1.    From the autocratic and the democratic to the theocratic; from the monarch and the prime minister and/or president to the dictator.


2.    From the monarchic and the prime ministerial and/or presidential to the dictatorial; from rule and representation to service.


3.    From autocratic and democratic economics to theocratic economics; from Feudalism and Capitalism and/or Socialism to Centrism (Centre trusteeship of the means of production).


4.    From autocratic and democratic politics to theocratic politics; from Authoritarianism and Parliamentarianism to Totalitarianism.


5.    From autocratic and democratic religion to theocratic religion; from Paganism and/or Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and/or Communism to Social Transcendentalism and/or Super-transcendentalism.


6.    From autocratic economics and democratic politics to theocratic religion; from Feudalism and Parliamentarianism to Social Transcendentalism.


7.    From autocratic politics and democratic religion to theocratic economics; from Authoritarianism and Protestantism and/or Communism to Centrism.


8.    From autocratic religion and democratic economics to theocratic politics; from Paganism and/or Roman Catholicism and Capitalism and/or Socialism to Totalitarianism.


9.    From autocratic economics and politics to autocratic religion; from Feudalism and Authoritarianism to Roman Catholicism.


10.   From democratic economics and politics to democratic religion; from Capitalism and/or Socialism and Parliamentarianism to Protestantism and/or Communism.


11.   From theocratic economics and politics to theocratic religion; from Centrism and Totalitarianism to Social Transcendentalism.


12.   From an economic (proton) root and a political (atomic) stem to a religious (electron) flower; from soul and matter to spirit.


13.   In Ireland, where Social Transcendentalism should first take root, economics and politics will be subordinated to religion.  Hence, while being centrist and totalitarian, Social Transcendentalism should remain primarily religious.  In other words, Social Transcendentalism comes first, because in Ireland, traditionally, religion takes precedence over economics and politics. (Unlike, for example, in Britain, where politics and economics [in that order] take precedence over religion.)


14.   Social Transcendentalism is the first phase of a proletarian religion, the relative (LSD-induced visionary awareness) phase leading, in due course, to Super-transcendentalism, in which hypermeditation becomes the absolute focus of religious endeavour.


15.   With the attainment to the second phase of proletarian religion, both economics and politics will effectively cease to exist in any recognizable sense.  However, while Social Transcendentalism is the order of the day, centrism and totalitarianism will continue to prevail, though in a subordinate capacity to the religious essence of the movement.  Social Transcendentalism is not politically centrist (in the middle-ground sense of that term), but religiously cent(e)rist.  For the Centre, as defined by me in relation to Social Transcendentalism, is the most radically omega-orientated of all phenomena.


16.   Although embracing both economic and political responsibilities, the Social Transcendentalist leader will predominantly remain what he had been (before assuming office), namely an electron equivalent, and this because he is not simply a dictator but, more importantly, a religious guide, the embodiment, as it were, of the Holy Spirit.  Thus his sovereignty is primarily justified on religious grounds, in contrast to the sovereignty of a political and/or economic dictator like Hitler or Mussolini, who puts politics first, whether in terms of Nazism or Fascism.


17.   Instead of subordinating religion - Protestant and/or Catholic - to politics, as did Fascism, Social Transcendentalism will subordinate politics to religion and economics to politics.  Both of these fundamentally diabolical phenomena will be eclipsed by religion and absorbed into the Leader, who, alone, should have the moral and spiritual strength to bear them in the name of truth and the concomitant development by the People of their spiritual potential.  Neither economics nor politics can corrupt the Social Transcendental Messiah, who will subordinate these proton and atomic phenomena to his electron will, which is divine.


18.   Thus he who represents the Divine Will is the true approximation to the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah.  Neither Hitler nor Mussolini can be said to have done so!  Only the Leader of Social Transcendentalism can be accredited true messianic status; for he is essentially an electron equivalent, who must subordinate politics and economics to his will.


19.   Consequently, he forms an antithesis to the true kings of autocratic antiquity, monarchs who were proton equivalents ruling the populace in their own, largely soulful interests.  Such kings may have been surrounded, in time, by an electron-biased ruling nobility, or aristocracy, but their responsibilities of state ensured a less hedonistic, and therefore more stoical, lifestyle.  Likewise the leader of a Social Transcendentalist society may find himself, in the relative nature of things, surrounded by a proton-biased serving nobility, or bureaucracy, who must execute his will and thus serve the People.  But for all his dictatorial responsibilities, he will remain predominantly an electron equivalent, in spiritual touch with the electron-biased proletariat to a no-less significant extent than (was) the ruling monarch of autocratic antiquity in soulful touch with the proton-biased peasantry of his kingdom.


20.   Monarch - aristocracy - peasantry/soldiery: a proton - electron - proton-biased atomicity indicating a distinct bias for the proton side of matter.  Leader - bureaucracy - proletariat/police: an electron - proton - electron-biased atomicity indicating a distinct bias for the electron side of matter.  The former stemming from the proton-proton reactions of pure soul; the latter aspiring towards the electron-electron attractions of pure spirit.  From the Father to the Holy Ghost, as from the First Cause to the Final Effect.


21.   And yet one should never forget that such atomic divisions and structures are but rough guides to basic realities rather than immutable absolutes.  There is an electron side to every proton equivalent; a proton side to every electron equivalent.  The king, too, can be hedonistically self-indulgent when it suits him.  The leader can also be ruthlessly dictatorial when he considers it appropriate to be so.  True absolutes are both anterior and posterior to material evolution, though flame can consume it.  The real purpose of our being here is to get spirit beyond material constraints and, worse still, its exposure to soul.  For pure spirit is indestructible!


22.   Ideal slogan for the true Irish people: Forever theocratic!


23.   Militant propaganda slogan against the false Irish people: Democrats beware, theocrats are here!


24.   Just as, for the revolutionary democrat struggling on behalf of socialist ideology in a liberal democracy, the most appropriate slogan would be: Forward to a People’s democracy! so, for the revolutionary theocrat struggling on behalf of Social Transcendentalism in a Catholic theocracy, the most appropriate slogan must be: Forward to a People’s theocracy!


25.   As liberal democracy to the socialist revolutionary, so Roman Catholicism to the revolutionary theocrat.  You do not extend the democratic spectrum (from liberal to social democracy) without a struggle with the liberal status quo.  Similarly, you will not extend the theocratic spectrum (from Roman Catholicism to Social Transcendentalism) without a struggle with the Catholic status quo.  Needless to say, both struggles are mutually exclusive.


26.   Catholicism corresponds to a grand-bourgeois autocratic (feudal) theocracy.  By contrast, Social Transcendentalism will correspond to a proletarian theocratic (centrist) theocracy.  There is all the difference between the Middle Ages and the twenty-first century in these two theocracies.


27.   People have often spoken of a Jewish world conspiracy, but, in reality, there can be no such thing.  The Jew will never dominate the world, for the simple reason that we are evolving towards an ideological identification and away, in consequence, from tribal roots.  Social Transcendentalists of Jewish descent may well be in highly influential positions in the world to-come, but to regard them as Jews would be to fall into an anachronistic trap nothing short of slanderous!


28.   An Israeli Social Transcendentalist would be as far from being a Jew as an Irish Social Transcendentalist from being a Celt.  As far as I am concerned, Israelis and Irishmen are but passing (nationalist) phenomena in between tribal and ideological extremes.  In the coming age, there will be neither Jews nor Celts, neither Israelis nor Irishmen, but regional components of supra-national federations of Social Transcendental Centres.


29.   One should perhaps distinguish between worker and proletarian, reserving the use of the latter term for citizens of socialist states, with the implication that they signify a transformation from the proton to the electron side of an atomic integrity, and are therefore essentially different from and superior to the proton-biased masses of a bourgeois state who, by contrast, are but an evolutionary stage further along from peasants (serfs), as a liberal manifestation of proton enslavement.


30.   In this respect, nothing could be more subjective and slanderous than to refer to proletarians in socialist states as 'mob', 'rabble', 'herd', etc., as some Western writers, of liberal tendency, are only too disposed to doing.  If such terms are ever applicable to the people at all, they would seem more relevant to the proton masses, or workers, of a liberal society, who are simply the exploited and exploitable victims of a bourgeois elite, and may accordingly come to reflect this fact, from time to time, in uncivilized conduct and speech.


31.   Social Transcendentalism in Ireland cannot solely appeal to proletarians, but must be regarded as an Irish Movement, a movement intended to extend theocracy in a Social Transcendentalist direction, rather than to extend democracy in a socialist one, and consequently aimed at the supersession of all democracy and, by implication, republicanism, which is but an acknowledgement of the People’s political sovereignty, the very sovereignty Social Transcendentalism looks down upon from its theocratic vantage-point.


32.   For its founder knows that religious sovereignty signifies a superior evolutionary development, being a reflection of post-republican and  truly theocratic thinking, in which the Leader comes to embody and/or intimate of the Holy Spirit in his correspondence to a Second Coming, beyond and above any democratic sovereignty, the kind that every true Irishman will know, in his heart of hearts, to be a Protestant phenomenon, more relevant to the British than to the time-honoured upholders of a theocratic bias.





1.    Autocratic - democratic - theocratic; one might even say: horses - carriages/cars - motorbikes, if one wanted to establish approximate correlations where such modes of transportation were concerned.  Certainly there is something autocratic (aristocratic) about using a horse for transportation, just as there seems to be something theocratic (proletarian) about the use of a motorbike.  And coming in-between these two extremes is a middle-of-the-road mode of democratic (bourgeois) transportation in carriages/cars.


2.    Of course, the carriage preceded the car, which only came into its own during a late-stage petty-bourgeois era, when streamlining (artificial beauty) reached unprecedented levels of perfection and, as a corollary of this, road performance was greatly improved - an evolutionary progression commensurate with the attainment of crude pre-classical black-and-white photography to colour photography or, alternatively, of crude pre-classical black-and-white film to colour film.


3.    Now just as there was a progression, on the civil side of four-wheeled transportation, from carriages to cars, so there was a like-progression, on its commercial side, from carts and/or coaches to vans and/or lorries, not to mention from horse-drawn coaches to buses and/or motorcoaches on its public side.


4.    As regards the theocratic (proletarian) spectrum of transportation, one could contend that bikes (bicycles) preceded motorbikes in a like-progression from the manual to the automotive.  Elsewhere in my writings, I have contended that mopeds should be conceived as following motorbikes in the evolution of two-wheeled transportation, and I believe that, despite a strong temptation to place them in-between bikes and motorbikes as a kind of cross or transition between the two, this contention remains valid, largely on the grounds that we are distinguishing between a late-stage petty-bourgeois mode of transportation and an early-stage proletarian mode, the latter of which presupposes a 'fall' (forwards) from full automation to semi-manual manipulation within the higher context of a less materialistic body design.


5.    With regard to scooters, which I equate with a late-stage petty-bourgeois mode of transportation, there seems to be valid grounds for placing them at the tail-end, as it were, of the autocratic spectrum, as a kind of successor to the horse, commensurate with such other pseudo-autocratic or quasi-theocratic phenomena as military dictatorships, sculptural light art, funk-jazz, and quasi-poetic philosophical writings.  In other words, as a mode of transportation diametrically opposite - though not antithetical to - motorbikes, which, in returning to political analogies, can be regarded as fascistic.


6.    So if scooters and motorbikes are on the extreme spectra of a late-stage petty-bourgeois era, they may be regarded as flanking the modern car, that socialistic mode of contemporary road transportation.  A genuine antithesis can only be established, it seems to me, between the inception and culmination or, alternatively, relative inception and relative culmination of opposite spectra.  Thus horses and motorbikes would constitute an example of the latter, as between, say, early-stage grand-bourgeois and late-stage petty-bourgeois modes of transportation, whilst a more absolute antithesis could be inferred between, say, elephants and mopeds, or their future successors.


7.    This contention concerning the nature of antitheses obliges me to revise a previous evaluation, appertaining to certain earlier works, which posited apes and Supermen as antithetical equivalents and, by a similar token, trees and Superbeings as a more extreme manifestation of the same type of antithesis.  Anyone familiar with my more recent work, namely that which concerns the division of human evolution into autocratic, democratic, and theocratic spectra in a sort of disjointed progression, will sooner or later discern the anomaly in regarding apes and Supermen as antithetical equivalents or, more correctly, Supermen as the antithetical equivalent of apes when, as I have elsewhere pointed out, such an equivalent can only be inferred to exist between antithetical parts of the same spectrum.


8.    Now if civilized human evolution begins in the autocratic and culminates in the theocratic, as I happen to believe, then anything pre-human or pre-civilized can only be conceived of as pre-autocratic, whether we are alluding to cavemen, apes, or trees, and, similarly, anything post-human or post-civilized can only be regarded as post-theocratic, whether in the guise of technological personnel, Supermen, or Superbeings (millennial supervisors, human brain-collectivizations, and new-brain collectivizations respectively).


9.    An antithesis, then, can only be established between opposite spectra, so one is obliged to conclude that pre-autocratic apes and post-theocratic Supermen form an antithesis, as, on more radical terms, do pre-autocratic trees and post-theocratic Superbeings.


10.   By contrast, an antithetical equivalent should only be inferred to exist between phenomena on the same spectrum, such as, say, late-stage grand-bourgeois Cromwellian revolution on the inception of the democratic one, and early-stage petty-bourgeois Leninist revolution at, or just before, its tail-end, these revolutions in large measure owing their motivation to the parallel theocratic schisms signified by Lutheran Protestantism and Marxist Communism respectively, which form a similar antithetical equivalent, albeit one less radical than that between early-stage grand-bourgeois Roman Catholicism and late-stage petty-bourgeois Fascism.


11.   I like to distinguish between middle class and bourgeoisie in the sense that I equate the former with spiritual/professional commitments and the latter with material/commercial commitments, so that a distinct dichotomy can be inferred to exist, in any relative society, between these two disparate categories, as between electron equivalents and proton and/or neutron equivalents.


12.   Proceeding from a class-evolutionary viewpoint, I should therefore have to distinguish between upper-middle-class priests and grand-bourgeois feudalists, middle-class vicars and bourgeois capitalists, and lower-middle-class gurus and petty-bourgeois socialists.


13.   Similarly, an artist may be described as middle class and a scientist, by contrast, as bourgeois.  In the present century, the chief distinction will be that between lower middle-class artists and petty-bourgeois scientists, though where, say, the seventeenth century is concerned, the prefixes 'upper' and 'grand' would be more appropriate.  Whatever the case, I have no hesitation in maintaining that the middle classes are superior, morally and socially, to the bourgeoisie, to the degree that spirit is superior to matter.


14.   Proton autocrats - atomic democrats - electron theocrats.  Autocracy is a stemming from the Father, democracy a Christian compromise, and theocracy an aspiration towards the Holy Spirit.  Autocracy signifies a proton-proton reaction (between monarch and populace), democracy an atomic compromise between reaction and attraction, and theocracy an electron-electron attraction (between leader and masses).  Autocracy fades away with the emergence and development of democracy, theocracy only comes properly into its own with the decline and eclipse of democracy.


15.   A fading autocracy (constitutional monarchy) is a pseudo-autocracy, a not-yet-independent and absolute theocracy (Roman Catholicism), a pseudo-theocracy, its endorsement of the Holy Spirit considerably diluted by 'autocratic' compromise with the Blessed Virgin, a concession to beauty rather than to truth.  Genuine theocracy can only emerge as an aspiration towards truth, in concentrated awareness.  One might say that pseudo-theocracy indirectly aspires towards truth (perfect essence) through beauty (perfect appearance), a highly contradictory and paradoxical situation!  And yet still preferable to any autocratic stemming from ugliness.


16.   Autocratic academies - democratic universities and/or technical colleges - theocratic seminaries.  Between academies and seminaries (or their future Social Transcendentalist successors) one finds the democratic, humanist institutions of universities and the socialistic, post-humanist institutions of technical colleges and/or polytechnics.  Certainly the age is partial to the development of the latter, though the former still exist in abundance throughout the civilized world, even if their status is in decline in most Western countries, where technical considerations are taking precedence.


17.   However, a genuinely theocratic country would abolish university education and demolish obsolescent theological colleges, replacing them with its own higher institutions of theological learning, as germane to Social Transcendentalism, and thus the truth.  It would doubtless subordinate technical colleges and polytechnics to theological ones, though by no means neglect their welfare, since technological studies will continue to be an important branch of post-humanist learning.


18.   There would, however, be no academies left in existence.  For if democratic institutions are unacceptable to a theocratic society, then autocratic ones would be nothing less than totally irrelevant!  But, of course, a society that is essentially theocratic, even if on a pseudo-theocratic basis, will not have too many academies in any case.  Rather, they pertain to autocratic democracies (or democratic autocracies), like Britain, where ambivalence and compromise are ever the norm.  Britain is the world's oldest democracy and yet, paradoxically, the People aren't truly sovereign, since they also share sovereignty with the reigning monarch - indeed, are the reigning monarch's subjects and therefore not really sovereign at all.


19.   To be sure, ambivalence is part-and-parcel of British dualism, of the bourgeois, Christian compromise.  If the People are not technically sovereign in Britain's Constitutional Monarchy within the United Kingdom, then they are at least intermittently and, in practice, sovereign, since they are free to elect representatives to parliament who, in the paradoxical order of such a liberal democracy, will both represent and govern them, depending on the political bias in question.


20.   Such an ambivalent, ambiguous situation has been the norm in Britain for some three centuries, and it will doubtless continue to be the norm until such time as history may decide otherwise.  The British could not, in all honesty, move towards a social democracy, even if some of them wanted that.  Far too many of them don't and, besides, even most Socialists are tarred by the parliamentary brush.  They speak of a gradual progression to Socialism, but in reality no such gradualism could bring about a social democracy in a society run along republican lines.  Probably a majority of the so-called Socialists would not want that, in any case, since they are British and therefore too set in their political and social thinking, as well as accustomed to compromising with the opposition and (no less shamefully from a genuinely socialist point-of-view) with the nobility!


21.   If most democratic peoples are destined to remain democratic in the short-term, though, eventually, on a more socialistic level than that to which they have hitherto been accustomed, then those peoples who may be described as essentially theocratic must remain theocratic, though on a higher level than hitherto!


22.   The ultimate revolution in Eire must accordingly ensure progress from Roman Catholic theocracy to Social Transcendentalist theocracy, but such a revolution will not be achieved without a struggle with the State.  As a political religion, Social Transcendentalism will be privileged to use the Church in its battle against the State.  For once it wins the support of the Church, it will have sufficient moral authority to defeat the State.  Then it will be in a position to build the Meditation Centres appertaining to its own religious integrity, which is nothing less than, potentially if not at this point in time literally, that of a True World Religion or, at any rate, the relative (LSD-induced visionary awareness) phase thereof, serving as a precondition for the absolute (hypermeditative) manifestation of the True World Religion, the literal practical manifestation of it, to flower in due course.


23.   But no flowering, no classical Become without a preceding romantic Becoming in Social Transcendentalism, the internal apparent phase leading to the truly essential phase in the course of evolutionary time - a situation corresponding to a progression from the proton new-brain to the electron superconscious.


24.   From the Republic of Ireland to the Irish Social Transcendental Centre, from nationalism to ideological identification, from the tricolour to the abstract emblem (Y-like in design) of the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah.  If the true Irish people have been selected as a new 'chosen people', it is because of their theocratic bias, their ethnic suitability to embrace and expand a higher theocracy, to effect the wider dissemination, through word and deed, of Social Transcendentalism, to be the root motivator of a projected Federation of Social Transcendental Centres stretching across the British Isles, Western Europe, and, eventually, farther afield.  An Irish Social Transcendental Centre would know when and where to proselytize the truth of the True World Religion, as well as how!





1.    The twentieth century witnessed the growth of a split in art between democratic and theocratic trends, a split, in effect, between Liberal Realism and Socialist Realism on the one hand, and Liberal Realism and Fascist Realism on the other hand.  The democratic artist, be he liberal or radical, represents the People, or that section of them - bourgeoisie, proletariat - with whom he chooses or is obliged to identify.  The theocratic artist, by contrast, intimates, in a variety of ways and in varying degrees, of the Holy Spirit, is free to 'do his own thing' irrespective of whether or not it brings him public approval.  He alone is sovereign, not the People, and consequently he sets such artistic/spiritual standards as he can achieve, leading, like a fascist dictator, from above.  Thus his art - symbolist, post-painterly abstractionist, surrealist, etc., is fascistic or, better, Transcendentalist.  It doesn't require the People's approval.  But neither, in a liberal society, can it be forced upon them!  Consequently it remains, by and large, an elite phenomenon.


2.    In a liberal society, democratic art cannot be forced upon the People either, though a socialist society can encourage the People to view and attempt an appreciation of the Social Realist art on offer.  Needless to say, there will be little or no Modern Realist art on offer in such a social democracy, and neither, of course, will there be much theocratic art, as produced by the painterly avant-garde in the liberal West.  The People’s artist must represent the proletariat, almost literally, though often mythically, as so many militant Marxists overthrowing or opposing bourgeois rule.


3.    Ironically, militant Socialist Realism becomes anachronistic in an age of détente, with its peaceful co-existence with the West.  Rather, it appertains to the militant phase of Communist struggle (particularly within Russia) against the bourgeois/aristocratic tradition.  Where there are no representatives of the old order left in power, the justification for militant Socialist Realism must be held in question.  Only a more benign, positivistic Socialist Realism, reflecting the day-to-day lives of the average proletarian, preferably in a working context, would seem to be in order.  Such a civilized Socialist Realism will reflect the progress of Socialism as it bears upon the transformation of the proletariat from a proton bias under the old order to an electron bias under the new one, following the inevitable socialist revolution.  One might even contend that a militant Socialist Realism would be demeaning to the proletariat in such a People’s democracy.


4.    However that may be, militant Socialist Realism would certainly not demean or misrepresent the workers (proton equivalents) of a liberal democracy, where the perpetuation of syndicalism affords the Western Social Realist a vehicle for militant dramatization ... in the form of the workers' struggle against bourgeois oppression, thus creating or perpetuating the myth of Marxist revolt.


5.    But such a militant form of Socialist Realism is only one aspect (necessarily extreme) of democratic representative art in a liberal society and, from the establishment's viewpoint, hardly the most important or attractive aspect either!  For co-existent with this art is Modern Realism, the conservative alternative to (left-wing) Socialist Realism, which generally portrays middle-class life in its complacent, classical setting, and therefore may be said to represent the electron-equivalent bourgeois and/or petty bourgeois of the contemporary West.  All very smug and relaxed, in contrast to the workers' struggle against capitalist oppression or, as in the more left-wing types of Modern Realism, the frank portrayal of the effects of such oppression upon the worker from a democratic socialist point-of-view.  One sees it in certain of the works of Hockney, just as one saw its nineteenth-century precursor in Degas, Manet, and Renoir.  Perhaps 'capitalist realism' would be the most appropriate term for this classical democratic art, the representative type of contemporary academic art?


6.    In the nineteenth century, however, academic art was less bourgeois and more aristocratic, or neo-aristocratic, in character, not so much a classical democratic art as an humanistic autocratic one, as represented by the choice of pagan (ancient Greco-Roman, Egyptian, Hebrew, Byzantine, etc.) subject-matter, congenial to artists like Alma-Tadema, Poynter, Leighton, and other such exponents of fin-de-siècle decadence, not to mention earlier masters like David and Ingres, who indubitably displayed a taste for autocratic nostalgia in an age of ongoing democracy, an age seemingly no-less partial to the prototypical social-realist works of Courbet, Millet, and Le Dounier, as well as to some revolutionary theocratic works from the brushes of Turner, Redon, and Moreau, each of whom preferred to 'do his own thing'.


7.    If humanistic autocratic art is now dead and unlikely ever to arise again, democratic art is still alive in both the liberal West and the socialist East, if to a lesser extent than formerly.  For the growth of theocratic art, particularly in France and the United States, is in many respects the most important contribution of the twentieth century to artistic progress, outweighing the achievements, varied as they may be, of Socialist Realism which, while bringing democratic art to a republican climax, signifies the tail-end of an old tradition rather than the inception and development of a new, higher order of painting, as pertaining to the Holy Spirit.  It is this theocratic art which, in the evolutionary nature of things, has taken over from and extended beyond the democratic, as in the case of Op art, a late-stage petty-bourgeois successor to early-stage petty-bourgeois painterly avant-garde art - painting, of whichever description, being incapable of extension beyond petty-bourgeois criteria, coming to a climax, one might say, on avant-garde and/or Social Realist terms.


8.    Thus in a late-stage petty-bourgeois era the only truly contemporary art will be theocratic Op, a genre above and beyond the scope of conventional painting.  Beyond this, however, lies the art of the proletariat, the light art, holography and, in particular, abstract computer art of an absolutely theocratic civilization, such as I hope will take root in Eire in the not-too-distant future, following a progression to truly classless criteria.


9.    Needless to say, an absolutely theocratic society would not encourage anything democratic, so there would be neither Modern Realism nor Socialist Realism, nor even earlier (petty-bourgeois) forms of theocratic art, whether abstract, and therefore at best quasi-theocratic (given the democratic nature of the painterly genre), or as Op or Kinetic art, and therefore fascistic.  Only that which could be described as relevant to a proletarian civilization, the logical successor to the spiritualistic, late-stage petty-bourgeois civilization of the contemporary West, with particular reference to the United States, and one not at all connected with or stemming from its materialistic counterpart in the (former) Soviet Union.


10.   Not all avant-garde or modern art is theocratic, as an intimation of truth.  Much of it is neo-autocratic in an anti-aesthetic and expressionist kind of way, more concerned to distort nature and the natural than to intimate of pure spirit.  An art of the Ugly rather than of the Beautiful, the Ethical, or the True.  Some of it is even neo-pagan, and thus a glorification of sensuality, hedonism, sun, strength, nature, etc.  And, of course, it should not be forgotten that nature-painting of any description is fundamentally autocratic, that is to say, concerned not with man, still less the Holy Spirit, but with that which, as nature, stems from the First Cause and thus, by implication, solar energy.


11.   If nature precedes man and his democratic, humanistic concerns, then nature-painting, whether in the hands of a Constable or a Cortot, a Monet or a Rousseau, is beneath democratic painting as a kind of more absolutist autocratic art than that which focuses, even in pagan guise, on men and human society generally.  To be sure, not a great deal of representational nature-painting was done in the twentieth century, least of all among the truly representative artists of the age.  But we should not let this fact lead us to attribute a democratic or a theocratic bias to paintings of nature done in a semi-abstract or minimalist style.  A more contemporary technical treatment of natural phenomena does not constitute the truly modern!   Rather, it is a form of attenuated autocratic art, indicative of the lowest type of twentieth-century art, using the latter term in its strictly painterly sense.


12.   If the highest type of twentieth-century art has its limits, how much more limited must this autocratic art appear when compared with that which, as holography and (more importantly in the immediate future) computer graphics, is beyond painterly art, and as much above and beyond such art as pagan sculpture was beneath it!  Indeed, to do this ultimate art justice, we should distinguish between holography, as a true antithesis to the inception of 'art' in pagan sculpture, and computer graphics, as a true antithesis to pagan and, in particular, ancient Greek amphora art.  In contrast to the antithetical equivalent that may be inferred to exist between light art and medieval stained-glass in a fascist/catholic distinction.  Thus holography and computer art are as much above and beyond the pale of Western civilization ... as pagan sculpture and amphora art were beneath and before it.


13.   Concerning elites, who are always a minority, one may note a progression, commensurate with autocratic/democratic/ theocratic distinctions, from aristocrats to meritocrats via plutocrats.  Whereas the autocratic aristocrats rule the populace (largely in the guise of peasants), the democratic plutocrats both rule and serve the People (as middle class and/or workers), while the theocratic meritocrats serve the masses (largely in the form of proletarians).


14.   A parallel description to the above categories can be discerned in the distinction between Lords, Ministers, and Commissars - the Lords ruling a subject populace, the Ministers representing (ruling and serving) a sovereign people, and the Commissars serving the free proletarian masses.


15.   However, one should distinguish between Commissars (more usually bureaucratic Ministers) of a socialist stamp and, conversely, those of a centrist one; for whereas the former endeavour, in their democratic capacity, to serve the material interests of the proletarian masses, the latter will strive, in their theocratic capacity, to serve what is best in the People - namely their spiritual potential, even though compromises with materialism will of course have to be made.





1.    Autocratic lesbianism, democratic heterosexuality and/or homosexuality, theocratic pornography.  Heterosexual sex is to the democratic compromise between proton and electron equivalents. viz. workers and bourgeoisie, what homosexuality is to its socialist successor, that is to say, the logical sexual concomitant of an atomic civilization.  If heterosexual sex corresponds to a proton/electron relativity between women and men, then homosexual sex corresponds to an electron-electron attraction between men.  However, there is still a relativity of sorts involved with the latter, and therefore an extension of humanism towards an absolute integrity.  Thus homosexuality is more suited to a social democracy than to a parliamentary one, and we need not doubt that many Socialists, or would-be Socialists, are essentially homosexual.  This is not to say, however, that all those who consider themselves socialist are really what they claim to be!  A strong bias for pornography would indicate a fascistic temperament and ideological suitability for theocracy, a strong bias for heterosexual relations ... a democratic or bourgeois integrity.


2.    Now let us turn to the two extremes - those corresponding to the autocratic and the theocratic respectively.  If lesbianism was the autocratic norm, then it was on account of the stemming from proton absolutism of the early (pagan) civilizations, their subatomic constitution favouring, in sexual as in most other matters, something equivalent to a proton-proton reaction.  But lesbianism was not the sole sexuality, nor even the most important one where some ancient peoples were concerned; for there also existed, at least with the ancient Greeks and Indians, a taste for erotic sculpture, which undoubtedly played a significant role in relieving sexual tensions!  We may say that nude sculpture was to them what pornography is to us or, at any rate, to those of us with a theocratic bias.  Thus an antithesis may be inferred to exist between latter-day pornography and erotic sculpture.


3.    However, if autocratic sexual indulgence implied a radical concession to materialism, to the sub-organic as well as to a pre-atomic proton absolutism in the form of lesbianism, the latter a later and more 'democratic' development than the former (corresponding to the progression, in modern times, from heterosexuality to homosexuality), then we need not doubt that theocratic sexual indulgence implies a radical concession to idealism, to the supra-organic, which manifests itself in various forms and degrees of pornography.


4.    Pornography, then, is the theocratic sex of the age, somewhat beyond the sculptural connection, in medieval iconography, of the Blessed Virgin or of her elevation onto stained-glass and canvas, an intellectualized, spiritualized compromise existing between lovers in the flesh, whether lesbian, heterosexual, or homosexual.  I have described it as fascistic, but that would apply to adult pornography, particularly of a hard-core nature, whereas its evolution to a proletarian level presupposes the use, through computers rather than magazines, of juveniles in an ultimate pornography only appropriate to a Social Transcendentalist age and society, in which a more attenuated sexuality, focusing on mature (16-19) teenagers, was the morally desirable alternative to properly adult levels of sex.  No doubt, earlier levels of pornography, together with the three kinds of fleshy sex, would be taboo in an absolutely theocratic society.   Propagation would increasingly become an artificial affair, invoking Centrist regulation and supervision.  Sperm banks and artificial insemination would gradually supersede natural sexual activity as the appropriate method of reproduction for an advanced civilization.  Couples, whether married or otherwise, would become a thing of the past, a reflection of atomic compromise, and this no less the case with regard to homosexuals than to their heterosexual counterparts.


5.    Regarding lesbianism again, my conception of a lesbian age, as germane to an autocratic society, isn't one - necessarily oversimplified - which posits lesbian relations solely between females but, on the contrary, one that regards all relations, whether between men and women or men and men, as fundamentally lesbian on account of the pre-atomic integrity of pagan society and, as a corollary of this, the reactive nature of sexual relationships.  In short, women would have been too reactive, by and large, to contemplate or indulge in regular sex with their own kind.  The ability of women to have attractive sex with one another comes later, at that point in time when women undergo masculinization to a degree whereby any such seemingly lesbian relations partake of a quasi-homosexual character.  Exceptions to this rule there may have been, but I am quite convinced that women would not have gone in for strictly lesbian sex with each other in pagan times!


6.    Concerning musical instruments, there exists, as in other contexts, a distinction between the autocratic, the democratic, and the theocratic.  Broadly, instruments falling within the first category include percussion, wind, and brass; instruments within the second category include strings, keyboards, and guitars; while those within the third category include harps, organs, and synthesizers.  Again, to generalize, we may hold that 'autocratic' instruments are played horizontally and naturally, i.e. with naked contact of fingers; that 'democratic' instruments are played horizontally and artificially, i.e. with bow, plectrum, etc; while 'theocratic' instruments are played vertically and artificially.  There is about the 'democratic' instruments a kind of dualistic compromise between the horizontal and the vertical, the natural and the artificial, as befits their bourgeois status.


7.    If acoustic upright pianos correspond to a liberal democratic integrity, then electric pianos signify a progression along that same democratic spectrum to an integrity corresponding to social democracy, and may accordingly be regarded as socialistic, in conjunction with electric guitars.  By contrast, the distinction between an acoustic organ and an electric organ would correspond to the theological distinction (on the schismatic theocratic spectrum) between Protestantism and Communism, whereas the truly theocratic instruments, corresponding to the catholic and fascist parts of the main theocratic spectrum, would be further apart from each other because flanking the 'false' theocratic instruments, and therefore more akin to the distinction between a harp or, alternatively, harpsichord and a synthesizer.  Has not the harp long symbolized Ireland's Roman Catholic theocratic integrity?


8.    However that may be, we are advancing towards an age when the harp should be supplanted by a more advanced 'theocratic' instrument, if not exactly a Moog synthesizer these days ... then one of its more sophisticated and autonomous successors in the form of a synthesizer appropriate to a Social Transcendentalist age.  Needless to say, all 'democratic' and 'autocratic' instruments would then become taboo!


9.    Referring to the autocratic, it seems feasible to contend that the popularity of the saxophone in the present century owes not a little to its vertical handling, since possessing a kind of quasi-theocratic integrity as an instrument equivalent to a military dictatorship, being on the tail-end, as it were, of the autocratic spectrum, and thus the logical successor to more horizontal types of brass (trumpet) and wind (flute) instruments.  But not, definitely not, electronic!


10.   A decidedly important factor with regard to Social Transcendentalism that will distinguish it, during both its phases, from petty-bourgeois LSD-tripping and/or transcendental meditation, will be its dependence, for practical realization, on specially-constructed chest-to-crotch harnesses suspended from an overhead scaffold-like apparatus within any given Meditation Centre, so that its practitioners are lifted free of the ground and enabled to trip or meditate, as the case may be, in a vertical posture - free, to all appearances, of their bodies.


11.   In such fashion, the body will be immobilized and thus rendered incapable of disturbing or dominating the mind, a particularly important consideration where LSD tripping is concerned, in that people would not be able to walk about or otherwise make physical nuisances of themselves.  A tripper trussed-up in one of these harnesses would be unable to leave the Meditation Centre during the duration of his trip, and so his psychic experiences would be strictly confined to the Centre in question, where qualified personnel would ensure his mental and/or physical wellbeing.


12.   Of course, I do not wish to stress the negative advantages of this procedure at the expense of the positive ones, which should always remain paramount - namely, that the individual practitioners of the true religion will be in the best possible physical position to cultivate spirit by dint of being in an absolutely vertical posture some feet above the ground, a posture as levitation-like as its psychological concomitance is transcendental.





1.    In relation to the Irish, Scots, and Welsh, the English have always effectively functioned as proton equivalents, holding an atomic U.K. together through domination.  Thus the 'Celtic fringe' is - and has long been - a predominantly electron equivalent.  One might say, to extend the analogy, that the relationship of British imperialism to natives in Empire and Colony was akin to a proton domination of electron slaves.  Freedom for the enslaved is, above all, release from proton domination, and its realization must entail, at some point in time, the development of a free-electron society, a society consciously dedicated to the furtherance of spiritual freedom.


2.    If Britain signifies, through its allegiance to a Constitutional Monarchy, an autocratic democracy, then Eire signifies, in its allegiance to the Roman Catholic Church, an autocratic theocracy.  A bourgeois republic, like France, would correspond, by contrast, to a democratic democracy, whilst a People’s republic, like China, may be accounted a bureaucratic democracy.


3.    In religion Protestantism signifies a democratic theocracy, whereas Fascism is more akin to an autocratic theocracy.  The only true theocracy, a theocratic theocracy, so to speak, will arise from Social Transcendentalism, as germane to true religion.  Thus for Eire, evolutionary progress must entail a shift from autocratic theocracy to theocratic theocracy.


4.    Anyone who defines himself as a theocratic theocrat, i.e. a Social Transcendentalist, should find literature, particularly in its novelistic essence, beneath him, since literature is fundamentally a liberal art-form, scarcely to be countenanced by a theocratic mind!


5.    Democracy-proper, akin to literature-proper, is ever a liberal phenomenon.  For a late-stage petty-bourgeois era, essentially post-liberal in character, there are one of two possibilities.  Either democracy can be stepped up, or improved upon, and one gets a system of proportional representation, akin to a magazine short-story in literature, or it can be transcended in a new 'genre', namely the bureaucratic democracy germane to Socialism, a political equivalent to colour film.


6.    At present, proportional representation and bureaucratic democracies co-exist.  But there are also liberal and/or autocratic democracies still in existence, political anachronisms corresponding to the literary anachronisms of novels and plays, genres still favoured by many Englishmen, writers and readers alike!  Given these analogies between politics and literature, one is tempted to ascribe more relevance to magazine short-stories within a P.R. democracy than to either novels or colour films.  Likewise one might suppose colour films to have more relevance to a bureaucratic democracy than to either of the other kinds.  But this is purely speculative.


7.    From the autocratic kingdom to the democratic state, from the Father to the fleshy side of Christ (Liberalism).  From the democratic church to the theocratic centre, from the spiritual side of Christ (Protestantism) to the Holy Spirit.  Thus civilized evolution may be perceived as progressing from a subatomic proton inception in the Kingdom to a supra-atomic electron consummation in the Centre via an atomic compromise in the balance between state and church.  In other words, a progression from soul to spirit via matter.


8.    Matter evolved out of soul, but spirit evolves - and will increasingly evolve - out of matter.  Paganism and Roman Catholicism were alike religions of soul, Protestantism signifying a 'fall' (forwards) into matter, Communism yet another, as a later and in some respects more refined materialism, whereas Fascism signified a reaction, in part, against such materialism in the form of a new spiritual impetus, the inception of a religion of spirit that will develop more absolutely in the guise of Social Transcendentalism, the religion of spirit and, consequently, ultimate world religion.


9.    An alternative word for Centre would be 'Saviourdom', an antithesis to 'Kingdom'.  In the former, the dictator leads; in the latter, the monarch rules.  The one as embodiment of the Holy Spirit, the other as embodiment of the Father.  In between, the collectivized institutions of church and state, deriving their collective integrity from the Christian notion of the equality of all souls/spirits and, hence, sovereignty in the mass, the people, with the political concomitant of representation and, so far as the Church is concerned, the religious concomitant of guidance.


10.   Just as the first civilizations were beneath fictions and thus given to the propitiation or worship of facts, both cosmic and natural, so the ultimate civilization will be above illusions, and thus given to the comprehension and experience of truth.  Just as the propitiation of natural phenomena preceded the worship and/or propitiation of mythical abstractions (fictions), so the experience of spirit, or superconscious mind, should succeed the acknowledgement of such contemporary illusions (scientific abstractions) as the curved-space theory and the notion of an expanding (cosmic) universe.


11.   Distinctions between cosmic and/or natural facts and mythical fictions on the one hand, and between spiritual truth and scientific illusions on the other, are only relevant to a relative civilization, not to an absolute one; the same of course applying to those theological abstractions - a cross between the mythical fiction and the scientific illusion - to be found in quintessentially dualistic and, hence, atomic civilizations, such as the Christian.


12.   Hitherto civilization has never been entirely civilized but, except in the earliest absolute examples, a combination, to varying extents, of the civilized and the barbarous.  If the earliest civilizations were, in their stoical integrity, a kind of controlled or regulated barbarism, then the relative civilizations, including the Christian, signified a distinction between a civilized elite and a barbarous populace, a distinction still applying where petty-bourgeois civilization, with its transcendental bias, is concerned.  The development of a truly civilized civilization, embracing the vast majority of people, has yet to come about.  But it will only do so, it seems to me, on Social Transcendentalist terms, as the masses are led (from above) towards the highest cultural and religious allegiance.


13.   Even Communism, which is fundamentally a petty-bourgeois ideology on the side of the People, cannot create a truly civilized civilization, since, despite its commitment to the proletariat, it makes no provision for the highest culture and religion but tends, on the contrary, to represent the People on their own necessarily barbarous terms, in accordance with its democratic bias.  No ultimate civilization can be established on the basis of representative leadership!  It requires the utmost theocratic leadership, in which political sovereignty is firmly and absolutely vested in the Leader, the Saviour of his - and eventually all - people(s).  And not simply in a positive sense ... as saving for, but also, if less importantly, in a negative sense ... as saving from, saving, above all, from the State, and thus democracy, republicanism, parliament, elections, representation, and other such political concomitants of statehood, that atomic integrity stemming from the autocratic sovereignty of kingdoms.


14.   The highest, most civilized civilization is indubitably of a free-electron integrity, significant of the greatest spiritual freedom on human terms.  It will inexorably lead towards the still greater spiritual freedom of the post-Human Millennium.  And that, in turn, will inevitably lead to the ultimate spiritual freedom of pure spirit in the post-Millennial Beyond.  Verily, how can an honourable and progressive man not be in favour of all this?


15.   A truly civilized civilization will always act not in the name of the People but in the name of the Truth.  The Leader serves the Truth.  For theocracy is ever above and beyond democracy, the culmination of human evolution.


16.   Communism does away with the Church but extends the State.  Social Transcendentalism will, if successful, do away with the State but extend the Church ... into the Centre.  In the one case, a social democracy.  In the other case, a social theocracy.  Both, in their contrary ways, are absolutist, in accordance with the absolute criteria of an incipiently extreme age.  There is no church/state relativity in Communism, any more than there could be in Social Transcendentalism.  People do not congregate in a Communist church, as they would in a Protestant one, since no such institution exists.  An absolute age demands state or church, not both!  Communism chose the former, Social Transcendentalism has chosen the latter, and on no-less genuine terms than the other camp's was pseudo.


17.   For the progression, in respect of Communism, from liberal to social democracy, or bureaucratic democracy, corresponds to a development from the genuine state to the pseudo-state, which is to say, from the bourgeoisie to the proletariat, from the national to the international entity beyond it, as beyond any intermediate petty-bourgeois nationalism/internationalism.


18.   Make no mistake, the pseudo-state, applying to a transformed proletariat (now electron equivalents) within the ideological context of an international entity, is historically superior to the genuine state!  And, by a like-token, genuine centrism, in a theocratic theocracy, would be superior to the pseudo-centrism of the RC church, which corresponds to an autocratic theocracy.  If Communism signifies a contraction of materialism from capitalism to socialism, then Social Transcendentalism most definitely signifies an expansion of the spiritual into the True World Religion.  The former, tied to the tail-end of the democratic spectrum, can never be anything more than petty bourgeois, even though it is pro-proletarian.  The latter, appertaining to an extension of the main, or non-schismatic, theocratic spectrum beyond petty-bourgeois Fascism, will be genuinely transcendental, one might even say the upholder of a People’s theocracy, bearing in mind its absolute status.


19.   But such a People’s theocracy would be primarily concerned with what is best in the People, namely their spiritual potential, and not with the People as a people, which, by contrast, would constitute an illogical concession to materialism, as appertaining to the democratic spectrum, and thus to Socialism.  Not for the ultimate theocracy to act in the name of the People, like some democracy, but primarily in the interests of their spiritual potential, whether in terms of the direct cultivation of spirit (awareness) in each individual or, less ideally but nevertheless imperatively, in terms of the dissemination of the Truth and, hence, Social Transcendentalism to various appropriate countries overseas - a procedure which, one way or another, may entail personal sacrifices on the individual's part.  One might say that this latter procedure corresponds to the 'social' side of the ideology, the direct cultivation of spirit, by contrast, to its 'transcendental' side.  Not until the Truth was established world-wide ... could a true spiritual absolutism emerge, paving the way for the post-Human Millennium.


20.   The higher, more intellectual men can make personal sacrifices in the name of the Truth, grasped in its theoretical and abstract formulation.  Not so the broad mass of people who, whether as soldiers or civilians, policemen or bodyguards, will respond to the concrete and tangible embodiment of the Truth in the person of the Leader.  They will make sacrifices for the Leader, not for his truth, about which they may be largely if not totally ignorant!  And the Leader will be more significant in their eyes to the extent that he appears before them as a spiritual guide, nay! the personification on earth of the Holy Spirit, rather than as a politician, be he president or prime minister, and thus a mere representative of the People.  For, in truth, the Leader is no politician, and he knows that the People generally despise and avoid politics, being potentially, if not actually, beyond it, as so many candidates for theocracy.


21.   Pertaining, as he does, to the climax of the theocratic spectrum, the Leader stands before them as a refutation of politics, the denier of the State, with its presidents and prime ministers, and thus the saviour of the People from democratic materialism ... for the life of the spirit, the Eternal Life to-come.  He signifies an electron absolutism, and so leads from above, leads from the Centre, the embodiment of spiritual freedom.  The People, if they are loyal to their selves and to their developing electron-biased constitution, cannot but be loyal to him; for he is their hope and encouragement, their promise of a better future, the phenomenal mirror to their spiritual selves.


22.   Autocratic subnationalism, democratic nationalism, social democratic internationalism, and theocratic supra-nationalism: a progression from the proton-biased tribe to the electron-biased ideology via the atomic nation-state.  A genuinely theocratic society, or Social Transcendental Centre, can only be supra-national, and hence dedicated to the establishment and furtherance of a federation of Social Transcendental Centres, in accordance with its classless integrity.  Neither bourgeois nationalism nor proletarian internationalism can be relevant to a genuinely theocratic society in a transcendentalist phase of social evolution.  To think in these anachronistic terms is to put oneself beneath the pale of genuine transcendentalist criteria.  If Eire is to do justice to its theocratic bias, it must progress from its current nationalist status to the ideological supra-nationalism of an Irish Social Transcendental Centre.  There is no evolutionary alternative!





1.    The dress is autocratic, by which I mean that it conforms to a centrifugal absolutism in its one-piece cylindrical shape.  Whether we are referring to very long dresses, germane to an aristocratic age, or to contemporary minidresses, necessarily petty-bourgeois in character, we are dealing with an autocratic mode of clothing.


2.    By contrast, democratic clothing is always dualistic, or relative.  It affirms an atomic compromise between the feminine and the masculine, skirts and trousers.  And this compromise is further indicated in the relativity of skirts to blouses and/or jackets on the one hand, and of trousers to shirts and/or jackets on the other hand, so that each of the sexes reflects a dualistic integrity, the one to a large extent the converse of the other.


3.    Coming to a theocratic mode of clothing, a mode the antithesis of the dress, we enter the realm of the post-dualistic, where a centripetal absolutism prevails in the form of a one-piece phallic shape or design.  I am of course alluding to boiler suits, which are a rudimentary manifestation of a more synthetic and absolute trend still to arise, a kind of proletarian precursor to the one-piece zippersuit of the future, doubtless the only kind of clothing permissible in a truly theocratic society, where an aspiration towards the absolutism of the Holy Spirit would be the religious/moral norm.


4.    If boiler suits, usually in denim, are socialistic, then these synthetic zippersuits will be centrist, or relative to a Social Transcendentalist integrity.  No-one will dress like a democrat, in a two-piece suit or, worse still, like an autocrat, in a dress.  Only the closed-society absolutism of a one-piece zippersuit will prevail!


5.    Since I have elsewhere distinguished between kingdom and state on the one hand, and between church and centre on the other, as reflecting an evolutionary progression from the subatomic to the supra-atomic via the atomic (church/state) compromise, I shall refer the above-listed modes of clothing to their respective politico-religious parallels, thus equating dresses with the Kingdom, skirts with the State, trousers with the Church, and one-piece zippersuits with the Centre, a progression from the subatomic absolute to the supra-atomic absolute via an atomic compromise in bourgeois relativity.  Thus like the Church, two-piece suits testify to a bound-electron equivalent, one-piece zippersuits testifying, like the Centre, to a free-electron equivalent.  Dresses and skirts, like kingdom and state, are proton and neutron equivalents respectively.


6.    Whereas the button-up collared shirt is relative, divisible into two halves, as it were, and further divisible between masculine buttons and feminine button-holes, the T-shirt is absolute, all-of-a-piece, and thus purely masculine in character.  Besides making dressing easier, it conforms to the extreme relativistic criteria of a late petty-bourgeois/early proletarian age, being the sartorial complement to jeans (cords or denims).  In conjunction with this other masculine attire, it reflects a socialistic and unisexual integrity, and this whether or not the wearer is consciously socialist and/or unisexual.  It accords with colour films, colour photography, and rock music, as appertaining to the tail-end of the middle, or democratic, spectrum of political evolution.


7.    One should distinguish between the upgrading of an old-style form of bourgeois, relative clothing, whether masculine or feminine, and the new-style relative clothing more absolutist in construction.  Thus one should distinguish between, say, a cord or denim trouser suit, the jacket of which overlaps the legs in traditional bourgeois fashion, and a cord or denim trouser suit with a short, waist-length jacket.  In the former case, a conventional relativity between masculine trousers and feminine jacket; in the latter case an absolutist relativity between masculine trousers (jeans) and jacket.  Whereas the one finds its political analogue in a P.R. liberal democracy, the other should be equated with a radical, or socialist, democracy.  Whereas the one is aligned with the heterosexual, the other provokes a homosexual analogue.  Thus the absolutist relativity of contemporary jean suits, in which no feminine overlapping of the leg occurs, is on a cultural level with the theocratic democracy of Communism and the masculine relativity of homosexuality.  If appearances were invariably aligned with essences, one would have no hesitation in regarding a person who dressed in the above-mentioned manner as either a communist or a homosexual, or both.  Certainly his mode of dressing corresponds to an extreme petty-bourgeois integrity.


8.    Now consider the man who wears a boiler suit or, better still, a one-piece zippersuit that zips up the front and gives him the appearance of a pilot or even of an astronaut.  Such a man would be dressed in an absolutist manner, the antithesis to a woman in a dress, and so approximate to proletarian criteria of sartorial appearances.  The political or, rather, religious analogue evoked here would be Social Transcendentalism, while the sexual analogue would be pornography, particularly of a radical nature, and the man concerned might well be a pornographer and/or transcendentalist of one type or another.  Such a man would almost certainly despise those who dressed in a relative manner, considering them bourgeois or, in the case of the more extreme relativities, petty bourgeois.  Whether or not he knew anything about political/sexual analogies, his appearance would correspond to a radical theocracy, theirs, by contrast, to either liberal or social democracy, thereby existing on an inferior evolutionary level.


9.    Where women are concerned, the upgrading of bourgeois, knee-length skirts takes the form of the mini, with or without a jacket, thereby retaining a relatively feminine appearance.  Recourse to jeans or jean suits would place the woman on an equal communist/homosexual footing with a man so attired, and thus bring her into line with contemporary petty-bourgeois criteria.  We need not doubt, however, that proletarian females will eventually gravitate from contemporary sartorial relativities to a one-piece zipper absolutism along the lines of the aforementioned zippersuit.


10.   In countries with a church/state dichotomy, conforming to their atomic status, it usually transpires that one side prevails over the other in accordance with the ethical/ideological bias of the people concerned.  Thus in Britain, the State prevails over the Church, whereas in Ireland the converse is generally the case.  And as though to symbolize this, not to say reinforce the respective distinctions, Britain retains allegiance to the Monarchy, Ireland to the Papacy.  On the one hand, an autocratic democracy; on the other hand, an autocratic theocracy.  To conceive of the Church being stronger than the State in monarchic Britain is as impossible as to conceive of the converse situation in papal Ireland.


11.   During the atomic stage of evolution, each people retains a distinct, nay, an antithetical bias, and one that will remain such should post-atomic absolutism replace atomic relativity in the not-too-distant future, if in radically dissimilar ways, so that a new distinction arises between, on the one hand, the theocratic centre in Ireland and, on the other hand, the bureaucratic pseudo-state in Britain, the former as hostile to democrats as the latter to autocrats.


12.   An Englishman, especially when middle class, easily adopts a utilitarian attitude to the weather on a hot summer's day; he wears the bare minimum, perhaps no more than sandals and shorts.  Religious or moral considerations don't occur to him, since he is largely devoid of them.  His attitude is crassly philistine!  By contrast, an Irishman is more likely to keep his clothes on, irrespective of the heat: socks, shoes, trousers, and shirt being the minimum requirement.  To the typical pragmatic Englishman, he may appear foolish, but that is only from a utilitarian point-of-view.  For the Irishman will know or, at any rate, sense that there is also a moral dimension which is more important - namely, that clothing is worn not just to keep warm but to cover the flesh, to hide the body, and this applies no less on a hot day than on a cold or a wet one.  Hence his attitude, unlike the Englishman's, is largely conditioned by religious considerations.  It is profoundly moral!


13.   If clothing were worn merely to keep one warm, then there would be little or no point in people in the Middle East, Iran, or North Africa wearing any.  But, as a rule, they are buttoned- and/or wrapped-up from head to toe, especially in the case of women.  Partly of course this protects them from the sun, but it is also an aspect of Islamic law, of a moral-world-order imposed by religion.  Generally speaking, theocratic peoples, wherever they may be, respect this moral dimension, whereas democratic peoples are only too willing to discard or, more correctly, shun it, since they respect merely the utilitarian dimension, which they mistakenly suppose, in their short-sighted materialism, to be the only one.  Instead of shunning or ignoring the sun, they rush to greet it, like so many heathens, obsessed by the prospect of sunbathing.  No wonder such people remain loyal to the ideals of an open society!  A passive form of sun-worship confirms their pagan bias - the opposite of a truly religions orientation.


14.   The above example of the way in which an Englishman can misunderstand and, consequently, belittle an Irishman is but one of countless examples that could be given.  Clearly, so long as the Irish remain under British rule and/or influence, they will never be evaluated according to their true worth, but be expected to behave in a British manner.... Which, because they won't or can't, leads to additional friction and belittlement in a vicious circle of prejudice and misunderstanding!  Salvation for the Irish is intrinsically linked with freedom from the British, freedom from the democratic, and will only come when Ireland is elevated to a radically theocratic status in an island purged of British, and hence democratic, influence.


15.   There can be no compromise between theocracy and democracy in the future!  The age demands an absolutist choice: either radical theocracy in the form of Social Transcendentalism, or radical democracy in the form of Socialist Republicanism.  There can be no question of Ireland's adopting the latter!


16.   If Britain was the hub or cynosure of a world empire, then Ireland, elevated in the aforementioned manner, should become the hub or, at the very least, root-motivator of a world centre, an ideological grouping of radically theocratic peoples that will stretch - in the short term - across those parts of the globe, including North Africa and South America, not destined for Socialism but entitled to work for Social Transcendentalism and, by implication, the eventual defeat of democracy in the world at large.  What Britain was on materialistic terms, Ireland should become on spiritualistic terms; and on the most absolute spiritualistic terms at that, not, as traditionally, on the level of Catholic missionary work, but with regard to what I have called the True World Religion, with its supra-national integrity.


17.   If an autocratic hairstyle is long, then a theocratic hairstyle is short.  If an autocratic hairstyle hangs down, then a theocratic hairstyle sticks up.  Because they are alike absolutist, both hairstyles will be without a parting.


18.   Not so the democratic hairstyles in between these two extremes, by which I mean the medium-length hairstyles that, in the liberal case, favour a parting in the centre of the head and, in the radical case, favour a peripheral parting.  The traditional liberal hairstyle naturally favours a relativity, consonant with dualistic criteria, but does so in a way bespeaking a balance between the feminine and the masculine, which is to say, between each side of a central parting.  By contrast, the radical hairstyle, whilst affirming a relativity, does so on terms which assert the superiority of the masculine side of the parting so that, instead of a feminine/masculine balance, one finds a masculine bias, and this in response to radical and/or homosexual criteria.  So we may affirm an evolution of hairstyles that passes from autocratic beginnings to theocratic endings via a democratic compromise, in which medium-length parted hair is the norm.


19.   Where the democratic compromise stage is concerned, a distinction will, of course, exist between feminine and masculine hairstyles, whether in terms of a continuing autocratic bias in the former or of its democratic modification in relation to the latter, as described above.  A woman's hair will generally be longer than a man's in a liberal society, whereas a society stressing sexual equality, and thus invoking a masculine bias compatible with homosexual criteria, will encourage women to wear their hair shorter, perhaps as short, or medium-length, as a man's, with the attendant concession of a more or less peripheral parting.


20.   A more comprehensive outline of the evolution of hairstyles should bear in mind that the progression from one absolute to another takes place by degrees, so that a peripheral parting which favours the feminine will precede a central parting, just as a peripheral parting favouring the masculine will succeed it.  Thus one could speak of a grand-bourgeois/petty-bourgeois antithesis (either side of a bourgeois relativity) in which the peripheral parting will be on opposite sides of the head.  Thus whereas the grand-bourgeois parting favoured the right-hand side of the head, corresponding to the old brain/subconscious mind, the contemporary petty-bourgeois parting favours its left-hand side, the side proximate to the new brain/superconscious mind.  The first parting attests to a feminine imbalance, the second to a masculine one.  In between, the central parting through which, in accordance with bourgeois relativity, the two sides of the head are in approximate balance, as between state and church, lesbianism and homosexuality.  However, such a balance no longer holds sway to any appreciable extent; for most people - women included - are partial to the left-hand side peripheral parting, and thus to a bias towards the Church or, at any rate, towards theocracy, while remaining, in their relativity, essentially democratic.  Only in a radically theocratic society would an absolutist hairstyle be systematically encouraged and, as already remarked, it would be short and vertical, constituting an exclusive masculinity, a proletarian antithesis to absolutist femininity in the unparted long hair of the autocratic aristocrats of pagan antiquity.





1.    The autocratic temple, the democratic church, and the theocratic centre.  From a worship of the Creator to an aspiration towards the Holy Spirit via a worship of and aspiration towards Christ.  From absolute enslavement to absolute freedom via a dualistic compromise.  From soul to spirit via matter, in this case 'human'.


2.    The autocratic subego, the democratic ego, and the theocratic superego; from subconscious to superconscious via the conscious mind.


3.    Where formerly, in liberal societies, politics and religion were separate, as between state and church, the post-liberal societies signify a progression from the relative to the absolute in the form of religious politics - the false world religion of the People.


4.    By contrast, societies that were genuinely Catholic and thus pre-liberal or, better, anti-liberal, can only progress from an uneasy compromise between church and state to a political religion, an absolute theocracy, in the guise of post-fascist Social Transcendentalism, which upholds the true religion of what is best in the People, namely their spiritual potential, and aims to cultivate this potential in the most systematic and radical way, in the interests of spiritual progress.


5.    Thus we are distinguishing between the communist illusion and the centrist truth, between the tail-end, as it were, of the democratic spectrum and the post-fascist level of the theocratic one.  Only this latter can extend towards the post-Human Millennium and, hence, the overcoming of man in the Supermen and Superbeings of its successive phases, as evolution draws nearer to a climax in pure spirit.


6.    From time to time, in accordance with the acquirement of fresh insights, I, like anyone else, revise my opinions and/or theoretical positions, and will do so now with respect to the distinction between aristocrats, plutocrats, and bureaucrats, which I formerly regarded as roughly synonymous with autocratic, democratic, and theocratic distinctions.  Not so!  A more comprehensive - and hence objectively correct - evaluation will include meritocrats, or those who embody the principle of elite leadership and passionately maintain that the best minds should be allowed and encouraged to go to the top ... if society is to be progressively and sensibly run.  These meritocrats are, in effect, the intelligentsia, and they can only be equated with the theocratic, and thus with the coming age of meritocratic guidance.


7.    So where, then, do bureaucrats fit in, if they are not, after all, to be equated with the theocratic?  Well, the simple answer to this is ... on the left wing of the democratic spectrum, whether moderate or extreme.  In a liberal democracy a relative distinction exists between capitalistic plutocrats and socialistic bureaucrats.  In a radical democracy, on the other hand, there exists only a kind of bureaucratic absolutism, which is intended to serve the People.  Thus a bureaucratic state is ipso facto communist, the successor, in effect, to states upholding a compromise between plutocracy and bureaucracy.


8.    Where, however, no such compromise has traditionally been upheld or, rather, where a theocratic bias has generally prevailed over secular concerns, then the logical evolutionary progression is from a kind of diluted, clerical meritocracy to a radical fascist or post-fascist meritocracy, such as would further curb plutocratic and bureaucratic tendencies in response to its more absolute theocratic integrity, thereby utilizing most of the monies available for the service of the Truth and, consequently, the consolidation and dissemination of the new enlightenment - a policy not disassociated from the service of what is best in the People, namely their spiritual potential.  Naturally, a certain amount of bureaucratic service, not to mention plutocratic generation of capital, would still be necessary, but a minimum bureaucracy, corresponding to the 'social' aspect of Social Transcendentalism, with particular reference to welfare, housing, and health.  Thus a Social Transcendental Centre could broadly be defined as a bureaucratic meritocracy, in contrast to the meritocratic bureaucracies that tend to prevail in communist states.


9.    An absolute antithesis may consequently be inferred to exist between autocratic aristocrats and theocratic meritocrats, whereas the antithesis between democratic plutocrats and democratic bureaucrats can only be relative.  Even communist bureaucracies are essentially democratic, serving the People.


10.   If Ireland was once a land of 'saints and scholars', i.e. a catholic meritocracy, it can become so again, this time on the more advanced theocratic terms of a Social Transcendental Centre.  Even now one may reasonably speak of a progression towards absolute meritocracy, notwithstanding the plutocratic and bureaucratic elements that cling to Ireland ... rather more as foreign bodies, one suspects, than truly representative institutions of Irish life!


11.   Autocratic ruralism, democratic provincialism/suburbanism, radical democratic urbanism, theocratic supra-urbanism.  A liberal democracy tends to reflect a provincial/suburban relativity, as between Conservatives and Liberals, whereas a social democracy reflects an urban absolutism.  The big city is essentially an environment aligned with radical democracy.  Beyond and above such an environment lies the supra-urban context germane to a radical theocracy, a Social Transcendentalist theocracy.  Alternatively, one could term it supra-rural.


12.   However that may be, it should not be confounded with the urban, since signifying a more evolved constitution, one, I should think, in which tall, well-spaced curvilinear buildings tend to predominate over any oblong, rectilinear arrangements of tenement-type dwellings.  Indeed, one in which such materialistic arrangements no longer exist, all buildings having become curvilinear, hence transcendentalist in construction and design - residential and commercial, cultural and educational facilities no longer separate but integrated into the one overall structure, thus creating the concept of an omega complex, whereby all parts, or functions, are dovetailed into the whole, the ultimate form of civic development on earth.


13.   The current existence and continuing creation of large, curvilinear housing estates, as in Northern Ireland, more than suggests a supra-urban tendency in process of development.  It is as though we are being confronted by the antithesis - communal and curvilinear - to the castles and palaces of autocratic antiquity - an arrangement owing nothing to suburban and urban, not to mention provincial (small town), precedent.


14.   Nature reflects an atomic integrity or, if you prefer, dichotomy, and therefore the natural is always a compromise and tension between atomic divisions, no less the case in political than in sexual relations.  Just as, in politics, an opposition between conservative and liberal interests reflects a natural order, so, in sex, heterosexual behaviour is ever natural or, more correctly, naturalistic.


15.   Opposed to this natural order, however, is that which, arising at a later time, scorns such an atomic division in favour of a pseudo-electron (protons in disguise) one-sidedness, and in politics this takes the form of a social democracy, its sexual equivalent ... homosexuality.  The natural and the anti-natural alike appertain to the atomic spectrum.  Not so the subnatural and the supra-natural, which appertain, in their very different constitutions, to the subatomic (proton) and supra-atomic (electron) spectra respectively, the former manifesting in an autocratic context, the latter in a theocratic one; the former the antithesis to the latter.  If the subnatural is beneath politics and, in a certain sense, sex, then the supra-natural will be above it, the former existing on the mundane level of economic materialism, the latter on the transcendental level of theocratic spirituality - a distinction between kingdom and centre, as between erotic sculpture and computer erotica, aristocratic rule and meritocratic leadership.


16.   Coming in-between the subnatural and the natural, however, one has what may be termed the pro-natural, manifesting sexually in lesbianism, that is to say, in a pseudo-proton (crude electron) one-sidedness, and politically in a pro-democratic Cromwellian pseudo-tyranny, equally one-sided in character, though essentially pertaining to the democratic spectrum, where it stands to the natural as a relativistic absolute to an absolute relativity.  Indeed, the subsequent emergence, on the same spectrum, of the anti-natural ... establishes an antithetical equivalent with the pro-natural, as between homosexuality and lesbianism, Bolshevik pseudo-dictatorship and Ironside pseudo-tyranny.  One could alternatively speak of the natural being flanked by the pre- and post-natural, two modes of extremism not to be confounded with the truly absolute extremities of the subnatural and the supra-natural respectively.


17.   As the early-Christian (Roman Catholic) civilization of Medieval Europe arose out of the Dark Ages accompanying and following the barbarous eclipse of late-pagan Greco-Roman civilization, so the early transcendental (Communist) civilization of countries like Russia arose out of the pseudo-Light Ages accompanying the decline of late-Christian (Protestant) Anglo-American civilization.  Contrary to popular superstition, evolution proceeds upwards in a spiralling movement, never exactly repeating itself, but manifesting antithetical parallels with an earlier age the higher it ascends.


18.   Thus to speak of an impending new Dark Ages would be to succumb to the superficial notion of an 'eternal recurrence' at the expense of objective historical evaluation.  The Anglo-American antithetical equivalents of the Greco-Roman stoical/hedonistic phases of late-pagan civilization are puritanism and promiscuity respectively - the one an expression of Protestant ethics, the other a consequence of republican revolution in the so-called Age of Enlightenment.  The former a calculated asceticism, the latter a sublimated self-indulgence.


19.   As the catholic Counter Reformation to the Reformation, so the fascist reaction to Communism, the latter an antithetical equivalent of the former, an aspect of antithetical parallels in evolutionary spirals.


20.   If early paganism - Egyptian/Byzantine civilization - was not a specifically Western development, then neither need late transcendentalism - Social Transcendentalist/Super-transcendentalist civilization - be so, since given to global aspirations.


21.   Western civilization, in the widest possible geographical sense of that term, begins with Greco-Roman late paganism, progresses to early-Christian Catholicism, progresses from there to late-Christian Protestantism, and culminates in early-transcendental Communism.  The first and last are of course tangential to Western civilization-proper, as manifesting in the atomic compromise, or dichotomy, between Catholicism and Protestantism.  They are akin, in resurrecting a sexual analogue, to the relatively absolute extremes of lesbianism and homosexuality flanking a heterosexual relativity.


22.   If Catholicism is a bound-electron equivalent, then Protestantism is its neutron opponent, a kind of suburban opposition to provincial (town) religion.  By contrast Communism is an urban ideology, just as late paganism was rural and thus as much pre-natural, in our specific atomic sense, as Communism is post-natural.  Only late transcendentalism could be supra-natural, as pertaining to a supra-urban environment, just as early paganism was subnatural, the absolute reflection of a desert environment.


23.   Thus genuinely autocratic and theocratic extremes flank the democratic civilizations, though only the Christian and, in particular, Protestant civilization may be accounted genuinely democratic.





1.    Increasingly I dislike the term 'supernatural', because it suggests a heightened naturalism, a kind of higher naturalism that contrasts with nature.  To my mind, 'supra-natural' does more justice to the concept of that which is above and beyond nature, i.e. a question of free-electron unity in attraction, in contrast to the uneasy and problematic compromise between protons and electrons, not to mention neutrons, in organic matter.  The supra-natural is divisible, it seems to me, into the artificial and the civilized, the one pertaining to the material world, the other to the spiritual one.


2.    A distinction, then, between, say, plastic furniture and a mind attuned to pure awareness, neither of which is incompatible with the twin aspects of Social Transcendentalism, which embraces both a bureaucratic and a meritocratic dimension, the former aligned with the material world, and hence artificial; the latter with the spiritual world, and hence civilized.  Perhaps, after all, the artificial, or synthetic, would be better described by the term 'supernatural'?


3.    When Christian theology distinguishes between the body and its afflictions, as between the Father and the Devil, the one good and the other evil, it is acknowledging the fact that, in general, ill-health is the exception to the rule, and therefore that the work of the Creator, namely the body, reflects the rule, whereas that of the Devil, in ill-health, reflects the exception.  Sound enough in its rather simple logic, though scarcely an argument in favour of the Holy Spirit!  For no matter how much the rule of good-health may prevail over the exception of ill-health in the vast majority of people, the body is still an obstacle to the extensive cultivation of spirit, and no man can ardently aspire towards the Holy Spirit who also acknowledges and serves the Father.


4.    To take a compromise position between the Creator and the Holy Ghost is to be Christian.  To turn away from the Creator, and by implication His Son, and aspire towards the attainment of pure spirit ... is to be transcendental, and thus supra-natural, an enemy of everything subnatural and natural.  Such a closed-society position is the only truly theocratic religion, above and beyond all autocratic and democratic attachments, free from enslavement to soul and to that which stems from it, in matter.  Free for spirit.


5.    The age of a truly theocratic religion may still be some way into the future, but, in the meantime, Social Transcendentalism, and by implication Social Transcendentalists (theocratic centrists), must rigorously oppose everything that accrues to the open-society mentality of those who would keep humanity enslaved to the past - to the natural and the subnatural.  Only through systematic struggle with reaction and tradition will a new and ultimate civilization in the history of the world emerge.


6.    Early-pagan ugliness, late-pagan beauty; early-Christian evil, late-Christian good; early-transcendental illusion, late-transcendental truth - an approximate quantitative attribute to each stage of civilized evolution.


7.    On the other hand, an approximate qualitative attribute thereof would read: early-pagan pain, late-pagan pleasure; early-Christian hate, late-Christian love; early-transcendental sadness, late-transcendental happiness, a happiness achieved through increased awareness.


8.    Ugliness is the doing against self, and the qualitative attribute of such negative behaviour is pain; beauty is the doing for self, and the qualitative attribute of such positive behaviour is pleasure; evil is the doing against others, and the qualitative attribute of such negative behaviour is hate; good is the doing for others, and the qualitative attribute of such positive behaviour is love; illusion is the being against self, and the qualitative attribute of such a negative stance is sadness; truth is the being for self, and the qualitative attribute of such a positive stance is happiness.


9.    Because Social Transcendentalism aims at the establishment of a supra-natural, supra-urban, supra-national society, it favours the concept of a classless society, the logical outcome to a process of world-historical evolution directed not, as with Communism, against the bourgeoisie, but towards the dissemination and development of true religion.  It does not intend to extend democracy at the expense of the bourgeois state, but to extend theocracy at the expense of the Church.  It does not favour a proletarian exclusivity, but the classless integration of as many different classes as possible into the new, Social Transcendentalist community for the purposes of furthering that community's true interests.


10.   A proletarian opposition to the bourgeoisie is communistic, because relative.  Only a people struggling, under the guidance of Social Transcendentalism, for the extension and expansion of theocracy to the level of true religion can be intrinsically classless, that is to say, existing on an absolute level of society for purposes beyond the pale of class warfare, which pertains, after all, to the State and therefore could not be relevant to a centrist society, above and beyond all class distinctions.  But not every people are qualified to struggle in such a fashion at this juncture in time, and class warfare will doubtless remain valid for those who aren't, as demanded by their proletarian social integrity.


11.   An approximate list of class-society distinctions in the history of civilized evolution would read as follows: early-pagan aristocratic absolutism; late-pagan aristocratic/grand-bourgeois absolutist relativity; early-Christian grand-bourgeois/bourgeois relativity; late-Christian bourgeois/petty-bourgeois relativity; early-transcendental petty-bourgeois/proletarian absolutist relativity; late-transcendental proletarian absolutism.


12.   Ultimately, the only truly and genuinely classless society will arise in the second phase of the post-Human Millennium, with the new-brain collectivizations of the Superbeings - that life-form far superior to man and, in all probability, existing in specially-constructed space cities from which spiritual transcendence, achieved through high-level meditation (hypermeditation), would be more likely of attainment than on the earth, in close proximity to the latter's gravitational pull.  What rumour and legend have sometimes taken for flying saucers (UFOs) might well be such space cities constructed by advanced human-equivalent life on other, unknown planets in the Galaxy.


13.   Fundamentally, the theocratic spectrum has always been classless, even during its Roman Catholic inception, since stressing the brotherhood of man, with particular reference to Christians.  Likewise the Nazis emphasized the brotherhood of Germanic, or Aryan, man.  Needless to say, both brotherhoods were upheld in the face of certain religious and/or racial outsiders.


14.   Just so, Social Transcendentalism will be obliged to exclude certain categories of men from its classless integrity vis-à-vis proletarian opposition to the bourgeoisie.  In truth, there will hardly be a bourgeoisie for Social Transcendentalist proletarians to be in opposition to, the vast majority of their opponents probably being reactionary aristocrats, tribalists, gypsies, clericals, and socialists - capitalism not being traditionally indigenous, so to speak, to the peoples concerned.


15.   Definitions of contemporary political madness: the application of communist criteria to theocratically-biased societies or, conversely, the application of fascist criteria to democratically-biased ones.  A failure, in each case, to come to grips with the ideological complexity of the world as deriving from the age-old dichotomy between the material and the spiritual, materialism and spirituality.  The first madness will lead to a Poland or, worse still, an Afghanistan.  The second madness to a Mosleyite failure in the face of majority democratic opposition.  Indeed, one could argue that even Nazism, conceived as a largely theocratic phenomenon, was out-of-place in North Germany, even if its applicability to Catholic Bavaria and, later, Austria was beyond dispute.


16.   However that may be, the deepest ideological dichotomy is not between Germans of one denominational persuasion or another, but between dissimilar ideological peoples of disparate race.  Thus the spiritual/material dichotomy between, for example, the Celts and the Anglo-Saxons has remained an ideological dichotomy in the national manifestation, traditionally, of Anglo-Irish hostility.  Such a dichotomy, necessarily profound, will still exist between the two peoples if and when Ireland adopts Social Transcendentalism and Britain socialism.  But, all the while, forces of evolutionary pressure will be at work undermining materialism at the expense of its upholders, and thus bringing the world closer to a spiritual absolutism.  For the material/spiritual dichotomy is merely a transient phenomenon, reflecting the passage of human evolution through an atomic stage of its unfolding.  What began in a soulful (autocratic) absolutism will culminate in a spiritual (theocratic) absolutism, having passed through a material (democratic) relativity.





1.    Just as Judaism was a revolt, in part, against pagan polytheism, so, in like measure, Protestantism was a Western revolt against Roman Catholic polytheism, substituting the one truly Christian divinity, viz. Christ, for the plethora of associated divinities to which the Catholic Church appeared to attach as much if not more importance, viz. the Father, the Blessed Virgin, St. Joseph, St. Peter, and a number of lesser figures derived from the Gospels and, inevitably, the Church itself.


2.    Now, however, it seems that a new kind of polytheism exists in various parts of the world where, under Marxism-Leninism or some derivative thereof, the practice of collective leadership prevails, the communist authorities not simply People’s representatives but also elevated to a pseudo-theistic status commensurate with their dictatorial prerogatives.  If Marx and Lenin are traditionally the chief 'divinities' of this pseudo-religion, then the current president and other high-ranking leaders of the communist state constitute its lesser 'divinities', apt subjects for iconization for the adulation of the proletariat, faithful followers of the gospel according to Marx and Lenin.


3.    However, no such secular polytheism would be permissible in a society under Social Transcendentalist guidance, where a new monotheism, embodied in the Leader, would signify the attainment of a classicism superior to either Protestant or Judaic precedent, a classicism relative to the Second Coming and/or True World Messiah, reflecting an aspiration towards the Holy Spirit rather than an acquiescence in Christ or a stemming from the Father.  If polytheism indicates a stemming from the Many, the diabolic roots of evolution, then monotheism indicates, by contrast, an aspiration towards the One, its divine consummation.  Whether this Oneness is diabolic or divine or a combination of both ... will depend on the epoch and people in question.


4.    Let us therefore list the approximate evolution of world civilization in a way which reflects this polytheistic/monotheistic alternation, as between romantic and classic antitheses: early-pagan (Byzantine) polytheistic romanticism, late-pagan (Judaic) monotheistic classicism; early-Christian (Roman Catholic) polytheistic romanticism, late-Christian (Protestant) monotheistic classicism; early-transcendental (Communist) polytheistic romanticism, late-transcendental (Centrist) monotheistic classicism.


5.    Greco-Roman civilization (which in relation to the West I have elsewhere characterized as late pagan) was of course polytheistic and thus, in effect, a continuation of early-pagan civilization vis-à-vis Judaism, with its monotheistic bias.  Early Christianity, whilst in part an extension of Greco-Roman polytheistic precedent, also embraced Judaic monotheism with regard to a Creator (the Father), compliments of the Old Testament (Jehovah), and thereby took on that relativity characteristic of Christian civilization, with its atomic dichotomy, a relativity still accruing, at a later date, to the Protestant revolt in favour of a more absolutist, monotheistic orientation in the person of Christ, Himself a relative, or anthropomorphic, divinity.


6.    Christian decadence is characterized not by an atheism that turns its back, as it were, on the Father and Christ, but by a slandering of these two traditional divinities.  Hence one could define it as a perverse relativity, a negative dualism wherein the Christian civilization is progressively polluted by internal slander.  The analogy of sheep in a pen who, instead of jumping over its fence into freedom, remain imprisoned, to steadily worsen their living conditions, is not entirely inappropriate here!  The Western bourgeoisie do pretty much the same thing, fouling Christianity with their blasphemous slander, but lacking the courage or desire to abandon it.  Clinging negatively to a class allegiance out of formalism rather than conviction.  Sowing the seeds of their own demise in soulless materialism.


7.    If the civilized petty-bourgeoisie are now capable of compiling and appreciating poetry anthologies, such anthologies are not abstract but descriptive and expressive.  Only in a Social Transcendentalist civilization would anthologies of abstract poetry be the norm, as an aid to contemplation, an aspect of religious striving, part of every Meditation Centre's cultural stock.  And such poetry would be the highest literature precisely because it induced contemplation rather than necessitated reading; because its appreciation favoured the electron as opposed to neutron and/or proton side of the new brain; because, in a word, it neutralized the will!


8.    As of old, literature, like art (holography) and music (pitch-oriented synthesizer tonality), would once again become inseparable from religion, an aspect of Social Transcendentalist self-realization.  Consequently no secular literature, art, or music would be encouraged, all democratic institutions of the arts - libraries, art galleries, museums, theatres, concert halls, etc. - having been transcended in the interests of a theocratic absolutism, people thus being encouraged to attend the Meditation Centre for such culture - apart from the possibility of films, videos, audios, and so on - as they may desire, the availability of the highest art itself a sufficient inducement in this regard.  Secular art having been consigned to the rubbish heap of bourgeois (church/state) history, obsolescent religious art likewise, the way would then be clear for the highest theocratic art to blossom on the firm foundations of a Social Transcendentalist civilization, drawing men nearer to the Holy Spirit and, hence, simultaneously pointing towards the future post-Human Millennium.


9.    Verily, so long as a single library or museum or concert hall or art gallery remains in existence, this ultimate civilization will not come to pass!  Those who patronize and uphold these secular institutions cannot be expected to further the cause of the truly theocratic institution that must bear sole responsibility for cultural nourishment of the spirit in their wake.  This task must be entrusted to people more attuned to theocratic progress, the revolutionary fighters for a better future - one based on sound Social Transcendentalist criteria!


10.   Unlike the Protestant church, the Roman Catholic church, more absolutist in character, catered to the various arts (literature, music, painting, sculpture), as did the temples of Greco-Roman pagan civilization, the early Greek in particular.  By banishing art from its precincts, however, the Protestant church, though well-intentioned in regard to itself, unwittingly encouraged the growth of secular art, with a consequence that various democratic institutions of cultural nourishment quickly came into being, and not simply to replace the cultural void created by Protestantism, but to satisfy a growing demand for secular culture as an expression of democratic freedoms and rights, the cleavage between state and church becoming more radical with the emancipation of the State attendant upon the Age of Enlightenment (or pseudo-Enlightenment) and, following the French Revolution, the progressive decadence of Western - meaning primarily Protestant - civilization.


11.   For if, during the classical phase of Protestant civilization, the Church was more influential than the State, by the time its romantic phase arrived the converse was increasingly becoming the case, with the State and, as a corollary of this, secular art growing in importance as time wore on, a trend which could not but culminate in the state absolutism of communist pseudo-civilization, with its all-powerful opposition to the Church and predisposition towards Socialist Realism - the most secular democratic art conceivable.


12.   Just as communist pseudo-civilization arose out of the decadence of Protestant civilization, and this in spite of a Catholic tradition, albeit one subject to Western influence, so the future Social Transcendentalist civilization should arise out of the church-biased Roman Catholic civilization of contemporary Ireland and, contrary to Communism, extend the legacy of the Church to a degree whereby, in the form of the Centre (the religiously-biased institution germane to Social Transcendentalism), it becomes all-powerful and can consequently dispense with the State and its secular culture altogether, arrogating political, not to say economic, responsibilities to itself.  In this civilization, art (in the fullest sense of that term) will once again become exclusively the 'handmaiden of religion', as it was in the distant past and, to a degree, still is wherever a genuinely Catholic civilization prevails, and this in spite of its continued co-existence with the secular art of the democratic, Protestant tradition - an art which, together with its communist successor, will be rigorously proscribed, once Social Transcendentalist criteria obtain in Ireland, as elsewhere, hopefully in the not-too-distant future.


13.   In literature, the novel is the most democratic art form, the one that strives to be popular and, hence, commercial, whether written from a conservative or a social democratic point-of-view.  Admittedly, a small number of novelists aspire towards theocracy to a degree, as did Aldous Huxley, and are thus akin to painters who push canvas art in an abstract direction.  But that is still merely the 'best of a bad job', so to speak, within the novelistic context, an elite procedure that will only appeal to the most spiritual intelligentsia and not to the broad mass of novel readers who, as before, require a more unadulterated democratic literature, particularly in countries like Britain and America.


14.   Needless to say, such literature would be taboo in a radically theocratic society - indeed, the writing and reading of novels, no matter how good their intentions, would be discouraged, if not proscribed, as unworthy of serious attention.  Only a democratic society, and in particular a liberal one, can take the novel for granted, just as it takes paintings and symphonies for granted - those plastic and musical counterparts to novelistic literature.  All this will change in the future, as much regarding the obsolescent theocratic and autocratic arts ... as the more conspicuously obsolescent democratic ones, not to forget the Social Realist successors to the latter.





1.    The only true and worthwhile revolution is the one that changes everything, not just a few things here and there!  The Social Transcendentalist revolution, if successful, will be the most radical and far-reaching revolution ever.  The Kingdom or, rather, Centre that he who corresponds to a Second Coming/True World Messiah intends to establish ... will be no mere continuation of open-society democracy, but the radical break with tradition, nature, the world, etc., that all true believers, whether Christian or Judaic, have awaited for centuries - a break that will confirm them in their belief and test its authenticity.


2.    Those who oppose this revolution will be judged severely, as they fully deserve!  The sword of truth will cleave the faithless from the faithful, the liars from the true.  Only those with faith in my teachings will be saved for the Centre, the others ... damned to a banishment irrevocable!  And they include all those who appear Christian on the surface but, underneath, would oppose the Second Coming and seek to protect the Church from criticism and supersession, the false believers who have substituted the institution of the Church for the living truth it exists to convey, the truth of the 'kingdom within', and would consequently oppose radical change, especially any radical change that threatens their vested interests.


3.    Christ taught that those who came unto Him would have to abandon parents and family.  It is ever the same where a true revolutionary is concerned.  You do not become a revolutionary by clinging to tradition or by hanging-on to the luxuries of bourgeois life.  You must be free, absolutely free, for the cause, not be inhibited by concern for parents or family.  You must be prepared, if necessary, to sacrifice them for it!


4.    If heterosexual behaviour is natural and homosexual behaviour anti-natural, corresponding, in political terms, to a communist opposition or alternative to liberal democracy, then anal intercourse between women and men should be regarded as a kind of homosexual heterosexuality, the sexual equivalent of democratic socialism, a sort of relative or diluted anti-naturalism in between liberal and communist contexts.  Alternatively, one could contend that, in the evolution of anti-natural sexuality, anal 'heterosexuality' precedes bisexuality, meaning an oscillation between straight heterosexuality and homosexuality, a more extreme relativity than that evinced by the anal violation of women, though a degree of this may still figure in bisexual relations or practices.


5.    Thus one would be distinguishing, to risk a further political analogy, between a Democratic Socialist equivalent and a Social Democratic equivalent, the one preceding the other as from early to late stages of petty-bourgeois evolution.


6.    If one were to return to the absolutist inception of the democratic spectrum, one would probably be justified in also speaking of Cromwellian or Whig lesbianism, but that is another matter and now I only wish to add that, by contrast, a truly theocratic sexuality, i.e. a supernatural sexuality, must involve recourse to pornography of one degree or another, either with adults (soft or hard) or - more for the transcendental future than the mundane present - the use, via computers, of lawful teenage juveniles.


7.    A supernatural sexuality is precisely one in which there is still a natural relation between model and masturbator/voyeur, as between female and male, vagina and penis, except that, the model being a reproduction and not a real-life flesh-and-blood woman, the sexual proceedings/relations are necessarily one-sided (absolutist) and sublimated.  Hence supernatural.


8.    The present age is partial to much hard-core adult pornography, and this static mode of sublimated sexuality can be contrasted with the video/film active mode which suggests a sexual parallel with a military dictatorship, i.e. the pseudo-autocratic successor to the autocratic rule of monarchs.  The sex film does not, as a rule, induce supernatural participation but, rather, the subordination of the viewer to the passive role of voyeur of other people's sexual activity.  A contrast, no doubt, with the pagan inception of autocratic sexuality in the worship of erotic sculpture, some of which, being static, must have induced actual copulation.


9.    One wonders whether the numerous arms and legs of certain oriental statues, for instance, were not specifically intended to discourage active participation by suggesting animation, the ever-active dance of sexual life.  Speculation aside, the significance of contemporary sublimated sexuality in the evolution of life towards a theocratic climax cannot be underestimated, and, certainly, pornographic erotica will continue to be respected wherever theocracy gains the ascendancy, even, in some future societies, to the extent of completely displacing other modes of sexuality, the democratic not excepted.


10.   The genuine artist is ever a law unto himself, a man who says what he wants to irrespective of whether or not it will be appreciated by the majority of people.  He is a kind of Arts Führer, in whom creative sovereignty resides, and he leads from above, setting new standards and creating fresh interpretative possibilities, which the public may draw near to if they wish or, more correctly, are capable of appreciating what he has suggested, achieved, or whatever.


11.   Thus he is essentially theocratic, in contrast to the bogus, or democratic, artist, who aims to please the broad masses - whether bourgeois or proletarian - and thus prostitutes his creative talent (such as it is) in the name of popularity and, by implication, financial success.  In a democratic society, the genuine artist will always be the exception, doing his own thing at the expense of popular acclamation and, hence, financial betterment.  But an age is coming when no democratic art will be available, and then, in the theocratic society that ensues, the theocratic artist will be the rule - in fact, the only representative of artistic endeavour.


12.   Economics - politics - religion; science - philosophy - art; autocratic - democratic - theocratic; aristocratic - plutocratic - meritocratic; beauty - goodness - truth; pleasure - love - happiness; Father - Son - Holy Ghost; protons - neutrons - electrons; kingdom - state - centre; propitiation - worship - self-realization; subego - ego - superego; soul - matter - spirit; Hell - Purgatory - Heaven; child - youth - adult.


13.   The aristocratic kingdom - the technocratic church/plutocratic state - and the meritocratic centre: from the autocratic to the theocratic via the bureaucratic/democratic, paralleling an evolutionary progression from the Father to the Holy Spirit via the Son, Who, in His humanistic relativity, embraces both the aristocratic and the meritocratic, as a kind of diluted Father and Holy Spirit respectively, but is not, in any absolute sense, aristocratic or meritocratic.


14.   The next civilization will be as much beyond Christ as the Christian one was beyond the Father, or Creator.  There can be no literal Second Coming ... of Christ as a cross between alpha and omega.  Embodied Holy Spirit does not acknowledge the Father, but champions an evolutionary course set on the freeing of all spirit from the body.  He who corresponds to a Second Coming, i.e. the founder and teacher of what, in its radical truthfulness, deserves to become a truly global religion, does not bear the name 'Christ', and neither should he be regarded as such.  For that would be an insult to peoples of non-Christian descent.


15.   Those who believe in a literal return of Christ are simply the dupes of theological expedience.  No such Christ - transmuted into pure spirit following His Ascension into Heaven - will ever return, for no such ascension ever literally occurred.  It was simply theologically correct that the Church should have taught the Ascension into Heaven (on the Third Day) in order to show simple humanity that there was more to life than the body and its dying, that, due to evolutionary progress, a dimension of life transcending the body had been discovered, as taught by Christ, and that future progress for mankind lay in expanding the spiritual at the expense of the sensual.


16.   The Ascension served as a metaphor for this divine possibility in man, as in evolution, and has accordingly been upheld wherever Christian and equivalent religious teachings have prevailed.  But in reality no man, not even Christ, can ever literally ascend into Heaven, the realm of pure spirit.  Evolution must pass through two post-human life forms before transcendence becomes possible, and this contention is at the core of my teachings, the teachings, as I said, of a new or second Christ-like figure, less a Second Coming than - at any rate potentially - a True World Messiah.


17.   But there are vested interests and fools who will cling to the past, seeking, in the process, to deny or slander my teachings.  It is really amazing how many stupid people are in positions of traditional power, people whose innate intelligence, even cleverness, has been stunted and limited by their class allegiance to the doctrinal teachings of their faith and, not least of all, by the influence of a rural or partly rural lifestyle, their dependence on nature in natural or semi-natural surroundings precluding the development of a truly radical, transcendental mentality!


18.   Ah, the enemies of evolutionary progress are legion, but Judgement must be severe if that progress is not to be held back indefinitely by the purblind machinations of sophisticated fools!  All power to the Centre!  Let Social Transcendentalist truth spread throughout the world, in order that it may eventually become united in the faith of the ultimate theocracy!



LONDON 1983-84 (Revised 1985-2012)