COLLECTIVISM AND INDIVIDUALISM
The tendency of female objectivity, rooted in the divergent vacuum of an elemental and molecular particle free soma, is towards collectivism and, hence, unity of social groupings or relations, of which the family unit is the bedrock; the tendency, by contrast, of male subjectivity, centred in the convergent plenum of a molecular and elemental wavicle free psyche is, by contrast, towards individualism and, hence, unity of moral purpose, of which religious conscience is the essence.
Unity of social purpose, which addresses society from a somatic standpoint, rests on the State; unity of moral purpose, which addresses society from a psychic standpoint, rests on the Church.
To contrast the noumenal collectivism (supercollectivism) of metachemical females with the noumenal pseudo-individualism (pseudo-superindividualism) of pseudo-metaphysical males at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, which is the apex of the state-hegemonic axis.
To contrast the phenomenal individualism or, rather, individuality (relative as against absolute) of physical males with the phenomenal pseudo-collectivity of pseudo-chemical females at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, which is the base of the state-hegemonic axis.
To contrast the phenomenal collectivism or, rather, collectivity (relative as against absolute) of chemical females with the phenomenal pseudo-individuality of pseudo-physical males at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, which is the base of the church-hegemonic axis.
To contrast the noumenal individualism (superindividualism) of metaphysical males with the noumenal pseudo-collectivism (pseudo-supercollectivism) of pseudo-metachemical females at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, which is the apex of the church-hegemonic axis.
The noumenal collectivism of metachemical females is in direct opposition to the phenomenal pseudo-collectivity of pseudo-chemical females, whilst the noumenal pseudo-individualism of pseudo-metaphysical males is in direct opposition to the phenomenal individuality of physical males on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from northwest to southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass.
The phenomenal collectivity of chemical females is in direct opposition to the noumenal pseudo-collectivism of pseudo-metachemical females, whilst the phenomenal pseudo-individuality of pseudo-physical males is in direct opposition to the noumenal individualism of metaphysical males on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching from southwest to northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass.
A country dominated, in overall axial terms, by females, like Britain, will be collectivistic and, hence, state-hegemonic, even unto a secular degree.
A country dominated, in overall axial terms, by males, like Eire, will be individualistic and, hence, church-hegemonic, even unto an ecclesiastical degree.
The test of a true or genuine male is not whether and how he conforms to society, which all men must do to greater or lesser extents, but to what extent he can develop, to speak in general terms, a Christ-like individuality, even at the risk of Golgotha- or Calvary-like consequences from his endorsement of a psychic as opposed to somatic ‘take’ on society.
My ideal society, combining a hegemonic noumenal individualism (superindividualism) with a subordinate noumenal pseudo-collectivism (supercollectivism), would be of the nature of ‘Kingdom Come’ in its juxtaposition of metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical elements, of an elemental-wavicle psychic individualism (God in Heaven) and a pseudo-elemental-particle somatic pseudo-collectivism (the pseudo-Hell of the pseudo-Devil).
Even if substance-motivated communal cyborgization were to apply to both elemental contexts, it would not apply to them on anything like the same terms, but on terms reflecting the gender distinction between a psychic-oriented individualism and a somatic-oriented pseudo-collectivism, the plenumous convergence and pseudo-vacuous pseudo-divergence of a subjective/pseudo-objective noumenal dichotomy.
Ultimately, God is the superindividuality (of superconscious self-awareness) accruing to a heavenly superindividualism, the truthful acknowledgement of joy, whereas his pseudo-female counterpart, the pseudo-metachemical subordinate of a metaphysical hegemony, is the pseudo-supercollectivity (of supersensuous self-denial) accruing to a pseudo-diabolic pseudo-supercollectivism, the pseudo-hateful corollary of pseudo-ugliness.