The danger with taking ego too seriously in metaphysics is that it can become detached from the Soul to a degree whereby it ceases to serve (or reflect) Truth and becomes merely knowledgeable, sinking to the level of physics and the ‘forbidden tree of knowledge’, wherein soul is subordinated (as pleasure) to the Ego, which is less philosophical than philological and therefore more disposed to the pleasures of theology than to the joys of theosophy, the joys that come from being at one with the Soul.

The philosopher of Truth will not be ‘king  of philosophy’ for long if he abandons metaphysics for physics and descends into the mundane realm of mere knowledge, where not Heaven but Man is if not exactly ‘king’ then at any rate ‘governor'. If the ‘Philosopher King’ is to remain godly or, at least, pro-godly, it will be because he defers to the primacy of the Soul, and hence Heaven, in the construction – always loosely formal – of his philosophy, that truthful (faithful) mirror, so to speak, of the Soul’s inner Being (joy).





The great writer, artist, philosopher … who is in the world but not of it – celibate, solitary, non-familial, capable of messianic insight and – who knows? – resolve.  Someone who, in his self-determined aloofness from the world and its social obligations and/or limitations, is really against it, a kind of enemy of the world and, for that very reason, a friend of otherworldly possibilities, of Heaven and godliness (in relation to Heaven) as an approximation to the form of Heaven, to heavenly soul (joy) perceived, as it were, from outside, as proof of its metaphysical existence from a strictly male standpoint – like a close-lipped smile, the godly proof of heavenly being (joy) which both precedes and defines it.  Impossible to conceive of such a universal condition existing in any but the highest (male) mind, whether now or in the (cyborgistic) future, when metaphysics will attain to perfect universality without hindrance from female or, indeed, any other distractions.





None of those males who succumb to the beauty of females, who marry and beget children, have a right to speak out against the idols of their church, or indeed to deride the Creator-equivalent star in back of them; for such images of the deities they worship simply reflect their own limitations as average men.  Only a ‘philosopher king’, aloof from the world like Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, has the right, granted by his celibacy and non-familial solitude, to oppose thingful deities from his vantage-point in metaphysical sensibility, even if he knows, in his heart of hearts, that they remain – and will continue to remain until ‘Kingdom Come’ – relevant to the common woman-oriented man.


Of course, the above would have more reference to Catholics than to Protestants who, at least in the case of  Puritans, tend to eschew images or carvings or statues in favour of 'the Word of God', with reference in particular to the New Testament.  But even they have never managed to completely dissociate themselves from what exists 'in back' as 'Creator' or 'Father' or 'God', and are thus beholden, even if more via Anglicans, to the root star-like concreteness, so to speak, of Christianity as an extrapolation from Judaism.





A civilization in decline loses its core values and becomes amorphous, where virtually anything and everything goes, partly in consequence of the sensuous barbarism which overlaps with and increasingly conditions it, so that it becomes a kind of distorted image of the prevailing ethos – nihilistic and anarchic, secular and feminist, barbarous and philistine, materialist and crudely fundamentalist – to which it is, perforce, subjected, even granted the part played by its own want of religious conviction and declining self-esteem. In that respect, the juxtaposition of decadent bourgeois Western civilization and the vigorous global barbarism which normally wears a proletarian mask makes for precisely that self-same situation in the modern world, with female ‘priests’, i.e. vicars, ministers, etc., of the protestant churches, falling short of the outright feminism of their secular counterparts in the global sphere, but nonetheless a product, in no small part, of their influence and, more to the point, the constant barbarous pressures afflicting Western civilization from beyond.





Women have only a very limited (usually sex-orientated) understanding of men.

Man is man and woman … a kind of two-legged animal.

A world in the stranglehold of women and kids … frightful!

Man could be more than what he is if he weren’t held back by women.

Strictly speaking, women are the primary sex and men their secondary dupes.

Life is fundamentally all about reproduction, which is a female prerogative.

The ‘God’ that created Adam in His own image couldn’t, surely, have turned around and also created Eve!

Biblical claptrap notwithstanding, women are anterior, not posterior, to men, as I'm sure John Cowper Powys would agree.

All men are ‘sons of women’, not of God, or what they call God, meaning ‘Devil the Mother’ hyped as ‘God the Father’, as the ‘best of a bad job’ starting-point of civilization as we know it.




The British have never been a free people; they are subjects of the reigning monarch who are permitted to vote -  without having the benefit, naturally, of a Bill of Rights – provided a government can be formed, within the parliamentary oligarchy, that will swear an oath of allegiance to the British throne which, in comparative terms, is alone free, in that it, and its constituent branches, including the Lords, upholds the sovereignty of somatic freedom, of the free female, metachemically speaking (that is, speaking in relation to the element of metachemistry), and her right to exploit society in general but males in particular.

There have been those, incidentally, even within the parliamentary executive, who have spoken of doing away with the House of Lords, as though one could abolish the upper chamber and still have a connection with the monarchy.  This is patently absurd, since the monarch could not venture into the Commons to address parliament, but is dependent on the Lords in what amounts to a royal/aristocratic overlap or, better, juxtaposition.  Nor, for that matter, could a government that swears oath to the monarchy subsequently do away with it, as though parliament were free to act independently of that oath and its subordinate status within the overall political establishment.  Playing to the gallery with political rhetoric is one thing, facing up to the realities of parliamentary democracy within a constitutional monarchy quite another!





It is not the flesh that is weak with women; it is their minds.  But precisely because, comparatively speaking, they have weak minds, they are all the more disposed to ‘strut their stuff’, as the saying goes. At least in an age when females are free and thus hegemonic, whether in metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics (north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass) or in chemistry over pseudo-physics (south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass), though more, with an emphasis on free will, in the former hegemonic context than in the latter, which rather panders to free spirit and, hence, vocal expression of one kind or another, notwithstanding the cardinal role played by 'mother's pride' in relation to the strength necessary to child-bearing and, doubtless, rearing.  Were the flesh 'weak' it would be unsuitable to this particular task, the resolution, in effect, of all natural female striving.


But if females generally have weak minds (bound psyche) and strong bodies (free soma), the latter of which has a calmness or coolness which is decidedly unmale, can it not be argued that males, by contrast, generally have strong minds (free psyche) and weak bodies (bound soma), and are therefore the ones for whom, in a sense, the 'flesh' could be described as weak - at least when they are being true, one way or the other, to themselves and not pseudo-male 'sons-of-bitches' who glory, falsely, in flesh because subordinate to free females and therefore mirroring, on a reverse ratio basis, the free soma and bound psyche, free bodies and closed minds, that tend to prevail in such metachemically- or chemically-dominated contexts.  Yet, being essentially contrary to that, they are still creatures for whom mind preponderates over body and will not find the body-over-mind approach to life quite as natural or congenial to themselves as they might have supposed, with, alas, predictably paradoxical consequences.






TV and PC is akin to Jehovah and Satan in the cosmos, or Saul and David in nature, or whatever it is that is equivalent to metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics, or, for that matter, chemistry and pseudo-physics (like Mary and the Christ Child), in mankind, never mind cyborgkind, the contemporary post-human, machine-dominated phase of history par excellence.  Females and pseudo-males, bitches and sons-of-bitches.  What a choice!

Oh, John, you computer-sucking sonofabitch!

To download TV onto a computer you’ve got to be a pretty stupid sonofabitch.  Or worse, an amoral bitch who descends, as though from TV to PC, on her own objectivistic terms.  But, of course, in theory that should induce a pseudo-male backlash of the pseudo-physical position under chemistry, let us say, immorally ascending from below with regard to a PC input onto TV, as though becoming quasi-chemical in consequence of quasi-pseudo-physical pressure from the amorally-inclined chemical position above.  Something along the lines, all in all, of a vicious circle.

The use of CRT (cathode ray tube) TVs and PCs, traditionally, would suggest a metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical dichotomy allowing for similar amoral and immoral parallels to that described above, bearing in mind that, in either case, the hegemonic position is moral and the subordinate gender position unmoral, whether absolutely (noumenal/ethereal) or relatively (phenomenal/corporeal), moral and unmoral on broadly heathen and unchristian terms, in which clearness and unholiness are, in general terms, the order of the day.





We who live in bedsits in small lodging houses – do we really live?  I think not. I am akin to a small insect in some spider’s web, bled dry by the rent and merely existing, like a husk.  Drawn, inexorably, towards the superficies of life, including the worldwideweb.






One does not think from the bottom up but from the top down.  That is the only way that the mainstream world, with its lapsed Catholic generality, can be ‘overcome’ … in the interests of otherworldly supra-humanism.  Only in that event would human limitations, including familial ones, cease to exist.






Social Theocracy should not be identified with mass movements, like Socialism and Nazism.  The masses cannot – and do not even wish to – achieve their own overcoming.  Except, ironically, through death and destruction.


What is Social Theocracy? - Social Theocracy is like Judaism the other way around.  That is, a kind of Y-chromosomal Supercross over a contiguously-encircled absolute star, significant of pseudo-metachemistry and thus of that which, in soma, is predominantly bound, like a neutralized dragon, lion, wolf, etc. under the proverbial lamb (of godliness) and/or saintly heel of righteousness, this latter of course synonymous with metaphysics and, hence, the hegemonic male position alluded to above whose disposition, in absolute contrast to that of his pseudo-female counterpart, is preponderantly one of free psyche.






‘Liberty Leading the People’ – the title of a painting by Delacroix, if memory serves me well.  But to where?  Females have a vested interest in achieving and consolidating worldly triumph through maternity.  Therefore the only place to which the masses can be led by the kind of metaphorical illustration depicted by Delacroix … is to a consolidated world of socialist republicanism.  How low and ignoble!






Sometimes I feel as though my philosophy of ‘world overcoming’ (from above) is as alien to the world as it currently exists, on broadly lapsed Catholic (chemical and pseudo-physical) terms, as … alien abduction via some kind of ‘flying saucer’ or spaceship.  My proposals for ‘man overcoming’ could not be any less radically removed from the world as it exists in arguably its mainstream manifestation than the concept – and fear – of alien abduction and the attendant possibility of some degree or kind of transfiguration or, more contemporaneously, transmutation under alien technology.

And yet Messianic intervention can only come from above, with good reason.  For it is motivated, in its metaphysical bias, by noble intentions, not least with regard to the indirect overcoming of all that is most axially ranged against metaphysics, including metachemistry and, by subordinate implication, pseudo-metaphysics.





Only a people like the Jews, who have traditionally gone along (like a majority of Christians) with the Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father subterfuge, which translates into metachemistry hyped as metaphysics and the cosmos as universe (or universal), to name but two examples of what could be described as sugar-coating the bitter pill of overwhelming female (objective) dominance in relation to cosmic contexts, could be expected to embrace film and film production with such enthusiasm and evident alacrity, as in Hollywood,  in what must be a paradoxical identification of righteousness with vanity or, rather, of vanity with righteousness.  You cannot be that open to the alpha of things, including film, unless your concept of righteousness has been subverted by vanity.  For vanity is the mother of all show.






Four reasons why compromise with the Catholic Church in Ireland (RoI) may be inescapable from a Social Theocratic standpoint:-

1. Recognition of Messianic credibility;

2. Avoidance of mass-movement associations, to the detriment of transcendentalism;

3. Means whereby pressure may be applied to the State authorities to allow the paradoxical utilization of the democratic process to a religiously sovereign end, i.e., the possibility of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, bearing in mind the significance of such sovereignty, as propounded and expounded by me, as a ‘Kingdom Come-ish’ alternative to worldly sovereignty, i.e., political, with its judicial and economic concomitants;

4. Reassurance of ‘the faithful’ (should any such still exist) as to the best, i.e., wisest, course of action with regard to Social Theocracy, the Messianic ideology of ‘Kingdom Come’ premised upon the relevance and desirability of religious sovereignty conceived as the ultimate kind of sovereignty as germane, in particular, to the metaphysical.

Of course, the Church might be completely against what Social Theocracy stands for, as, for that matter, might a majority of females; but one should not prejudge or discount the possibility of some degree of compromise, bearing in mind the disastrous course of recent history, not least in Ireland (RoI), where the Republic has gone from bad to worse in consequence of its accommodation, through the rejection of republican socialist tradition, with capitalism and what could be termed Anglo-American influence and pressures, but where, equally, a return to such traditions – meaningful as they may have been in the struggle against imperial oppression – would be no viable solution in the current climate, where not socialist republicanism but Social Theocratic Centrism (akin to Centralism but having to do with 'the Centre') is the only sensible alternative to both socialism and capitalism if, indeed, the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis with which mainstream Ireland has traditionally identified and, to some extent, still identifies, is to be resurrected on suitably revolutionary terms, terms alone capable of delivering the mass of Catholics from their lowly chemical and pseudo-physical estates to metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry ‘on high’ – a ‘highness’ well beyond the extrapolative, straining-at-the-leash-limitations of Catholic tradition, ever beholden to Creator-ism and, hence, to Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father metachemically in back, like a Judaic anchor, of the Western, Christian extrapolation, no matter how much it may veer towards a metaphysical opposition or antithesis to anything Judaic.





Most people are so small-minded (and not just when female) that the only afterlife, or concept of life continuing after death, they could reasonably be expected to subscribe to would be that which results in the proliferation, from out their decaying flesh, of countless maggots!

The afterlife according to the rank and file … (pardon the Baudelairean tone).





The fall of man … through woman – at least if man (post-pubic) is sufficiently metaphysical to ‘fall’ from metaphysics to pseudo-physics via pseudo-metaphysics, and all at the behest of the female determined to counter-rise, as it were, from metachemistry to chemistry, as from a beautiful vacuum of free will to a proud plenum of free spirit – the plenum of maternity, and thus the resolution of her maternal aspirations, which I have also termed (see my e-scroll and/or e-book ) a regressive transcendence.

But the male who is insufficiently metaphysical to begin with, the Protestant and particularly Puritan male, is already quite low in physics, and merely axially polar to metachemistry, in what is a more convenient situation for women, even with the subsequent obligation, ethnically conditioned, of a pseudo-chemical deference to the equivocal hegemony of the physical male down at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on what is, in any case, a state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis dominated, in overall terms, by females and likely, in consequence, to result in large populations.




He was a man who swore not because he was low but because he’d had more than enough of the mob, its female members not least.

Those sort of people always have kids.





Captain Hermann Haller – could this be a pun on Harry Haller as Hermann Hesse’s leading character in the novel , one which combines the author and his principal character in a composite name? I suspect so.  And if so, the writer of the film  would seem to have known his Hesse and to have drafted that character – rather cynical, pedantic, and hypocritical – accordingly, as though transferring a supercilious bourgeois intellectual to the front.

As for Hans, Fritzy, Rollo, and Otto – what can one say? Simply unforgettable!

Even the nobler captain, not to mention general, who reminded me of Albert Finney.

Frankly, this is my favourite war movie.





METACHEMICAL RIGHT is polar, on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from north-west to south-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass, to PSEUDO-CHEMICAL WRONG, as VANITY to JUSTICE, whilst, in secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms, PSEUDO-METAPHYSICAL PSEUDO-WRONG is polar to PHYSICAL PSEUDO-RIGHT, as PSEUDO-MEEKNESS to PSEUDO-RIGHTEOUSNESS.

METAPHYSICAL RIGHT is polar, on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching from north-east to south-west points of the inter-cardinal axial compass, to PSEUDO-PHYSICAL WRONG, as RIGHTEOUSNESS to MEEKNESS, whilst, in secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms, PSEUDO-METACHEMICAL PSEUDO-WRONG is polar to CHEMICAL PSEUDO-RIGHT, as PSEUDO-JUSTICE to PSEUDO-VANITY.

From a female point of view, free soma is always RIGHT and bound soma WRONG, whether in genuine or in ‘pseudo’ terms, depending on the axis.

From a male standpoint, free psyche is always RIGHT and bound psyche WRONG, whether in genuine or in ‘pseudo’ terms, depending on the axis.

In a secular age, like the present, WRONG transposes into LEFT, pretty much as HEATHEN into SOCIALISTIC  SECULAR.

Conversely, RIGHT transposes into WRONG, pretty much as CHRISTIAN into FASCISTIC REACTION.





Listening to percussive music – jazz, rock, electronica, etc. – all the time would be like only drinking fizzy drinks – champagne, lager, cola. etc.  Unthinkable!

Pep, fizz, beat – call it what you will – equates with the life-force, with an alpha-stemming and/or alpha-oriented disposition that is always, in its heathenish secularity, at loggerheads with (if not entirely opposed to) the grace and wisdom of world-denying religion and therefore with peace conceived as an eternal verity.  It exemplifies the restlessness of the masses, of female-dominated diurnal life. Ugh!  Could anything be more contrary to the ‘spirit’ of Heaven?

Cola was an American invention.  Small wonder!

Water, tea, wine – are they not compatible with a certain kind of classical disposition or predilection?

And what is classical if not that which aspires, no matter how paradoxically and, at times, ineffectually, towards the eternal verities?

Left wing, whether extreme (noumenal) or moderate (phenomenal), metachemical or chemical, is simply that which reflects a pepped-up, restless, agitative, female-dominated lifestyle – the lot, in short, of the urban masses.




The otherworldly enormity, sorry, eternity of what I am ideologically all about is positively messianic; it could never be left to the diurnal limitations of the masses to bring about, but requires messianic intervention as something deriving from above the worldly mass and its social limitations.

Mass movements may aspire (not invariably) towards something better, a ‘better world’, as they say, but, short of taking the latter phrase literally (and therefore striving to re-arrange this one), they can never achieve it. They remain bogged down in and accountable to the masses, doomed to mirror the limitations of the female-dominated masses and to recapitulate worldly criteria.

The nazi salute, particularly in the form of Hitler, who was of Catholic descent,  may suggest an aspiration from south-west to north-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass upon what is effectively the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis (catholic), but it remains a far cry (socialistically) from that which would impose its will from above in the interests of the overcoming of man (transfiguration of the masses) by otherworldly criteria orientated towards the superhuman if not supra-human.

Needless to say, such a ‘will’, being messianic,  can only be in the service of metaphysics and thus the Soul, which is the refutation of anything openly wilful and … pepped up by female dominion.

In general, it would appear that the nazi salute was not like Hitler’s, with any sort of church-hegemonic axial directionality, but more of a metachemical straight up 'jerk-off' objectivity fairly parallel to the body which may well have owed something, if not everything, to the want of a catholic ethnicity in its practitioners, or in those practitioners whom one would hesitate to regard as even remotely Catholic – a sizeable proportion, no doubt, of the German population of the time, who, being Protestant, could only have shied away, in the vulgar manner portrayed, from church-hegemonic axial criteria and thus contributed, in no small measure, to the undoing of Nazism, which was largely of South German origins.

Be that as it may, a mass movement, whether democratic or autocratic, is bound to fail from an eschatological standpoint, since it will be concerned with the world and the problems of those who live in it and are most representative of it rather than of any 'world overcoming' in the interests of otherworldly criteria – something that even Nietzsche, Protestant Saxon that he was, would have been unenthusiastic about from a standpoint rooted in the earth and fighting shy not only of autocratic 'overworld's men' but, by implication, of theocratic 'otherworld's men', for which read: Catholic theologians.





A drum solo is the exemplification, purely and simply, of the Will, as an expression of metachemical dominance.  It exemplifies the Life Force.

Jazz is the most backward kind of modern music – backward in the sense of exemplifying  the Will in an alpha-stemming and/or alpha-oriented predilection towards percussion and … brass, that fiery ‘bovaryization’ of wind suited to a fundamentalist if not materialist disposition.

Jazz, fundamentally, is about space and pseudo-time – spatial pitch and sequential rhythm. That is what makes it materialist/fundamentalist and pseudo-idealist/pseudo-transcendentalist, as though a combination, to varying extents, of metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics, Will and pseudo-Soul, which appertain to the north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on what would be the ruling positions of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis.

Jazz-rock, or 'fusion', is an accommodation of Jazz to 'the world' of that which, in rock or rock 'n' roll, properly appertains to the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on what would be the deferential positions of the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.  It is as though cinema were being accommodated, via film, to television.






The Weimar Republic, indubitably a female-dominated species of secular freedom, gave Germany the impetus to restock its population after the horrendous losses of the Great War.  A paradoxical prelude to the rebirth of a male-oriented German nationalism and, ultimately, nation, which would follow a single leader rather than continue to be governed by people's representatives or regress to subservience before an autocracy such that, in any case, had plunged Germany into the First World War and subsequent bloodbath.  Too bad the leadership was flawed.






That which is only there to be looked at – say, a beach or country scene – works as a view.  That which has particular uses rarely if ever does.  Therefore for a satisfactory desktop photo one needs to avoid the utilitarian in favour of the purely aesthetic.  This necessarily excludes women, for instance, insofar as they may exist, in the mind, as sexual objects and not simply as objects to be contemplated, like a seascape or distant mountain.  I accept that one can swim in the sea and climb mountains, but that is not necessarily what one would wish to do the way one might wish to make love to a beautiful woman, assuming one is of a romantic disposition. 


With a picture or photo of a particular woman there will always be a certain unease in the mind that arises from the general concept of women as being more than objects of contemplation.  One cannot contemplate that which is fundamentally utile for long without succumbing to this ambivalence over the aesthetic viability of the object of contemplation, and such ambivalence makes for psychological restlessness and a desire to change objects, which, of course, can continue infinitum if one is lacking insight into the underlying cause of such a desire.






Wasn’t it Christ who is reputed to have said: ‘Love thy enemies'?

Frankly, it would have been no less daft had he said: ‘Hate thy friends’!

Loving your enemies would be the surest way of ensuring that you came to hate your friends.  And then what would be the point of having any?





There is no God(liness) except in relation to Heaven, no Truth(fulness) except in relation to Joy, no Superconsciousness except in relation to Soul, no Higher Form except in relation to Higher Contentment.

Intellectual truth, even when avowedly ‘metaphysical’, is not Truth per se but the ‘bovaryization’ of ego or, more correctly, of knowledge towards metaphysics and, hence, the possibility of understanding, from outside the true Self, what Truth really is.

Similarly, the man who is capable of understanding Truth intellectually is not God but a bovaryized kind of man who will be in favour of godliness and, more importantly from a metaphysical point of view, its heavenly precondition … from a kind of messianic or pro-godly standpoint.

It has been claimed that ‘In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was God’ … but such a Biblical claim is patently false, like so much else in the Bible.  You can be in favour of God and, more importantly, Heaven from the standpoint of ‘the Word’, as a Truth-oriented ‘bovaryization’ of ego (knowledge), but that does not make ‘the Word’ God, still less Heaven, which precedes God, or godliness, and is thus directly responsible for His existence … as a ‘bovaryized’ mode of ego (superego) or, more correctly (for this is not the same as intellectual Truth, or Truth grasped intellectually) a mode of consciousness which, compared to superego, has a right to be called superconscious, the halo-like reflection of heavenly Soul (joy).

Thus we need to distinguish between superego as intellectual Truth germane to ‘bovaryized’ ego, and superconsciousness as the properly metaphysical psychic reflection of heavenly Joy in the Soul, if we are not to confound ‘the Word’ (including mine) that purports to be pro-godly with God, or ‘bovaryized’ knowledge with Truth-proper.  Else you risk intellectual hype and even the kind of sublimated idolatry of ‘the Word’, not to mention any person associated with it, which tends to be more Protestant than Catholic, given the greater Catholic predilection for images.

I am not – and never could be – God, but an advocate of Heaven, as a metaphysical condition that engenders a godly penumbra, or halo-like reflection of itself, as outer proof (existence, or form) of its inner experience (being, or essence).  Thus I sharply distinguish superego from superconscious, since intellect, even when ‘bovaryized’, is less a manifestation of psyche (mind) than a function of the brain.

All this God-thingfulness is simply idolatrous and just plain false (untrue), and for that reason it deserves to be swept onto the rubbish heap of history, together with those who uphold it to the detriment of true religion, which is metaphysical and only metaphysical.

The Social Theocratic mission, as I conceive of it, is to deliver the people from falsehood and lead them onto the path of supra-human (cyborgistic) righteousness (males) and pseudo-justice (pseudo-females), the respective ethereal destinies of those earmarked through salvation for metaphysics (the pseudo-physical pseudo-males) and those, by contrast, earmarked through counter-damnation for pseudo-metachemistry (chemical females), so that the chemical ‘first’ (equivocally hegemonic over the  pseudo-physical at the south-west point of the intercardinal axial compass) will become pseudo-metachemical ‘last’ (unequivocally subordinate to the metaphysical at the north-east point of said compass) and the pseudo-physical ‘last’ (equivocally subordinate to the chemical at the south-west point of said compass) will become metaphysically ‘fist’ (unequivocally hegemonic over the pseudo-metachemical at the north-east point of said compass), like the metaphorical ‘lamb’ over the (neutralized) ‘lion’ and/or ‘wolf’, or, alternatively, the proverbial Saint (St George) over the (neutralized) Dragon … at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass upon what is the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis in polar remove from anything chemical and pseudo-physical at the foot of the said axis.

In every traditional (‘bovaryized’) religion one finds only error and superstition or, at best, some accommodation with the corporeal limitations of the people, the masses of the supposed faithful, most of whom, being female, are the natural enemies of religion and, hence, heavenliness/godliness, conceived in properly metaphysical terms.

Judaism is even more ‘bovaryized’ than Christianity, and largely on a scientific (cosmic) rather than a political or an economic (opposing kinds of worldliness) basis, notwithstanding the contrary deference of Catholicism and Puritanism towards either otherworldly (quasi-religion done down pseudo-scientifically) or netherworldly (science tending to rule and subvert pseudo-religion) positions at the north-east and north-west points of the inter-cardinal axial compass on respectively opposite – and incompatible – types of  axis.

The difference, to return to my opening theme, between Truth cogitated and Truth experienced is precisely that between superego and superconscious, brain at its most quasi-ethereal and mind when most ethereally true to the Soul.

One may contrast the quasi-godly ‘intellectual’ understanding of Truth in relation to metaphysics with the actual godly reflection of heavenly Joy through experienced Truth which, in relation to males capable of metaphysics, is universal, not personal or, rather, superpersonal (like superego and superman) … as a ‘bovaryization’ of ego which, to be sure, not everyone would be capable of to the same degree, since requiring a certain philosophical disposition that, to judge by the majority of people and their beliefs, is anything but widespread, much less universal.

If it is possible to blaspheme against God, or godliness (as I prefer to say in view of the deplorable extent to which that term has been hijacked by the various ‘bovaryized’ religions in thingful vein), it would have to be in terms of the faking of a joyous smile (closed lipped), when the Soul has not actually given rise to one.  That would not do God, much less Heaven, any favours.

But of course one needs to get away from a God-centred emphasis even in metaphysics, which is   the element of Soul, and hence of Heaven par excellence.

By far the greater proportion of God-centredness derives from falsity and superstition – the twin pillars, one could say, of conventional religion.

Exposing the ‘false gods’ for what they are should not be regarded as a species of blasphemy, still less as the end game in the evolution of thought, but, rather, as the consequence of intellectual enlightenment, which, through higher knowledge, tends to liberate the mind from falsehoods as the brain is utilized  in a logical, one might even say a superlogical manner, after the fashion of someone superhuman.  And it is that enlightenment which gives us - and I mean only persons like myself - the right to challenge conventional religion and the world as it stands in the name of otherworldly criteria and the possibility of non-bovaryized religion – in a word, of true religion, or religion which is truly centred in the Soul. For such religion is beyond all falsehoods and is thus the prerogative of the metaphysical.





The Irish Republic, rather like the Weimar Republic before it, has become a fucking disgrace – fit only to be condemned to the rubbish bin of history.

I never much liked the Tonean tricolour anyway; it sharply suggests the divide-and-rule policy of perfidious Albion, keeping the Green and Orange Celts apart while feigning unity between the main ethnic traditions – Catholic, Anglican, and Dissenter (puritan).  An Anglo-Irish Republic that, as modern history has shown, has been quick to abandon its republican socialist traditions in pursuance of capitalist gain and an effective sell-out to the WASPS.  But that is at the roots of its current undoing and ... enslavement to Western and, in particular, European capital.  It is also the reason why the island of Ireland is still divided, because republicanism, for all its secular boasts, cannot transcend the ethnic divisions that were responsible for the split in the first place. 

To me, this Irish Republic is nothing but an interim stage of political ideology between Ireland's colonial past and, hopefully, its theocratically-liberated future.





The difference between a genuine writer and a hack is that whereas the former only writes when he has something to say, the latter writes for the sake of writing or, more usually, for his pay.  Something along the lines of that old distinction between artists and journalists.






Supersoul + Superego in Superconsciousness, with a fulcrum in the Supersoul.

Ego + Soul in Consciousness, with a fulcrum in the Ego.

Superwill + Superspirit in Supersensuousness,  with a fulcrum in the Superwill.

Spirit + Will in Sensuousness, with a fulcrum in the Spirit.

The Superwill of Metachemistry vis-a-vis the Supersoul of Metaphysics, alpha and omega of noumenal absolutism.

The Spirit of Chemistry vis-a-vis the Ego of Physics, alpha and omega of phenomenal relativity.

The Supersoul + Superego of Superconsciousness vis-a-vis the Subspirit + Subwill of Subsensuousness in the free psyche and bound soma (3:1 ratio) of Metaphysics, which is divisible between Superchristian and Subheathen, Supernurtural and Subnatural criteria.

The Ego + Soul of Consciousness vis-a-vis the Unwill + Unspirit of Unsensuousness in the free psyche and bound soma (2½:1½ ratio) of Physics, which is divisible between Christian and Unheathen, Nurtural and Unnatural criteria.

The Spirit + Will of Sensuousness vis-a-vis the Unsoul + Unego of Unconsciousness in the free soma and bound psyche (2½:1½ ratio) of Chemistry, which is divisible between Heathen and Unchristian, Natural and Unnurtual criteria.

The Superwill + Superspirit of Supersensuousness vis-a-vis the Subego + Subsoul of Subconsciousness in the free soma and bound psyche (3:1 ratio) of Metachemistry, which is divisible between Superheathen and Subchristian, Supernatural and Subnurtural criteria.

The pseudo-Supersoul + pseudo-Superego of pseudo-Superconsciousness vis-a-vis the pseudo-Subspirit + pseudo-Subwill of pseudo-Subsensuousness in the bound psyche and free soma (3:1 ratio) of pseudo-Metaphysics, which is divisible between pseudo-Superchristian and pseudo-Subheathen, pseudo-Supernurtural and pseudo-Subnatural criteria, in relation to a Metachemical hegemony.

The pseudo-Unego + pseudo-Unsoul of pseudo-Unconsciousness vis-a-vis the pseudo-Will + pseudo-Spirit of pseudo-Sensuousness in the bound psyche and free soma (2½:1½ ratio) of pseudo-Physics, which is divisible between pseudo-Unchristian and pseudo-Heathen, pseudo-Unnurtural and pseudo-Natural criteria, in relation to a Chemical hegemony.

The pseudo-Unspirit + pseudo-Unwill of pseudo-Unsensuousness vis-a-vis the pseudo-Soul + pseudo-Ego of pseudo-Consciousness in the bound soma and free psyche (2½:1½ ratio) of pseudo-Chemistry, which is divisible between pseudo-Unheathen and pseudo-Christian, pseudo-Unnatural and pseudo-Nurtural criteria, in relation to a Physical hegemony.

The pseudo-Superwill + pseudo-Superspirit of pseudo-Supersensuousness vis-a-vis the pseudo-Subego + pseudo-Subsoul of pseudo-Subconsciousness in the bound soma and free psyche (3:1 ratio) of pseudo-Metachemistry, which is divisible between pseudo-Superheathen and pseudo-Subchristian, pseudo-Supernatural and pseudo-Subnurtural criteria, in relation to a Metaphysical hegemony.

With Metachemistry and pseudo-Metaphysics one finds Superheathen and Subchristian in free soma and bound psyche vis-a-vis pseudo-Subheathen and pseudo-Superchristian in pseudo-free soma and pseudo-bound psyche.

With Chemistry and pseudo-Physics one finds Heathen and Unchristian in free soma and bound psyche vis-a-vis pseudo-Heathen and pseudo-Unchristian in pseudo-free soma and pseudo-bound psyche.

With Physics and pseudo-Chemistry one finds Christian and Unheathen in free psyche and bound soma vis-a-vis pseudo-Christian and pseudo-Unheathen in pseudo-free psyche and pseudo-bound soma.

With Metaphysics and pseudo-Metachemistry one finds Superchristian and Subheathen in free psyche and bound soma vis-a-vis pseudo-Subchristian and pseudo-Superheathen in pseudo-free psyche and pseudo-bound soma.

All of the above is true to logical sequence rather than to the paradoxes which occur within the phenomenal elements and pseudo-elements when axial polarity of either a church-hegemonic or a state-hegemonic order is brought to bear on them – a subject I have, in any case, gone into quite extensively in other writings.





The methodologies of saluting from metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics (state-hegemonic axis) to metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry (church-hegemonic axis) via physics/pseudo-chemistry (state-hegemonic axis) and chemistry/pseudo-physics (church-hegemonic axis), are as follows:-

1. Raised arm open-hand salute (with palm of hand facing outwards) in the noumenal objectivity of metachemistry over the bent arm clenched-fist salute (with fist facing inwards) in the noumenal pseudo-subjectivity of pseudo-metaphysics, the former moral (superheathen) and the latter unmoral (pseudo-superchristian).

However, an amoral descent of the one in the form of a bent arm clenched-fist salute (with fist facing outwards) should logically provoke an immoral retort in the form of a raised arm open-hand salute (with palm turned inwards) which can only diminish the objectivity of the metachemical salute-proper, insofar as it will have a pseudo-subjective dimension (inwards-turned open hand) not proper to the context in question but stemming from an unlocked pseudo-metaphysics (via antimetaphysics) in quasi-metachemical vein.

Thus the quadruplicity of options (moral, amoral, unmoral, and immoral) attaching to metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics at the north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass as the ruling principle of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria.

2. Let us examine the polarity to such a principle in the physics/pseudo-chemistry of the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass which defers, as in a kind of Faustian pact, to it, i.e., in terms of the female gender polarity of pseudo-chemistry to metachemistry (primary) and of the male gender polarity of physics to pseudo-metaphysics (secondary).

Hence the clenched fist to brow salute (with fingers of said fist turned inwards towards the brow) in the phenomenal subjectivity of physics over the bent arm to chest open-hand salute (with hand parallel to the forearm at right-angles to the chest such that allows only thumb and forefinger any contact thereof) in the phenomenal pseudo-objectivity of pseudo-chemistry, the former moral (christian) and the latter unmoral (pseudo-unheathen).

However, an amoral descent of the one in the form of a bent arm to chest open-hand salute (with inwards-turned hand upon the chest) should logically provoke an immoral retort in the form of a clenched-fist to brow salute (with fist held at right angles to the brow such that allows only contact of thumb and forefinger thereof) which can only diminish the subjectivity of the physical salute-proper, insofar as it will have a pseudo-objective dimension (outwards-turned clenched fist) not proper to the context in question but stemming from an unlocked pseudo-chemistry (via antichemistry) in quasi-physical vein.

Thus the quadruplicity of options (moral, amoral, unmoral, and immoral) attaching to physics/pseudo-chemistry as the defining principle of lower order (phenomenal) state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria.

3. Let us now examine the axial antithesis to such a principle in the chemistry/pseudo-physics of the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass which defers, as in a kind of divine pact, to metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry at the north-east point of the said compass, i.e., the male gender polarity of pseudo-physics to metaphysics (primary) and the female gender polarity of chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry (secondary).

Hence the open hand to brow salute (with palm facing outwards) of conventional (British) military saluting in the phenomenal objectivity of chemistry over the clenched-fist to breast salute (with inwards-turned fist of fingers pressed against chest) in the phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity of pseudo-physics, the former moral (heathen) and the latter unmoral (pseudo-unchristian).

However, an amoral descent of the one in the form of a clenched-fist to breast salute (with fist at right angles to the chest such that allows only thumb and forefinger any contact thereof) should logically provoke an immoral retort in the form of an open hand to brow salute (with inwards and downwards turned palm) which can only diminish the objectivity of the chemical salute-proper, insofar as it will have a pseudo-subjective dimension (inwards-turned open hand) not proper to the context in question but stemming from an unlocked pseudo-physics (via antiphysics) in quasi-chemical vein.

Thus the quadruplicity of options (moral, amoral, unmoral, and immoral) attaching to chemistry/pseudo-physics as the defining principle of lower order (phenomenal) church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria.

4. Let us finally examine the axial polarity to such a principle in the metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry of the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass which leads it towards the possibility of ‘Kingdom Come’, with the aforementioned gender polarities (see section 3 above).

Hence the raised arm clenched-fist salute (with fist turned inwards on a not-too-rigid arm) in the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysics over the bent arm open-hand salute (with palm facing outwards) in the pseudo-objectivity of pseudo-metachemistry, the former moral (pre-Christian) and the latter unmoral (pseudo-scientific).

However, an amoral descent of the one in the form of a bent arm open-hand salute (with palm turned inwards) should logically provoke an immoral retort in the form of a raised arm clenched-fist salute (with fist facing outwards) which can only diminish the subjectivity of the metaphysical salute-proper, insofar as it will have a pseudo-objective dimension (outwards-turned clenched fist on more rigidly-raised arm) not proper to the context in question but stemming from an unlocked pseudo-metachemistry (via antimetachemistry) in quasi-metaphysical vein.

Thus the quadruplicity of options (moral, amoral, unmoral, and immoral) attaching to metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass as the leading principle of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria.

In all four cases of morality and unmorality adumbrated above, I have limited myself to a single term in each case, that being the majority ratio aspect of each position and therefore the correct basis for a credible generalization or, in this instance, series of generalizations.

It should also be noted that the phrase 'to the brow' always denotes the side of the brow or head, not the centre of the brow, since no salute can be conducted on the latter basis; although in the case of the chest, saluting is always 'to the centre', as though to the heart.






The Supersensuous/Subconscious in Metachemistry over the pseudo-Subsensuous/pseudo-Superconscious in pseudo-Metaphysics = 3:1 ratio of free soma to bound psyche over 1:3 ratio of pseudo-free soma to pseudo-bound psyche in the noumenal objectivity of spatial space over the noumenal pseudo-subjectivity of sequential time or, in simple parlance, space over pseudo-time at the north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass.

The Conscious/Unsensuous in Physics over the pseudo-Conscious/pseudo-Unsensuous in pseudo-Chemistry = 2½:1½ ratio of free psyche to bound soma over 1½:2½ ratio of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma in the phenomenal subjectivity of massive mass over the phenomenal pseudo-objectivity of voluminous volume or, in simple parlance, mass over pseudo-volume at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on what is, in relation to the above, a pseudo-chemical polarity to metachemistry on primary (female) state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms and a physical polarity to pseudo-metaphysics on secondary (male) state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms.

The Sensuous/Unconscious in Chemistry over the pseudo-Sensuous/pseudo-Unconscious in pseudo-Physics = 2½:1½ ratio of free soma to bound psyche over 1½:2½ ratio of pseudo-free soma to pseudo-bound psyche in the phenomenal objectivity of volumetric volume over the phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity of massed mass or, in simple parlance, volume over pseudo-mass at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass.

The Superconscious/Subsensuous in Metaphysics over the pseudo-Subconscious/pseudo-Supersensuous in pseudo-Metachemistry = 3:1 ratio of free psyche to bound soma over 1:3 ratio of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma in the noumenal subjectivity of repetitive time over the noumenal pseudo-objectivity of spaced space or, in simple parlance, time over pseudo-space at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on what is, in relation to the above, a metaphysical polarity to pseudo-physics on primary (male) church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms and a pseudo-metachemical polarity to chemistry on secondary (female) church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms.

One should note the parallelism of psyche and pseudo-psyche, whether absolute or relative, noumenal or phenomenal, vis-a-vis the parallelism of soma and pseudo-soma in the hegemonic/subordinate gender dichotomous norm.





Not Who You Are, nor What You Have.  Not even Who You Have, but What You Are – this is what counts from a metaphysical (religious) standpoint.

Just as Who You Are requires a gender subordinate What You Are Not in the class/pseudo-race dichotomy of metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics, and What You Have a gender subordinate Who You Have Not in the occupation/pseudo-sex dichotomy of physics and pseudo-chemistry on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from north-west to south-east points on the inter-cardinal axial compass,  so Who You Have requires a gender subordinate What You Have Not in the sex/pseudo-occupation dichotomy of chemistry and pseudo-physics, and What You Are a gender subordinate Who You Are Not in the race/pseudo-class dichotomy of metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching from south-west to north-east points on the inter-cardinal axial compass.

Science and pseudo-Religion vis-a-vis Economics and pseudo-Politics on the one axis; Politics and pseudo-Economics vis-a-vis Religion and pseudo-Science on the other axis.  Or, in more philosophical language, noumenal objectivity and noumenal pseudo-subjectivity vis-a-vis phenomenal subjectivity and phenomenal pseudo-objectivity on the state-hegemonic axis; phenomenal objectivity and phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity vis-a-vis noumenal subjectivity and noumenal pseudo-objectivity on the church-hegemonic axis.





‘Ladies and Gentlemen’ – a definite no-no from a metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical standpoint, which is orientated, in religion and pseudo-science, towards race and pseudo-class as opposed, in metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics, to class and pseudo-race, or science and pseudo-religion.

Such a form of address as ‘ladies and gentlemen’ may be appropriate to the metachemical and pseudo-metaphysical but not, assuredly not, to the metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical, who are brothers and sisters or, rather, pseudo-sisters, i.e., the pseudo-angels under the divines, the pseudo-dragons (neutralized dragons) under the saints, the pseudo-lions and/or wolves (neutralized lions and/or wolves) under the lambs, and so on, through other equivalent metaphors.

However, now that I have written the above, I can see a counter-argument along the lines that if, in metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, one can have brothers and pseudo-sisters, then surely one can also have sisters and pseudo-brothers in metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics.  In fact, what is to preclude one from contending that the terms ‘ladies and gentlemen’ can also be split along such lines, with ladies and pseudo-gentlemen in the metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical context and gentlemen and pseudo-ladies in the context axially antithetical to that, wherein the notion of the gentleman saint and the pseudo-lady neutralized dragon (pseudo-dragon) would surely have some applicability?

Be that as it may - and excluding for the moment the irrelevance of class to the metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical context - it can certainly be argued that ladies and gentlemen, as an expression, is as cohesively implausible as would be the terms Devil and God, and for the very sound reason that what hangs together at any point of the inter-cardinal axial compass is less antithetical, as I am contending both the above terms would be, than hegemonic and gender subordinate, in which case the proximity, on different noumenal planes, of Devil and pseudo-God in the one case and of God and pseudo-Devil in the other must have a parallel in the use of such terms as ladies and gentlemen or, for that matter, brothers and sisters.

Yet, in broad terms, I still find it difficult to dismiss the idea that ‘ladies and gentlemen’ has class implications whereas ‘brothers and sisters’ doesn’t, being, if anything, more racially oriented, as in the use of ‘brother’ among large sections of the black or coloured community to distinguish themselves from their white or non-soulful counterparts.





Mind that is subject to ego through the brain, as in egocentricity, is never more than conscious, the recipient of knowledge, which is usually pleasurable.  One might call this mind thought-mind.

Mind that is subject to soul through the central nervous system, on the other hand, is never less than superconscious, the recipient of joy, which is truth.  Such mind can be called feeling-mind, since it is the centre of conscience as the product of how one  about anything and contrasts with that which, buried in thought, rarely if ever exemplifies conscience but is calculatingly conscious in its rational remove from feelings or, at any rate, from all but the most attenuated and knowledge-derived, including intellectual pleasure.

I have said it before and I shall say it again; superego, as a ‘bovaryization’ of ego, and hence knowledge, is a philosophical approach to truth which may be pro-heavenly/godly in its understanding of metaphysics, but can never be properly metaphysical and thus heavenly and/or godly itself.

The ‘Word’, hyped as God, is just another, if more advanced, species of religious 'bovaryization’ and effective idolatry, the idolatry of ‘the Book’ and the worship of intellect, and hence knowledge, as opposed to the experience of joyful soul in superconscious truth, which is beyond even philosophical truth and therefore superego.

One might call the Soul the supersensibility, spinal-cord deep, that infuses consciousness superconsciously when it becomes a truthful reflection of joy.

For me, the term ‘Superman’ does not just equate with superego but, more radically and progressively, with a personal or, rather, superpersonal individual cyborgistic destiny that would complement, from an administrative and/or protective standpoint, the supra-human destiny of substance-motivated communal cyborgization in both metaphysical  (divine) and pseudo-metachemical (pseudo-diabolic) manifestations of religious sovereignty, whether or not the latter would be more fittingly described as pseudo-scientific in its predominantly bound-somatic contrast to anything metaphysical and therefore preponderantly freely psychic.





The middle classes are not representatively Irish, any more than are the upper classes.  Only the lower classes and their pseudo-middle-class counterparts in public sector service can be adjudged properly Irish – along with the quasi-classless (ethnic torch-bearers) and/or pseudo-upperclass priests, monks, nuns, etc., of the Roman Catholic tradition.

It is of course the lower classes/pseudo-middle classes approximating to chemistry/pseudo-physics at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass who can be saved (pseudo-physical) and counter-damned (chemical) once the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis in countries with the appropriate axial preconditions, like Ireland, has been resurrected on Social Theocratic (superchristian) terms in relation to a full complement of metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical factors, following a majority mandate for religious sovereignty (and its pseudo-scientific corollary) from the paradoxical utilization of the democratic process by Social Theocrats with or without (though hopefully with) support from the Catholic Church in the necessity, amongst other things, of avoiding mass-movement associations to the detriment of world-overcoming and transcendental credibility. 

For unless the relevant masses are saved and counter-damned, according to gender, they will never be released from the predatory clutches of the other axis, with its state-hegemonic disregard for religious idealism, and, no less importantly, those who appertain to it will never be damned and counter-saved to their respective polarities, pending a general realignment of the church-hegemonic axis on terms sympathetic to pluralism under a metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical umbrella that, with centro-complexification (a de Chardinesque term) should allow for long-term totalitarianism as the metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical goal of all evolution and counter-devolution in space-centre apotheosis, celestial city-like, ‘On High’.



We live in an age of screen addiction, whether to TVs, PCs, mobile phones, DVD-players, hand-held devices, cinema screens, LEDs on electric keyboards, MIDIs, etc., GPR systems, or whatever – you just cannot get away, seemingly, from screens of one type of another.  Poor eyes!  Poor mind!  A lethal addiction?  Certainly demonstrative of the female-dominated nature of our times and the pressure to ‘keep up appearances’, not least, it would appear, in relation to spectacles, contact lenses, etc., in order to be able to see or view, clearly and in the greatest detail, whatever is digitally and electronically afoot!  No wonder I came up with an alternative system and possible lifestyle to all that!  Who that wasn’t an appearance-obsessed bitch or a crazy sonofabitch wouldn’t?





Anyone who, when the time came for the Bible to be confiscated and consigned to the rubbish heap of history, preferably through incineration in special facilities, thought the Torah and the Koran, not to mention other such traditional religious texts printed on paper, shouldn’t share a similar fate … would be grossly mistaken.  A majority mandate for religious sovereignty from the electorate in countries like Eire (traditionally axially church-hegemonic) would enable the Social Theocratic authorities – and servants of the religiously sovereign – to begin implementing the necessary steps towards purging the country of anachronistic and irrelevant (irrational, mystical, mythical, magical, etc.) religious texts, and there could be no exceptions or exemptions!  Any refusal on the part of one sector of society, be it Moslem or Judaic or whatever, to comply with measures designed to facilitate religious and social progress (under Social Theocracy) would have to be addressed in the most appropriate way – first as regarding and then as treating such persons as enemies of the Centre, the Social Theocratic combination of state-like administrative aside to the Centre-proper and, in relation to the latter, the church-like focus of religious sovereignty of the metaphysical and their pseudo-metachemical (pseudo-scientific) subordinate gender counterparts, all those predominantly bound-somatic pseudo-females who would exist a plane down, in pseudo-space under time, from their freely psychic male counterparts at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the pinnacle of the (resurrected and therefore stepped-up) church-hegemonic axis.

Now as enemies of the Centre, in both its state-like (Social Theocratic) and church-like (Social Transcendentalist) manifestations, it would be necessary to round them up, intern them in the interests of the majority population (not to mention for their own sake), and, where possible, use them in the advancement of Social Theocratic progress, whether (depending on suitability) as workers for the various projects (some underground) that would be sanctioned or as effective guinea pigs for the various experiments that would have to be undertaken in the interests of ‘man overcoming’ (to use a Nietzschean expression) through progressive cyborgization of the person, not least in respect of the synthetically artificial substance entitlements that would accrue to the religiously sovereign as a cardinal aspect of religious sovereignty on both metaphysical (free psychic) and pseudo-metachemical (bound somatic) lines, with a view to ensuring that the proverbial saint and neutralized dragon (or lamb and neutralized lion and/or wolf) of those positions properly came to pass as the necessary structure of the Centre-proper in the overall context, including that of the administrative aside, of the most credible approximation to ‘Kingdom Come’ that one could possibly envisage, even given the inevitability of formative and transitional stages that could only fall well short of the eventual resolution of the entire order in some kind of space-centre approximation to Bunyan’s ‘Celestial City’ or Teilhard de Chardin’s ‘Omega Point’, the culmination of all prior endeavour.

All the above speculation is premised, however, upon the attainment of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty from the electorate of any given axially relevant country via the paradoxical utilization of the democratic process by Social Theocracy towards a religious end properly commensurate, in its full complement of metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, with ‘Kingdom Come’ in the form, necessarily, of the Social Theocratic Centre that, in countries like Eire, would begin the long and difficult process of putting an end to the world (of the lapsed catholic generality of feminine females and pseudo-masculine males at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the chemical/pseudo-physical base of the church-hegemonic axis), including republicanism, in the name of otherworldly and (for the pseudo-metachemical) pseudo-netherworldly criteria – the opposite of what now dominates the global scene from a standpoint based in netherworldly and pseudo-otherworldly criteria, as germane to a metachemical and pseudo-metaphysical complementarity that necessarily upholds the expedient lie – and ‘best of a bad job’  sugar-coating the bitter pill of overwhelming female dominance, stellar-wise, in the Cosmos – of Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father, identifying God with Love when, in point of fact, Devil the Mother corresponds to Beauty (in relation to the free soma of metachemical free will) and Love is simply the once-bovaryized spirit (compared to the pride – mother’s pride – of chemical spirit) which is a corollary (again in metachemical free soma) and consequence of Beauty that has less to do with Devil the Mother than with Hell the Clear Spirit, both of which predominate over the ugliness and hatred of the bound psyche of the Daughter of the Devil and the Clear Soul of Hell in the ratio of 3:1, the absolute ratio germane to the noumenal objectivity of metachemistry as the element whose fulcrum, or most characteristic aspect, is Free Will.

Of course, none of the above has anything whatsoever to do with metaphysics and, hence, religion-proper, which manifests not Beauty and Love in free soma (metachemically), but Joy and Truth in free psyche (metaphysically) – the Joy of Heaven the Holy Soul and the Truth of God the Father or, more correctly in view of the extent to which this term ‘God’ has been metachemically hijacked and  thingfully corrupted through materialist and fundamentalist associations, godfatherliness, the consequence and corollary of Heaven, inseparable from Heaven and not capable of being regarded as a thing-in-itself to be prayed to or feared or obeyed or whatever.  God or, better, Godfatherliness in Heaven is the only godliness which has any religious credibility, and it will be the duty of Social Theocracy to ensure that the Heaven of which it is a corollary is given every encouragement in the decades and centuries to come.





I wouldn’t go anywhere near a Christian Church, to stand in a mixed congregation and listen to the androgynous waffle of world-deferring priests, but I make a distinction, even so, between the celibate priest of the Catholic Church, who at least has some religious credibility and authority, and the priest or, rather, vicar or minister of the Protestant churches, who may well have had sex with his wife (or mistress) only the night before or, at any rate, on a fairly regular basis over a period of years if not decades, producing offspring who only confirm his worldly standing as one who has little or no religious credibility and authority but is effectively a mirror of the world and its family values.  I can’t tell you how much I despise such people, some of whom aren’t even male, but the living embodiment of everything that conduces towards the world and the worldly submission of males to a female agenda!






The Bolsheviks repeated the Jewish or Judaic religiously scientific position in their combination of hegemonic star and subordinate cross-like emblem (hammer and scythe) which, in Judaism, is a kind of candlestick or candelabrum called a menorah.  Both of these false religions, that of cosmos-based religious science and, in the case of the Bolsheviks and their Soviet successors, of Marx-based dialectical materialism, appertain to the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from the north-west (Judaism) to the south-east (Communism) poles of the inter-cardinal axial compass, extreme poles that in the one case are anterior to Anglican Monarchism and in the other case posterior to Puritan Parliamentarianism, though naturally sharing many values in common with the ‘Protestant’ polarities, which necessarily operate along less extremist lines.

But it would be difficult not to believe that English Protestants, not least, have a tolerance for Jews and even Communists, including radical Social Democrats, that derives from their common axial orientations, since Jews and Bolsheviks are simply more extreme manifestations, as noted above, of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, manifestations that can become, as in Soviet Russia, state absolutist, and therefore against any form of religion, no matter how true or false.

In relation to what could be called the Judaic/Bolshevik polar parallelism, however, it needs to be remarked that a noumenal/phenomenal distinction exists between the two positions, or false religions, such that enables us to distinguish the absolute from the relative, not least in respect of the absolute star, or so-called ‘Star of David’ (which I believe to be a misnomer), with its six points deriving from two interlocked triangles, and the relative, or five-pointed star deriving, in its origins, from a lunar rather than a stellar paradigm, such that has more applicability to the corporeal than to the ethereal, and which, like its absolute counterpart ‘upstairs’, represents a female bias towards soma, a bias favouring the body – and hence in this particular case manual labour – at the expense of the mind and, correlatively, the state at the expense of the church.

The only ‘good star’, from a Social Theocratic standpoint, will be the contiguously-encircled absolute star (six-pointer) under the free-standing supercross of Y-chromosomal intimation and symbolism, the Saint-like supercross of metaphysics over the neutralized dragon-like pseudo-superstar of pseudo-metachemistry, which will remain forever subordinate as, in representative pseudo-primal ratio terms, the pseudo-infinite pseudo-death that ‘lies down’ with or, rather, under Eternal Life – the eternity (in the preponderating ratio factor of free psyche) of metaphysical supremacy.  That will be the opposite, in every respect, of Judaism, never mind Bolshevism and its subsequent communistic offshoots.


Incidentally, the all-too-prevalent use of 'relative' stars to denote value or merit, as with films and discs, is sadly reminiscent of my experiences at infant school, when teacher - usually if not invariably female - gave one a star of one colour or another as the equivalent of a mark or tick, so that one's product or behaviour was graded accordingly.  It seems that the age has infantile predilections in this regard, insofar as the ubiquitous marking system of the star has continued - in a sense rightly - to characterize what are more usually female-dominated products and lifestyles.


Frankly, these stars leave me cold, and I always feel an innate reluctance to acquiesce in them, even when circumstances fairly oblige me to do so.






To contrast the body-mind symbiosis of metachemistry and chemistry with the mind-body symbiosis of physics and metaphysics, as one would contrast the free soma and bound psyche of hegemonic females with the free psyche and bound soma of hegemonic males.

The delusion of only a body-mind symbiosis – all too contemporary – derives from the female hegemonies of metachemistry (fire) and chemistry (water), power and glory, wherein the ‘sonofabitch’ pseudo-male is upended in gender subordination from free psyche and bound soma (in physics and metaphysics) to bound psyche and free soma (in pseudo-physics and pseudo-metaphysics) in what would appear to be a pale reflection of the female hegemonic positions, given the gender-conditioned ratio differentials that still persist. 

In those particular elemental/pseudo-elemental contexts dominated by females, and hence ‘the star’, there is no place for a mind-body symbiosis, much to the disadvantage of males, whose form and contentment (in physics and metaphysics) takes an unpleasantly pseudo-formal and pseudo-contented nosedive before the female dominance of glory and power in chemistry and metachemistry, the one hegemonic over pseudo-physics (with its pseudo-ego) and the other over pseudo-metaphysics (with its pseudo-soul).





The eschatology of the Third Reich – the salvation of Christian Germans to the National Socialist community, but the damnation of non-Christians, including Communists and Jews, to the concentration camps.

Hence the Life of the German people within the Reich – alleged to be capable of lasting a thousand years (a modest estimate, in my opinion) – and the Death of those regarded as subhuman(ist) enemies of the Reich and, hence, of the German people.

Hitler, as I believe I have argued on several previous occasions, was to all intents and purposes the Germanic equivalent of the Second Coming, who brought both Heaven and Hell, Life and Death, Hope and Fear, the Reich and the concentration camps, to pass in an eschatological judgement which still haunts – and fascinates – the modern world.

Even the state-hegemonic WASPS, who have no sense of a subhuman/superhuman dichotomy, in their humanistic liberalism, are haunted and fascinated by the Nazi era, which grew from a south German kernel of ethnic Catholics, including Hitler, Hess, and Himmler, partial, whether consciously or otherwise, to church-hegemonic axial criteria, not least in respect of the southwest-to-northeast directionality, in relation to the inter-cardinal axial compass, of Hitler’s salute – something completely alien to the WASPs, as for a corresponding reason would be the anti-Semitism which Hitler embodied in his eschatology as symptomatic of a destiny with Second-Coming implications that emerged from a Catholic background and correlative repudiation of Jews, as extrapolative strainings towards the north-east point of the said compass tended in a contrary (transcendentalist) direction from what could be called Judaic fundamentalism at the north west. 

Yet even this would have been alien to a majority of north Germans, traditionally Protestant, and in no way capable of endorsing such an axial orientation, not even in their manner of saluting, which more corresponds to the average take on Nazism as something fundamentally metachemical and absolutely objective – the objectivity, in a word, of the jerk, as though indicative of one subconsciously shying away from church-hegemonic axial directionality in his overly vertical approach to the type of salute in question – which could be generically described as fascist, even though many so-called 'fascists' of Catholic descent, not least in Germany, would have been wanting in a southwest-to-northeast directionality as epitomized by their Fuhrer.

This is not, however, an apologetics for Hitler's style of saluting since, even if my hunch is true, approaching church-hegemonic axial directionality from the bottom up, as this appears to do, is contrary to anything metaphysical and capable of symbolizing that which would lead the people from above in the interests of the hegemony of noumenal subjectivity.





When everybody does the ‘right thing’ on the Internet, as advocated by the self-appointed 'gurus', few if any will make any money.  The bandwagon upon which so many climb will simply sink beneath the weight of success-hungry entrepreneurs, who think not for themselves but according to a set of rules and principles laid down by somebody else – the few who actually make most of the money from exploiting their gullibility.






Difficult not to see a connection between the Biblical 666 (Revelations), the so-called ‘number of the beast’, and 1666, the year of the ‘Great Fire of London’, which destroyed most of the city.  To me, 1666, even more than 1066, the date of the ‘Battle of Hastings’, was the year par excellence of ‘the beast’, of the fire that ravaged and laid waste the capital of England. It was as though London became the Devil’s plaything on that hellish date.






The Superman, as I conceive of him, as one given to the bovaryization of ego from knowledge to truth, or physics to metaphysics, in what becomes superego, is not godly in the sense of mind superconsciously infused by joyful soul, but one who stands to one side of the superconscious even as he advocates it for others and is himself pro-godly or, more accurately, pro-metaphysical.  For the metaphysical context is not of bovaryized ego (superego) but of the Soul, and the informing of mind by the Soul is what makes for superconsciousness as a halo-like concomitant of Being, a godly concomitant of Heaven, which both precedes and defines superconsciousness as that which can be described as godly.

But there is no God, least of all thingfully, as thing-in-itself, and independently of Heaven. That is the alpha Lie which, originating in Judaism (though with a certain justification in view of its concrete basis in noumenal objectivity), informs the Western extrapolations, including Mary as the so-called ‘Mother of God’ and Christ as ‘God’ (never mind the so-called 'Son of God'), notwithstanding the fact that the Puritans prefer the so-called ‘Word of God’ in the Bible, with an emphasis on the New Testament, to what figuratively passes as God for the simple-minded, including, ironically, those Anglicans who are less partial to the Bible than to a plethora of sculptural effigies and wooden carvings congenial to an alpha-stemming disposition of whatever denominational hue.

But if, to return to my opening paragraph, the ‘intellectual’ Superman is one thing, the ‘spiritual’ Superman is quite another, a superbeingful rather than supertaking individual whom we can define as transcendentally superhuman – certainly in relation to transcendental meditation – and therefore a godly witness to Heaven or what may appear as such from the outside, bearing in mind that godliness is really Heaven from the outside and not at all separate or distinct, any more than would be the superconscious from Soul, which is as much the reason why there is superconsciousness at all as … the brain or, more correctly, the ego is the reason why there is consciousness and thus thought, not to mention, with certain soulful and other intrusions, dreams, which appear to erupt from the unconscious as from a more sensuous precondition.

All this should become more intelligible in the cyborgistic future, after the post-worldly superficially cyborgistic (machine) present has been democratically superseded by an otherworldly/pseudo-netherworldly society premised upon the supersession of political sovereignty in the mass by religious sovereignty, and the people are not merely superhumanly but, through substance-motivated communal cyborgization, supra-humanly transfigured by a serving superhuman elite whose transfiguration would be more individual and thus, in a sense, superpersonal, as befitting their administrative status.





Anti-Semitism is not natural, one might say, to the British; they remain axially aligned with Jews both ‘on high’, Judaically, and ‘down below’, Bolshevistically (or what used to be such prior to a number of transmutations, including radical Social Democracy), that is, to Jews behind Anglican Monarchism and beyond Puritan Parliamentarianism, so that they could be described as being (or of having been) flanked by more extreme manifestations, up and down the axis, of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria, even, in radical Social Democracy, to a near-absolute degree.

In contrast to the Americans, however, the British would traditionally have been more drawn to Bolshevism than to Judaism, given the contrast of political emphasis with America which, in Britain, focuses on ‘the below’ rather than ‘the above’, the sensible/pseudo-sensual phenomenal as opposed to the sensual/pseudo-sensible noumenal, that is, physics/pseudo-chemistry as against metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics, so that, to give a sporting analogy, the British favour association football rather than rugby football, whereas the Americans favour American football (their kind of rugby equivalent) to soccer.





We should think of supremacy and primacy, two terms I have often used in the past, as equivalent to free and bound, virtue and vice, positive and negative, etc., whether in relation to soma or to psyche or, rather, whether in relation to female or male gender criteria – the former exemplifying, when hegemonic, free soma and bound psyche, the latter … free psyche and bound soma, so that supremacy can be freely somatic or freely psychic, and primacy, by contrast, unfreely (bound) psychic or unfreely (bound) somatic, depending on the gender context.

Therefore, in metachemistry, which is a female element in the vacuousness of its noumenal objectivity, the free soma of beauty and love would correspond to metachemical supremacy, the bound psyche of ugliness and hatred, by contrast, to metachemical primacy, the ratio of the one to the other in this objectively absolute, space-dominated ethereal context being 3:1.

Contrariwise, in metaphysics, which is a male element in the plenumousness, so to speak, of its noumenal subjectivity, the free psyche of joy and truth would correspond to metaphysical supremacy, the bound soma of woe and illusion, by contrast, to metaphysical primacy, the ratio of the one to the other in this subjectively absolute, time-dominated ethereal context being 3:1.

However, in chemistry, which is a female element in the vacuousness of its phenomenal objectivity, the free soma of pride and strength would correspond to chemical supremacy, the bound psyche of humility and weakness, by contrast, to chemical primacy, the ratio of the one to the other in this objectively relative, volume-dominated corporeal context being 2½:1½.

Finally, in physics, which is a male element in the plenumousness, so to speak, of its phenomenal subjectivity, the free psyche of knowledge and pleasure would correspond to physical supremacy, the bound soma of ignorance and pain, by contrast, to physical primacy, the ratio of the one to the other in this subjectively relative, mass-dominated corporeal context being 2½:1½.

When the female is hegemonic, whether in metachemistry or in chemistry, the male will be more pseudo-primal than pseudo-supreme, whether to an absolute (pseudo-metaphysical) or to a relative (pseudo-physical) degree, that is, whether in terms of pseudo-sin vis-a-vis pseudo-folly or of sin vis-a-vis folly, depending on the axis.  Contrariwise, when the male is hegemonic, whether in physics or in metaphysics, the female will be more pseudo-primal than pseudo-supreme, whether to a relative (pseudo-chemical) or to an absolute (pseudo-metachemical) degree, that is, whether in terms of punishment vis-a-vis goodness or of pseudo-punishment vis-a-vis pseudo-goodness.  Supremacy and primacy proper only exist for the hegemonic gender, never for the subordinate one.





They speak of the coming ‘resurrection of the dead’ within ‘Kingdom Come’, but who are ‘the dead’?  Precisely and only, I maintain, the pseudo-physical pseudo-males under chemical females at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the foot of what used to be – and to some extent still is in countries like Eire (Republic of Ireland) – the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis, where they exist, as it were, as pseudo-mass (massive) under volume (volumetric).

But why are they ‘dead’?  Because, the straightforward answer must be, they are 2½:1½ bound or, more correctly, pseudo-bound psyche (sin) to pseudo-free soma (folly) under female hegemonic pressure (in chemistry) of 2½:1½ free soma (pseudo-evil) to bound psyche (pseudo-crime).  The authentic evil and crime would, of course, be a 3:1 ratio of free soma to bound psyche metachemical dichotomy at the north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass ruling the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis, but this lower-order variety of evil and crime associated with chemistry is less noumenal than phenomenal, less ethereal on elemental objective terms than corporeal on molecular objective terms.

So, conditioned to pseudo-bound psyche and pseudo-free soma in the aforementioned ratio (phenomenal) by hegemonic females, these pseudo-physical pseudo-males are effectively ‘the dead’ to the extent that they are more pseudo-bound psyche (2½) than pseudo-free soma (1½), and are only such, in any case (quite apart from the phenomenal relativity of such a ratio as opposed to the 3:1 absolutism of its noumenal counterpart), because of the chemical females who represent a maternal resolution of the female predicament in effectively Marian vein, with the acquirement of a surrogate plenum (the child) to relieve them from the strain – and shame – of a non-maternal vacuum, as germane to their root metachemical condition.

Only the pseudo-physical can be saved from a 2½:1½ ratio of pseudo-bound psyche to pseudo-free soma in sin and folly to a 3:1 ratio of free psyche to bound soma in grace and wisdom, from meekness (vis-a-vis chemical pseudo-vanity) to righteousness (vis-a-vis pseudo-metachemical pseudo-justice), as from pseudo-phenomenal pseudo-primacy/pseudo-supremacy in pseudo-physics to noumenal supremacy/primacy in metaphysics.  That, in a nutshell, is the ‘resurrection of the dead’, and for it to transpire, following a majority mandate for religious sovereignty from the paradoxical utilization of the democratic process by Social Theocracy in countries with the right (church-hegemonic) kind of axial preconditions, the chemical females would have to be counter-damned, on secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms, from a 1½:2½ ratio of bound psyche to free soma in pseudo-crime and pseudo-evil to a 1:3 ratio of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma in pseudo-punishment and pseudo-goodness, from pseudo-vanity (vis-a-vis pseudo-physical meekness) to pseudo-justice (vis-a-vis metaphysical righteousness), as from phenomenal primacy/supremacy in chemistry to noumenal pseudo-supremacy/pseudo-primacy in pseudo-metachemistry, becoming, thereby, the proverbial ‘lion’ and/or ‘wolf’ that, in a predominating pseudo-bound soma, ‘lies down’ with ‘the lamb’, and only because, as pseudo-females, they had been neutralized with a kind of substance entitlement at variance with that to which the metaphysical would be entitled as free, hegemonic males, males akin, to cite another metaphor, to the saint who has his metaphorical foot firmly upon a pseudo-metachemical pseudo-dragon, a neutralized dragon that can never again, like a free female, wield a XX-chromosomal cosh at the male’s expense, and eventually, via pseudo-metaphysics under metachemistry, condemn him to ‘the world’, meaning, in the case of that which might have been superficially metaphysical (as a more intelligent Catholic male), as a pseudo-physical subordinate corollary of a chemical hegemony, the fruit of maternal resolution.

But if this substance entitlement is to work, either way for each gender, ‘man’ will have to be ‘overcome’, to use a Nietzschean kind of expression, and the cyborgization of both the metaphysical (subjectively) and the pseudo-metachemical (pseudo-objectively), that is, in centripetal and pseudo-centrifugal vein, will accordingly have to ensue, and on increasingly communal terms as the need to serve a large number of religiously sovereign citizens would surely dictate.  Therein lies the challenge, it seems to me, of ‘Kingdom Come’, a society in which the pseudo-physical have been saved from their relatively preponderating pseudo-bound-psychic sinful death to an absolutely preponderating free-psychic graceful Life, the Eternal Life of the metaphysical Elect of Soul, while their chemical counterparts – who would be the equivocally hegemonic ‘first’ destined to become unequivocally subordinate ‘last’ -  would have to have been counter-damned from their relatively predominating free-somatic pseudo-evil pseudo-life to an absolutely predominating pseudo-bound-somatic pseudo-good pseudo-Death, the pseudo-Infinite Death that, in representative ratio terms, would be the ‘neutralized’ corollary of the free-psychic Eternal Life of the metaphysical.





The alpha-oriented and alpha-stemming distinction between decadent bourgeois civilization (Protestant secularism) and proletarian barbarism, the degeneration of Western civilization (in relation, for instance, to female priests or, rather, vicars, ministers, etc.) and the inception of global civilization (in relation, for instance, to feminism), the former of which overhauled, in inception, the medievalism of Catholic Christianity, the latter of which has still to be overhauled, democratically, by the inception of global civilization-proper in terms of the transcendentalism of Social Theocratic Centrism, the ‘Superchristianity’, as it were, of ‘Kingdom Come’, which presupposes a majority mandate for religious sovereignty conceived as the sovereignand means whereby not only ‘man’ can be ‘overcome’ but, more importantly, transfigured towards his evolutionary successor, the cyborg, who will be completely beyond what passes for God, i.e. Devil the Mother, in his enhanced metaphysical capacity for Heaven.






To say ‘father’ to a priest is something I could never do, nor want to do.  It would put me in the unenviable position of being a ‘son’, but that is merely, in relation to Christianity and, in particular, to Christ, the bound soma (crucifixional paradigm) of metaphysics, a shortfall from the free psyche of the 'father’ – and more representatively of heavenly soul - in relation to a full complement of metaphysics, who and/or which doesn’t exist in the Western tradition except peripherally and on a surrogate basis in terms of ‘fathers’, i.e. Catholic priests.

But I am the intellectually-bovaryized personification – call it superpersonification – of free psyche, and to a degree beyond the comprehension, I wager, of most if not all priests.  I am, in a sense, the ultimate free or, rather, superfree thinker, a veritable ‘philosopher king’ whom it would be difficult if not impossible to surpass.  I could never kowtow to priests, whom I despise for being dominated, through the Old Testament, by Creator-ism, i.e., by Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father in and as the noumenally objective embodiment of metachemical free will, the very thing that precludes all but a resurrectional straining on the leash towards metaphysics in the crucifixional paradigm of the so-called ‘true Cross’ by what is an extrapolation, in Catholic Christianity, from the Judaic anchor, so to speak, of the Middle East, an extrapolation, moreover, that has to accommodate and, to a degree, transcend ‘the world’ of the mass Catholic position below before approximating – and then imperfectly – to an axial antithesis to the aforementioned ‘Creator’, whose fundamentally somatic basis in metachemistry ensures that the Christ ‘On High’ remains figurative and thus well short of signifying, in male-hegemonic abstraction, anything or, rather, anyone freely psychic and, hence, properly metaphysical.

Hence the Judeo-Christian anachronism vis-a-vis global civilization in its alpha-stemming or formative manifestation, which only the paradoxical exploitation of the democratic process in certain traditionally church-hegemonic countries to a religiously sovereign end will enable us not merely to overhaul but, with the emergence of the Social Theocratic Centre, effectively consign to the ‘rubbish heap of history’, where it will join all those other bovaryized religions rooted in Creator-ism that can have no place in ‘Kingdom Come’, a kingdom centred, metaphysically, in Heaven the Holy Soul.





Woman – symbol of man’s shame.


Few would deny that classical music is a whole lot finer – and more subjective – than rock, despite its depressingly state-hegemonic orientation whenever dominated by either strings or brass if not, in many instances, by both at once, to the detriment of metaphysics (wind). Nonetheless, rock is axially relevant to church-hegemonic criteria, as, in a higher way, is new-age electronica, and therefore not a form of music that finds its sensible 'fineness' in physics over pseudo-chemistry at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, in a neutron-like acoustic bowing remove from electron-dominated rock strumming/singing.  It is also a form of music, despite its innate crudities, that allows the musician to express his feelings directly, not hampered by a score such that, in the classical context, always reflects a neutron-like physical predilection towards knowledge and thus the vitiation if not extinction of soul as germane not to what is expressed on the printed score but to what resides within, independently of outward show.


To be friends with a particular person, you need to have got away from people in general.


God or, as I prefer to say, godliness, is Heaven perceived from the outside, like candlelight from the flame, and the ratio of the one to the other can change, depending on the stage of metaphysical evolution and of one’s relationship to it. But there is no real distinction between God and Heaven, despite appearances to the contrary, since there would be no candlelight without candleflame, no evidence of superconscious joy (truth) without the joy of the superconscious (soul) to begin with.  Therefore when we speak of the One ... we mean that metaphysical free psyche is centred in soul (heaven) and that the appearance of this soul from the outside (god) does not differ in any marked way from the soul as experienced within but, rather, confirms its beingful condition as a reflection of joy (truth). Thus God and Heaven, truth and joy, are one and the same superconscious reality - a reality which is noumenally transcendent in its universality and devoid of any physical or personal associations whatsoever.


With an autocracy there is only one ruler – namely the king or king-equivalent, more usually a military dictator.  With a democracy, on the other hand, you get a choice of semi-autocratic collectivities called parties, only one of which – barring coalitions – will govern you.  The Party elects its own leader, who acts as a kind of party autocrat, hiring and firing as he sees or, rather, thinks fit.


Trust is in what is; faith is in what could be.


Sunday 6th February, 2011 – started to copy some Gary Moore CDs onto my new laptop, having concentrated on other musicians during the previous 6-8 weeks since its purchase.  Later on, that evening, heard over the Radio Four News that he had died in a hotel-room in Spain earlier that day.  Shocked and amazed.  He was my age – 58.

Gary Moore wouldn’t be my favourite guitarist; he wouldn’t even be my favourite singer; but as a lead guitarist who also sang and sometimes sang his heart out, I can think of none better.





There is no other male freedom than freedom from woman and bodily domination.  The idea of freedom through woman is a delusion, because sex is a woman's freedom, not a man's, given the inherent foreignness, with males, of a predominating somatic ratio in both noumenal and phenomenal contexts. 

Men are only free when psychically free, whether through ego or, preferably, through soul, which makes for superconscious freedom and thus for that which is a product, as superconsciously free mind (soul) actually is, of the central nervous system.  Mind which is not true to itself but knowledgeable and effectively false, having been corrupted by education, is less a product of the central nervous system metaphysically than of the brain physically, and is thus identifiable with ego.  Ego-mind is what you think, not what you feel (and I don't mean touch or sense or even see and hear).  For what you see and hear, not to mention smell and taste, through the senses can be channelled in either direction - either down, with intellectual corruption of the Self, towards the thoughts of the Ego or up, given sufficient avoidance of such corruption, towards the feelings of the Soul. 

But ego-mind is generally more dependent on externals than soul-mind, as we may call that which, when more or less left to its own devices, is superconscious rather than merely conscious.  One might say that the Ego is more heavily indebted to sense than the Soul, given its association with the brain rather than with the core of the Self (not to be confused with the heart), which I have for many years tended to identify with the brain stem and, especially, spinal cord of the central nervous system, that repository of all higher sensibility which, if truly left to itself, would cannibalistically self-consume rather than respond to external sense stimuli and a plethora of organic demands, and thus enter into what Christians - and Catholics in particular - would equate with afterlife experience ... at least until it had self-consumed or self-combusted to a degree whereby it could only fade and, ultimately, succumb to quiescence for want of nervous stimulation - the second death, as it were, that follows upon the initial one of organic failure and is tied up, barring cremation, with ongoing decomposition of the corpse.

Finally, I should like to maintain that the distinction between ego-mind and soul-mind is largely axially and therefore ethnically conditioned, and that if some people or peoples are less prone to the former than to the latter, it is because they have not been ethnically conditioned in the same way as those for whom education is a human right and virtual ne plus ultra of respectability, and this despite the discouragement placed upon it through such metaphors as the 'forbidden tree of knowledge' and religious teachings conducive to the life - the higher life in its consciousness - of the Soul. 

As someone born an Irish Catholic, I, too, go along with those teachings, but, living my whole life-long in a Protestant country (England) with Protestant criteria never very far away, I have tended to bovaryize ego - and thus knowledge - towards Truth in relation to what I call superego, which is indubitably pro-superconscious in its 'understanding' of metaphysics and of what metaphysics should - and one day could - be all about if granted the opportunity of, if you will pardon the metaphor, 'coming out' in a stepped-up form commensurate with Social Theocracy and a whole new approach to Eternal Life than that to which the Christian - and in particular Roman Catholic - tradition has been partial, an approach founded on synthetically artificial criteria that would allow the term 'eternity' a longevity way beyond anything subject, in death, to human limitations, and precisely because those limitations would cease to apply as man was systematically 'overcome', as described by me in a variety of previous titles and, indeed, major texts, following 'judgement' and the possibility, thereafter, of 'Kingdom Come', two traditional terms which, for me, imply the utilization of the democratic process to a religiously sovereign end and the implementation of that end, under Social Theocracy, when once a majority mandate for religious sovereignty is forthcoming, without which there can be no such 'kingdom' and no advancement, via the 'resurrection' of the church-hegemonic axis, not to mention, in countries like the Republic of Ireland, the republican 'dead' (to the possibility of Life Eternal), towards the eternal life of the Soul, a life that centres not on organic matter, still less on inorganic matter, but on the psychic freedom of the central nervous system (brain stem and spinal chord) from all that is naturally or organically somatic, and precisely because of the synthetically artificial criteria that will take over from where nature left off the business of advancing life to unprecedented levels of both artificially psychic freedom and artificially somatic binding, the latter of course determined by the experiences of the former.  For in this male-dominated world of a metaphysical hegemony (over pseudo-metachemistry), experience of course precedes - and conditions the nature of - existence. 

Yes, in this male-dominated world of a metaphysical hegemony over pseudo-metachemistry that I envisage (which is contrary to how Sartre, for instance, viewed life from a left-wing and therefore female-dominated perspective), experience or essence precedes - and conditions the nature of - existence in the form of what I have tended, in the past, to call a substance-motivated drive towards communal cyborgization of the religiously sovereign, whether metaphysically hegemonic or pseudo-metachemically-subordinate, lamb or (neutralized) lion and/or wolf, saint or (neutralized) dragon, as you prefer.  For the male reality of psyche preceding and preponderating over soma in a mind-body symbiosis is the only retort to the nature-fuelled female reality of soma preceding and predominating over psyche in the body-mind symbiosis which is still, alas, the prevailing wisdom of contemporary female-dominated state-hegemonic society, as in the WASP-dominated West, where of course not soul-mind but ego-mind, in its contemporary pro-technological guise, is the only mind that the twin female tyrannies of will and spirit allow.





To distinguish, as I believe I have done to some extent before, a metaphysical ratio in free psyche (never mind bound soma) of least heaven and most god from less (in relation to least) heaven and more (in relation to most) god, and this in turn from more (in relation to most) heaven and less (in relation to least) god, and most heaven and least god, as one might distinguish, from our point of view, metaphysics in the cosmos from metaphysics in nature, and that in turn from metaphysics in mankind and metaphysics in cyborgkind (to slightly anticipate the future), or, more specifically, planets like Saturn (cosmos) from winged seedpods (nature), and this in turn from prayer and/or meditation (mankind) and substance entitlement (cyborgkind), the latter of which, corresponding to most heaven and least god, would be the definitive manifestation of metaphysics and therefore the most internalized stage of all.

But although I have said pretty much the same thing before, also allowing for man, in general terms, to approach cosmic metaphysics smokingly and natural metaphysics sexually, I did not distinguish, as I can now, between the heavenly and godly aspects of metaphysical free psyche in terms of the inner experience of Heaven and that experience perceived (by us) from the outside, which is effectively where the concept of God, or godliness, comes into play, since that is no more and no less than a superficial, or external, take on Heaven, not a separate entity that stands apart from Heaven like some kind of person.

Between the Soul and its superconscious self-realization there is no distinction, even though a distinction indubitably exists between the basis of the Soul in the brain stem and spinal cord of the central nervous system and the experiencing, all-too-sentient soul itself, which is superconscious and never more so, I shall contend, than when self-absorbed rather than distracted, via the senses, by external phenomena and even noumena, as in the case, for example, of the stars.

There is also a distinction, touched upon in an earlier entry, between this superconscious and what I have termed superego, which owes more to the brain – and possibly even to the brain stem as that part of the brain closest to the spinal cord – on an intellectually-bovaryized basis than ever it does to the Soul, since it is used to understand metaphysics and to be pro-metaphysical even as it necessarily falls short of metaphysics-proper, in which the Soul’s superconscious experience of itself precludes thought, being pertinent to the ‘peace that surpasses all understanding’.

One should also note, in dropping from metaphysics to physics, that between the Ego and its conscious self-realization there is no appreciable distinction either, even though one indubitably exists between the basis of the Ego in the brain and the thoughts of the Ego itself, which is conscious, and never more so, I shall argue, than when self-absorbed rather than distracted by externals, most of which will register as phenomena rather than noumena to a person centred in the Ego and therefore more disposed to what could be called a corporeal view of life.

Thus no less than feelings are germane to superconsciousness, so thoughts are germane to consciousness, both of which tend, barring bovaryized thoughts (pro-spiritual superego) and bovaryized feelings (pro-intellectual subsoul) to be mutually exclusive, since effectively appertaining to the sensibilities, noumenal and phenomenal, metaphysical and physical, of contrary axes, with correspondingly disparate ethnic implications.

Ego and soul do not inhabit the same person, but only either ego and bovaryized soul (pro-intellectual subsoul) on the one hand, or soul and bovaryized ego (pro-spiritual superego) on the other hand, the former centred in knowledge (with a correlative manifestation of pleasure) and the latter in truth or, rather joy (with a correlative manifestation of truth), so that the distinction is rather akin to economics and religion, form and contentment, a humanistic world and a transcendental otherworld, neither of which are – or ever could be – compatible.





It has been said, and by no less a luminary than Jean-Jacques Rousseau, that ‘man is born free’ … but that, I have to say, without wishing to drag in the rest of the quote, is manifestly untrue.  The newborn child remains umbilically tied to its mother and, even after severance, remains directly dependent on her for several months and even years.  One is not born free; one is born into maternal slavery, or dependence on one’s mother, and only gradually becomes free or, at any rate, freer, eventually going one’s separate way as a young adult individual who may or may not end up ‘in chains’ to a particular woman, having passed through sexual freedom or experimentation en route to familial responsibility and accountability, only to glory in the sight of somebody else – namely one’s offspring – even more enslaved than oneself.





One day the bourgeois intellectuals will grow ashamed of having spoken of the Subconscious without prior reference to the Supersensuous, its freely somatic precondition in metachemistry, which predominates over it in the noumenally objective (absolute) ratio of 3:1.  Until then, they will continue to read and revel in delusion.





I have spoken often enough in the past of the triadic Beyond as not only the stepped-up (resurrected) church-hegemonic axis that would gradually transpire in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty (conceived as the ultimate sovereignty, germane to 'Kingdom Come') in countries with the right kind of axial preconditions traditionally, but as the result, thereafter, of the collapsed state-hegemonic axis and of the need to accommodate ex-Protestants, including Puritans and Anglicans, to middle and bottom tiers of the said Beyond, as though under the ex-Catholics who had initially been saved (pseudo-physical to metaphysics) and counter-damned (chemical to pseudo-metachemistry) to what would effectively be the top tier.

Such a triadic Beyond would therefore become pluralist after people primarily affiliated to the state-hegemonic axis had been accommodated to it in the wake of their ex-Catholic counterparts, and such pluralism, deferential from the bottom up to what leads it at the top, namely metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, would probably remain the triadic norm, with due gender differentiation on each tier, for several decades if not centuries to come, bearing in mind the need for structural stability in the interests of consistency and continuity, even if those on the middle and bottom tiers were necessarily less metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical than their properly saved and counter-damned counterparts 'upstairs', so to speak, on the top tier, and to a degree whereby some physical/pseudo-chemical and even chemical/pseudo-physical elements persisted, in attenuated to transmuted vein, within the overall framework.

But if, over the course of time or, rather, eternity, a progression towards some kind of metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical totalitarianism were to emerge from out of the initial pluralism, in keeping with the general need to step things up and effect a more centro-complexified (de Chardin) resolution to proceedings properly commensurate with the gradual unfolding of evolutionary/counter-devolutionary criteria, then it seems to me that the best, most sensible way of effecting such a totalitarian outcome would be from 'on high', that is, not within the earth-bound - and maybe missile-silo-like - triadic structures of the Social Theocratic Centre itself, however many such 'centres' there would be across the planet (for Social Theocracy has global aspirations in its ideological universality), but from having designed the Space Centre of the potential culmination point of all such evolution/counter-devolution on a more totalitarian basis, so that it would be structured along lines primarily if not exclusively designed to facilitate a metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical culmination-point, together with a built-in administrative aside, or serving capacity, intended to accommodate the servants of the religiously sovereign and to ensure that the latter were properly addressed in their various, gender-conditioned entitlements.

Thus with a more advanced design of the Centre 'on high', it should be possible to transplant by special shuttles each of the gender-segregated tiers of the triadic Beyond up to the one centralized metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical tier structure of the Space Centre, conceiving of the latter as equivalent to Bunyan's 'Celestial City' or to de Chardin's 'Omega Point', the resolution, in short, of all evolutionary/counter-devolutionary progress/counter-regress in 'Kingdom Come', that is, within the overall umbrella of the Social Theocratic Centre.

Hence that which finally made it into space in relation to the ultimate Centre - beyond even Space Mortuaries for those who continued to die in naturalis for want of a sufficiently advanced cyborgization - would not only be more totalitarian than any previous centre structure; it would be appropriate to the noumenal heights of an antithesis, on synthetically artificial terms, to stellar/solar bodies in cosmic space, and to a parallel antithesis, as it were, to planets like Saturn and Venus, which can be equated, vis-a-vis anything metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical, with a rudimentary metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical status, the kind of status that our projected Space Centre (very different to contemporary scientifically-oriented space stations) would signify to an ultimate, unsurpassable degree.

Only then would totalitarianism, ever respectful of the fundamental gender divisions, be fully justifiable and, more to the point, completely desirable from the standpoint of the hegemonic gender, equivalent to the 'lamb' whose peace of mind is guaranteed by the 'wolf' and/or 'lion' that, properly neutralized, is obliged to 'lie down' with him for all eternity, thereby perpetuating the noumenal parameters of time (eternity) and pseudo-space (pseudo-infinity), repetitive time as the mode of time  and spaced space as a subordinate mode of space commensurate with the influence of repetitive time upon itself, making for that parallel with pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics or, to return to an earlier analogy, the neutralized dragon (pseudo-dragon) under the saintly heel of he who, in his divine blessedness, appertains to noumenal subjectivity over noumenal pseudo-objectivity at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at what would be the transcendent apex of the church-hegemonic axis.





I envisage the Space Centre of the Social Theocratic or, rather, Transcendental future as a large mainly two-part structure, the upper and smaller part of which would be designed on an absolute curvilinear basis (circular) and the lower and larger part on an absolute rectilinear basis (square), the former intended for the metaphysically Saved and the latter for the pseudo-metachemically counter-Damned, both of which would be served by the 'administrative aside' (of the Social Theocratic Party and/or Movement leadership and/or members) in such fashion that numerous curvilinear or rectilinear passageways would lead from each of the main aspects of the Centre-proper (church-equivalent) to the surrounding circular or square structures (state-equivalent), depending on the tier being served, and of course from those structures, somewhat akin to halos or rings (in the sense of what surrounds planets like Saturn), back into the Centre-proper, so that the serving leadership could easily go to-and-fro to their respective tier charges, whether metaphysically elect or pseudo-metachemically gender subordinate in order to ensure their religiously-sovereign entitlements were being met and even advanced where some advancement was still possible or desirable.

The surrounding structures to the Centre-proper would be large enough to house the living quarters and relaxational or entertainment areas of the servants of the religiously sovereign, as well as being able to support store rooms and landing bays for shuttle services to and from the Earth.

There could also be smaller curvilinear and rectilinear structures above and below the main components of the Centre-proper that would have a police and/or military aspect in the protection of the Centre, both main and peripheral, church- and state-equivalents, from alien or reactionary aggression, and perhaps even a small superstructure for the overall leader of the Social Theocratic Centre, who would have to co-ordinate policy and procedures.  All such centralized structures, whatever their function, would be joined by vertical columns that included lifts or other means of ascending or descending from one tier and/or structure to another.

Whatever the eventual outcome, this kind of structure which I have termed a Space Centre would be large enough to house all the individual tier structures (top, middle, and bottom of the so-called triadic Beyond), including their respective type of gender differentiation or segregation, of the Earth Centres, as we may call those centres that are developed on the Earth prior to any more advanced Centre set in space, and to house them in such fashion that it signified, for them, a convergence to the Omega Point (de Chardin) of the One, Ultimate Centre, a veritable 'Celestial City' of definitive salvation and counter-damnation of the metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical for all Eternity and pseudo-Infinity, Heaven and pseudo-Devil, free soul and bound will without gender-differentiated end.



Having said all the above, it now occurs to me that what was said roughly corresponds to my composite theocratic/pseudo-autocratic emblem whereby a Y-like supercross stands hegemonic over a contiguously-encircled absolute star termed by me a pseudo-superstar, pretty much in the manner of St George and a neutralized dragon (pseudo-dragon).  The arms that extend around or, more, correctly, to either side of the 'head' of the supercross could well approximate to the living quarters, etc., of the administrative aside, while the band of contiguous encirclement around the 'body' of the pseudo-superstar might just as easily represent the same thing from a standpoint more concerned with pseudo-metachemistry (the pseudo-superstar) than with metaphysics (the supercross).  But in space I should imagine this kind of structural arrangement would proceed on a parallel or horizontal plane rather than vertically, in the manner usually described or implied by this dual-sided concept, so that it would come to resemble a huge multi-sectioned space ship (see diagram above).





Those who foolishly and superficially identify the heart with the Soul are either obliged, accepting that the heart is mortal, to reject any possibility of afterlife experience or, failing to realize the mortality of the heart, persist in identifying it with the Soul even though it fails to meet the criterion of eternity proper to the Soul, irregardless of whether such an ‘eternity’ is more of a permanent condition (of almost cannibalistic self-consuming by the spinal cord in an inner illumination or incandescence) than of indefinite duration due to the inevitability of the ‘petering out’ of the Self, the Soul, the spinal cord, the central nervous system, call it by what name you like, in due process of self-consumption, a process proceeding in tandem with – though eventually overhauled by – the extensive decomposition of one’s mortal remains, so that it could be said that the ‘inner light’ is fated to be smothered or overhauled by the darkness of its own negation.

But if this is the afterlife in naturalis or, rather, super-naturalis, which those fated for burial rather than cremation are more likely to experience, particularly in the case of males, then it still leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of durational eternity, which, as I teach, can only transpire in the event of ‘man’s overcoming’ through substance-motivated (communal) cyborgization – such that, within the context of ‘Kingdom Come’, would preclude death and, hence, the need for birth through reproduction, allowing life to continue indefinitely on a basis parallel to that of what has been described above without risk of its ‘fizzling or petering out’, but with a controlling element that allows it to be switched on and off according to convenience.





Just as the superego tends, in what I like to think of as its brain-stem proximity to the spinal cord of the central nervous system, to be pro-superconscious and thus effectively pro-metaphysical, so the ego, in its brain-centred proximity to the eyes, tends to be pro-supersensuous and thus effectively pro-metachemical, deferring not to soul but to will, not to essence but to appearance, not to truth but to beauty.

With the ego, thoughts are too often conditioned by what is seen rather than by what is felt, and there is no surer way of spotting an egotist than by witnessing the extent to which his thoughts are conditioned by what he sees and, as though to derive a modicum of self-respect from his predilection or, rather, female-dominated predicament, reinterpreted, usually in the most cynically gross and sarcastic fashion, for the benefit of his ego.

But his ego is a sham, with no real independence of external appearances; for it is not only a poor reflection of himself but, being a focal-point for personal selfhood, an obstacle whereby access to the true self, the Soul, is denied, and precisely because it remains beholden – one might even say loyal – to the Will and merely subject to its empirical rule and arbitrary selectivity.

Without the Will to rule it, as when thought is conditioned by what is seen, the ego would collapse into self-loathing through personal knowledge, and quickly cease to have any value.  For the ego, unlike the Soul, is not an end-in-itself, but a means for the Will to rule over what it sees.  The close proximity of the brain to the ego or, rather, the reliance of the ego upon the brain ensures that the ego has no real existence of its own independently of empirical knowledge, but is merely a means whereby such knowledge, initially perceptual, may be conceptually interpreted to the satisfaction of the Will.

The axial link between the ego and the Will is what guarantees that the egotist can never be saved (in the metaphysical sense) but must continue to remain enslaved, despite his pretensions to intellectual independence, to the senses in a kind of Faustian pact with the Devil, not Satan, however, but Devil the Mother, who more corresponds to the Creator-esque ‘First Mover’ than to any ‘fall guy for slag’ (denigration), after the fashion of the proverbial ‘red under the bed’.

The egotist is already damned by subservience to that which, as free will, is undamned (but not on that account saved), but can only be damned when that which is governed by spirit has been delivered from its lowly pseudo-egotistical estate to soul, as from pseudo-physics to metaphysics, and that, correlatively, which is of free spirit has been counter-damned to pseudo-will, as from chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry, thereby depriving the wilfully metachemical and their pseudo-soulful pseudo-metaphysical underdogs of a captive audience for their manifold exemplifications of somatic licence, without which their ‘race is run’, both physically (economically) and metachemically (scientifically), once and for all, with pseudo-chemical damnable consequences for the metachemical and physical counter-saved consequences for the pseudo-metaphysical – at least temporarily and until the possibility of axial transference to church-hegemonic criteria from what is no longer a viable state-hegemonic axial polarity comes ideologically to pass.

Thus and only thus can the lie of Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father be defeated and effectively consigned to the ‘rubbish bin of history’.  Until then, the metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical will continue to rule over not only the physical/pseudo-chemical of their own axis but, indirectly and across the axial divide, the chemical/pseudo-physical, to the detriment of metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry, the detriment, in short, of free soul over bound will or, more correctly (for it only transpires from male hegemonic pressure) bound pseudo-will, the pseudo-will of pseudo-Devil the pseudo-Mother under, as pseudo-space under time at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass on a stepped-up (resurrected) church-hegemonic axis, the free soul of Heaven the Holy Soul, the joyful soul of the superconscious as that which is One with soul, as God is One with Heaven and in no way a separate entity but merely the outer manifestation, so to speak, of Heaven, without which there would no more be any truth (god) than candlelight without a candleflame burning away in self-centred consumption.





The Apparent Doing of the Will in Space.

The Quantitative Giving of the Spirit in Volume.

The Qualitative Taking of the Ego in Mass.

The Essential Being of the Soul in Time.

To contrast the Apparent Doing of Will in the Protonic Heat of Space with the Essential Being of Soul in the Photonic Light of Time, as one would contrast the Noumenal Objectivity of Metachemistry in the Elemental Particle Absolutism of Spatial Space with the Noumenal Subjectivity of Metaphysics in the Elemental Wavicle Absolutism of Repetitive Time.

To contrast the Quantitative Giving of Spirit in the Electronic Motion of Volume with the Qualitative Taking of Ego in the Neutronic Force of Mass, as one would contrast the Phenomenal Objectivity of Chemistry in the Molecular Particle Relativity of Volumetric Volume with the Phenomenal Subjectivity of Physics in the Molecular Wavicle Relativity of Massive Mass.

The pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of the pseudo-Will in pseudo-Space.

The pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of the pseudo-Spirit in pseudo-Volume.

The pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of the pseudo-Ego in pseudo-Mass.

The pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of the pseudo-Soul in pseudo-Time.

To contrast the pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of the pseudo-Will in the pseudo-Protonic pseudo-Heat of pseudo-Space with the pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of the pseudo-Soul in the pseudo-Photonic pseudo-Light of pseudo-Time, as one would contrast the Noumenal pseudo-Objectivity of pseudo-Metachemistry in the Elemental pseudo-Particle Absolutism of Spaced Space with the Noumenal pseudo-Subjectivity of pseudo-Metaphysics in the Elemental pseudo-Wavicle Absolutism of Sequential Time.

To contrast the pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of the pseudo-Spirit in the pseudo-Electronic pseudo-Motion of pseudo-Volume with the pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of the pseudo-Ego in the pseudo-Neutronic pseudo-Force of pseudo-Mass, as one would contrast the Phenomenal pseudo-Objectivity of pseudo-Chemistry in the Molecular pseudo-Particle Relativity of Voluminous Volume with the Phenomenal pseudo-Subjectivity of pseudo-Physics in the Molecular pseudo-Wavicle Relativity of Massed Mass.

With Metachemistry and pseudo-Metaphysics at the north-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, the Apparent Doing of Will in the Protonic Heat of Space is hegemonic over the pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of pseudo-Soul in the pseudo-Photonic pseudo-Light of pseudo-Time, like Vanity over pseudo-Meekness.

With Chemistry and pseudo-Physics at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, the Quantitative Giving of Spirit in the Electronic Motion of Volume is hegemonic over the pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of pseudo-Ego in the pseudo-Neutronic pseudo-Force of pseudo-Mass, like pseudo-Vanity over Meekness.

With Physics and pseudo-Chemistry at the south-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, the Qualitative Taking of Ego in the Neutronic Force of Mass is hegemonic over the pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of pseudo-Spirit in the pseudo-Electronic pseudo-Motion of pseudo-Volume, like pseudo-Righteousness over Justice.

With Metaphysics and pseudo-Metachemistry at the north-east point of the inter-cardinal axial compass, the Essential Being of Soul in the Photonic Light of Time is hegemonic over the pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of pseudo-Will in the pseudo-Protonic pseudo-Heat of pseudo-Space, like Righteousness over pseudo-Justice.





In the Alpha of Metachemistry, Hell is in the Devil as, in positive terms (free soma), Love in Beauty, or Hell the Clear Spirit in Devil the Mother and, in negative terms (bound psyche), Hate in Ugliness, or the Clear Soul of Hell in the Daughter of the Devil, with a 3:1 ratio favouring the positive factor.

In the Omega of Metaphysics, by contrast, God is in Heaven as, in positive terms (free psyche), Truth in Joy, or God the Father in Heaven the Holy Soul and, in negative terms (bound soma), Illusion in Woe, or the Son of God in the Holy Spirit of Heaven, with a 3:1 ratio favouring the positive factor.

Therefore Metachemistry and Metaphysics, the alpha and omega of the noumenal planes of space and time, are as antithetical as it is possible for any two absolutes to be, Hell being in the Devil, whether as Love in Beauty (positive) or as Hate in Ugliness (negative), no less than God being in Heaven, whether as Truth in Joy (positive) or as Illusion in Woe (negative), Hell being no less the inside of the Devil than God the outside of Heaven.

Paradoxically, one conceives of Hell through the Devil, whether as Love through Beauty or as Hate through Ugliness, but perceives Heaven through God, whether as Joy through Truth or as Woe through Illusion.  Nevertheless, Metachemistry is more about the Devil than Hell, Metaphysics, by contrast, more about Heaven than God.

In that respect, Hell is no less a kind of  ‘quantitative’ detraction from the Beautiful Appearance of the Devil (through free will) than God is a kind of ‘qualitative’ detraction from the Joyful Essence of Heaven (through free soul), to take the respective majority ratio factors corresponding, in their positivities, to free soma in the metachemical context and to free psyche in the metaphysical one.

Man’s tendency to personify Heaven through a personal God, or the concept of ‘God as Person’, bespeaks an egotistical shortfall from an accommodation with soul that always leaves religion exposed to idolatrous abuse, as and when the concept of God takes precedence, through the Person, say, of Christ, over Heaven.  Moreover, the crucified Christ is arguably a poor reflection of Heaven, serving merely to illustrate Woe through Illusion.

For Joy through Truth, on the other hand, one must go beyond (transcend) the Crucifixion paradigm of metaphysical bound soma – something Christianity has been reluctant to do in view of its extrapolative dependence upon the Judaic anchor, so to speak, of the Metachemical Creator, wherein Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father precludes all but the negative side of metaphysics (as a kind of straining on the resurrectional leash towards what is metaphysically antithetical to the Creator) by dint of its own Creator-esque association with the Beauty of Metachemical free will and, through that, the Love of Metachemical free spirit which is the Hell that resides within the Devil (Devil the Mother).





The Jews have never been too fond of Christianity, with its reliance upon the Cross.  One cannot blame them, since the Cross was the scourge of their ancestors under Roman rule and it is doubtful that any Jew with the slightest degree of self-respect could ever wish to identify, much less worship, anyone or anything associated with that!

They say that Christ died for the sins of the world, that is, took the sins of the world upon himself in order to save others from them or that others might go free.  But this is nonsense or, at best, a rather grandiose interpretation of the crude reality of the fact that, quite apart from subversive political goings-on, Christ was crucified for being too omega-orientated and even Promethean for the liking of those (always a majority) who are either alpha-stemming bitches or alpha-oriented ‘sons-of-bitches’ and therefore ever more disposed to the female-worshipping Alpha than to the female-denying Omega of things.  Get too anti-heathenistically progressive and there will be any number of people eager, one way or another, to have one crucified – not least in this day and age!

Yes, he died not to save them from ‘sin’, though that is always a concept dear to Christians, but because of their ‘sins’, their alpha-oriented limitations, as anyone would risk doing who goes too much against the ‘common grain’.  On the other hand, the idea of a Messiah saving men from sins is at the core of Christian belief and deserves a degree of respect.  However, it is more and less than just sin, which I identify with pseudo-physical pseudo-bound psyche; it is also from the folly of pseudo-physical pseudo-free soma, neither of which would properly exist (in the 2½:1½ corporeal ratio of psyche to soma) but for the female hegemonic pressure of pseudo-evil, which I equate with chemical free soma, coupled to the pseudo-crime of chemical bound psyche, neither of which (existing in a 2½:1½ corporeal ratio of soma to psyche) have anything to do with sin or folly.  On the contrary, they have to be evaluated on their own terms and treated as a separate issue, one requiring counter-damnation to pseudo-metachemistry by a pseudo-female complement to the metaphysical Saviour or Messiah, a kind of female pseudo-Devil whose responsibility is to oversee the counter-Damnation of the chemical to pseudo-metachemistry in conjunction with the Salvation of the pseudo-physical to Metaphysics by the Messianic individual.  Only thus can a structure arise whereby one has the equivalent of lamb and pseudo-lion and/or wolf (neutralized lion and/or wolf) or, equally, Saint and pseudo-Dragon – the neutralized dragon of pseudo-metachemistry under the saintly heel, so to speak, of a metaphysical hegemony.

Now isn’t all that some step beyond Christianity?



Modern man can split the atom through nuclear fission, but unlike me, or my philosophy, he hasn’t learnt to split such terms as ‘freedom’ and ‘sanity’ from their atomic, virtually androgynous worldly traditions into gender-differentiated categories that permit a contrast, either side of liberal relativism, between, say, ‘outsanity’ and ‘insanity’, or ‘somatic freedom’ and ‘psychic freedom’, the former female and the latter male.

Hitherto people have contrasted sanity with insanity and regarded the latter as equivalent to ‘mad’ or psychologically undesirable and, in some way, anomalous, largely, I suspect, because of the traditional female dominance of society, particularly in the West, which has enabled what I call ‘outsanity’, and identify with somatic (bodily) licence, to be solely identified with sanity, and any departure from this, or alternative to it, to be denigrated with the pejorative epithet ‘insane’.  But, in reality, insanity, as I define it, has long been the male alternative, centred in psyche, to the outsanity of the female disposition, and therefore has long been at variance, to varying degrees, with its female counterpart, even when engaged in what may appear to be ‘outsane’ behaviour.

Much of the behaviour by ‘males’ that could be characterized as ‘outsane’ is actually pseudo-insane, since the pseudo-male counterpart to female outsanity, as in pseudo-physics to chemistry at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass at the phenomenal (corporeal)  foot of what would traditionally be the church-hegemonic axis, or, on noumenal (ethereal) terms, pseudo-metaphysics to metachemistry at the north-west point of said compass at the head of what would traditionally be the state-hegemonic axis.  One might say that the proverbial ‘sonofabitch’, chasing around after a football or what have you on some sports field, is more pseudo-insane than outsane to the extent that the somatic outer, or physical, aspect of the game is compromised by the psychic inner aspect or, in strictly pseudo-male terms, the pseudo-somatic outer aspect by the pseudo-psychic inner aspect in terms of the extent to which somatic behaviour is regulated by a plethora of rules and regulations, coupled, at the most professional level, to tactics and stratagems which owe more to mind or, in this case, pseudo-bound psyche than to pseudo-free soma in the pseudo-bound and pseudo-free aspects of a pseudo-physical and/or pseudo-metaphysical disposition largely due to female hegemonic pressures in chemistry and/or metachemistry, as the axial case may be, which ensure that the pseudo-male mirrors, on opposite ratio terms of soma to psyche, the prevailing female free soma and bound psyche (2½:1½ in phenomenal relativity and 3:1 in noumenal absolutism) of the hegemonic gender, so that his behaviour is largely in consequence of female pressure and not a reflection of his gender disposition, as when left to his own devices, of psyche preceding and preponderating over soma in one of two ratios (relative or absolute), depending on his class integrity and/or axial ethnicity.

Be that as it may, if insanity or, rather, pseudo-insanity is the pseudo-subjective or pseudo-convergent subordinate counterpart of the objectivity and divergence of outsanity, as a female-based freedom, then the converse of this will be the hegemonic sway of insanity over the pseudo-outsanity of a pseudo-objective and pseudo-divergent disposition as germane to either pseudo-chemistry under physics (phenomenal relativity) or pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics (noumenal absolutism), and such a sway, characterized by male-hegemonic criteria centred in subjectivity and convergence, can only result in the somatic subjugation of the female to a pseudo-female subordinate standing in which culture, epitomized by the male, is triumphant over civility, be it the genuine culture and pseudo-civility in metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, respectively, which accord with righteousness and pseudo-justice,  or the pseudo-culture and genuine civility in physics and pseudo-chemistry that accord with pseudo-righteousness and justice, with contrary axial and therefore ethnic implications.

Few would deny that culture and civility, in whichever permutations, are preferable to barbarity and philistinism, likewise in whichever axial permutations.  Yet we live in an age in which the latter are if not all-prevalent or pervasive, then certainly largely prevalent or pervasive and capable of excluding, in all but exceptional contemporary cases (notwithstanding bourgeois anachronisms of a decidedly Western and usually Protestant disposition), a bias towards culture and civility, not least in terms of genuine culture and pseudo-civility, which are the modes of insanity and pseudo-outsanity, subjectivity and pseudo-objectivity, according with the noumenal planes of time and pseudo-space, upon which metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry are the elemental norms equivalent to the lamb and pseudo-lion and/or wolf (neutralized lion and/or wolf) of Biblical note, the Saint and pseudo-Dragon (neutralized dragon) of the structure in which male psychic freedom (insanity) is hegemonic for all Eternity over pseudo-female pseudo-somatic binding (pseudo-outsanity) in the pseudo-Infinity of pseudo-metachemical subjection to the hegemonic triumph of metaphysics.

Truly, for that to transpire the gender atom will have to have been split apart from any worldly androgynous cohesiveness such that accords, in this post-worldly day and age, with a pre-nuclear Western anachronism suited to the mixed congregations of Christian churches but not, assuredly not, to the otherworldly religion of what will hopefully one day be the Superchristian centres of ‘Kingdom Come’.

As an afterthought, let me add this.  Sanity seems to be a liberal concept suited to those who, in mixed curricular fashion, are outsane now and insane later, physical now and mental later, before returning, via some form of physical activity, to outsanity again, and so on, in a perpetual alternation between somatic and psychic behaviour.  Neither overly athletic nor overly sedentary and intellectual, such ‘androgynous’ types can only really prevail in a worldly age or society, when atomic relativism is the norm or, at any rate, mean.  That ceased to be the case when man split the atom, and to this day it remains split or capable of being split, as of course does the atom of sanity into its respective components – outsane over pseudo-insane in chemistry over pseudo-physics at the south-west point of the inter-cardinal axial compass and insane over pseudo-outsane in physics over pseudo-chemistry at the south-east point of said compass, to take but the phenomenal (corporeal) cases alone.  We cannot go back to a compromise way of thinking of these opposite types of freedom, nor should we, since they are, in any case, incompatible.



Just as fiction is sublimated drama, or theatre, the ‘drama’ of the within, the psyche, so philosophy tends to be sublimated poetry, the ‘poetry’ of the within, the psyche, of sensibility.  That partly explains why there is a lot of confusion between drama and fiction on the one hand, and between poetry and philosophy on the other, usually in terms of those disposed to drama giving themselves prosaic airs and those disposed, by contrast, to poetry giving themselves philosophic airs, irrespective of the fact that both dramatists and poets kowtow, from opposite gender standpoints, to free soma from a bound psychic standpoint, a standpoint at variance with the psychic freedoms, again from contrary gender standpoints, of fiction and philosophy.

Put in elemental terms, the dramatist corresponds to either metachemistry (acting) or chemistry (speaking), outsanity of either a noumenal or a phenomenal, an absolute or a relative, kind, whereas the poet’s correspondence is to either pseudo-metaphysics (rhymed stanzas) or pseudo-physics (free verse), pseudo-insanity of either a noumenal or a phenomenal, an absolute or a relative, kind.

All of this contrasts with the correspondence of the philosopher to either metaphysics (aphorisms) or physics (essays), insanity of either a noumenal or a phenomenal, an absolute or a relative, kind, and with the correspondence of the fiction-writer to either pseudo-metachemistry (short stories) or pseudo-chemistry (novels), pseudo-outsanity of either a noumenal or a phenomenal, an absolute or a relative kind.

In axial terms, the phenomenal fiction-writer (novelist) is no less polar to the noumenal dramatist (actor), as pseudo-chemistry to metachemistry, than the phenomenal philosopher or, rather, pseudo-philosopher (essayist) to the noumenal poet or, rather, pseudo-poet (rhymed stanzas), as physics to pseudo-metaphysics on what is the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from north-west to south-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass.

Likewise, the phenomenal poet (free verse) is no less axially polar to the noumenal philosopher (aphorist), as pseudo-physics to metaphysics, than the phenomenal dramatist or, rather, pseudo-dramatist (spoken word) to the noumenal fiction-writer or, rather, pseudo-fiction writer (short prose), as chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry on what is the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate  axis stretching from south-west to north-east points of the inter-cardinal axial compass.

For, when axial relativity is taken into account, the male side, viz. poetry and philosophy, is always more genuine on the church-hegemonic axis than its female counterpart (in drama and fiction, both of which, as noted above, are pseudo), whereas the female side, viz. drama and fiction, is always more genuine on the state-hegemonic axis than its male counterpart (in poetry and philosophy, both of which, as noted above, are pseudo). That tells you a lot about the axial distinctions between the Irish and the British, even if such distinctions are rarely clear-cut, not least for reasons of mixed ethnicity as aspects of contemporary 'open' or 'pluralist' societies.



I have written recently (see 'The Atomic Limitations of Sanity' above) about sanity vis-a-vis pseudo-insanity in metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics and chemistry/pseudo-physics, the former in each pairing female and the latter … pseudo-male, as well as, antithetical to each of these pairs of apparent complementary dichotomies, their seemingly more essential counterparts in metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry and physics/pseudo-chemistry, wherein one has a male/pseudo-female dichotomy between insanity in the one case (that of the hegemonic male elements) and pseudo-outsanity in the other (that of the subordinate pseudo-female elements or, rather, pseudo-elements).

In neither instance, alpha/pseudo-omega or omega/pseudo-alpha, did I identify the prevailing order of ‘sanity’ or the subordinate order of ‘pseudo-sanity’ with madness, because in neither instance, noumenal or phenomenal, ethereal or corporeal, did I believe that there was a logical case for such an identification.

But there is, nonetheless, a place for what could be called the madness of abandoning one’s own gender standpoint by approximating, on reverse ratio terms of soma to psyche (female) or of psyche to soma (male), to the opposite gender’s position, whether in terms, therefore, of an amoral descent from ‘above’, i.e. the hegemonic gender position, or, in consequence of that, an immoral ascent from ‘below’, i.e. the subordinate gender position, which has been identified with a pseudo-male  and/or pseudo-female status, as the axial case may be.

Hence an amoral descent from metachemistry to pseudo-metaphysics or from chemistry to pseudo-physics would be no less ‘mad’, in the aforementioned sense, than an immoral ascent, in consequence of that, from pseudo-metaphysics (via antimetaphysics) to metachemistry and from pseudo-physics (via antiphysics) to chemistry, the net result being an amoral/immoral exception to the general moral/unmoral rule of outsanity/pseudo-insanity which takes the form of either quasi-pseudo-insanity (amoral) or quasi-outsanity (immoral), to the detriment of each gender and, not least, the prevalence of morality.

Likewise, an amoral descent from metaphysics to pseudo-metachemistry and from physics to pseudo-chemistry would be no less ‘mad’, in our gender-twisted sense, than an immoral ascent, in consequence of this, from pseudo-metachemistry (via antimetachemistry) to metaphysics and from pseudo-chemistry (via antichemistry) to physics, the net result once again being an amoral/immoral exception to the general moral/unmoral rule of insanity/pseudo-outsanity which takes the form of either quasi-pseudo-outsanity (amoral) or quasi-insanity (immoral), to the detriment, once more, of each gender and, not least, the prevailing morality.

Therefore madness can and, unfortunately, does exist, but it would have nothing to do with pseudo-insanity, much less insanity, to take but the pseudo-omega and omega ‘male’ alternatives, but solely with amoral and immoral departures from the moral/unmoral norm, which can only have a destabilizing effect on both the hegemonic and the subordinate genders’ standard positions.

Madness, to repeat, is the exception to the general rule, and it is not logically excusable or defensible, especially since its origins lie (amorally) with the hegemonic gender, who will either be abandoning clearness for unholiness in the female case or holiness for unclearness in the case of the male, to speak in general terms rather than on specific axial terms relative to the noumenal and phenomenal alternatives. 

Admittedly, such an amoral abandonment of the hegemonic position by the moral gender will be less mad, granted its predominating (in free soma) or preponderating (in free psyche) positivity in either class or elemental case, than the immoral madness coming up from the unmoral 'below' in reverse ratio terms to what is proper to the 'above', with, in consequence, more negativity, whether on an absolute or a relative ratio basis, than positivity.  But in the end it matters little that the amoral kind of madness is less mad than its immoral counterpart, since, as I have argued in the past, it invites its nemesis in the guise of the immoral retort, and such a nemesis can only be bad for what is moral, whether on female clear or on male holy terms, serving to eclipse its 'sanity', whether outer or inner, with the worst possible kind of madness – that which is quasi-outsane or quasi-insane without being in the least comparable to outsanity and insanity proper, whether noumenal or phenomenal, absolute or relative.



Having recently recently dealt with the issue of 'sanity', conceived as a liberal composite concept, on the basis of a gender division between somatically-dominated outsanity on the one hand, that of metachemical and chemical females, and psychically-dominated insanity on the other hand, that of physical and metaphysical males, with the subordinate gender positions corresponding to pseudo-insanity in the cases of pseudo-metaphysical and pseudo-physical males or, rather, pseudo-males in relation to their metachemical and chemical hegemonic counterparts, and to pseudo-outsanity in the cases of pseudo-chemical and pseudo-metachemical pseudo-females in relation to their physical and metaphysical hegemonic counterparts.

Interestingly the intrusion of madness (see 'What is Madness?' above) as either an amoral descent upon the unmoral position of the subordinate gender or, worse, an immoral ascent, in consequence of such a descent, towards the moral position of the hegemonic gender, though the exception to the general (moral/unmoral) rule, cuts both ways, since such descents and ascents are as possible in the male-dominated contexts of physics/pseudo-chemistry and metaphysics/pseudo-metachemistry as (they are) in the more basic distinctions, characterized by female-hegemonic criteria, of metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics and chemistry/pseudo-physics - a descent from the hegemonic elemental positions being either quasi-'insane' (from metachemistry and chemistry) or quasi-'outsane' (from physics and metaphysics), as they amorally encroach upon the subordinate elemental (pseudo-elemental) positions in either quasi-pseudo-metaphysical or quasi-pseudo-physical terms on the one hand, or in either quasi-pseudo-chemical or quasi-pseudo-metachemical terms on the other hand, thereby pressurizing the subordinate gender into an immoral backlash which takes the forms of either a quasi-metachemical departure (via antimetaphysics) from pseudo-metaphysics or a quasi-chemical departure (via antiphysics) from pseudo-physics on the one hand, that of the subordinate pseudo-males, or either a quasi-physical departure (via antichemistry) from pseudo-chemistry or a quasi-metaphysical departure (via antimetachemistry) from pseudo-metachemistry on the other hand, that of the subordinate pseudo-females, none of which ascending departures will be of any help to the original hegemonic positions, since indicative of worse types of madness than even the amoral varieties, given the preponderance (male) or predominance (female) of negative over positive factors in psyche and soma.

In literary terms - and there are of course literary parallels to all of this - amoral madness takes the forms either of a descent, with females, from drama into poetry, to speak generally, or, in the case of male-hegemonic criteria, a descent from philosophy into prose fiction, thereby inviting the possibility - indeed, virtual inevitability - of an immoral backlash which, in the one case, takes the forms of an ascent from poetry into drama and, in the other case, an ascent from prose fiction into philosophy, each of which, whether the product of pseudo-male (poetic) or of pseudo-female (prosaic) ascending departures from the unmoral positions of poetry and prose respectively, will be madder, by relative (phenomenal) or absolute (noumenal) degrees, than that which can be held amorally responsible for provoking such a backlash to begin with.

Thus the so-called male dramatist, whether genuine (in quasi-metachemistry) or pseudo (in quasi-chemistry) is madder than the so-called female poet, whether pseudo (in quasi-pseudo-metaphysics) or genuine (in quasi-pseudo-physics), given the association of the former options with a preponderating (bound psychic) negativity, and of the latter options with a predominating (in free soma)  positivity characterized by a dramatic input into poetry.  Neither, however, are properly outsane or pseudo-insane, moral or unmoral, as the gender case may be.

Likewise, the female philosopher, whether pseudo (in quasi-physics) or genuine (in quasi-metaphysics), is madder than the male fiction-writer, whether genuine (in quasi-pseudo-chemistry) or pseudo (in quasi-pseudo-metachemistry), given the association of the former options with a predominating (in bound soma) negativity, and of the latter with a preponderating (in free psyche) positivity characterized by a philosophical input into fiction, neither of which, however, are properly insane or pseudo-outsane, moral or unmoral, given the gender differentials which continue to operate even from a standpoint orientated towards literary madness.

Was Shakespeare mad?  Yes, indubitably so, to the extent that he is identified with playwriting at the expense of poetry.  And mad not only amorally, like, say, the novelist Aldous Huxley, who could be accused of abandoning essays for novels, but in relation, one would have to argue, to an immoral ascent from the poetic and properly pseudo-male realm of poetry, pseudo-centred, one can argue, in either pseudo-metaphysics or pseudo-physics, to the female realm of drama, rooted, a plane up in each class or elemental case, in metachemistry and/or chemistry.  So much for Shakespeare!

Therefore if you are to remain 'sane', whether in dramatic outsanity or in philosophic insanity, depending on your gender orientation, you stick to your hegemonic position and do not pressurize the unmoral pseudo-insane or pseudo-outsane, as the correlative axial case may be, into an immoral retort which will make for a worse type of madness on both absolute (noumenal) and relative (phenomenal) terms.  You do not, as a female, abandon drama for poetry, as of metachemistry and/or chemistry for pseudo-metaphysics and/or pseudo-physics, on the one hand, and you most certainly do not, as a male, abandon philosophy for fiction, as of metaphysics and/or physics for pseudo-metachemistry and/or pseudo-chemistry, on the other hand.  For the consequences will be worse for all concerned (everybody and everyone), including the degenerate amoral descenders and effective starters of the rot.

As for me, with my metaphysical and therefore genuine approach to philosophy, I shall endeavour to remain insane but not mad, morally subjective but not amorally quasi-pseudo-objective, morally convergent but not amorally pseudo-divergent, scorning, from my aphoristic vantage-point, a philosophical input into short prose! For why should I do the literary equivalent of exchanging a tapering zipper-suit for a tapering dress, especially since the only logical consequence would be the worse madness of somebody else exchanging a straight dress for a straight zipper-suit or velcro-suit or what have you?  I shall 'stick to my (metaphysical) guns', if you'll pardon the metaphor, and thereby insure, by remaining 'stuck up', as cynics would say, that the pseudo-metachemical pseudo-females are not given any encouragement to abandon short prose-fiction for aphoristic philosophy, or straight dresses for straight zipper-suits, to the gross detriment of my divine insanity which, already compromised by the madness of an amoral descent into fiction, would now have to suffer the final humiliation of having to endure, without censure, any immoral quasi-philosophical ascents from 'below' by mad pseudo-females pseudo-hell-bent on subverting the heavenly realm of metaphysical subjectivity from a pseudo-objective standpoint partial to the sublimated fact of narrative exaggeration within an absolute framework.  That is something I should not wish to be in any degree responsible for!

LONDON 2011 (Revised 2012)



Check out John O'Loughlin's principal website @

for e-scroll and other variants on his literary oeuvre