather than idealism or materialism the golden mean, a realism appertaining to politics no less than to religion and therefore focusing sovereign attention upon the individual, who is deemed responsible, in large measure, for his own destiny. As democrats and deists, Protestants have little sympathy for autocrats and theists, and one could logically infer that, to all intents and purposes, they are atheistic with regard to the Father, since formally scorning his representative on earth in the interests of a more unequivocally Christian humanist stance.

 

130. Of course, from Christian humanism to Antichristian humanism is just a matter of time, and although Protestantism has no real ambition to transform itself into Communism, it nevertheless paves the way, if indirectly and in spite of itself, so to speak, for that more absolutist and collective humanism which deifies the proletariat and, consequently, is atheist even with regard to Christ, whom it castigates as a bourgeois idol. In short, worldly realism paved the way for anti-worldly materialism, which owes more than a little to the Jews and, in particular, to Karl Marx. Thus, in its rebellion against otherworldly idealism, Protestant civilization eventually became the cradle of a revolt against worldly realism that takes the full-blown form of the modern Socialist State. The brain/ego dualism finds itself confronted by a new-brain absolutism of antinatural materialism. Prime minister and archbishop have been eclipsed by president.

 

131. Fortunately I am neither a Protestant nor a Communist but a self-styled Social Transcendentalist, so I do not feel personally threatened or imprisoned by proletarian materialism. Neither am I a Neo-Platonist, with an alpha-stemming closed-world view of salvation ... as entailing a return to the Father, the primordial One from which man, in conjunction with the rest of Creation, 'fell'. I do not confound alpha with omega or think solely in terms of the former, and I have to confess to a poor view of those who, in this day and age, suppose that the Holy Trinity should be regarded as an alpha entity, with the Son and Holy Ghost as merely separate manifestations of the Father. I can perfectly well understand such absolutist reasoning in the context of the Middle Ages, which were autocratic in character and therefore partial, in their comparative primitivity, to an alpha-stemming evaluation. But in an incipiently omega age, an age the other side of democratic relativity, such a view of the Trinity, not to mention salvation, can only be obsolete; though societies upholding Catholicism doubtless contain individuals who would contest that, if only from their own aristocratic point-of-view. Having lived most of my life in a Protestant society, with its brain/ego dualism, I have never felt constrained to limit myself to old-brain/subconscious thinking. Nor have I allowed myself to identify too closely with its humanistic successor, since atomic criteria are largely alien and distasteful to me, and I have avoided, as far as possible, their worldly seductions. Instead, as a Catholic-born Irishman exiled in England, I have preferred to concentrate on new-brain/superconscious dualism and to develop, from a superconscious vantage-point, a uniquely transcendent concept of salvation which posits a steady progression towards free-electron spirituality in an omega culmination of evolution that, in its electron-electron attractions, is radically, indeed diametrically, antithetical to the proton-proton reactions of the alpha inception of evolution in the Father. Natural creation, including man, from a subnatural base is one thing, but supernatural creation, including Superman, from an artificial base ... quite another! It is both man's privilege and destiny to break entirely free of the natural and to aspire, ever more intensively, towards the supernatural. An omega-oriented closed society would have nothing to do with the Father, nor, for that matter, with His only begotten Son. Instead of worshipping these alpha and egocentric levels of God, the People, as superfolk, would realize their own spiritual perfection in the cultivation of pure spirit and thus, in effect, become the Holy Ghost, if on a comparatively humble level initially. No longer politically sovereign in the new brain, they would be religiously sovereign in the superconscious, a progression from electron particles to wavicles, as from the Republic to the Centre. Now the superconscious, with its capacity for artificially-induced visionary experience, is radically antithetical to the subconscious, which knows only the subnaturally-induced visionary experience of dreams. Dreams and trips - two diametrically antithetical levels of visionary experience - correspond, on their own terms, to the Father and to the Holy Ghost respectively, and it would be as impossible to confound the one with the other ... as to confound old-brain instinctual motivations with new-brain intellectual ratiocinations, corresponding to Satan and Antichrist. If we obtain an inkling of the Father through dreams, we draw nearer to the Holy Ghost through trips. And, in between, we find the natural consciousness of egocentric vision, which corresponds to Christ. Thus subconscious, conscious, and superconscious parallel the Holy Trinity in an evolutionary way, just as old brain, brain, and new brain parallel Hell, World, and Anti-world or, conceived politically, Henry VIII, Cromwell, and Lenin, corresponding to the Anti-Father, the Anti-Virgin, and the Anti-Christ, which find their political concomitants in the autocratic Kingdom, the parliamentary State, and the democratic Republic, while the Holy Trinity, by contrast, has its religious concomitants in the institutions of Temple, Church, and Centre ... in that order, with the Catholic Church being especially partial to the Blessed Virgin - no less a sort of intermediate divinity between the Father and the Son ... than the Second Coming is a sort of intermediate divinity in between the Son and the Holy Ghost, as germane to Social Transcendentalism.

 

132. If Eire was a genuine republic instead of a nominal one, it would have an executive presidency, like France and the United States. Instead of which it has a titular presidency, as though to confirm the fact that the Republic is recognized in appearance though not in substance. To all practical purposes executive authority rests in the hands of the prime minister and, through him, the government, so that an approximation to the liberal mode of parliamentary democracy, as practised in Britain, is the political consequence, suggesting a brain rather than a new-brain correspondence. Were the republican ideal (of new-brain exclusivity) more widely and deeply recognized in Eire, there would be little prospect of its becoming a Social Transcendentalist Centre in due course. But because of the especial importance attached to religion by the indigenous Catholic majority, Eire remains a republic in name and appearance only, in the interests, as remarked elsewhere, of political freedom. Its true bias is thus religious rather than political, the freedom struggles against the British having their origin in the negative motivation of freeing the Catholic majority from Protestant oppression and discrimination rather than in the genuinely positive motivation of forging a socialist republic, which, by contrast, has always been something of a 'red herring' or, at any rate, largely tangential to the main raison d'tre of Irish independence. But a republic now exists and, willy-nilly, the People are politically sovereign, free to elect their own representatives, no longer subject to British or Protestant monarchic dominion. That is surely a good thing, but it isn't enough, in an incipiently omega age, to have- political freedom merely in order to be able to continue in traditional religious tracks, free from Protestant discrimination and retributive persecution. Doubtless Catholicism suits some people, but there are others - a growing number among the true Irish - who would welcome a new religious framework, appropriate to an omega age, in which an aspiration towards the Holy Ghost, conceived as the transcendent culmination of evolution, supersedes worship of the Father and/or Virgin Mary, and the People are accordingly religiously sovereign in their selves, no longer subject to the papal dominion of the Roman Catholic Church. Yes, here is stage two of the Irish freedom struggle! For having thrown off the British monarchy and embraced the Republic, all that now remains for the People to do is to throw off the Catholic papacy, through the Republic, and embrace the Centre ... in order that they may be set free from all dominion, their own traditional religious variety no less than the British political variety, subconscious as well as old brain, and thus come to realize their spiritual perfection in the fullness of an electron-wavicle equivalent, commensurate with the omega religion of Social Transcendentalism. If republicanism in Eire is not an end-in-itself ... by dint of the inherent religious bias of the Irish, it can at least be seen as a means to an end, and thus be fully vindicated for providing the political freedom in which the majority population can come, in due course, to vote for Social Transcendentalism in the full knowledge that it is the ideology of 'Kingdom Come' which, under the aegis of the Second Coming, can alone save them from proton-wavicle dominion for the higher freedom of electron-wavicle self-realization in the transcendent centres which Social Transcendentalism would be determined to erect. If the Republic has achieved anything, the People will not remain tied to the medieval skirts of the clergy but, on the contrary, be able to make-up their own minds as to the best course to follow, and vote accordingly! Only then will they be truly free. For once having transferred political sovereignty to the divinely-inspired Leader in return for religious sovereignty, the People need be in no doubt that he will have the power to free them from the autocratic clutches of the proton-biased Church and thus encourage them, as electron equivalents, to develop their own religious sovereignty in the subsequent People's theocracy ... of the full-blown Social Transcendentalist Centre. Yes, Social Transcendentalism values and champions the Republic to the extent that it provides the necessary political framework in which the ideology of 'Kingdom Come' will further its - and, by implication, the Irish people's - supertheocratic interests at the expense of everything outmoded and anti-People. Social Transcendentalism will be safe from the Roman Catholic Church in the democratic framework of the Republican State, and it will use the democratic weapons of the Republic to fight for the true Irish people's deepest and most long-lasting interests in the pure spirit of a transcendent freedom, as germane to true religion.

 

133. Between the Father and the Holy Ghost there is no contiguity, no more than there is any contiguity between the subconscious and the superconscious, or between pope and leader or, for that matter, old brain and new brain, as between monarch and president. Absolutes do not blend. Only with the in-between realm of Christ or ego or archbishop or brain or prime minister ... does a kind of contiguity with the absolutes exist, to the extent that the relativity of the atomic compromises reflects a diluted version of the antithetical absolutes while the compromises remain integrated entities in themselves. Likewise, a contiguity of sorts exists between God and Satan on the alpha level of the central star of the Galaxy and the sun, as between subconscious and old brain, or pope and monarch. No less than the central star of the Galaxy precedes the peripheral star that is the sun, so the subconscious precedes the old brain and, in the undifferentiated guise of God-Kings, the papacy precedes the monarchy in the evolutionary progression of alpha-stemming life. In regard to the latter context, it could credibly be contended that the Kings of Tara in ancient pagan Ireland were proto-popes, intended to embody and reflect the divine unity, in the central star of the Galaxy, behind the dualistic appearances of suns and planets, secular kings and populace. However, as alpha-stemming evolution progressed, so the original undifferentiated absolutism gave way to the dualistic absolutism of papacy and monarchy (corresponding to the further development of the subconscious and old brain within a psychic totality more differentiated than hitherto), which still derived its fundamental justification from the less-differentiated roots of the Galaxy in ... central star and sun. The monarchic slogan Dieu et mon Droit indicates the justification, within an alpha-stemming context, of the monarchy as a sun equivalent - 'Le Roi Soleil' - in relation to the first-cause central star of the Galaxy, which may be presumed to have 'given birth' to the sun. Certainly, the monarch is not the equivalent, on earth, of that central star, and therefore he cannot be identified with it - unlike the pope, who may be said to correspond to the Father and thus to sanction the rule of kings, just as the central star of the Galaxy is implicated in the existence and rotation of suns. No less than of monarchs, would Dieu et mon Droit serve the purpose of suns, those 'fallen angels', of which our sun is the Satanic root of all evil in the world, causing the planet to spin around it. Yes, if the sun could speak, it, too, could claim Dieu et mon Droit, as could the old brain in relation to the subconscious, since it is the instinctual motivations of the old brain, prompted by subconscious will, that cause the body to move on a basis analogous to the planet.

 

134. Materialism and idealism, Devil and God either side of the realistic world, of which nature is the epitome. For, unlike the Galaxy conceived in the hierarchical totality of central star, suns, and planets, and unlike man and, for that matter, the animals, who correspond to the galactic hierarchy of star-equivalent subconscious, sun-equivalent old brain, and planet-equivalent body (divisible, as with the planet, into three distinct levels, viz. blood, bone, and flesh), nature, with particular reference to trees, is bereft of a head, which is to say independent of a governing mind/brain, idealist/materialist dichotomy, since quintessentially realistic and, hence, corporeal. Nature does not revolve around the sun, like a planet, and consequently it is tangential to the hierarchical ordering of the Solar System, not to mention the Galaxy in toto. The chief distinguishing factor about nature, not least of all in relation to trees, is that it is static, does not revolve or move, like the human body, at the dictates of some superior governing entity. Naturally it is dependent on the sun for sustenance and growth, but that is all! Rooted to the earth and incapable of movement, it remains profoundly worldly, one might almost say heathen, and we need not doubt that the worship of nature will be especially prevalent in an age of realism, like the 18-19th centuries, when the old hierarchical order, embracing monarchs and popes, has been called into question, if not effectively overthrown, and a new concern for man in the world below, meaning this one, becomes the guiding principle, a concern which finds a palpable analogue in nature, seemingly independent of cosmic coercion. Whether we are mindful of Jean-Jacques Rousseau in the nineteenth century or of John Cowper Powys in the twentieth, the advocacy of nature has its raison d'tre in the apparent freedom from autocratic tyranny that nature seems to reflect, and is accordingly a quintessentially Liberal ideal. But if it is Liberal, it is scarcely Socialist, and few indeed are the latter-day Socialists who, with their materialistic contempt of realistic compromises, subscribe to the doctrine of nature worship, or 'Elementalism', to cite Powys.

 

135. Why were the masses content to live under a cosmos-derived hierarchical system for centuries and then, at a certain later point in time, suddenly rebelled against it and, in some countries, freed themselves from its clutches? Why all the talk of freedom from tyranny or autocratic constraints when men had taken such bondage for granted times-out-of-mind? Evidently for the simple reason that they had changed, had become, under evolutionary and social pressures, different from what they were before. No longer peasants but, thanks in large measure to bourgeois gains at the expense of the aristocracy, incipient or actual proletarians, a different breed of men for whom the old order, suitable to peasants, was no longer relevant; a breed largely urban rather than rural, an artificial humanity scorning the subnatural/natural affinities of the peasantry; a breed that would not have come into existence had the bourgeoisie not created it out of their need for industrial exploitation and the correlative availability of a steady reservoir of cheap labour situated in the towns and cities. In sum, an electron-biased breed of humanity that must be accorded an antithetical status to the proton-biased breed of humanity which, as peasants, had preceded them, no longer creatures of the soil or identifiable with leaves, but city creatures, artificial and industrial, whether white- or blue-collar, intellectual or manual. And fated to struggle against that atomic breed of humanity which, whether in Cromwellian England or Napoleonic France, had wrenched power from the aristocracy and thereby established their own liberal societies - either parliamentarian, as in the (earlier) English Revolution, or republican, as with the (later and more radically materialistic, albeit still fundamentally realistic) French Revolution. Man evolves, and the final outcome is a completely different type of humanity, no longer partial to Fathers and Sons but potentially of the Holy Ghost, desirous of the freeing of electron equivalents from all proton and/or atomic constraints. Small wonder that such men look upon monarchs and popes, not to mention prime ministers and archbishops, with loathing and disdain! For them, only presidents and leaders will suffice.

 

136. Yet the electron breed of humanity is itself divisible into two kinds, viz. particle and wavicle equivalents, approximately corresponding to blue- and white-collar workers respectively, and it makes a lot of difference whether revolutionaries primarily side with the one kind or with the other, since the People's society that eventually emerges will have a bias accordingly, and the emphasis fall on materialism or idealism rather than on both equally. This is the distinction, of course, between Transcendental Socialism and Social Transcendentalism, with Antichristic and Second Coming affinities in each case. If the former, then the emphasis is on new-brain materialism and an executive presidency. If the latter, then the emphasis will be on superconscious idealism and an executive leader. In the first case a People's democracy, in which a premium is attached to the (comparatively) mindless manual work of the industrial proletariat, or blue-collar workers. In the second case a People's theocracy, in which a premium is attached to the (comparatively) mindful intellectual work of the commercial superfolk, or white-collar workers, with due emphasis on mind-oriented play as a higher long-term ideal than brain work. Thus while the Communist type of People's society puts the emphasis on the lowest kind of worker, the Centrist type of People's society to come will place due emphasis on the highest kind of worker - the one with a bias for mind over body.... Which should ensure the final and highest kind of People's revolution, with a superidealistic bias and a penchant for leaders who, in the Social Transcendentalist context, will be akin to transmuted presidents, a distinction duly emerging between the leader of any given Social Transcendentalist Centre (within a federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres) and the overall leader of the Centrist federation, who will have a superleading status the antithetical equivalent to the superruling status of the pope vis--vis individual monarchs within an alpha-stemming civilization. By which I mean that the overall leader, or superleader, will symbolize the projected spiritual unity of the Holy Ghost, the unitary aspiration of humanity towards the culmination of evolution, and will accordingly reflect a divine status commensurate with the superconscious, whereas the individual leaders of any given Centre will represent the various components of the federation and function on a quasi-presidential basis, with new-brain affiliation, albeit one transmuted in and by the Centre to a subordinate status vis--vis the superconscious, or superleader, that will accord with the 'social' side of Social Transcendentalism. Thus leaders will stand to the superleader as monarchs to the papacy, and they will take their guidelines for the overall integrity and ideological uniformity of the federation from him. Indeed, in the relatively undifferentiated distinction between superleader and leaders, we are closer to the like-distinction between the God-King of Tara and the regional kings of ancient Ireland, in accordance with the more unequivocally absolutist criteria of an extreme epoch in human civilization, than to the differentiated distinction between pope and monarch, which probably finds its latter-day antithetical equivalence in the distinction between 'leader' and presidents (as between the 'leader' of the 'Free World' - the American president - and the various regional presidents and/or prime ministers). However that may be, the superleader would have ideological jurisdiction over all the regional leaders, those heads of administration in the various Centres. In such fashion the Centre, conceived in its religious or transcendent form, and the Movement would remain linked together, part of an absolutist whole the higher side, in evolutionary terms, of atomic (church/state) dichotomies. No less than the old-brain/subconscious relativity of Kingdom and Catholic Church formed an integral whole derived from the galactic cosmos, the transmuted new-brain/superconscious relativity should form a like-whole in relation to the projected spiritual 'cosmos' of transcendent unity. (If, at first, the Second Coming is both active head of the Movement and theoretical head of the Centre, the two functions will be separated-out in the course of time, following the due emergence of People's theocracies throughout the Centrist federation.)

 

137. Subconscious idealism of an alpha-stemming Father-based society; conscious idealism of an atomic Christian society; superconscious idealism of an omega-oriented transcendental (of the Holy Ghost) society. Subidealism, idealism, and superidealism.

 

138. Old-brain materialism of an Anti-Father (Satanic) monarchic society; brain materialism of an Anti-Virgin (Cromwellian) parliamentary society; new-brain materialism of an Anti-Christ (Marxist) republican society. Submaterialism, materialism, and supermaterialism.

 

139. Divine and diabolic, wavicles and particles, in ascending orders of evolutionary relativity. To be balanced between one absolute and another in a different type of society or in a society with one of the above biases ... is to be a realist, though never more so than in the ego/brain relativity of Protestant Church and Liberal State. And yet, the natural worldly are always flanked by the godly and the devilish.

 

140. I would like to think that, when the history of Irish philosophy is taken into account, my work adds the final link to the chain of idealism which stretches from the Father-biased Eriugena through the Christian Berkeley to my own transcendental absolutism ... in Social Transcendentalist Centrism, the refutation and dismissal of the other two. For the closed society that I envisage would have no time for alpha or atomic levels of thought, but would be solely dedicated to its own omega level ... in the interests of spiritual progress towards the transcendent culmination of evolution, a progress that cannot be made without a complete and utter break with the past. That is why the Social Transcendentalist revolution must be the most far-reaching in the history of revolutions. For it ushers in, under Messianic auspices, the 'Kingdom of Heaven', and everything alien to that divine 'Kingdom' ... of the Centre ... must be swept away, in order that 'the good' may be saved, saved, in their predominantly superfolkish manifestation, from both church and state alike, though particularly the latter.

 

141. Yet the next and final civilization is not the end. For if 'the good' are truly to be saved, they must be saved, in due millennial time, from the body which, as I hope to have shown, is an alpha-stemming entity fundamentally partial, in its blood-bone-flesh triplicity, to autocratic criteria, particularly as pertaining to the old brain. Closer to the Father than to the Holy Ghost, the body can only be an obstacle to extensive spiritual progress and must accordingly be overcome, if a truly free-electron life form is to emerge. The mind and brain may evolve, attaining, at their zenith, to superconscious and new-brain affiliations, but the body stays more or less rooted to its animal origins, ever closer to subconscious and old brain, a natural thing that can never be equated with a truly People's level of evolution, and, for that reason, something that is essentially a thing of the past, not in harmony with transcendent striving. In fact, the further man evolves the more he is obliged to ignore the body, to reduce his commitment to it, in order to have greater spiritual freedom. A man with a new-brain/superconscious bias will lead a rather sedentary life, his psychic integrity suggesting that, whilst he may live in the body he is emphatically not of the body, being, in effect, of the Holy Ghost and thus above it, obliged to look down on it from a closed-society vantage point, scornful of its feudal hierarchies, not excepting the old-brain/subconscious mind's control of and association with it. Doubtless such a man will understand that a genuinely classless, free-electron society can only be established after the body has been overcome by scientific means, and the human brain is artificially supported and no-less artificially sustained in collectivized contexts, thereby giving birth to the first of two stages or types of post-human life - namely, that of the Superbeings (a term which conveys a more genuinely post-human impression than would, say, the use of a term like 'Supermen' which, following Nietzsche's lead, I was formerly disposed to adopt to this particular concept of the post-human, and as recently as in earlier parts of this book). Now the resulting life form, superior to man to the extent that it would be totally above the body and thus free of feudal attachments, would hypertrip, or undergo artificially-induced visionary experience more extensively and doubtless more intensively than ever the transcendental men (supermen) of the corresponding phase of the preceding civilization did, with greater spiritual freedom the logical corollary. But such a life form would still fall short of a truly classless, free-electron status by dint of the survival of the old-brain/subconscious mind, not to mention mid-brain/conscious mind, so that remnants of autocratic antiquity and of democratic atomicity would cling to it, preventing a completely transcendent absolutism. Hence the need for a second post-human life form engineered out of the first by qualified human technicians, who would surgically remove the old brain and recollectivize the remaining new brain(s) on a more intensive basis, the result being a totally new collective entity which, in contrast to the preceding life form, would hypermeditate towards transcendence, or the emergence of pure spirit, of free-electron cohesions, from the intensive superconscious beatitude of this ultimate manifestation of millennial life. How many such new-brain collectivizations, or Supra-beings, there would be ... I cannot of course know, nor how long it would take any given Supra-being to literally attain to the post-Millennial Beyond. Yet they will probably - indeed almost certainly - be set free of earthly proximity in special space centres, the better to cultivate pure spirit in a suitably transcendent context. And each of these centres, with their precious occupants, would constitute a truly classless society, free from even the millennial technicians and not least of all from old brain and subconscious - those monarchic and papal equivalents of the alpha-stemming past. Only with these new-brain collectivizations would a truly and intensely omega-aspirant future get properly under way, an aspiration destined, when all transcendences (of electron-electron attractions) have emerged and converged towards one another, to culminate in the indivisible unity of the Omega Point, the supernatural culmination to all electron evolution, owing nothing whatsoever to the alpha inception of evolution, and having nothing whatsoever to do with stars or suns or planets or moons - those alpha-stemming phenomena of the subnatural past. Here the true unitary Oneness of the genuinely divine, not the apparent unitary Oneness of the Alpha absolute, the central star of any particular galaxy that lords it over both suns and planets alike, but which is really one of a myriad such central stars throughout the numerous galaxies that co-exist, and have long co-existed, from the beginning of the Universe. For the Universe did not spring, like the Galaxy, from a unitary Oneness behind all dualism but, on the contrary, from numerous large primal stars, each of which were in anarchic competition with the others and fated to become Father equivalents vis--vis the suns and planets which were destined to form galaxies, to revolve around the central star from which, in effect, they had 'fallen'.

 

142. Thus, viewed from a universal perspective (as opposed to a merely galactic one), dualism not out of primal unity but out of numerous primal unities ... attesting to the archdiabolic nature of the Alpha absolutes, in contrast to the archdivine nature of the Omega Absolute, which is destined to emerge at the culmination of electron evolution in a definitive and ultimate unitary Oneness, a unitary Oneness that, unlike the subidealism of the Father, would never engender suns and planets but, on the contrary, be complete in itself, blissfully saved for evermore. Neither Creator-God nor Creating-God, the Omega Absolute would be the Created-God, a perfect consummation to electron striving, a refutation of everything stemming from the proton inception of the Universe, a supertruth and not a subfact. Such a God would never co-exist with the Devil and the world. This is the unitary Oneness beyond all dualism, the Oneness towards which the best people on this planet tend. May those who are not the best suffer the consequences of their alpha-stemming diabolism and be returned to it in due course! Those who reject these divine revelations pass moral judgement upon themselves. Those who accept them ... are already on the road to Heaven.

 

143. Of course, Communists are not alpha stemming, neither in an unequivocally proton guise (like the aristocracy) nor in an attenuated, or atomic, guise (like the bourgeoisie), but they aren't exactly omega aspiring either, since their electron-particle bias, which is principally directed against atomic relativity, keeps them partial to materialistic criteria within the context of a proletarian humanism, commensurate with a People's democracy. Consequently, it is unlikely that many Communists will rush to endorse such revelations as I have herein compiled, since they live under the delusion that theirs is the final word and that Communism has truly global applicability, much as Lenin and Trotsky (not to mention Marx) also did! Fortunately, however, that is far from being the case, though I don't doubt that Socialism can and will spread farther afield in the course of time. Yet for those peoples who are capable, in their inherent idealism, of an electron-wavicle bias, then nothing short of Social Transcendentalist Centrism will suffice, because this is the ultimate ideology, one that envisages not merely the overcoming of the bourgeoisie in the People's interests but, as a long-term goal, the overcoming, through advanced technology, of the People ... in order that they may be transformed into the post-human life forms of the Superbeing/Supra-being Millennium and accordingly draw all the closer to that omega culmination of electron evolution in pure spirit. More radical than and superior in every respect to Communism, Social Transcendentalism demands nothing less than an omega-aspiring world, and it is confident that such a world can eventually come about, even if it must bide its time and resign itself to sharing the globe with Transcendental Socialism in the meantime. God and Devil on the People's levels of Messianic superidealism, appertaining to the visionary superconscious, and Antichristic supermaterialism, appertaining to the rational new-brain. But, of course, while the former may be more genuinely divine than on any preceding level of idealism, the latter is certainly less genuinely diabolic than on any preceding level of materialism, the rational new brain being biased towards electrons and thus not so much a straight (evil) antithesis to the visionary superconscious as a 'good evil' in relation to the 'evil goodness' of the latter. And this is something that applies no less to the distinction between Transcendental Socialism and Social Transcendentalism, the two ideologies I have been discussing throughout this work, and which I believe to lie beyond the more absolutist distinction between Communism and Fascism, corresponding more unequivocally to new brain and superconscious respectively. By which I mean that while Transcendental Socialism is predominantly an ideology of the new brain, it is infused with a subordinate superconscious dimension, just as Social Transcendentalism has its preponderant superconscious affiliation infused with a subordinate degree of new-brain materialism, neither of these ideologies completely absolutist but relativistic, with a bias one way or the other, depending on the ideology in question. In the one case fascistic Reds, in the other case communistic Whites, both of which are drawn closer together though still running separately, as it were, on parallel tracks. Now I can think of no better paradigm to illustrate this paradox of divine diabolism and diabolic divinity than to draw the reader's attention to the contemporary distinction, in People's modes of road transportation, between streamlined motorbikes on the one hand, and stripped-down scooters (or scooters with part of the engine on display beneath the body casing) on the other, each of which are of smaller scale than the preceding communistic bikes and fascistic scooters, yet both of which reflect a realistic compromise between idealism and materialism, wavicle casing and particle engine, albeit with an appropriately dissimilar bias in each case - the streamlined motorbike predominantly a thing, in its engine bias, of the new brain; the stripped-down scooter preponderantly a thing, in its streamline bias, of the superconscious - People's levels of realism beyond the idealism of Communist and Fascist absolutes. And, needless to say, beyond the antagonism between Rockers and Mods that has traditionally gone with them!

 

144. Other distinctions which could be made on these People's levels are between, on the Social Transcendentalist side, radio headphones of a slender construction with centralized foam ear pads, and, on the Transcendental Socialist side, radio headphones of a chunky or squat construction with ring-like cushioned earpads, each of which are beyond the Fascist and Communist levels of pocket-sized portable radios with one band and (depending on the type) slender or squat constructions, plus the optional availability of a single earphone. Beneath these, one can speak of democratic radios of one sort or another, usually with two or more bands, of larger scale, run on mains and/or batteries, with tone-and-volume controls, a speaker rather than an earphone norm, and so on - the Labour and Conservative models slightly more absolutist, in one way or another, than the Liberal model from which they derive.

 

145. Everything can be ideologically categorized, and means of lighting a cigarette are no exception, whether we are considering matches or lighters, bourgeois naturalistic or People's artificial modes of striking flame. In the first case, Liberal large red-tipped matches leading to Democratic Socialist small red-tipped matches, which are opposed by radical Conservative small brown-tipped matches. Beyond which one can speak of the Marxist and Nazi distinctions between small red-tipped or brown-tipped strip matches, a sort of parallel to pocket transistors with, instead of one band, one tinder strip on which to strike a match, the design accordingly absolutist rather than relativistic in construction. And in the second case-proper, the theocratic rather than democratic levels of People's modes of striking flame, a distinction between squat silver-cased lighters on the one hand and ... slender, tubular transparent plastic lighters on the other hand - Communist and Fascist, with each of them becoming more refined and drawing slightly closer together in construction as Transcendental Socialist and Social Transcendentalist criteria duly emerge, opaque plastic replacing metal in the former type, transparent plastic being replaced by opaque plastic in the latter type.

 

146. Whilst on the subject of flame (an inherently diabolic, because proton-constituted, phenomenon), it should be noted that electric fires of one kind or another pertain to the democratic level of heating, particularly on the left-wing side, with one-bar electric fires establishing a sort of Marxist climax to an essentially relativistic tradition, whereas fan heaters pertain to the higher People's level ... of a theocratic equivalence above and beyond the term 'fire' and, consequently, having no connection with red-hot filaments or bars. Doubtless such fan heaters can be divided into Social Transcendentalist and Transcendental Socialist equivalents, and I fancy that while the tall, slender, quieter ones with a vertically-positioned rotational switch pertain to the former, the flat, squat, noisier ones with a horizontally-positioned rotational switch pertain to the latter - a distinction, clearly, between idealism and materialism, wavicles and particles.

 

147. Whether one has a democratic or a theocratic concept of the People will to a large extent depend on the political tradition to which one's country has been accustomed, which is itself to some extent dependent on racial factors. Those who think of the People democratically will be Socialists; those who think of them democratically in a theocratic way will be Communists; and, finally, those who think of them theocratically in a democratic way will be Centrists. In the first case, it will be thought desirable that the People should become direct owners of the means of production. In the second case, it will be thought desirable that the People should become indirect owners of the means of production through the bureaucratic machinery of the State. But in the third case, to which I subscribe, it would be thought desirable that the People should be released from all materialistic responsibilities of ownership by the Centre, so that they may be all the better qualified to cultivate their spiritual sovereignty in due course, a sovereignty which the Centre alone can impart to them. Of the three systems, or concepts of the People, the third is by far the best, though the second is unquestionably preferable to the first, which would simply leave the People burdened by direct collective ownership (assuming, for the sake of argument, that such a procedure were possible) - a not-unattractive proposition to materialists and culturally inferior types who, in their proton bias, lack even the vaguest notion of a transcendent idealism, but contemptible even from a Communist point of view, which is rather more anti-democratic than genuinely theocratic.

 

148. Largely because of an enforced English upbringing and consequent acquaintance with British political moulds, I have tended, throughout my work, to use English political equivalents when ascribing an ideological significance to any particular phenomenon, so that Liberal, Labour, and radical Conservative (not to be confounded with old-style Conservative) designations have been the norm, at least as far as bourgeois and/or petty-bourgeois phenomena are concerned. But for Irish readers, for whom most of this work is primarily intended, a workable equivalent of the above designations can easily be substituted, with Fine Gael taking the role of the Liberals (latterly the Liberal Democrats), Fianna Fil taking the role of radical Conservatism, and the Irish Labour Party conveniently stepping into the role held by Labour [latterly New Labour] in Britain. Thus Irish liberalism, nationalism, and democratic socialism - the three principal modes of modern democratic politics. Beyond which lie the Nazi or, at any rate, quasi-Nazi (Social Nationalist?) and Marxist equivalents of Sinn Fein supernationalism on the extreme right and socialist internationalism on the extreme left, with the Communist Party standing to the Socialist Party of Ireland as Soviet-style Communists to Marxist Socialism in general. Clearly, the only political interest left to be added - excluding the historical role of 'Blue Shirt' Fascism - is the supra-nationalism of Social Transcendentalism, which desires nothing less than the democratic supersession of the Republic by the Centre, and the formation, forged in due diplomatic time, of a Centrist federation.

 

149. This 'book' is a sort of superphilosophy beyond all aristocratic and bourgeois modes of literary production, a uniquely People's level of writing which is intended as the 'materialistic' counterpart to the purely abstract superpoetry which I have also pioneered in the name of a Centrist idealism. Such collectivized and cohesive aphoristic/notational writings as are gathered here may be regarded as pertaining to the 'social' aspect of Social Transcendentalism. They signify the culmination of my theoretical work and, hopefully, will stand as a beacon of light to progressive humanity, particularly to those who, through unconscious or premeditated superfolkish predilection, flock to the wavicle rather than the particle side of People's ideology - supertheocratic to the manner born!

 

150. How significant that electric guitars are usually divisible into two kinds, viz. the slender streamlined 'Stratocaster' kind with an absolute machine-head, and, by contrast, the squat utilitarian 'Gibson' kind with conventional relativistic machine-head: clearly a distinction between fascistic and communistic alternatives.