THE NATURES OF ARISTOCRACY, MERITOCRACY, BUREAUCRACY, AND TECHNOCRACY

Since I am always writing about what I call the intercardinal axial compass these days, I should like to suggest some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-metaphysics under metachemistry at the northwest point of the said compass – namely pseudo-theocracy under autocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called aristocracy.

Likewise some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-chemistry under physics at the southeast point of the said compass – namely pseudo-democracy under plutocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called meritocracy.

Thus what I have tended to identify with state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria would be comprised, in overall terms, of a female polarity between autocracy and meritocracy, and a male polarity between aristocracy and plutocracy, as between metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry in the one case, that of primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, and pseudo-metaphysics and physics in the other case, that of secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria.

As for the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching, by contrast, from the southwest to the northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, I should like to suggest some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-physics under chemistry at the southwest point of the said compass – namely pseudo-plutocracy under democracy, the former of which can – and should – be called bureaucracy.

Likewise some alternative terms for the equivalent to pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics at the northeast point of the said compass – namely pseudo-autocracy under theocracy, the former of which can – and should – be called technocracy.

Thus what I have tended to identify with church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria would be comprised, in overall terms, of a male polarity between bureaucracy and theocracy, and a female polarity between democracy and technocracy, as between pseudo-physics and metaphysics in the one case, that of primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria, and chemistry and pseudo-metachemistry in the other case, that of secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria.

Baudelaire saw woman as a paradoxical cross between a tyrant and a slave – in other words (mine), as a combination of autocrat and democrat, requiring of the subordinate male (pseudo-male) an aristocratic deference towards autocracy and/or a bureaucratic deference towards democracy.  Such deferences would aptly describe the nature, it seems to me, of a ‘sonofabitch’, as one who follows the female lead or, rather, rule in dotted-line clockwise terms.

Be that as it may, there are also what could be called pseudo-slaves and pseudo-tyrants where subordinate female (pseudo-female) positions to a male hegemony are concerned, and I venture to suggest that the pseudo-chemical deference to physics would imply a meritocratic (pseudo-democratic) deference to plutocracy on the pseudo-female’s part, while the pseudo-metachemical deference to metaphysics would imply a technocratic (pseudo-autocratic) deference to theocracy on her part, making each of them akin to what could be called, in keeping with the sentiment of the above, a ‘daughterofabastard’, or one who follows the male rule or, rather, lead in dotted-line counter-clockwise terms.

Advertisement

Leave a Comment

Filed under Philosophy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s