1. Anyone who has followed the evolution of my thinking thus far would be aware that I have developed a concept of dialectical interaction in the explanation of the historical process, in relation to the development of civilization, which differs quite substantially from, say, Hegel or Marx, those, in many respects, forerunners of my own philosophical development in this regard. For it is not simply the case that thesis plus antithesis equals synthesis, or that a consequence of the interaction of thesis with antithesis is a sort of synthetic fusion which yet transcends the dialectical struggle whether in terms of idealism, as with Hegel, or materialism, as with Marx, but, rather, in contrast to any such simplistic deduction, that something corresponding to a thesis subsequently engenders an antithesis which becomes the starting point for or catalyst of a new thesis which exists in a synthetic relationship to the preceding antithesis.
2. I have described this process in terms of an action leading to a reaction which in turn becomes the subject of an attraction which, as the basis of a new action, subsequently engenders another reaction, and so on, in a dialectical process which involves both progression and regression, centro-complexification and de-centralization, evolution and devolution, in relation to either positive or negative stages of civilized development.
3. We may, however, equate the action with a thesis, the reaction with an antithesis, and the attraction with a synthesis, and thus arrive at a process of dialectical interaction which explains, more fully and, I believe, credibly than either Hegelian or Marxian dialectics, the historical process, as bearing upon the development of civilization, as from an alpha point in the past to a hypothetical omega point in the future.
4. For I have contended that civilization begins positively, with birth, and concludes positively, with birth, albeit on diametrically antithetical terms, while in between come a series of alternations between death and birth which constitute intermediate manifestations of negative and positive development.
5. Furthermore the distinction between positivity and negativity isn't necessarily commensurate with progress on the one hand and regress on the other, nor is reaction to an action, the antithetical retort to a thesis, necessarily negative and/or regressive. For what determines whether something is progressive or regressive is not its affiliation with positivity or negativity, birth or death, but whether it conforms to centro-complexification in relation to de-centralization, evolution in relation to devolution, in which case it is progressive, or whether, on the contrary, it conforms to de-centralization in relation to centralization, devolution in relation to evolution, in which case, quite obviously, it will be regressive.
6. Let us look into this matter in more detail. We began, you may recall, with the contention that civilization began liberally, in de-centralized vein, and subsequently embraced a centralizing tendency commensurate with totalitarianism, as though in a distinction between Hinduism and Judaism, polytheism and monotheism. I would call this early civilization pagan in character, because it has more to do with free soma than with either bound psyche, bound soma, or free psyche; more to do, in other words, with the freedom of Devil the Mother conceived as that which most corresponds to free soma within civilized contexts, or societies, that are more cosmic than naturalistic or humanistic or cyborgistic, and which consequently tend to orientate their religious devotions, their worship, towards the most dominant and characteristic elements of the Cosmos, which happen to be stellar bodies.
7. Be that as it may, any distinction between liberalism and totalitarianism, polytheism and monotheism, in relation to somatic freedom of a broadly metachemical order, the order most affiliated to stellar bodies in the Cosmos, will have reference not only to positivity, the positivity of a stage of civilization corresponding to the birth of Devil the Mother, to worship of Devil the Mother hyped as God, but once that distinction is understood to embrace both thesis and antithesis, action and reaction, in relation to somatic freedom of a metachemical order, also to a progression from the liberal version of paganism to its totalitarian version, as indeed from Hinduism to Judaism, commensurate with a shift, where applicable, from cosmic polytheism to cosmic monotheism, such that enables us to infer a progression, correlatively, from de-centralization to centralization and, indeed, to interpret such a progression in terms of centro-complexification in respect of Devil the Mother.
8. Thus pagan civilization presents us with a positive stage of civilization divisible into two phases, the active phase which is liberal in its cosmic polytheism, and the reactive phase which is totalitarian in its cosmic monotheism, the latter of which signifies a progression over the former as somatic freedom proceeds from stellar bodies in general to one stellar body in particular, the focus of Creator for Judaic and, subsequently, Christian civilizations or, more correctly, stages of civilization.
9. Polytheistic thesis plus monotheistic antithesis does not, however, equal a pantheistic synthesis, at least not in relation to what already exists, but only in terms of a negative attraction to the progressive reaction to a positive action, the negativity of which takes the totalitarian form of the death of Devil the Mother or, more correctly, the death of the (paganistic) worship via sacrifice to Devil the Mother as the coming of Christianity, specifically in terms of its inceptive manifestation in Catholicism, establishes what can be regarded as a synthetic context whereby like backs away from like, in this case the totalitarianism of monotheism, albeit on the negative terms alluded to above, so that one may speak of the overlap between Judaism and Roman Catholic Christianity as constituting a synthetic attraction involving both the preceding antithetic reaction and the ensuing thetic action, the former both progressive and positive, the latter negative, since the death of Devil the Mother must ever contrast negatively with the actual worshipful birth and, in some sense, life of Devil the Mother conceived as characteristically pagan.
10. Christianity, on the other hand, is precisely that which is contrary to or against anything pagan, and therefore the death of the Son of Devil the Mother or, more correctly, of the earthly and effectively pantheistic embodiment of Devil the Mother constitutes an altogether new stage of civilization in which the Crucifixion comes to symbolize the death of pagan sacrifice to Devil the Mother (hyped as God) as Devil the Mother gave Her Son to be sacrificed in such fashion that mankind, albeit not yet fully human, could partake of the Eucharistic paradox of Her Son's self-sacrifice instead, thereby ceasing to be pagan and becoming what we would regard as Christian. Even the 'Virgin Birth' makes a certain amount of theological sense in relation to Devil the Mother, to the fact that there is nothing anterior to Devil the Mother, least of all in the Cosmos, that could be held responsible for impregnating Her, since not only is space anterior to time, as, lower down the hierarchy of planes, volume would be anterior to mass, but the stellar plane is anterior to the solar one, as the lunar plane to the terrestrial one, and therefore even the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother, the so-called 'Mother of God', can be regarded as being extrapolated out from a primal status in such manner that the concept of a virgin birth remains theologically credible.
11. But if the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother is no 'Mother of God', then neither is the Son of Devil the Mother commensurate with 'God the Son' or 'the Son of God', but simply that which, issuing from Devil the Mother, made it possible for people, who became known as Christians, to partake of His own 'body and blood' in Eucharistic rejection of pagan sacrifice, or sacrifice of animal or other somatic matter to Devil the Mother, since His sacrifice on the Cross had the effect of allowing civilization to advance a stage further than paganism as it effectively turned its back on Devil the Mother through worship of Her Son, albeit Devil the Mother was still hyped as 'God' and the Son of Devil the Mother still regarded, somewhat illogically and paradoxically, as the 'Son of God'.
12. The above fact continued to be the case even when this totalitarian thesis of Christian negativity came up against a regressive reaction in the guise of the Reformation, and the ensuing schism within Christianity that led to a distinction between the totalitarian version of the death of (pagan worship of) Devil the Mother and its liberal version, this latter, broadly identified as Protestant, itself subject to subsequent denominational splinterings and divisions, whether in terms of Puritanism against Anglicanism, for example, or indeed of subsequent rifts and splinterings within Puritanism itself.
13. However that may be, Christianity remains broadly negative in its worship of the Crucified, Whose sacrifice put an end to pagan positivity and thus to the taking for granted of somatic freedom, His body nailed to the Cross in a graphic paradigm of somatic binding, a binding that, in rejecting pagan freedom, inevitably paves the way for greater emphasis, albeit within a limited context prescribed by both Catholic and Protestant structures of Christian worship, on free psyche, regarded as salvation. But the development from Roman Catholicism to Protestantism, however one conceives of the latter, was certainly symptomatic of a regressive reaction to a negative thesis, one leading, as noted, from totalitarian centralization in respect of a pantheistic order of monotheism to a sort of liberal or pluralistic de-centralization in respect of a pantheistic order of polytheism or, rather, polytheistic order of pantheism in which Christ Himself became fragmented along multi-denominational lines broadly corresponding not only to the Protestant schism between Anglicanism and Puritanism but, more generally, to the ensuing denominational sub-divisions within Puritanism itself, of which Quakers, Baptists, Methodists, Unitarians, Presbyterians, Calvinists, and Seventh Day Adventists are only a selection.
14. But if the second stage of civilization is broadly negative, then what ensues with the coming of humanism in synthetic attraction with the liberal phase of the death of (pagan worship of) Devil the Mother, is altogether more positive in character, a birth and not a death, the birth, more particularly, of man, and thus of a new emphasis on mankind and mankind's ability to take care of itself and sort out its own problems, whether with or without 'God's' help. Thus a new synthesis is established and remains discernible in which the liberal version of the birth of man backs off the liberal version of the death of Devil the Mother, a positive action backing off a regressive reaction which paves the way, in due humanistic course, for a progressive reaction to this action, which of course takes the form of the totalitarian version of the birth of man, call it social democracy after liberal democracy or communism after parliamentary liberalism or even proletarian humanism after bourgeois humanism, as the greatest happiness of the greater number is developed to its logical conclusion along broadly Marxist lines.
15. Were social democracy the end of the evolutionary line of civilization's advance, history would already have reached its culmination, and we would now live in a communist world. Such, of course, was not to be the case, for even the totalitarian version of the birth of man, being a phase of the third stage of civilization, became subject, in due historical course, to a negative synthetic attraction in the guise of the totalitarian version of the death of man, which, having more to do with worship of the machine and of machine culture than of mankind's self-worship along broadly political lines, can be equated with fascism, that arch-rival to communism which owes not a little to Hegelian dialectics and to state-worship of a markedly different kind, a kind effectively more economic than political, and dedicated to the furtherance of national self-interest at the expense of internationalism, including the so-called internationalism of Marxism-Leninism which, for a totalitarian version of the birth of man, must rank somewhat below bourgeois liberalism in terms of international endeavour and appeal, not least in respect of empire-building.
16. Be that as it may, the more avowedly nationalistic form of totalitarianism that emerged with fascism, while it might oppose social democratic totalitarianism, soon found itself up against a regressive reaction in terms of the liberal version of the death of man that, hailing principally from America, duly made a major contribution to the demise of economic totalitarianism in the so-called corporate state as it sought not only to supplant fascism but, in conjunction with what had survived of the liberal version of the birth of man, principally in respect of Great Britain, to squeeze out totalitarian competition wherever it raised its anachronistic head, whether on positive or negative terms, and to further, in conjunction with countries like Britain, a world safe for liberalism, for secular pluralism, for economic internationalism, which is not only distinct from economic nationalism, but from political nationalism, including the Bolshevik variety, as well!
17. Not altogether surprisingly, political internationalism and economic internationalism, the two ends of the humanistic spectrum, have been able to work together to defeat humanistic totalitarianism, whether that totalitarianism took a positive reactionary turn, as in the case of communism, or a negative actionary turn, so to speak, as in the case of fascism, discarding for a moment fascism's own synthetic status in the negative attraction with communism which spanned the humanistic divide between the birth of man and the death of man, politics and economics, as civilization, besotted by the machine, entered its fourth stage of development, and did so via arguably the worst war in the history of mankind.
18. But now that both communism and fascism are no more, or at least no more than peripheral to the mainstream thrust of civilization, and liberalism stands triumphant over the world like a pluralistic colossus bestriding both the political and economic forms of mankind's internationalism, the time is fast approaching when a new synthesis will emerge, when civilization will enter its fifth and final stage, as a positive attraction to economic liberalism's regressive reaction to totalitarian economics signals the dawn of the liberal birth of God the Father, of the coming of 'the Kingdom' under the auspices of Messianic leadership, broadly identifiable with the Second Coming, in which a pluralistic manifestation of what has been termed Social Theocracy, aiming at a triadic Beyond and administrative aside to the said Beyond, utilizes liberal democracy for purposes of encouraging the electorates of certain already-specified countries to vote for religious sovereignty and thus move beyond humanism, whether in respect of its birth or its death, but especially in relation to its more contemporary manifestation, towards that transcendentalism which will be properly commensurate with God the Father, and thus with a divine leadership of society to a self-transcending end.
19. Therefore just as totalitarian corporatism, or fascism, opposed totalitarian socialism, or communism, from a contrary humanistic standpoint, so must liberal centrism, or social theocracy, offer mankind an alternative to liberal corporatism, the non-fascist corporatism of the present age, in order that man may be overcome and superseded, where applicable and where possible, by God the Father, civilization attaining to its omega-oriented goal along pluralistic lines, relative to the triadic Beyond, which can only become subject to a progressive reaction as a more totalitarian orientation in respect of centrism brings civilization to its Omega Point, in complete contrast to the liberalism, and therefore polytheistic pluralism, of its alpha-most inception.
20. For it is in God's nature or, rather, nurture to raise that which is lower to the heights of noumenal sensibility, and in due course whatever appertained, in the triadic Beyond, to phenomenal sensibility would have to be raised towards the noumenal heights, where a virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry, God the Father and the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, coupled, in bound soma, to the Son of God and Antidevil the Antimother, will seek their respective psychic redemptions in Heaven the Holy Soul and the Unclear Soul of Antihell, though not without recourse, in bound soma, to the Holy Spirit of Heaven and Antihell the Unclear Spirit, so that truth may know joy via the truthful approach to beauty and the joyful approach to love of its own bound (metaphysical) soma, and the beautiful approach to truth know the loving approach to joy via the beauty and love of its own bound (antimetachemical) soma.
21. The outcome of civilization, and therefore of the historical and indeed dialectical process, is therefore no longer in doubt! That which, as the liberal manifestation of centrism, will constitute a positively synthetic attraction vis-à-vis liberal corporatism will, as a new thesis to a fresh stage of civilization, become subject, in due course, to a progressive reaction in the form of the totalitarian version of the birth of God the Father which will bring centrism to a properly social theocratic head, a head which would have been there all along thanks to the top tier of and administrative aside to the triadic Beyond, but which will gradually overcome the body of its own liberal pluralism and elevate 'the phenomenally sensible' to positions of noumenal sensibility, so that, as civilization draws towards its space-centre omega point, there will be nothing but noumenal sensibility in respect of both metaphysics and antimetachemistry remaining, and therefore nothing to contest the ethereal abstraction and anticoncretion of Eternal Life.
22. For God the Father, coupled in antimetachemical terms, to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, will not die, as men die and even as Devil the Mother and her Antison of Antigod 'fall guy' can be made to die, or at least be rejected, in Christian fashion, but live-on in cyborgistic transcendence of mankind for ever and ever, never being subject to a negative synthetic attraction in the hypothetical guise of a totalitarian version of the death of God which would entail the likelihood if not inevitability of a regressive reaction in due liberal vein, and for the simple reason that the death of God would be a contradiction in terms, a patent absurdity, given the fact or, rather, truth that God is the one being that doesn't die but is commensurate with Eternal Life, and never more so than in relation to the coming per se manifestation of Divinity in cyborgization, which would overhaul all previous manifestations of Divinity, of metaphysical sensibility, whether in mankind, in nature, or in the Cosmos, the latter being the context where God the Father is least evolved, least psychically free, and therefore most under the shadow of Devil the Mother, of the most devolved, and therefore somatically free, manifestation of metachemical sensuality, as already defined in relation to the stellar bodies of spatial space.
23. Nothing could be less desirable or indeed feasible than the illogical concept of the death of God the Father; for not only would it contradict the eternal essence of godhead, of genuine godliness as germane to metaphysical sensibility, but could lead, if you will permit me to persist with this line for the sake of argument, to the even greater absurdity of a cyclical recurrence in which Devil the Mother came back around again, the liberal version of that backing off, in positively synthetic attraction, from the liberal version of the death of God, with the likelihood that everything else would have to come back around again in due course, the death of Devil the Mother, the birth of man, the death of man, etc., in a futile and altogether insane repetition of what had already happened before, as described above in relation to the historical process.
24. No, let us not delude or deceive ourselves with insane Nietzschean notions like the 'death of God' or 'eternal recurrence' or whatever! If the East has a tendency to think in cyclical terms, whether in relation to the doctrine of reincarnation or to some kind of 'eternal recurrence', let us remember that globalization is more than both the East and the West regarded either separately or together, being a transcendence of both which, while taking elements from each, develops a whole new structure of and perspective on life, in which the rectilinear and the curvilinear not only no longer exist in effective cultural isolation from each other but, in coming together, support and sustain each other on an altogether transcendent footing, the curvilinear stabilized, as it were, by the rectilinear in such fashion that the idealistic emphasis of the former is prevented from succumbing to a cyclical recurrence of other and lesser matters, but held to a stable position commensurate with the Omega Point.
25. And this stable position will not only allow transcendentalism to have its divine way, its metaphysical sensibility, but preclude any possibility of a death-like paradox from subverting Eternal Life and reducing it to a forerunner of the return of Devil the Mother on a wheel of suffering which would bring everything one had already lived through and got away from back around again to no positive avail! Thanks to the utilization of technology in relation to the cyborgization of life to an eternal end, there will be no cyclical recurrence, and therefore no prospect of God the Father having to make way, in insane course, for Devil the Mother, Who, in Her evil nature, her metachemically free soma, would start the whole process of devolution and evolution off all over again, with painfully predictable consequences!