OPEN AND ENCLOSED AS FREE AND BOUND
The Skull & Crossbones, being X-shaped, is every bit as bad, if not worse, than the nazi swastika. Blackbeard = Hitler.
Schopenhauer was wrong about females being number two of the human kind. Males are.
The Union Jack, national flag of
The Scottish flag, the so-called Cross of St Andrew, is X-like in its bisecting diagonals and therefore reminiscent of the diagonal clash of swords that one would identify with battle and strife, as though an abstraction thereof.
In relation to females, open-toed high heels go with a flounced dress as a metachemical mean; open-toed low heels go with a flounced skirt as a chemical mean; enclosed-toe low heels go with a tight skirt as a pseudo-chemical mean; and enclosed-toe high heels go with a tight dress as a pseudo-metachemical mean.
High heels, whether open or enclosed, alpha or omega, sensual or sensible, summery or wintry, are upper order, or noumenal, ethereal, absolute; low heels, whether open or enclosed, alpha or omega, etc., are lower order, or phenomenal, corporeal, relative.
One fancies that large-breasted females have more of a right to high heels than their small-breasted counterparts. As also to dresses as opposed to skirts.
Open societies, like open-toed heels, are alpha, heathenistic, female-dominated, sensual; enclosed societies, like enclosed-toe heels, are omega, christianistic, male-dominated, sensible.
This is not, however, a distinction between ‘left’ and ‘right’, which is rather more axial in character. ‘Left’ and ‘right’ are not in overall axial polarity in relation to the hegemonic factors; they pertain, above all, to opposite axes.
Extreme Right = Upper Class; Moderate Right = Middle Class; Moderate Left = Lower Class; Extreme Left = Classless.
Hence an upper-class/middle-class polarity, characterizing the hegemonic axial positions, between metachemistry and physics, science and economics, noumenal female and phenomenal male. But a lower-class/classless polarity, again characteristic of the hegemonic axial positions, between chemistry and metaphysics, politics and religion, phenomenal female and noumenal male.
The church-hegemonic axis stretching from the southwest to the northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, being hegemonically political and religious, is illustrative of a polarity between moderate and extreme left-wing positions.
The state-hegemonic axis stretching from the northwest to the southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, being hegemonically scientific and economic, is illustrative of a polarity between extreme and moderate right-wing positions.
In overall axial terms, left-wing societies are more psyche than soma, mind than body; right-wing ones … more soma than psyche, body than mind. This is because females, whether hegemonically or subversively, dominate state-hegemonic and males, by contrast, church-hegemonic societies.
In overall hegemonic terms, the state-hegemonic polarity between science and economics is equivalent to an Extreme Right/Moderate Right polarity between autocracy and plutocracy, with, in subordinate terms, pseudo-religion and pseudo-politics indicative of a pseudo-Extreme Left/pseudo-Moderate Left polarity between pseudo-theocracy (aristocracy) and pseudo-democracy (meritocracy).
In overall hegemonic terms, the church-hegemonic polarity between politics and religion is equivalent to a Moderate Left/Extreme Left polarity between democracy and theocracy, with, in subordinate terms, pseudo-economics and pseudo-science indicative of a pseudo-Moderate Right/pseudo-Extreme Right polarity between pseudo-plutocracy (bureaucracy) and pseudo-autocracy (technocracy).
The polarity between autocratic science and plutocratic economics is indirect, i.e. of a female/male character, as is that between pseudo-theocratic pseudo-religion (pseudo-male) and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics (pseudo-female), whereas the polarity between autocratic science and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics is direct, i.e. of a female/pseudo-female character, as is that between pseudo-theocratic pseudo-religion (pseudo-male) and plutocratic economics (male).
The polarity between democratic politics and theocratic religion is indirect, i.e. of a female/male character, as is that between pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics (pseudo-male) and pseudo-autocratic pseudo-science (pseudo-female), whereas the polarity between democratic politics and pseudo-autocratic pseudo-science is direct, i.e. of a female/pseudo-female character, as is that between pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics (pseudo-male) and theocratic religion (male).
The primary state-hegemonic polarity, being female, is between autocratic science, the Extreme Right, and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics, the pseudo-Moderate Left, whereas the secondary state-hegemonic polarity, being male, is between pseudo-theocratic pseudo-religion, the pseudo-Extreme Left, and plutocratic economics, the Moderate Right.
The primary church-hegemonic polarity, being male, is between pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics, the pseudo-Moderate Right, and theocratic religion, the Extreme Left, whereas the secondary church-hegemonic polarity, being female, is between democratic politics, the Moderate Left, and pseudo-autocratic pseudo-science, the pseudo-Extreme Right.
Science, being metachemical, is more about Doing than Being; religion, being metaphysical, more about Being than Doing; politics, being chemical, is more about Giving than Taking; economics, being physical, more about Taking than Giving.
Pseudo-science, being pseudo-metachemical, is more about Pseudo-Doing than Pseudo-Being; pseudo-religion, being pseudo-metaphysical, more about pseudo-Being than pseudo-Doing; pseudo-politics, being pseudo-chemical, is more about pseudo-Giving than pseudo-Taking; pseudo-economics, being pseudo-physical, more about pseudo-Taking than pseudo-Giving.
Doing prevails over pseudo-Being as metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics, science over pseudo-religion, autocracy over pseudo-theocracy, at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, where females, being unequivocally hegemonic, dominate pseudo-males in primary state-hegemonic terms.
Taking prevails over pseudo-Giving as physics over pseudo-chemistry, economics over pseudo-politics, plutocracy over pseudo-democracy, at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, where males are equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-females but are effectively subverted by pseudo-females to somatic emphasis at the behest of metachemical females in secondary state-hegemonic terms.
Giving prevails over pseudo-Taking as chemistry over pseudo-physics, politics over pseudo-economics, democracy over pseudo-plutocracy, at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, where females are equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-males but are effectively subverted by pseudo-males to psychic emphasis at the behest of metaphysical males in secondary church-hegemonic terms.
Being prevails over pseudo-Doing as metaphysics over pseudo-metachemistry, religion over pseudo-science, theocracy over pseudo-autocracy, at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, where males, being unequivocally hegemonic, dominate pseudo-females in primary church-hegemonic terms.
Open and enclosed are correlative factors at all points of the intercardinal axial compass, though the openness can be somatic (female) or psychic (male) and the enclosedness psychic (male) or female (somatic), depending on the elemental/pseudo-elemental positions.
Hence the somatic openness of noumenal objectivity in metachemistry has to be seen in relation to the psychic enclosedness of noumenal pseudo-subjectivity in pseudo-metaphysics, where bound psyche prevails over free soma in the ratio of 3:1, the converse of the metachemical position.
Hence the somatic openness of phenomenal objectivity in chemistry has to be seen in relation to the psychic enclosedness of phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity in pseudo-physics, where bound psyche prevails over free soma in the ratio of 2½:1½, the converse of the chemical position.
Hence the psychic openness of phenomenal subjectivity in physics has to be seen in relation to the somatic enclosedness of phenomenal pseudo-objectivity in pseudo-chemistry, where bound soma prevails over free psyche in the ratio of 2½:1½, the converse of the physical position.
Hence, finally, the psychic openness of noumenal subjectivity in metaphysics has to be seen in relation to the somatic enclosedness of noumenal pseudo-objectivity in pseudo-metachemistry, where bound soma prevails over free psyche in the ratio of 3:1, the converse of the metaphysical position.
Just as autocracy unequivocally holds dominion over pseudo-theocracy (aristocracy), so the equivocally hegemonic dominance of pseudo-democracy (meritocracy) by plutocracy is subverted to a secondary state-hegemonic position in relation to the primary state-hegemonic polarity between autocratic science and pseudo-democratic pseudo-politics on the female side of the gender divide, as between metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry.
Just as theocracy unequivocally holds dominion over pseudo-autocracy (technocracy), so the equivocally hegemonic dominance of pseudo-plutocracy (bureaucracy) by democracy is subverted to a secondary church-hegemonic position in relation to the primary church-hegemonic polarity between theocratic religion and pseudo-plutocratic pseudo-economics on the male side of the gender divide, as between metaphysics and pseudo-physics.