Preview the Centretruths eBook version of THE MYTH OF EQUALITY
Op.
86
THE
MYTH
OF EQUALITY
Cyclic
Philosophy
Copyright
©
2011 John O'Loughlin
______________
CONTENTS
Cycles
1–12
_____________
CYCLE
ONE
1. To conceive, if rather poetically, of
blue-eyed
whites as the flower of the human race, green-eyed whites as its stalk,
and
brown-eyed whites as the roots of this Caucasian plant, as germane, by
and
large, to Europe, and northern Europe in particular.
2. Brown-eyed coloureds, whether Black or
Asian,
could be described, in like vein, as the soil of the human race, while
those
with almond eyes might well be its fire
and/or sun.
3. On the other hand, persons with grey
eyes
could well qualify for an analogy with the sea and thus, in effect,
with water.
4. Be that as it may, to speak of racial
equality with regard to persons of similar eye coloration is one thing;
to
speak of it with regard to persons of dissimilar colours seems to me to
fly in
the face of reality and overlook the obvious - namely, that eye
coloration is
an indication of racial inequality, not the only one, by any means, but
a
significant and vital indication nevertheless!
5. People of mixed race - even within the
broad
spectrum of colours found in the white race - often have mixed eye
coloration,
like greenish blue or bluish green, and so on, while those who are most
racially pure tend to reflect this in the unadulterated or uniform
coloration
of their eyes.
6. Generally it is right and proper that
people of
blue and even green eyes, as of combinations of each, should rise to
the top of
society and have positions of responsibility commensurate with their
racial
natures.
7 A world dominated by brown-eyed
people would
not be particularly high-minded but, on the contrary, too earthy and
mundane
for anything of truly cultural or religious significance to emerge.
8. The Germans,
together with the Irish and Scandinavians, are amongst the most
blue-eyed
peoples in
9. The Third Reich is only fully explicable
on
the basis of a blue-eyed racial highness, largely germane to Germany
and
kindred lands, which felt itself under threat from both internal and
external
races of a largely, if not exclusively, brown-eyed constitution and
duly 'broke
out' of the siege mentality under which it had existed, to wreak havoc
on the
races in question.
10. The Third Reich was not imperialism in the
classic Western or even Eastern models of countries like France,
England,
Spain, and Russia, but, rather, a reaction of racial highness to the
perceived
threat posed by racially lower countries and peoples to its racial and
national
interests.
11. For blue-eyed races will not normally go out
of their way to involve themselves imperialistically with brown-eyed
races
farther afield, but prefer, as in the case
of
12. Nothing is more important to a higher race
than the protection of its gene pool and racial characteristics from
the threat
of pollution and vitiation at the hands of racially lower peoples.
13. There is nothing higher on this planet, nor
has there ever been, than the blue- and even green-eyed peoples who
constitute
what I elsewhere described as the flower of humanity, and from which
the
highest achievements in civilization and culture, but especially
culture, tend
to flow.
14. The world is well populated with brown-eyed
peoples, but those regions which have produced blue and green eyes are
not so
prevalent, nor even as populous overall, and deserve such protection
and
encouragement as they can get, to ensure that higher racial material is
not
snuffed out by the general pattern of things, but can flourish and
spread its
enlightenment to kindred peoples in the interests of cultural progress.
CYCLE
TWO
1. Of course culture and race are two
different
things, even if two sides of the same abstract, or noumenal,
coin
-
a coin on which the heads side, as it
were,
will always be characterized by culture and the tails side by race.
2. But race and
culture
nonetheless complement and even confirm each other, and no higher
culture can
be achieved except on the basis of a racial predisposition in the
peoples
concerned. In this respect, culture
is
quite unlike civilization, which requires not a racial but a generative
precondition or basis, and applies, in any case, to the concrete realm
of the
phenomenal, with particular regard to the planes of volume and mass.
3. The planes of time and space, on the
other
hand, are precisely those on which culture and race have their
principal
thrones, and one can distinguish space from time on the basis of
culture from race,
duly dividing each between beauty and truth, and truth and beauty, as
between
clear and holy manifestations of culture and unholy and unclear
manifestations
of race.
4. The student familiar with my texts will
know
- or should know - that the antipodes of a given spectrum or, rather,
plane
tend to be mutually exclusive, and that movement from race to culture
or from
culture to race, as from sensuality to sensibility, tends to be in the
diagonal
bisecting of such contiguous planes as pertain, as here, either to
space and
time or, down below, to volume and mass.
5. Since one can rise or fall diagonally,
as
from time to space or from space to time, it follows that a diagonal
rise from
the one to the other will be commensurate with progress from race to
culture,
while a diagonal fall from the one to the other will be commensurate,
by
contrast, with a regression from culture to race. For
not
only are race and culture of time and
space, but they are of it in diametrically antithetical ways, as
between beauty
and truth in the case of space, and truth and beauty in the case of
time.
6. The distinction between beauty and truth
is
of course germane to a gender-based dichotomy between appearance and
essence,
will and soul, with the former female and the latter male, since noumenal, or upper-class, females are rooted in
will and noumenal, or upper-class, males,
by contrast, centred in
soul, as, in elemental terms, between fire and air, metachemistry
and metaphysics.
7. Culture is no more exclusively
metaphysical than
space, while race is no more exclusively metachemical
than time. Beautiful culture is simply
the female manifestation of culture and is therefore metachemical,
whereas true culture is its male manifestation, and therefore
metaphysical. True race, on the
other
hand, is simply the male manifestation of race and is therefore
metaphysical,
whereas beautiful race is its female manifestation, which happens to be
metachemical.
8. Hence noumenal
males (divine) can only rise, in keeping with their subjective bias for
truth,
or essence, from time to space, as from true race to true culture,
while noumenal females (diabolic) have no
option but to fall, in
keeping with their objective bias for beauty, or appearance, from space
to
time, as from beautiful culture to beautiful race.
9. To rise from
time to
space is to progress from metaphysical sensuality to metaphysical
sensibility,
as, in organic terms, from the ears to the lungs, and is effectively to
be
saved from racial truth to cultural truth.
To fall, on the other hand, from space to time is to regress
from metachemical sensuality to metachemical
sensibility, as, in organic terms, from the eyes to the heart, and is
effectively to be damned from cultural beauty to racial beauty.
10. Hence the salvation of noumenal
males, or gods, from time to space presupposes the damnation of noumenal females, or devils, from space to time. Those who were 'last' in true race become
'first' in true culture, while those who were 'first' in beautiful
culture
become 'last' in beautiful race. From
being a plane below females in racial truth, males rise diagonally to
being a
plane above them in cultural truth.
Conversely, from being a plane above males in cultural beauty,
females
fall diagonally to being a plane below them in racial beauty.
11. Having dealt briefly with space and time,
culture and race, let us now turn to volume and mass, civilization and
generation, their lower-class, or phenomenal, counterparts.
12. Since one can rise or fall diagonally, as from
mass to volume or from volume to mass, it follows that a diagonal rise
from the
one to the other will be commensurate with progress from generation to
civilization, while a diagonal fall from the one to the other will be
commensurate, by contrast, with a regression from civilization to
generation. For not only are generation
and civilization of mass and volume, but they are of it in
diametrically
antithetical ways, as between strength and knowledge in the case of
volume, and
knowledge and strength in the case of mass.
13. The distinction between strength and knowledge
is, of course, germane to a gender-based dichotomy between quantity and
quality, spirit and ego, with the former female and the latter male,
since
phenomenal, or lower-class, females are rooted in spirit and
phenomenal, or
lower-class, males, by contrast, centred in ego, as, in elemental
terms,
between water and vegetation (earth), chemistry and physics.
14. Civilization is no more exclusively physical
than volume, while generation is no more exclusively chemical than mass. Strong civilization is
simply the female manifestation of civilization and is therefore
chemical,
whereas knowledgeable civilization is its male manifestation, and
therefore
physical. Knowledgeable
generation, on the other hand, is simply the male manifestation of
generation
and is therefore physical, whereas strong generation is its female
manifestation, which happens to be chemical.
15. Hence phenomenal males (masculine) can only
rise, in keeping with their subjective bias for knowledge, or quality,
from
mass to volume, as from knowledgeable generation to knowledgeable
civilization,
while phenomenal females (feminine) have no option but to fall, in
keeping with
their objective bias for strength, or quantity, from volume to mass, as
from
strong civilization to strong generation.
16. To rise from mass
to
volume is to progress from physical sensuality to physical sensibility,
as, in
organic terms, from the phallus to the brain, and is effectively to be
saved from
generative knowledge to civilized knowledge.
To fall, on the other hand, from volume to mass is to regress
from
chemical sensuality to chemical sensibility, as, in organic terms, from
the
tongue to the womb, and is effectively to be damned from civilized
strength to
generative strength.
17. Hence the salvation of phenomenal males, or
men, from mass to volume presupposes the damnation of phenomenal
females, or
women, from volume to mass. Those who
were 'last' in knowledgeable generation become 'first' in knowledgeable
civilization, while those who were 'first' in strong civilization
become 'last'
in strong generation. From being a plane
below females in generative knowledge, males rise diagonally to being a
plane
above them in civilized knowledge. Conversely,
from
being
a plane above males in civilized strength, females fall
diagonally
to being a plane below them in generative strength.
CYCLE
THREE
1. To rise diagonally, as a male, from
folly to
wisdom, unholiness to holiness,
unrighteousness to righteousness,
physical and/or metaphysical sensuality to physical and/or metaphysical
sensibility, sin to grace, whether on the relative terms of phenomenal
subjectivity, as germane to mass-volume, or on the absolute terms of noumenal subjectivity, as germane to time-space,
thereby
being saved from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge and/or
from racial
truth to cultural truth.
2. To fall diagonally, as a female, from
evil to
good, clearness to unclearness, righteousness to unrighteousness,
chemical
and/or metachemical sensuality to chemical
and/or metachemical sensibility, crime to
punishment, whether on
the relative terms of phenomenal objectivity, as germane to
volume-mass, or on
the absolute terms of noumenal
objectivity, as
germane to space-time, thereby being damned from civilized strength to
generative strength and/or from cultural beauty to racial beauty.
3. That which rises diagonally in salvation
does
so from the curse of under-plane subservience of a secondary order of
freedom
(from self) to a primary order of freedom (in not-self), whereas that
which
falls diagonally in damnation does so from the blessing of over-plane
hegemony
to under-plane subservience of a secondary order of binding (in
not-self) to a
primary order of binding (to self).
4. Thus that which, on the male side of the
gender divide, had been secondarily free in sensuality becomes
primarily bound
in sensibility, while that which, on the female side of the said
divide, had
been primarily free in sensuality becomes secondarily bound in
sensibility.
5. For the female is ever a creature in
which
not-self takes precedence over self, the organs of, in particular,
chemistry
and metachemistry over the spinal column
and brain
stem, whereas the male, by contrast, is ever a creature in which self
takes
precedence over not-self, the spinal column and brain stem over the
organs of,
in particular, physics and metaphysics.
6. This is because while the female is
rooted,
through objectivity, in a vacuum, the male is centred, through
subjectivity, in
a plenum. Or, to reverse this, one could
say that it is precisely the fact of the female's being rooted in a
vacuum
which makes for objectivity, or a tendency to diverge (sensuality)
and/or
converge (sensibility) in straight-line fashion, while it is equally
the fact
of the male's being centred in a plenum which makes for subjectivity,
or a
tendency to diverge (sensuality) and/or converge (sensibility) in
curved-line
fashion.
7. Hence freedom associated with a vacuum
is
always primary, while freedom associated with a plenum remains
secondary; the
one having especial connections with the not-self and the other with
the self.
8. Contrariwise, binding associated with a
plenum is always primary, while binding associated with a vacuum
remains secondary;
the one having especial connections with the self and the other with
the
not-self.
9. Thus the female form of freedom is ever
primary and the male form merely secondary, while, conversely, the male
form of
binding is ever primary and the female form merely secondary.
10. Females achieve perfection in primary freedom,
which is immoral in its sensuality, whereas males only achieve
perfection in
primary binding, which is moral in its sensibility.
The one appertains to the righteousness of clearness,
which is ever evil; the other to the righteousness of holiness, which
is ever
wise. Secondarily to each of these, the
unrighteousness of unholiness is ever
foolish, and
the unrighteousness of unclearness ... ever good.
11. Good, therefore, can
only be secondary to evil for a female, whether in the relative context
of
volume-mass or in the absolute context of space-time. For evil is a manifestation of civilized
and/or cultural clearness, and is accordingly blessed with direct
freedom (for
the not-self), whereas good(ness) is a
manifestation
of generative and/or racial unclearness, and is accordingly afflicted
with
indirect binding (of the not-self).
12. Conversely, folly can only be secondary to
wisdom for a male, whether in the relative context of mass-volume or in
the
absolute context of time-space. For folly is a manifestation of generative and/or racial
unholiness, and is accordingly cursed with
secondary
freedom (from the self), whereas wisdom is a manifestation of civilized
and/or
cultural holiness, and is accordingly sanctified by primary binding (to
the
self).
13. Stable civilization and culture complexes do
not ordinarily oscillate too perceptibly between alpha and omega,
sensuality
and sensibility, but tend, notwithstanding minor and incidental
oscillations,
to uphold civilization or culture on a given gender-biased platform, be it female, and sensual, or male, and sensible.
14. Hence the prevalence of civilized and/or
cultured righteousness in relation to clearness tends to preclude the
contrary
prevalence of civilized and/or cultured righteousness in relation to
holiness. Either the female has her way
at the expense, by and large, of the male, as in the West
traditionally, or the
male has his way at the expense, by and large, of the female, as in the
East
traditionally. Regional exceptions to
the rule notwithstanding, stable civilizations and cultures are either clear or holy, not both at once or,
rather, by turns.
15. The existence of cultural clearness, or
beauty, in the West has long tended to preclude the contrary existence,
certainly on anything like an official or institutional level, of
cultural
holiness, or truth; for the West, like much of the East, particularly
the
Middle East, is rooted in both Graeco-Roman
and
Judaic
traditions, and therefore upholds the Biblical concept of a
cosmic First
Mover (Jehovah), as germane to the Old Testament.
16. Ironically, the New Testament parallel to this
is not the Father, but the Risen Virgin, whereby one is more concerned
with
organic supremacy, and hence eyes over ears, than with inorganic
primacy, and
hence stellar over solar bodies in the Cosmos.
Be that as it may, cultural beauty still precludes the official
coming
to pass of cultural truth, and ensures that such truth as does exist or
is
affirmed remains 'beyond the pale' of theocratic or theological
requirement.
17. For the believer in
and devotee of cultural truth, which tends to manifest in the practice,
intermittent or otherwise, of transcendental meditation, has no time
for theocracy,
theology, theosophy, or any other religious tradition rooted in theism. He is atheist, or against theism, to the
extent that what he upholds is alien to a world in which cultural
criteria are
rooted in theocracy, with its organic beauty (Risen Virgin) or
inorganic
ugliness (Jehovah), and in righteous clearness via either the eyes or
the
stellar plane. For him God or, rather,
godliness is not theistic but deistic, not external but internal, not
rooted in
the Cosmos but centred in the self, and, in any case, not metachemical,
like 'first movers' tend to be, but metaphysical, and therefore germane
to air
rather than to fire. He is the Western
outsider par
excellence, for this doctrine of atheism vis-à-vis cosmic
and even universal (organic) theism has long been known and upheld in
the East,
even if only by a noumenal elite.
18. Not altogether surprisingly, the nations which
are most characteristic of the West tend, like Britain and America, to
be the
most free, whether in terms of civilization (
19. Both countries are typified by righteous
clearness, in which female criteria are hegemonic over male criteria,
as
symbolically confirmed by the association of Britannia, 'ruler of the
waves',
with parliamentary Britain, and the Statue of Liberty, whether or not
dubbed
'Liberty Belle', with America, which, though republican, tends to be
more
cultural than civilized in the extent to which freedom is equated with
fire
rather than water, as with regard to the camera-besotted media of film
and the
press rather than the voice-besotted media of radio and theatre.
20. Be that as it may, one could believe that
freedom of speech was more characteristic of civilized Britain, and
freedom of
image, or the camera-besotted press, more characteristic of cultural
America,
but, whatever the case, neither country would strike one as championing
the male
forms of civilization and culture to any great extent, which is why
they are
bastions of secular freedom and the reign, in consequence, of females.
21. But if the West is largely characterized by
freedom, and the East by binding, whether or not on ecclesiastical
terms, is
there not something almost geographically and even geopolitically
inevitable
about this, which makes it difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a
time when
either universal freedom or universal binding will obtain in the world.
22. For if the West is
the opposite of the East, then different they will always remain, even
if the
influence of the one on the other is inescapable, whether in favour of
the
West, as at present, or in favour of the East, should that ever
transpire. Certainly one cannot reasonably
conceive of a
world in which only freedom or only binding obtain, because neither
term nor
reality would make much sense if divorced from the other.
23. Freedom without binding,
or vice versa, is as implausible a concept as left without right, or
day
without night, or female without male. It is unlikely, barring global catastrophe,
that the world will ever be any one thing to the total exclusion of its
opposite. All that is likely to happen,
in the event of increased globalization, is that the West will become
less free
and the East less bound; for the West cannot cease to be the West any
more than
the East can cease being itself. The
division between East and West predisposes one to an acceptance of a
gender
struggle between binding and freedom, male and female life principles;
for
sensibility and sensuality would seem fated to continue the battle of
life as
long as life itself continues in recognizably human form.
CYCLE
FOUR
1. One hears much talk of Western
godlessness
from, not least, Eastern religious fanatics of one persuasion or
another, but
one has to be careful how one interprets the term 'God',
and thus what one understands by religion.
If one means 'God as Creator', in the sense of some cosmic First
Mover
credited by certain ancient texts, including the so-called Christian
Bible,
with the creation of the world and all or most of the creatures in it,
then one
is adhering to a very basic and, to my mind, primitive concept of God
which,
whether or not it has ceased to apply to the West, is only credible, it
seems
to me, in relation to a naturalistic and largely rural background.
2. It may be that the West is comparatively
Godless in terms of adherence to such a primitive and basic notion of
God as
the term 'Creator' evokes, but if that were so - and there are
conflicting
opinions here - is that any great misfortune or shortcoming when
considered not
only in relation to Christian traditions of Christ-worship (wherein,
even with
distinctions between the Old Testament 'Creator', or Jehovah, and the
New
Testament 'Creator', or the Father, the Son is effectively a salvation
from if
not the eternal, then certainly a temporal manifestation of the Father
and
effective cynosure, in Christ, of worship), but, notwithstanding such
traditions, to the sorts of environmental or climatic conditions in
which such
basic notions of God normally flourish.
3. When one lives closer to Nature in rural
or
mountainous lands it stands to reason that some acknowledgement of
either
Nature or that which is deemed responsible for Nature, like a variety
of cosmic
bodies, will be officially upheld and widely practised through
conventional or
traditional religious rites, even if less in terms of Nature-worship
than of
some sublimated extrapolation from Nature and/or the Cosmos which may
or may
not be given anthropomorphic associations.
4. But what of those countries or peoples
which
have moved beyond such primitive conditions and now command vast
reserves of
industrial, technological, scientific, and other know-how, having
acquired a
much more urban orientation in which man-made rather than nature-made
things
abound - can they be expected to relate to naturalistic concepts of
God, and if
not, what is wrong with their more humanistic and socialistic concerns?
5. For it seems that the more developed
countries and peoples become, the more they abandon primitivistic
religion in the interests of a sort of humanistic focus in which things
made by
man take precedence over whatever might have been fashioned by Nature
or some
outside force operating on Nature from the Cosmos.
They are no longer surrounded by Nature to
any appreciable extent, but have a uniquely humanized world to live in
and
develop. Small wonder if traditional
concepts of God or religion fall by the roadside!
6. But humanism,
even
Christian humanism, is hardly the end of the road, nor is its secular
counterpart, which takes a variety of socialistic forms.
For urban civilization provides a bridge, it
seems to me, from the Nature-bound past to a much more interiorized and
even
genuinely religious future, a future in which godliness is truly
within, as one
emerges from the 'black hole', as it were, of industrial development
into a
light which owes little or nothing to the Sun, still less to the
Cosmos, but
much if not everything to the soul and its capacity for inner light, as
revealed through a variety of meditative devotions and chemical
stimulants, not
to mention intellectual and spiritual studies conducted via the use of
personal
computers and such like.
7. Of what relevance is the 'Garden
without' to
a person who has gone within and whose whole lifestyle is aided and
abetted by
environmental and technological transformations in society which, while
rooted
in sensuality, intimate of a sensible alternative and deeper resolution. For city life contrasts with Nature,
nature-in-the-raw, as an environment in which more sensibility is
possible by
dint of the interior parallel to sensibility which living or being
indoors much
of the time inevitably provides.
8. Doubtless the West, and northern Europe
in
particular, owes not a little of its urban and technological
sophistication to
weather conditions which, in their various inclemencies,
conduce
towards
an indoor lifestyle - something which could hardly be said of
much of north Africa and the Middle East, to take but two regional
examples. People do not ordinarily get
as much chance to lounge around in the sunshine in northern Europe as
they do
in some places farther afield, and over
the centuries
a mentality has developed, in conjunction with Christianity, which
places more
emphasis on living indoors than outdoors, so that most indigenous
Europeans
more or less take their sedentary lifestyles under roofs and between
walls for
granted, only venturing out when they have to or as the leisurely
exception to
a general rule.
9. But how inextricably tied to sensibility
this
is, and how it contrasts with those countries and peoples which, for
climatic
as well as environmental reasons, were never given quite as much
incentive to
develop a civilized and urban alternative to Nature but, even with
certain inclemencies, revelled in the
outdoors and in the
sensuality that hot climates entail.
Even now the African or Arab or coloured person in general in
Western
cities is more likely to linger longer outdoors on a fine day than his
European
counterpart. And if he is not more
sensible, he is certainly more sensual, and thus closer to nature, as
they say,
than those of us for whom city life and city lifestyles are the
time-honoured
norm.
10. Of course, the city is not only a vehicle for
furthering sensibility in the extent to which indoor lifestyles
proliferate; it
can and does contain much sensuality, though arguably much less
sensuality than
rural areas or than those countries in which the sun is so much more
prevalent. Sensuality is the basis of
life for even the most sensible of persons, and few if any of us would
be able
to tolerate life without at least some daily contact with the
scaled-down
nature of, for instance, parks, gardens, indoor plants, pets, roadside
trees,
and so on. But this scaled-down and
often transmuted nature is not to be confused with nature-in-the-raw,
or Nature
with a capital N, and no-one in his right, sensible mind would ever
wish to
return to a context closer to Nature in that rural or primitive sense. For he would ultimately risk returning to a
primitive concept of God and mode of religion, a mode rooted in the
notion of
cosmic Creator and requiring worshipful subservience of a degree likely
to
evoke unpleasant political connotations with authoritarian monarchy!
11. No, the city at least prevents any such
retrogressive step for those who are properly germane to it, and to
that extent
it is a guarantor of freedom from theocratic or other authoritarianisms
and
vehicle for enhanced sensibility, to the extent that people respond to
the
indoor summons on a positive note, scorning contact with the great
outdoors on
all but a tangential, or city-conditioned, basis.
12. But there is more than one kind of
sensibility, and the city often tends to reflect this in the different
types of
architectural style which different usages and orientations dictate,
ranging
from the metachemically square to the
metaphysically
round via the chemically rectangular and the physically elliptical, as
from noumenal objectivity to noumenal
subjectivity via phenomenal objectivity and phenomenal subjectivity. Cities can be more one thing than
another,
and so they often tend to be, yet are also capable of being transmuted
not only
in terms of enhanced interiorization, but
of one type
of architectural parallel to sensibility at the expense of or in
preference to
another, depending on the nature of the city and even of the people who
happen
to inhabit it.
13. Cities are not fixed but infinitely
transmutable in their development, and widespread disillusionment with
one type
of architectural bias does not invalidate the possibility of another
but,
rather, portends the likelihood of further change attendant upon a
variety of
ideological and functional preconditions.
Ultimately, we get the city we deserve!
14. But whatever city we live in, the distinction
between raw nature and urban civilization is indubitably one between
sensuality
and sensibility, the outer and the inner, and to that extent the
development of
any higher culture, be it Christian or post-Christian, is premised upon
a
civilized precondition, without which lifestyles will remain heathenistically given to the 'great outdoors'. And so, by a correlative token, will
religion and thus the concept of God.
CYCLE
FIVE
1. I like to think that the American rush
to
urbanize and industrialize and generally develop technology as quickly
and
efficiently as possible owes not a little to the Christian ancestry
which most
Americans inherited from the Old World and which made them especially
determined, in consequence, not to be dwarfed and dominated by Nature
but to
set about rivalling it as vigorously as possible, in the interests of a
sensible retort to the sensuality which even now is so much more
prevalent in
that vast continent than in Europe generally, and Western Europe in
particular.
2. Thus the Americans, especially those of
European descent, were bequeathed a Christian conscience which sought
the rapid
and sophisticated transformation of a continent still beset by
nature-in-the-raw to a degree which had long before ceased to
characterize much
of Western Europe. Even with its
violence and sensuality, latter-day
3. If America now leads the world it is not
because it has or ever returned to nature but, on the contrary,
because, right
from the start, it made war on Nature and brought civilization to a
continent
that had known only barbarism. This,
incidentally, is generally true of imperialism and colonialism
everywhere.
4. Freedom in the democratic and economic
sense
is incompatible with being too close to Nature, since naturalism
correlates
with primitivity not only in religious
terms but also
in political and economic terms. The
struggle against Nature is effectively a struggle for civilization and
the
possibility, in consequence, of enhanced sensibility as confirmed by
cultural
sophistication attendant upon an indoor lifestyle.
5. To be free from religious or other
tyranny is
a mark of any higher civilization, since the tyrant constrains his
subjects to
sensuality, and thus prevents their sensible redemption or
transmutation. He (though especially She)
is something to be
worshipped, and in all worshipful subservience there is a loss of
self-respect
and absence, in greater or lesser degree, of the possibility of
holiness,
which, as a male reality, is intimately, indeed inextricably,
associated with
closeness to self, meaning, needless to say, the brain stem and spinal
column
of what passes, in general parlance, for the central nervous system.
6. But holiness is only one side of a
dual-sided
sensible equation. The other is
unclearness, and this is as much a female reality, whether in
phenomenal or noumenal, lower- or
upper-class, terms, as holiness is
male, given the extent to which females are creatures primarily of the
not-self, especially with regard to the objective organs of metachemical
and chemical sensuality and sensibility, and only secondarily of the
self,
unlike their male counterparts.
7. There can be no holiness for males, in
short,
without a corresponding degree of unclearness for females, who are as
much
damned from the evil righteousness of clearness as sensible males are
saved
from the foolish unrighteousness of unholiness
which,
in sensuality, defers, in fairly worshipful vein, to clearness, pretty
much as
a religious primitive, trapped in racial unholiness,
to
some
cosmic and/or stellar manifestation of cultural clearness.
8. Cultural clearness, which is upheld in
the Jehovahesque Old Testament, is the
principal enemy of and
obstacle to the possibility of cultural holiness, which is beyond the
civilized
level of Christ and thus beyond - and above - prayerful devotion in
what
transpires to being a meditative praxis at once the epitome and
guarantor of
religious sanctity. He who prays rather
than meditates knows nothing of genuine religion, and hence cultural
holiness. He lives the half-wisdom, in
Christ, of civilized holiness, as germane to vegetative sensibility,
the
sensibility of physical rebirth, and is but a lower-class shortfall
from the
airy sensibility, the sensibility of metaphysical rebirth, in which
transcendental meditation has its divine throne. The
man
or, rather, effective god who
meditates through consciousness of his breathing is beyond the scope of
Biblical delusion and Creator-rooted religious primitivity. He scorns such a thing as unworthy of true
enlightenment! For, to him, only the
inner light has any claim on metaphysical holiness, the outer light, no
matter
how clear, being metachemically
antithetical to the
righteousness which is wise and of God in any ultimate sense, ultimate,
that is
to say, in relation to the supreme beingfulness
of a
sensible manifestation of organic supremacy having reference to
metaphysical
rebirth.
9. Thus the true Son, the Son of God who is
metaphysically rather than physically sensible, who is indeed godly
rather than
manly in his upper-class male sensibility, counsels against not only
the Father
of metaphysical sensuality, Who is a secondary Father compared to the
manly
Father of physical sensuality and fulcrum of vegetative sin (in the
phallus),
but against both positive (Risen Virgin) and negative (Jehovah)
manifestations
of metachemical sensuality, since neither
the organic
nor the inorganic mode of cultural clearness can admit of the
possibility or do
anything to advance cultural holiness, least of all in relation to
organic
supremacy, which requires, on the contrary, the complete and utter
repudiation
of all cultural clearness and thus righteous evil, the immoral
righteousness of
sensual 'First Movers' who, in their noumenal
objectivity, are really Devils, not Gods.
10. Freedom from worshipful subservience, and even
enslavement, to cosmic and/or universal 'First Movers' in the cultural
clearness of metachemical sensuality is
one thing;
binding to cosmic or, better, universal (organic) 'Last Movers' (or, better, 'Last Groovers')
in
the
cultural holiness of metaphysical sensibility is quite another, and
for
this to come properly to pass as ultimate salvation for those males who
would
be 'up to it' and entitled to a sensibly transcendental destiny, those
who
relate to metachemical sensuality must be
brought
low, or damned, to metachemical
sensibility in an
unclear deference to holiness, as metaphysically-biased males climb
from the
unrighteousness of metaphysical sensuality in the Father to the
righteousness
of metaphysical sensibility in the Son, as and when they democratically
opt for
salvation from racial unholiness to
cultural holiness
through the Second Coming, and officially pass beyond aural sins to
respiratory
graces.
11. For freedom is assuredly not the end of the
evolutionary or even devolutionary road but, rather, a half-way house
between
other-worship and self-binding, between the primitivity
of false religion and the sublimity of
true religion,
and the sooner those who now have and revel in freedom, whether
political or
otherwise, realize this, the sooner will the possibility of salvation
and/or
damnation (according to gender) from sins and/or crimes of the world
come to
pass, and holy and/or unclear binding become the sensible solution, in
'Kingdom
Come', to the dilemmas of contemporary secular freedom which, despite
their
social benefits, are always vulnerable to the ungodly seductions of
tyrannical
falsehoods, as well as to their own rhetorical aggrandizements.
CYCLE
SIX
1. Returning from general concepts of
culture
and civilization to more particular concepts, it is demonstrably the
case that
race and culture are no less part-and-parcel of the same coin, in this
case noumenal, than generation and
civilization are
part-and-parcel of a phenomenal coin, which is to say, of a coin having
associations, in lower-class vein, with the planes of mass and volume
rather
than with the planes of time and space, their upper-class counterparts.
2. Race and culture, whether sensual and
immoral
or sensible and moral, are only genuinely possible in relation to the noumenal planes of space and time, and
accordingly
presuppose an upper-class bias in which, not strength and knowledge,
but beauty
and truth are the antithetical or antipathetic rivals.
3. Generation and civilization, on the
other
hand, are only genuinely possible in relation to the phenomenal planes
of
volume and mass, and accordingly presuppose a lower-class bias in
which, not
beauty and truth, but strength and knowledge are the antithetical or
antipathetic rivals.
4. Peoples who are extensively
'mongrelized', or
of mixed racial antecedents, do not normally uphold race and culture to
any
appreciable extent but, placing a taboo on racism, racial
consciousness,
desires for racial purity, and so on, reject such realities in the
interests of
generation and civilization, to which they more readily and even
logically
subscribe. Thus they are not generally
known or recognized as a 'culture people' but, on the contrary, as a
'civilized
people', for whom culture is much less genuinely apparent or even
essential.
5. For culture
can be
apparent or essential, evil or wise, beautiful or truthful, and
adherence to
the one, as we have argued, tends to marginalize, if not exclude, the
other. Such is also so, of course, of
civilization, which can be quantitative or qualitative, evil or wise,
strong or
knowledgeable, and, again, adherence to the one tends to marginalize if
not
exclude the other.
6. Evidence shows that while the British
are, by
and large, a generative/civilized people, the Irish, by contrast, are
largely a
racial/cultural people, and that both peoples mostly tend to identify,
in this
day and age, with the sensual manifestations of race/culture on the one
hand,
and of generation/civilization on the other hand, so that freedom
rather than
binding is the more prevalent 'cultural' norm in each 'civilization'.
7. I have identified this tendency, in the
past,
with triangular realities for each people, the British largely given to
an
inverted triangle in which strong civilization, duly divisible between
dispassionate and passionate manifestations, tends to prevail over
knowledgeable generation, like volumetric volume over massive mass, or,
in
political terms, Tories and Labourites over Liberals, and the Irish, by
contrast, largely given to a pyramidal triangle in which beautiful
culture,
aided and abetted by an economic manifestation of beautiful race, tends
to
prevail over true race, pretty much like spatial space and repetitive
time over
sequential time, or, in religious terms, the Risen Virgin and the
Sacred Heart
of the Risen Christ over the Father ... in what strikes this writer as
a sort
of Catholic decadence that not only flies in the face of the phenomenal
sensibility (brain over womb) of Catholic tradition, but testifies to a
noumenal parallel, in space and time, to
the Protestant
reality of Puritans/Dissenters over Anglicans in the mass/volume phenomenality, as it were, of a society more
characterized
by tongue over phallus than by eyes over ears, and thus by heathenistic
than by paganistic criteria of sensual
alignment.
8. Be that as it may, the Irish/British
dichotomy is very much, at this point in time, one in which sensual
manifestations of culture and race compete with sensual manifestations
of
civilization and generation, as freedom has its day on both noumenal
and phenomenal levels of evil and folly.
9. I offer to both peoples the prospect and
indeed possibility, on a Messianic basis, the basis of a paradoxical
election
for religious sovereignty, of deliverance from sensuality to
sensibility, and
thus of salvation and/or damnation, according to gender, from the
triangular
realities of the present to the hierarchic structures of a 'Kingdom' in
which a
sensible manifestation of racial beauty, posterior to that of the
so-called
Risen Christ (in reality a sort of secondary Mother) will serve
sensible manifestations
not only of cultural truth but, lower down the triadic hierarchy, of
civilized
knowledge and generative strength, as mass, volume, and space take
their
eternal place beyond time in the unfolding of a non-triangular
alternative to
the heathenistic and even paganistic
realities and structures of the secular present.
10. For if, as a noumenal
male, you rise diagonally from sensual time to sensible space, as from
racial
truth to cultural truth, you must fall diagonally, as a noumenal
female, from sensual space to sensible time, as from cultural beauty to
racial
beauty, thereby achieving contrary - and moral - orders of culture and
race to
what obtains in the paganistic present.
11. And if as, a phenomenal male, you rise
diagonally from sensual mass to sensible volume, as from generative
knowledge
to civilized knowledge, you must fall diagonally, as a phenomenal
female, from
sensual volume to sensible mass, as from civilized strength to
generative
strength, thereby achieving contrary - and moral - orders of
civilization and
generation to what obtains in the heathenistic
present.
12. Thus if noumenal
males rise, in absolute salvation, from ears to lungs, noumenal
females must fall, in absolute damnation, from eyes to heart, the one
gender
rising from racial truth to cultural truth, and the other gender
falling from
cultural beauty to racial beauty.
13. And if phenomenal
males rise, in relative salvation, from phallus to brain, phenomenal
females
must fall, in relative damnation, from tongue to womb, the one gender
rising
from generative knowledge to civilized knowledge, and the other gender
falling
from civilized strength to generative strength.
14. Either way, salvation is from the folly of
unholy unrighteousness to the wisdom of holy righteousness, whereas
damnation
is from the evil of clear righteousness to the goodness of unclear
unrighteousness, in which morality obtains as a sensible alternative -
and
retort - to sensual immorality.
15. However, females, whether noumenal
or phenomenal, upper-class or lower-class, will not remain resigned to
the
unrighteousness of sensible unclearness for long, if there is
insufficient
wisdom in place to maintain them in goodness as the female counterpart
to male
morality. They will return, soon enough,
to the righteousness of sensual clearness and drag males back and down
to the
immorality of a foolish deference to evil.
16. This inevitably happens when moral endeavours
strive to create or maintain a society built around sensibility, but
with
insufficient incentives for females to remain attached to a sensible
bias; for
moral endeavours are usually male-driven and only to the advantage,
ultimately,
of males.
17. You can officially uphold morality as a
sensible civilized and/or cultural ideal, but you cannot expect people
- least
of all females - to rigorously adhere to it as though Christianity or
equivalent 'reborn' religious dispensations could be adhered to
twenty-four
hours a day seven days a week right through every year.
They can't, and any attempt to force the
issue or create unreasonable expectations is doomed to failure. It plays into the hands of religious
fanaticism, and that is a sure formula for the unleashing of hell,
usually,
though not invariably, in the guise of a scientific backlash, of which
war is
the most prevalent manifestation.
18. Despite the
rhetoric,
there are, unfortunately, no 'holy wars'; all wars are if not grossly
unholy,
then certainly grossly clear, in which folly and evil, though
especially evil,
become the order of the day. Fortunately,
we have recently begun to treat certain acts of war or actions carried
out
under the umbrella of war as criminal and subject to indictment. We have yet to criminalize war itself, though
I am cautiously optimistic that that day, too, will eventually come,
even if it
has to wait until the 'Kingdom' to which I alluded above.
CYCLE
SEVEN
1. The sort of people who subscribe to the
concept of 'holy wars' are often partial to a concept of God which owes
more than
a little to scientific principles and realities, not least of all in
relation
to the Cosmos and any religious extrapolations thereof.
In other words, so much does metachemical
culture and race figure in the minds of
peoples habituated to primitive concepts of God and religious
practices, that
they unwittingly find themselves hyping the martial and omnipotent
significance
of God in consequence of the dubiously divine criteria which apply to
'First
Movers' and 'Creator Gods' anyway, much as though their religious
delusions
played into the hands not only of a scientific subversion of religion
but the
subversion of the concept 'God' by the Devil, so that many of the
qualities
attributed to this primitive deity or, rather, theity
... are in reality less divine than diabolic, given the metachemical
bias of both sensual and sensible manifestations of noumenal
objectivity.
2. This 'first mover' God, whether stellar
or Venusian, sensually metachemical
or sensibly so, is all too capable of being harnessed, whether
metaphorically
or otherwise, to a scientific disposition and to acts that owe less to
godliness than to devilishness, and all because any concept of God
rooted in
the Cosmos and having associations with Creation is vulnerable to
diabolic
subversion in power-centred rhetoric.
3. The very term 'Almighty' applied to God
indicates just how far from understanding, let alone practising,
genuine
godliness the devotees of such a primitive God really are; for, in
reality, any
more genuinely religious concept of God is inseparable not only from
metaphysics, but from a context in which, due to metaphysical reality,
power is
the least of the factors which contribute to the total equation of
divine
procedure.
4. For above power in any correct
realization of
godliness must come glory, form, and, most characteristically of all,
contentment, this latter being the very raison
d'être of the process
whereby, through transcendental meditation, a primary God, identifiable
with
the ego of metaphysical sensibility, utilizes a secondary God,
identifiable
with the will of such a context, in order to glide out via the 'wings'
of a
secondary order of Heaven, identifiable with the spirit of such a
context, to
the inevitability, in self-preservation, of recoil to a primary order
of
Heaven, identifiable with the soul of such a context, the goal and
redemption
of the primary God.
5. Thus, in a certain specifically
metaphysical
sense, and more in relation to sensibility (wisdom) than to sensuality
(folly),
a wise manifestation of God-the-Son utilizes a wise manifestation of
God-the-Father in order to ride-out upon a holy manifestation of
Heaven-the-Spirit before recoiling to self, in self-preservation,
through a
holy manifestation of Heaven-the-Soul, the ultimate raison
d'être of the meditative process in question, and thus of the most
genuinely
religious context.
6. Inner metaphysical self into inner
metaphysical not-self (the lungs) leads the inner metaphysical self to
identify
with the spiritual emanation from that not-self (the breath) up until
that
point where it must recoil, in self-preservation, to self more
profoundly,
which is precisely its soulful manifestation as revealed through the
most
sublimated joy of which the self is capable, and which enables that
which had
been primarily of God to enter a primary Heaven before returning, again
and
again, to its egocentric fulcrum in the Son, as it were, and plunging
anew into
the secondary godliness of the inner metaphysical not-self which, being
of the
will, is germane to the Father in the context in question.
7. But that 'Father', or secondary God, is
of
the nature, in metaphysics, of a fourth-rate order of power, the power
of the
lungs to breathe, and thus guarantor not only of a first-rate order of
contentment for the heavenly self, the inner metaphysical soul, whose
contentment is joyful, but complement to a third-rate order of spirit
in the
breath and associate of a second-rate order of ego in the inner
metaphysical
self, or that aspect of the brain - more specifically the brain stem
and spinal
column - which, bypassing the brain in general, is consciously
committed to the
entire process of transcendental meditation, as centred in the lungs.
8. How far one is here from primitive and
fundamentally false notions of God as 'cosmic Creator', 'First Mover in
the
Cosmos', 'Almighty', and other such terms that owe more to metachemistry,
and hence fire, than ever they do to metaphysics, and hence air, as
well as
more to science than to religion! It
seems that mankind, to use that term in its broadest possible sense,
begins by
investing its religious capacity in science, and only gradually
extricates it,
if at all, from such a rudimentary affiliation to one in which not even
politics and economics can claim ultimate jurisdiction over religion
but only
religion itself, by which time it is almost as though one had grown
beyond
religion, in its various theocratic guises, to that which atheistically
repudiates all such traditions in the interests of its deistic insights
and
self-awareness as the ultimate wisdom and guarantor of soulful
consummation.
9. For, ultimately, what we are talking
about is
the life of the soul, not just of any old soul, be it fourth-rate and
loving (metachemical), third-rate and proud
(chemical), or
second-rate and pleasurable (physical), but that soul which, as the
essence of
life, can only come to light, so to speak, in association with the
essential
element, the element which is neither apparent, quantitative, nor
qualitative
but essential in its hiddenness and withdrawness from the naked eye.
I am alluding, of course, to air, and air it
is which, corresponding to the subnatural,
permits
that which is most genuinely soulful, and hence subconscious, to be,
and
not
simply to be foolishly, as is invariably the case with the
airwaves-utilizing sensuality of aural metaphysics but, in salvation
from such
folly, to be wisely, as the fruit of the metaphysics of
respiratory
sensibility, as it were, in which transcendental meditation has its
holy
throne, and thus the lungs rather than the ears.
10. For being is the nature or, rather,
psyche of heaven (subconscious), and for this ultimate being to
come to
pass there must be the requisite, or metaphysical, modes of doing,
giving, and
taking, as of will, spirit, and ego, or power, glory, and form, in
order to
make possible to the soul its ultimate contentment in the
Being-of-Beings, the
joyful being of the Holy Soul, so to speak, of Heaven.
11. Therefore just as we can speak of 'holy being'
in the soul of the inner metaphysical self, so we can speak of 'wise
taking' in
the ego of that same self, with 'wise doing' in the will of the inner
metaphysical not-self (lungs) and 'holy giving' in the spirit of that
same
not-self (breath) complementing the self as secondary orders of God and
Heaven
to primary orders of God and Heaven, the former of which are there, in
the
context of transcendental meditation, to serve the latter or, more
specifically, to enable the ego of inner metaphysics to achieve
redemption for
itself in the resurrection of self from ego to soul, God-the-Wise-Son
to
Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, and thus achieve its joyful beatitude in the
Being-of-Beings, the Heaven-of-Heavens, and consummation of all
religious
striving.
CYCLE
EIGHT
1. Obviously the Being-of-Beings to which I
refer
above is not for everyone, but only those males who would be capable of
metaphysical sensibility to any appreciable extent, and who are
therefore
already pretty metaphysical in their upper-class disposition, through noumenal subjectivity, for a godly bias, even if
more in
relation, at this point in time, to the foolish godliness of aural
sensuality
than to the wise godliness of respiratory sensibility, which is the
salvation
of the Metaphysical from sin to grace, as from the Eternal Father, a
secondary
order of the Father, to the Eternal Son, a primary order of the Son,
which, as
inner metaphysical ego, has its own complementary order of father, as
described
above.
2. What makes both the Father and the Son
of the
sensual/sensible metaphysical dichotomy in question Eternal is their
affiliation to the noumenal planes of time
(Father)
and space (Son), so that they may be said to contrast, in this respect,
with
the temporal orders of the Father and the Son as germane to the
phenomenal
planes of mass (Father) and volume (Son), neither of whom have any
bearing on
godliness, but only manliness, as befitting their phenomenal natures in
relation to the vegetativeness, so to
speak, of
physics.
3. Thus the Father and the Son of the
sensual/sensible physical dichotomy between, as it were, the phallus
and the
brain are the temporal manifestations of sin and grace, with the former
very
much germane to a primary manifestation of the Father and the latter
no-less
germane to a secondary manifestation of the Son, neither of whom exist
in
relation to Heaven but solely to earth, so that we can differentiate
between
unholy and holy modes of both earthly spirit and soul as we distinguish
physical sensuality from physical sensibility, with complementary
subdivisions
between foolish manifestations of both the Son and the Father on the
one hand,
and wise manifestations of both the Son and the Father on the other
hand, each
pairing of which has reference solely to man, not to God.
4. Thus there is no godliness where physics
is
concerned, neither in the ego-realm of the Son nor in the will-realm of
the
Father, and no heavenliness either, since what exists in relation to
mass and
volume, phallus and brain, does so in connection with the earth.
5. But the
temporal
Father, the vegetative context of the phallus, is very much the per
se
manifestation of the Father and thus of sin, while the temporal Son,
the
vegetative context of the brain, is merely a secondary manifestation of
the
Son, and hence of grace.
6. This Son, corresponding to the First
Coming
(Christ) saves from sin (to grace), but only relatively, in relation to
the
vegetative sensibility of prayer, and thus exists as second-fiddle, so
to
speak, to the temporal Father, whose carnal sinfulness is ever the
fulcrum of
the phenomenal context (physics) in question.
Only through the Eternal Father, the noumenal
Father having more relationship, in organic supremacy, to the ears than
to the
phallus, are Christian - and specifically Catholic - males brought
closer to
metaphysics. But then, paradoxically, in
relation to a secondary order of the Father from whom it is necessary
to be
saved, if one wishes to achieve - unlike with Christ - a primary order
of the
Son, and thus the possibility of a fulcrum in grace through
transcendental meditation.
7. Obviously one can only be saved, in this
way,
through the Second Coming, and hence through the exponent of 'Kingdom
Come',
which is conceived by the Son in question as lying beyond Christendom
in a new
order of society that would require a majority mandate for what its
exponent
calls religious sovereignty, and presumably via a paradoxical kind of
general
election in which it was agreed that, should such a mandate be
forthcoming,
then the electorate concerned would not only have rights in relation to
what
has been called a triadic Beyond, open to Protestants as well as
Catholics, but
be delivered from their political sovereignty and concomitants as from
'crimes
and/or sins of the world' to the Beyond in question.
8. For you cannot be religiously sovereign
and
still have secular sovereignty in terms of political rights and duties,
since
they exist in relation to the world of secular values in which both
crime and
sin are the sensual norms, as confirmed by the triangular structures to
which a
majority of latter-day Catholics and Protestants now relate in their
respective
ways.
9. To be saved from sin to grace you need
also
to damn (females) from crime to punishment, and in achieving
deliverance from
each manifestation of freedom on both noumenal
(Catholic) and phenomenal (Protestant) terms you are effectively opting
for
sensibility at the expense of sensuality, and thus for what has been
called the
triadic Beyond, in which punishment and grace would co-exist as the
sensible
alternatives, in goodness and wisdom, to the crimes and sins, evils and
follies, of the sensual - and secular - present.
10. Thus because political sovereignty is
intimately associated with the secular realities of a sensual bias and
the
objective hegemony (of females), it must be disowned, democratically
and
officially, when and if the time comes for the 'chosen peoples' (as
outlined in
previous texts) to have an option on religious sovereignty, and thus
paradoxically use the democratic process to vote for what alone
guarantees
deliverance, whether in evolutionary or devolutionary terms, from the
criminal
and sinful realities of the present.
11. It would be like trading one sovereignty for
another, and should the paradoxical come to pass, and people actually
vote in
sufficient numbers to guarantee a majority mandate for religious
sovereignty
and the rights appertaining to it in relation to the various types of
sensibility, then 'judgement' would be done and the 'end of the world'
would
accordingly transpire ... as the triadic Beyond and administrative
aside
thereof was duly brought to pass in the form of 'Kingdom Come', that
new and
structurally ultimate order of society in which sensible manifestations
of
mass, volume, and space would be served from the most sensibly devolved
manifestation
of time, and new modes of both the phenomenal and the noumenal
Sons as well as both the phenomenal and noumenal (administrative aside) Mothers
accordingly ensued
in the wake of the official abandonment, by the relevant peoples, of
the Fathers
and Daughters of the sinful and criminal present.
12. Now to have any chance of being saved and/or
damned (according to gender) from the sensual present to a more (though
not
exclusively or fanatically) sensible future, one must be in a position
whereby
such deliverance (for better or worse) is possible, which is to say,
not only
politically sovereign and in a position to use that sovereignty, should
the
paradoxical election which I have equated with 'Judgement' subsequently
transpire, but not hamstrung from rising or falling diagonally through
either
of the phenomenal (mass and volume) or noumenal
(time
and space) planes, according to both gender and denominational
entitlement.
13. In previous texts I have specified the
probability of and desirability for Irish Catholics and Protestants to
opt for
the deliverance in question, and also included their Scots and even
Welsh
counterparts, since it occurred to me that the formation of a new
union, as
between the Celtic or Gaelic countries, was not only desirable from the
standpoint of religion and the bringing to pass of 'Kingdom Come', but
also
desirable from the standpoint of politics and the possibility of Irish
unity
and an end to the divisive and destructive frictions of the schismatic
present. For a new union, premised upon a
federation
of the Gaels, would surely allow a majority of Unionists and
Nationalists to
'save face' on the basis of a compromise between the two traditions
that would
not otherwise be possible, thereby catering, in the long run, to the
interests
of all.
14. I do not wish to drag this text down to
political exegesis or philosophy, since there has been enough
discussion of
this subject in previous texts, and I wish, here, to concentrate on
eligibility
for deliverance of Catholics and Protestants to the triadic Beyond. Obviously, Anglicans, to name but one
category of Protestant, cannot progress to this Beyond if they are
constrained,
as in England, by the Monarch as acting head of the Church and in no
position,
in consequence, to desert the inverted triangle of so-called Protestant
solidarity, of which their place is at the foot, so to speak, of the
triangle
in question, and opt for deliverance, in salvation, from phallus to
brain,
thereby rising diagonally from mass to volume, as from massive
sensuality to
voluminous sensibility, in effectively pro-Catholic vein, with the
corollary of
Nonconformists having to fall diagonally from volume to mass, as from
volumetric volume to massed mass, the tongue to the womb, in pro-Marian
vein.
15. The fact of Anglicans being pegged to the foot
of the inverted triangle of British civilization in this way through
the
reigning monarch who, despite being temporal head of the Established
Church in
England, has a sensibly fundamentalist position, as it were, behind and
above
this triangle due to an association with the Blood Royal and hence, by
implication, the heart, obviously ensures that nothing subversive of
the
structure in question can arise, since there is nowhere for Anglicans
to go
when they are not in a position to be saved from phallus to brain, as
from
sensual physics to sensible physics, and effectively become Roman
Catholic on a
Christic basis, the sort of basis that
requires a
Marian corollary in the womb, and thus would necessitate the damnation
of
Nonconformists from sensual chemistry to sensible chemistry, tongue to
womb, in
due devolutionary fashion.
16. This is not going to happen in England, least
of all in the foreseeable future, which is another reason why, quite
apart from
cultural and racial reasons, I have confined my initial expectations
for
'Kingdom Come' to
17. Be that as it may, there can be no salvation
of Anglicans (or vegetative equivalents) and damnation of
Nonconformists (or
watery equivalents), and hence, when Catholics and others have also
been taken
into account, no triadic Beyond, without sufficient independence of
Anglicans
from monarchic allegiance, and therefore England is not, and at this
point in
time could not, figure in the Messianic blueprint for 'Kingdom Come',
but only
the aforementioned Gaelic countries, with especial emphasis, in
relation to
Northern Ireland, on Ireland and Scotland.
18. Having dealt with the triadic Beyond more
fully in certain previous texts, I shall not further elaborate on it
here,
except to remind the reader that each tier should be subdivided three
ways, not
only to allow for a gender distinction between chemical females and
physical
and/or metaphysical males but, as the latter option would indicate,
between
intellectual and emotional approaches within the overall Social
Transcendentalist ideological context (as described in previous texts)
to
either nonconformism, humanism, or
transcendentalism,
depending on the tier, as applicable to a distinction between ego and
soul as
the male complement to female spirit and, as far as the metachemical
bias of the administrative aside was concerned, to female will.
CYCLE
NINE
1. A society given to the institutional
protection and advancement of sensibility across the elemental
spectrum, so to
speak, of both eternal and temporal options in the above Messianic
fashion
would be one in which the wise righteousness of cultural holiness took
precedence not only over the good unrighteousness of racial
unclearness, like a
noumenal Son over a noumenal
Mother, but also over the wise righteousness of civilized holiness and
the good
unrighteousness of generative unclearness, corresponding to a
phenomenal Son
and a phenomenal Mother, this last-mentioned context, effectively that
of the
womb, no less the per
se manifestation of the Mother than the first-mentioned
context, effectively that of the lungs, is the per se
manifestation of
the Son, and thus of that which offers a graceful fulcrum in
transcendental
meditation.
2. Such a society is beyond anything rooted
in
the evil righteousness of cultural clearness and the foolish
unrighteousness of
racial unholiness, corresponding to noumenal manifestations of the Daughter and the
Father, not
to mention anything rooted in the evil righteousness of civilized
clearness and
the foolish unrighteousness of generative unholiness,
as
germane
to phenomenal manifestations of the Daughter and the Father,
the
last-mentioned context, effectively that of the phallus, being no less
the per
se
manifestation of the Father than the first-mentioned context,
effectively that
of the eyes, is the per se manifestation of the Daughter, and
thus of
that which offers a criminal fulcrum in fundamentalist contemplation.
3. Thus metaphysical salvation from racial unholiness to cultural holiness, as from a
secondary Father
to a primary Son, presupposes metachemical
damnation
from cultural clearness to racial unclearness, as from a primary
Daughter to a
secondary Mother, while physical salvation from generative unholiness
to civilized holiness, as from a primary Father to a secondary Son, presupposes chemical damnation from civilized
clearness to generative unclearness, as from a secondary Daughter to a
primary
Mother.
4. Goodness will not stay long under
wisdom,
whether noumenal or phenomenal, absolute
or relative,
unless wisdom is sufficiently bound in self to oblige goodness to
follow suit,
albeit in relation to constraints upon the objectivity of metachemical
and/or chemical not-self rather than in relation to enhanced
subjectivity of
metaphysical and/or physical self, as germane to what is properly male
in both
divine and masculine contexts.
5. Therefore unless there is a genuine
resolve
for wisdom, or the righteousness of cultural and/or civilized holiness,
the likelihood
of females being pegged to the good unrighteousness of racial and/or
generative
unclearness for very long is pretty slim, bearing in mind their
preference for
the evil righteousness of cultural and/or civilized clearness in the
sensual
hegemonies of metachemistry and chemistry
- the one
over metaphysics and the other over physics.
6. Like it or
not, evil
and folly 'will out' and have their day even in the best of societies,
for we
cannot be exclusively sensible, nor, fanatical exceptions to the rule
notwithstanding, should we try to be so.
Sensuality is everywhere the bedrock of sensibility, and
therefore
something that has to be allowed for and accepted even after you have
officially set-up the institutional guarantors of sensibility and made
morality
your official ideal.
7. Therefore even 'Kingdom Come', should it
democratically come to pass, will have to allow for and accept not
merely the
likelihood but the inevitability of backsliding from the ideal, or
various
sensible ideals, to a more sensual basis, since one cannot fly in the
face of
reality without paying a heavy price.
8. But one can certainly set about
encouraging
sensibility and making it harder for sensuality to prevail to anything
like the
same extent as in so-called open or free societies.
Doubtless one of the most efficacious ways of
doing so, especially where females are concerned, would be to encourage
the
voluntary consumption, within the religious structures of our projected
triadic
Beyond, of certain drugs whose influence was known to be likely to
constrain
objectivity and effectively bottle-up the sorts of freedoms accruing to
a
creature for whom not-self is primary and self secondary, so that
females
became more respectful of male subjectivity and any enhancement of it
in
relation both to intellectual and emotional, cognitive and meditative,
endeavours on the part of males.
9. I have gone into this and kindred
subjects
before, so will not tire either myself or the reader with additional
suggestions at this juncture, but I do not doubt that if a moral lead
and mean
is to persist in the otherworldly context of 'Kingdom Come', it will
require
more than good will on behalf of those taking part, since the reality
of female
moral intransigence and even opposition to prolonged sensibility will
remain a
potent factor to be reckoned with, long after any hypothetical resolve
to
institute a sensible new order had borne tangible fruit.
10. Therefore while one must hold out at least
some hope of a better world to come, as premised upon a moral resolve
to uphold
cultural and civilized holiness over racial and generative unclearness,
one
cannot expect any dramatic change in the overall ratio of sensual to
sensible
factors in the foreseeable future, least of all while human beings
still exist
as human beings rather than in some hypothetical cyborg-to-post-human
transmutation
offering
scope for enhanced sensibility, not to mention while
cosmic energies are still unchallenged by, for instance, what in
certain
earlier texts I was apt to call 'blocking devices', or large filtering
shields
that could be set in space specifically with a view to reducing the
kinds of
incoming energies or rays or whatever that tend to condition humanity
along
lines owing more to the freedoms of sensuality than to the bindings of
sensibility, not to mention more to the negativity of inorganic primacy
than to
the positivity of organic supremacy.
11. Certainly, progressive and radical steps could
be taken to, if you like, subtly change the terms of life.
But they would take time, much time, and are
only likely to materialize, if at all, within an otherworldly context
like
'Kingdom Come', whereby a definite omega-oriented, and hence sensible,
resolve
had become the official and therefore institutional norm.
12. So-called 'open societies', on the other hand,
tend to be all-too-open to the Cosmos and to both religious decadence
and space
exploration conceived within the broadly objective parameters of an
ongoing
external curiosity. They are also given
to freedom in a way which tends to place the emphasis on sensuality
rather than
sensibility, and to uphold, in consequence, culture and civilization on
the
female terms of righteous clearness, to which, willy-nilly, the
unrighteous
follies of racial and generative unholiness
are
obliged to bow, as to a blessed hegemony of not-self freedom of action
for
females over the cursed self-abasement of males.
13. Thus has it long been in the West and not only
the West but much of the East, including the Middle East, as well, and
thus
will it continue to be until such time, if ever, as 'Kingdom Come'
begins to
make democratically-achieved headway into the secular - if not
effectively paganistic and/or heathenistic -
status quo, to the lasting advantage of those who, as males, would
profit
considerably from being saved from the curse of their under-plane
freedom from
self to an over-plane binding to self in which not evil but wise modes
of
culture and civilization prevailed for ever more - indeed, for all
Eternity, in
response to the will of He who proclaims himself Second Coming, and
hence
Son-of-Sons or God-of-Gods.
14. For there is no wise God-the-Son except in
relation to transcendental meditation, and therefore no holy
Heaven-the-Soul
achieved by God-the-Son on the back, as it were, of both the wise
God-the-Father and the holy Heaven-the-Spirit, as germane to the will
of the
lungs to breathe and the out-breath itself within the inner
metaphysical
context of respiratory sensibility. Only
thus does supreme being achieve a heavenly
resolution
in the most consummate joy.
CYCLE
TEN
1. If it is true that in general terms
things
proceed, on the male side of life, from sin to grace, as from the
Father to the
Son, whether in terms of time-space metaphysics or, down below, of
mass-volume
physics, it must also be the case that, relative to each of these
options, they
proceed from a relevant manifestation of Nature to a complementary
manifestation of Psyche, as from sensuality to sensibility, since
sensibility
owes more to psyche than to nature, without, however, excluding the
latter.
2. But as well as this general progression
from,
say, the subnatural to the subconscious
(metaphysics)
or from the natural to the conscious (physics), there must also be a
dichotomy
in each context between Nature and Psyche, sin and grace, since we need
not
doubt that the relationship between the Will and the Spirit on the one
hand,
and between the Ego and the Soul on the other hand, owes not a little
to the
subatomic distinctions which we have already noted (in certain earlier
texts)
between elemental particles and molecular particles in relation to will
and
spirit, power and glory, and between molecular wavicles
and elemental wavicles in relation to ego
and soul,
form and content(ment), in whichever
Element, be it metachemical and arguably
divisible between photons and photinos,
chemical and arguably divisible between electrons
and electrinos, physical and likely to be
divisible
between neutrons and neutrinos, or metaphysical and probably divisible
between
protons and protinos, or something to that
effect.
3. Therefore it seems logical to link both
the
Will and the Spirit, whether in the context of sensuality or
sensibility, with
the sinfulness of Nature, in the male case either natural or subnatural, physical or metaphysical, and both
the Ego and
the Soul, whether in relation once again to folly and unholiness
(sensuality) or to wisdom and holiness (sensibility), with the grace of
Psyche,
in the male case either conscious or subconscious, physical or
metaphysical,
and this in overall keeping with the subatomic distinction between
particles
and wavicles, as alluded to above.
4. In so doing we shall be led to draw a
distinction between a maxi-sinfulness, as it were, of the Will and the
Spirit
in either the natural or the subnatural
manifestations of sensual Nature, and a mini-gracefulness, so to speak,
of the
Ego and the Soul in either the conscious or the subconscious
manifestations of
sensual Psyche, while, contrariwise, drawing a parallel distinction
between the
mini-sinfulness of the Will and the Spirit in either the natural or the
subnatural manifestations of sensible
Nature, and the
maxi-gracefulness of the Ego and the Soul in either the conscious or
the
subconscious manifestations of sensible Psyche.
5. Thus, in sensual metaphysics, we can
distinguish the maxi-sinfulness of God-the-Foolish-Father and
Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit from the mini-gracefulness of
God-the-Foolish-Son and
Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul, whilst, in sensible metaphysics, which is the
salvation
of the godly, we should be able to distinguish the mini-sinfulness of
God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit from the
maxi-gracefulness of
God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul.
6. Likewise, in sensual physics, we can
distinguish the maxi-sinfulness of Man-the-Foolish-Father and
Earth-the-Unholy-Spirit from the mini-gracefulness of
Man-the-Foolish-Son and
Earth-the-Unholy-Soul, whilst, in sensible physics, which is the
salvation of
the manly, we should be able to distinguish the mini-sinfulness of
Man-the-Wise-Father and Earth-the-Holy-Spirit from the
maxi-gracefulness of
Man-the-Wise-Son and Earth-the-Holy-Soul.
7. Therefore grace and holiness are no more
strictly commensurate than sin and unholiness. Holiness is no less a sensible complement to wisdom than unholiness
a sensual complement to folly. The fact
is that, in physics and metaphysics, both the Will and the Spirit are
germane
to Nature, and therefore sinful, whereas both the Ego and the Soul, by
contrast, are germane to Psyche, and therefore graceful.
8. The Spirit here, whether unholy or holy,
sensual or sensible, is no less sinful than the Will: it is simply
sinful in a
different way, with regard to natural and/or subnatural
quantities as opposed to appearances, as relevant to either physical or
metaphysical manifestations of molecular particles and elemental
particles
respectively.
9. The Ego here, whether foolish or wise,
sensual or sensible, is no less graceful than the Soul: it is simply
graceful
in a different way, with regard to conscious and/or subconscious
qualities as
opposed to essences, as relevant to either physical or metaphysical
manifestations of molecular wavicles and
elemental wavicles respectively.
10. But, of course, there will be more sinfulness
in sensuality than in sensibility and, conversely, more gracefulness in
sensibility than in sensuality, which is why I have distinguished
'maxi' from
'mini' manifestations of each, while still accepting that the massive mass of sensual physics will be the one with,
due to its natural Nature, the principal manifestation of sinfulness
for males,
while the spaced space of sensible metaphysics will be that in which,
due to
its subconscious Psyche, the principal manifestation of grace is to be
found.
11. But, either way,
sin
will always attach to the physical and metaphysical not-selves, whether
in will
or spirit, and grace to the physical and metaphysical selves, whether
in ego or
soul. Both the phallus and the brain,
not to mention their spiritual corollaries in sperm and thought, are
sinful
contexts, as are the ears and the lungs, not to mention their spiritual
corollaries in airwaves and breath. Only the self, whether physical or
metaphysical, given primarily to consciousness or primarily to subconsciousness, is worthy of being equated
with grace,
irrespective of whether in relative (phenomenal) or absolute (noumenal) terms, and such grace is inseparable
from the
forgiveness of sin.
CYCLE
ELEVEN
1. What is
strictly male,
and therefore subjective and secondary (to females), appertains to the
natural
and subnatural aspects, in vegetation and
air, of
Nature, and to the conscious and subconscious aspects, in ego and soul,
of
Psyche.
2. What is
strictly
female, and therefore objective and primary (in relation to males),
appertains
to the unnatural and supernatural aspects, in fire and water, of
Nature, and to
the unconscious and superconscious
aspects, in soul
and ego or, rather, in modified soul (id) and ego (superego), of Psyche.
3. Males have a much more developed ego and
soul
in relation to Psyche than females, who rarely rise above third- and
fourth-rate orders of each (see earlier texts), but females have a much
more
developed or, at any rate, prominent will and spirit in relation to
Nature than
males who, by contrast, rarely rise above third- and fourth-rate orders
of each
(as already explained in certain earlier texts).
4. Consequently the genders approach life
from
contrary standpoints, and to evaluate the one gender according to
criteria
(once understood) applicable to the other ... is to fall into one of
the
greatest, and most prevalent, of errors, and an error, alas, of which
contemporary Western society is far from innocent!
5. One cannot even evaluate females in
terms of
sin and grace, folly and unholiness or
wisdom and
holiness in each case, since such subjective attributes apply
principally to
males and only secondarily, if at all, to females.
No, evaluation of females has to be conducted
in terms of crime and punishment, evil and clearness or goodness and
unclearness, with the latter pair very much the sensible alternative to
the
former.
6. Just so, one does not speak of Father
and
Son, still less of Heaven and Earth, in relation to females but, more
properly,
of Daughter and Mother, Hell and Purgatory in respect not of the
subjective
elements of vegetation and air, physics and metaphysics, but of the
objective
elements of fire and water, metachemistry
and
chemistry, which, like females, stem from and appertain to a vacuum as
opposed
to a plenum.
7. Being objective, females do not rise
diagonally between the sensuality and sensibility of noumenal
or phenomenal planes, but fall diagonally in what amounts, for them, to
a
devolutionary regression from sensuality to sensibility, space to time
and/or
volume to mass. Hence they fall, in such
fashion, from the Daughter to the Mother, as from crime to punishment.
8. But just as there is both sin and grace
in
the male dichotomy between not-self and self, Nature and Psyche, so
there is a
comparable distinction between crime and punishment where females are
concerned, since the objective not-self is ever criminal and the
objective
self, whether phenomenal or noumenal, ever
punishing
(of the criminality in question).
9. However, one can note a distinction,
once
again, between a maxi-criminality in the sensual not-self and a mini-punishingness in the sensual self, as between a
mini-criminality in the sensible not-self and a maxi-punishingness
in the sensible self.
10. In so doing, we will be led to draw a
distinction between a maxi-criminality, as it were, of the Will and the
Spirit
in either the unnatural or the supernatural manifestations of sensual
Nature,
and a mini-punishingness, so to speak, of
or, better,
by the Soul and the Ego or, more correctly, by the Id and the Superego
in
either the unconscious or the superconscious
manifestations of sensual Psyche, while, contrariwise, drawing a
parallel
distinction between a mini-criminality of the Will and the Spirit in
either the
unnatural or the supernatural manifestations of sensible Nature, and a
maxi-punishingness by the Id and the
Superego in either the
unconscious or the superconscious
manifestations of
sensible Psyche.
11. Thus, in sensual metachemistry,
we
can
distinguish the maxi-criminality of Devil-the-Evil-Daughter and
Hell-the-Clear-Spirit from the mini-punishingness
of
Devil-the-Evil-Mother and Hell-the-Clear-Id, whilst, in sensible metachemistry, which is the damnation of the
devilish, we
should be able to distinguish the mini-criminality of
Devil-the-Good-Daughter
and Hell-the-Unclear-Spirit from the maxi-punishingness
of Devil-the-Good-Mother and Hell-the-Unclear-Id.
12. Likewise, in sensual chemistry, we can
distinguish the maxi-criminality of Woman-the-Evil-Daughter and
Purgatory-the-Clear-Spirit from the mini-punishingness
of Woman-the-Evil-Mother and Purgatory-the-Clear-Superego, whilst, in
sensible
chemistry, which is the damnation of the womanly, we should be able to
distinguish the mini-criminality of Woman-the-Good-Daughter and
Purgatory-the-Unclear-Spirit from the maxi-punishingness
of Woman-the-Good-Mother and Purgatory-the-Unclear-Superego.
13. Therefore punishment and unclearness are no
more
strictly commensurate than criminality and clearness.
Unclearness is no less a sensible complement
to punishment than clearness a sensual complement
to criminality. The fact is that, in metachemistry and chemistry, both the Will and
the Spirit
are germane to Nature, and therefore criminal, whereas both the Id, as
instinctually modified Soul, and the Superego, as spiritually modified
Ego, are
germane to Psyche, and therefore punishing.
14. The Spirit here, whether clear or unclear,
sensual or sensible, is no less criminal than the Will: it is simply
criminal
in a different way, with regard to unnatural and/or supernatural
quantities as
opposed to appearances, as relevant to either metachemical
or chemical manifestations of molecular particles and elemental
particles
respectively.
15. The Ego (Superego) here, whether evil or good,
sensual or sensible, is no less punishing than the Soul (Id): it is
simply
punishing in a different way, with regard to unconscious and/or superconscious qualities as opposed to essences,
as
relevant to either metachemical or
chemical
manifestations of molecular wavicles and
elemental wavicles respectively.
16. But, of course, there will be more criminality
in sensuality than in sensibility and, conversely, more punishment in
sensibility than in sensuality, which is why I have distinguished
'maxi' from
'mini' manifestations of each, while still accepting that the spatial
space of sensual metachemistry
will be the one with, due to its unnatural Nature, the principal
manifestation
of criminality for females, while the massed mass of sensible chemistry
will be
that in which, due to its superconscious
Psyche, the
principal manifestation of punishment is to be found.
17. But, either way,
crime will always attach to the metachemical
and
chemical not-selves, whether in will or spirit, and punishment to the metachemical and chemical selves, whether in id (instinctualized soul) or superego (spiritualized
ego). Both the eyes and the heart, not to
mention
their spiritual corollaries in sight-light and blood, are criminal
contexts, as
are the tongue and the womb, not to mention their spiritual corollaries
in
saliva and amniotic fluid. Only the
self, whether metachemical or chemical,
given
primarily to unconsciousness or primarily to superconsciousness,
is
worthy
of being equated with punishment, irrespective of whether in
absolute
(noumenal) or relative (phenomenal) terms,
and this,
as we have seen, is inseparable from crime.
CYCLE
TWELVE
1. One thing we can be sure about is that
males
and females are not equal, or equivalent, creatures but organic
opposites on
both noumenal (diabolic and divine) and
phenomenal
(feminine and masculine) planes, since females stem from or operate in
relation
to a vacuum, the objectivity of which necessarily precludes genuine ego
and
soul, while males stem from or operate in relation to a plenum, the
subjectivity of which renders will and spirit transmutably subordinate
to ego
and soul.
2. Hence while the one gender is selflessly
objective and inclined to subordinate self to not-self, or Psyche to
Nature, in
respect of metachemistry and chemistry, or
the
objective elements par
excellence, the other gender is selfishly subjective and
inclined to subordinate not-self to self, Nature to Psyche, in respect
of physics
and metaphysics, or the subjective elements par excellence.
3. The objective predominance of the Will
and
the Spirit with females means that, in both metachemistry
and chemistry, Nature tends to condition Psyche, making less for Soul
and Ego
than for their metachemical or chemical
modifications
in terms of Id and Superego, the one at once more instinctual and the
other
more spiritual.
4. Contrariwise, the subjective
predominance of
the Ego and the Soul with males means that, in both physics and
metaphysics,
Psyche tends to condition Nature, making less for Will and Spirit than
for
their physical and metaphysical modifications in terms of Mind and Subspirit, the one at once less instinctual and
the other
less spiritual.
5. It could be said that, transmuted
exceptions
to the rule notwithstanding, females only achieve a real sense of Ego
and Soul
in relation to males, and that these become aspects of their male
makeup, while
males likewise only achieve a real sense of Will and Spirit in relation
to females,
which then become aspects of their female makeup.
6. However that may be, it is
incontrovertibly
the case that females relate primarily to the Will and the Spirit in
those
unnatural and supernatural contexts which approximate to metachemical
and chemical Nature and only secondarily to the Soul and the Ego, duly
modified
as Id and Superego, in those unconscious and superconscious
contexts which approximate to metachemical
and
chemical Psyche, so that they are forever driven to subordinate self to
not-self in due objective fashion.
7. Likewise, it is incontrovertibly the
case
that males relate primarily to the Ego and the Soul in those natural
and subnatural contexts which approximate
to physical and
metaphysical Nature and only secondarily to the Will and the Spirit,
duly
modified as Mind and Subspirit, in those
conscious
and subconscious contexts which approximate to physical and
metaphysical
Psyche, so that they are forever driven to subordinate not-self to self
in due
subjective fashion.
8. Clearly, a society which treats males
and
females alike, as the same, is going to be in for a lot of
disillusionment and
confusion! For criteria conceived as
relevant by the one gender will largely prove irrelevant to and even
undermining of the other gender, and either an androgynous muddle or
the
disguised tyranny of one gender over the other will ensue, with
unsavoury
consequences!
9. Even the attempt to reduce mankind to
one
class flies in the face of reality and backfires on those foolish or
ignorant
enough to espouse and even, in certain tragic circumstances, to further
a
class-partisan point of view. No more
than criteria applicable to one gender will suffice for both genders,
can
criteria applicable to one class suffice for both classes, whether noumenal or phenomenal, upper (in time and
space) or lower
(in volume and mass). For the reduction
of society to one class, say the lower class, is likely to deprive
mankind of
beauty and truth in the interests of strength and knowledge, whether or
not these
are then hyped out of all proportion to their true worth, while the
reduction
of society to one gender, say the female gender, can deprive mankind of
a moral
lead, and thus the possibility of holiness on both civilized and,
especially,
cultural terms.
10. In reality, the division of mankind between
two genders and two classes ensures that the full gamut of elemental
reality is
accounted for and that not only generation and civilization but, of
higher
significance still, race and culture are granted due recognition
whether in
sensuality or, preferably, in sensibility, where, as I have attempted
to
demonstrate, civilization and culture would be wise, and generation and
race
good, and therefore germane to a morally-oriented society in which
truth and
knowledge were characterized by holiness, and race and generation by
unclearness, as females deferred to males in acknowledgement of a
greater
binding than that to which they were subject (in due operation of a
damned good
predicament and moral paradox) - the binding, in other words, of a
saved wise
elevation in which self-enhancement was the sensible - and righteous -
order of
the day.
11. For only through wisdom can those who are
capable of genuine ego in civilized knowledge and genuine soul in
cultural
truth constrain those who are incapable of both manliness and godliness
to the
goodness of generative strength in the superego and of racial beauty in
the id.
12. The absence of such constraints is - and
always will be - testimony to a wont of true wisdom; for things will
revert to
a context in which Nature has the better of Psyche and evil and folly
accordingly freely prevail under the secular, not to mention paganistic or heathenistic,
banners
of
sensual culture/race and/or civilization/generation, with the clear
righteous dominating the unholy unrighteous from the blessed
advantage-point of
objective freedom.
13. Such is, in effect, the nature of modern
reality, and if there is to be any prospect of a less evil and foolish
and even
more good and wise outcome to historical development, then judgement
will need
to be done and those who are now effectively blessed or cursed with
sensual
freedom be saved or damned, according to gender (both literal and
denominational, in response to a majority mandate for religious
sovereignty),
to the sensible bindings of a triadic Beyond and administrative aside
in
'Kingdom Come'.
14. For there is no other way forward, and no
other way, ultimately, in which the sanctity of the individual, but the
male
individual above all, can be both protected and maintained in the face
of those
collectivistic or socialistic moral aberrations which stem from a wont
of both
ego and, especially, soul, in due female vein, and banner forth the
false
doctrines of cultural, racial, social, and sexual equality under the
scientific
and political audacities of secular freedom, to the detriment of all
that is
wise and holy, as well as to the detriment, in female terms, of all
that is
good and unclear.
15. Only when the myth of equality has been
consigned to the rubbish heap of history will the inequalitarian
truth of 'Kingdom Come' actually stand a chance of coming to pass, to
the
lasting advantage of mankind, and not only of mankind with a masculine
emphasis, as embodied in the concept of a sinful fulcrum, but, in a
more
comprehensive manner of speaking, of womankind, devilkind,
and
especially
godkind, with the possibility
of
corresponding 'afterlife' experiences according with the nature or,
rather,
psychic nature of the various types of gender and/or class-based self,
from metachemical and chemical to physical
and metaphysical,
beautiful and strong to knowledgeable and true, with the inevitable
psychic
corollaries of love, pride, pleasure, and joy.
LONDON
2001
(Revised 2011)
