Is patriarchy inextricably linked with civilization

Modern civilization and its five basic conditions - from the perspective of the alchemy thesis *

Modern civilization as a whole In contrast to their glorification as the best of all possible, which promises progress, development, democracy and human rights for all, must be described as the “civilization of alchemists” or “alchemical war system” or first as “capitalist patriarchy”. This civilization is literally about to destroy the world and is in a state of failure. We are currently experiencing it as a “crisis” (Werlhof 2012).

In this civilization, which represents the high point of the historical development of the patriarchy so far, it is "idealiter" from the beginning about the successive realization of a The overthrow of previous civilizational orders, indeed the entire natural order as such. This goal can be characterized as "patriarchal" because it describes a new order previously unknown in history and is increasingly being pursued in practice, which in the end should have realized the ideal of a "pater arché", namely a continuous "at the beginning a father." ". The beginning, understood as the beginning of everything, the born as well as the made or manufactured, is supposed to have freed itself from all previous beginning, which is a maternal - mater arché - or natural - mother nature - or culturally assumes it. Because it works in patriarchy as one utopian project not a supplement to the previous creation i. w. S., but about its in principle complete abolition and simultaneous replacement by an allegedly better male counter-"creation". The concrete utopia of creating a purely “fatherly” world beyond mothers, nature and previous culture or civilization, insofar as it is not patriarchal, is therefore that of a literally “patriarchal” civilization throughout.

When we talk about patriarchy, then we are not talking about a lewd assertion of women's rights and an insulted willingness to participate by those who are excluded. Quite the opposite is the case, as the “participation” of women in and in patriarchy would only perfect this.

Rather, it is about a term of patriarchy, which means an upheaval or upheaval as well as the successive transformation of everything that has existed, thought, wanted and felt outside of the patriarchy and their reversal or reversal into their opposite. This opposite can be characterized as a way of thinking, wanting, feeling and acting that is no longer based on what is actually found and its cyclical becoming, being and passing away. Rather, it is now about the “creation” of a being “purified”, abstracted, independent and initially only “thinkable”, that is, one that has so far only been imagined as a “beyond” of this world. This new, supposedly better, higher and more divine afterlife is supposed to become the only and eternal, “paradisiacal” reality through the method of “alchemy”, namely the destruction, transformation and, in the end, complete replacement of the real world by a “great work” . Alchemy is the "process" with which the "In the beginning the mothers" is to be transformed into a "In the beginning the fathers".

This new way of thinking, feeling and acting, oriented towards an alleged possibility and threatening reality in a hostile manner, arises with the emergence of patriarchates and develops with them. It is a historical processthat gradually spreads, goes faster or slower, experiences setbacks and detours and sometimes produces very different forms of civilization.

This process does not begin “evolutionarily”, i.e. in the sense of continuous further development, but with one historical break in the shape of the origin of the war (Dieckvoss 2003). For about 6000 years warlike developments and conquests have been observed (Southeast Europe, Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, China, India, Greece and the Roman Empire, then the European colonization of the world and the formation of the modern world system, today a threatening one "New world order").

With the war as a destructive transformation method, the following establishment of an appropriate “order” in the “interior” of the conquered area emerges. This is the one Country, which enables the rule over the subjugated in the long term. Under these conditions, the subjugated civilizations, which are generally considered to be “matriarchal”, that is, oriented towards “In the beginning the mother” (Göttner-Abendroth 1988), are gradually “patriarchalized”, inverted, negated and destroyed.

This is especially true for the practice that is already used in the already patriarchal, Hellenistic Egypt "Alchemy" is called (Schütt 2000). The apparently very old, matriarchal origin of alchemy as a civilizing way of dealing with natural conditions, which can be characterized by mimetic approach and cooperation within the “connectedness of all that is” (Werlhof 2010b), is now gradually “forgotten” and turned into its opposite . Cooperation with nature becomes its planned outwitting and ultimately supposedly possible overcoming as well as the one supposedly wanted by herself Replacement through a no longer maternal or natural, but “fatherly” and male “creation”. This should legitimize the patriarchal rule and lead in the long run to a "pure patriarchy" without matriarchal remnants.

Such a re-creation or a new creation and the transformation of all things and living beings has in principle the patriarchal-alchemical destruction of the existing things and living beings, the so-called "mortification". The alchemical "procedures" the transformation is based on the further use of what has been destroyed - Appropriated, subjugated - as a "raw material", the so-called "materia prima" or "massa confusa", and their new composition with "pure" substances, which they "ennoble" in several steps to the "great work" of alchemy. This goes from blackening to whitening to yellowing and reddening - in metals, from lead to silver and gold to the highest level of matter as living, yes, the so-called "philosopher's stone", which would be the incarnation of power, the process to be carried out everywhere with one stroke, i.e. without wasting time The "stone" would be nothing less than the "world formula" mean for world domination.

In other metaphors, the process goes from the original substance via the queen (moon) to the king (sun) and the resulting "child" or the "divine" alchemist as hermaphroditic "Creator" himself.

This is how the new and supposedly better world is supposed to come into being. One wants to gradually “cleanse”, free and emancipate oneself from mothers and mother nature, their times and cycles as well as the previous, matriarchal culture and civilization. Because from a patriarchal perspective they are imperfect, impure, base, sinful, demonic, yes violent - there man is "dependent" on them - and is destructible and dispensable.

The dark and violent alchemical processes are being experimented with in all patriarchies, from India and China to the Middle and Near East, albeit initially in a minority manner, and in principle in all areas of dealing with nature, gender and generational relationships, and politics and the relationship of transcendence. However, ultimately you will always fail detected. Because the motherless production of the living and the transformation from lead to gold will / cannot succeed, not to mention the production of the "stone".

It was only when alchemy came to Europe with the Arabs at the end of the Middle Ages that its global success story began. In addition to the characterization of ancient alchemy as a patriarchal “total science”, this is the central thesis of the KPT (Werlhof 2010c; Man.).

In the early modern period, the Renaissance, the career of patriarchal alchemy begins, which, with its integration as a basic procedure and objective, becomes modern progress. Modern (natural) science and technology, the machine, are based on the alchemical principles as well as modern state building, warfare, justice and bureaucracy, modern gender relations, the small family and modern economy, capitalism. This is a completely new - and completely contrary to the previous view - idea regarding the origin, characterization and further development of modern civilization. Instead, the latter prides itself on having overcome older methods such as alchemy as failed, successfully left them behind and replaced them with completely new ones (Schütt 2000). Only an analysis of alchemy critical of patriarchy therefore opens up a “different view” of this development and shows that both the goals and the methods of “progress” have remained almost classic alchemical. It is still about the allegedly possible production of a “better” and “higher” matter as well as that of a similar “life” by means of “divide, transform and rule”. This general patriarchal motive and its methodical implementation have evidently (become) so self-evident that they cannot (be) reflected as such and are always (un) consciously presupposed. They thus belong to the “collective unconscious” of modern civilization (Werlhof 2013). As an unconditional “belief” in the male “creation” and its successful implementation, they are virtually unquestionable. It is therefore so difficult to represent and disseminate the CPT and the alchemy thesis on which it is based as a new approach. Because this shows that the patriarchal project of re-creation does not succeed and cannot succeed at all, it must be perceived as extremely painful and heretical by all those who think and feel patriarchally (cf. My Hanh Derungs 2011).

For the adoption and advancement of alchemy as the "Method of Patriarchy" the Church first took action, with the Inquisition. Together with the “secular arm”, and after the Reformation also the Protestants, it was the first modern institution to generalize the alchemical process between the 12th and 18th centuries. For more than 600 years she subjugated millions of people and, since the 15th century, in particular women as a sex through terror, persecution, theft, torture and murder (Becker et al. 1977, Honegger 1978). This “mortification”, the physical, mental and emotional breakdown of the European population (Federici 2004), was followed by their “improvement” to become subjects in the modern nation state (Opitz-Belakhal 2006) and their integration as soldiers, wage workers, unpaid “housewives” and industrialists Reserve army in the modern economy of capitalism (Werlhof, Bennholdt-Thomsen, Mies 1983).

At the same time, the colonization of the world had ensured the alchemical transformation of the “colonies” into resources for the “higher” civilization of the colonizers in Europe, which was also carried out with tremendous force (Mies 1988). This gave rise to the modern international division of labor as a "world system" that is still fundamental today (Wallerstein 1979).

Today, in spite of the constantly flaming counter-movements, for example in the peasant wars of the 16th century (Zimmermannn 1982), the "Alchemical modernity" It has become so self-evident everywhere that hardly anyone recognizes it (more) as such, let alone as a project of violence. In the meantime, she has continued to destroy nature and all living things until they collapse all over the world and have not replaced this loss with anything worthy of the name. Although the utopian art world of progress pretends to be the beginning of a new paradise on earth, it is now increasingly unable to hide the fact that it cannot exist without further nature and even as garbage without reusability, yes as an environmental threat ends.

That is the background and underground of today's crisis of modern civilization as a global alchemical war system in which it is only a question of who can claim the last "resources" - before there is literally nothing left (cf. TTIP, TPP , TISA). Because the speed with which the world is being destroyed is breathtaking and has only come about in around 200 years (Wright 2006). In comparison, if one were to measure the periods of earth events over a period of one year, this would correspond to less than a nanosecond.

The utopia of patriarchy has long since become Dystopia become, alchemy failed all the more after its global success. Only because patriarchal civilization has passed its climax and has begun to tip over as a result of its extreme violence has it even become recognizable as finite. Recognizing this and drawing conclusions from it is the task of time. But first of all the Superstition to progress and modernity as the best of all worlds, and that means to them as "Alchemical project".

Without renouncing patriarchal alchemy in all its aspects, no reform will change anything in the current crisis of civilization. Only after alchemy as a civilizing project will it be possible to encounter nature and all that is still alive in a cultivated, cooperative and loving manner. However, such an attitude cannot be generally and permanently developed in a patriarchy because it is committed to overcoming the living. Only when this motive is consciously and consciously rejected is the way free for reparations to Mother Earth and all her remaining creatures.

A new, at last appropriate to reality, no longer wrong view of today is necessary. We always want to assume that in BUMERANG.

We now look at that five basic conditions of modern civilization as a patriarchal-alchemical-capitalist world system:

The relationship to nature is the central relationship of every civilization (Genth 2011). It essentially includes their economics and technology. From the beginning of the patriarchy, these are associated with the andro- resp. Anthropocentrism been connected, that is, the prerequisite for a higher value “man” or “human being” compared to all other natural phenomena. Accordingly, “spirit” and “soul” were increasingly being denied and thus an unauthorized liveliness. This paved the way for the almost complete disregard for life, the earth and all living beings today. They are thus exposed to their ongoing annihilation without this being stopped so far.

In today's patriarchy, the relationship with nature is not just about submission, Control and lootingbut about the irreversible transformation of all living nature in "coagulated", dead nature: in "capital". This “metamorphosis” is not based on nature, which is the “great changer” per se, but entirely against it and its genuine order. Because it is about the systematic "use" of their powers on the part of the lords and for them and their civilization and, in principle, theirs "Replacement". Due to the extractive “cannibalistic” relationship to nature and to all living things, both their weakening and, in the long term, their use are preprogrammed. The desired replacement of natural forces by the alchemical process of transformation up to the attempt to get hold of the life force as such by means of the philosopher's stone has not been successful. This result of the relation of nature as that Disappearance of the world we are faced everywhere today (e.g. Jaeger 2008 following Goethe).

The relationship to nature has a history of several thousand years of attempts to dominate, subjugate, control, plunder and replace nature. Even in ancient times there were attempts to artificially create nature as living matter in order to achieve its allegedly possible “improvement” compared to its natural origin (Schütt 2000). One wanted to gradually become independent of her as “Mother Nature” through her “replacement”.

In contrast to its matriarchal origins, this “alchemy” served to overcome the nature that was initially still considered female and maternal and women as mothers. A patriarchal man should ideally not come from the womb of a woman, but from the head / spirit / logos / thighs / penis or the rib of a "priest". From now on, the creator of the world / nature had to be a male god, who, however, stood beyond the world he supposedly created, which also appeared to be less perfect than himself (Ernst 2014, Straube 2001). Because how else could one have justified wanting to create this new world and as a "better" one?

With the modern age, alchemical thinking, acting and willing, which has failed time and again, has not been given up, as is always claimed, but has entered a further, decisive phase that has meanwhile spread around the world.

With the help of the “development of the productive forces” through the new technology of the “machine” (Genth 2002), which itself is a result of alchemical thinking and alchemical processes, as we have discovered (Werlhof 2010c), alchemy has become a general and now global program Overall transformation of the world into “capital”, that is, a transformation from “Madame La Nature” into “Monsieur Le Capital”, as Marx would call it. The capital thus appears in a new light. It is a symbol, form and expression of a new, man-made, patriarchal world without mother and nature, which is or is to become a second and this time "eternal paradise", the utopian civilization of pure patriarchy. In contrast to the traditional paradise, all matriarchal remnants and "dependencies" on mothers and nature have been successfully expelled from this paradise. It is a "paradise" that has been "purified" and emptied of the living and is / is filled with lifeless art products (think of photos of Las Vegas in the middle of the desert or of the production of artificial snow on the dwindling glaciers (Scheiber 2015)) which, however, are regarded as the “better life” or the “better nature”.

The underlying Mother and nature phobia goes far beyond what Max Weber called the “disenchantment” of nature.

Technically, with the so-called development of the productive forces in the form of “machinization” (Genth 2002), we are approaching this state of a literal one Overthrow of the natural order, including all cultural orders based on it, in modern civilization more and more. So the destruction staged is one "Destruction by procedure" or a "Development of the destructive forces".

These are most evident in the invention of new military technologies. However, they are not restricted to use in declared wars, but are regularly adopted into civil life without their prior "conversion" into peaceful techniques (for example various NBC weapons in medicine and the pharmaceutical industry). As “macro technologies”, they have even led to secret warfare (weather wars, plasma weapons, geoengineering), which has not been officially discussed up to now, and to increasing damage to the earth as a planet as a whole (Bertell 2013a). Our earth is apparently to be "tamed" or "mortified" in order to be able to "improve" it into a technically controllable "mega-machine" and use its powers especially as a "weapon of war" (Bertell). An official discussion and theoretical classification of these life-threatening phenomena does not take place, indeed is prevented everywhere by all means. Economically, the alchemical project has become a profitable undertaking, so that by all means and accelerated by greed it has developed a tremendous dynamic. The basis for this was and is exploitative and the actors as well as their work materials forcibly transforming the “production factors” “labor” and “raw material” / “resource” or commodity into “production relations”. On the social basis, these range from unpaid housework, slavery, serfdom, precarious, "marginal" and forced labor as today's "housewifeized" working conditions and forms of "wageless product production" to "proletarian wage labor" as the so-called "normal employment relationship", seen worldwide, however, this only applies to a minority of the workforce (Bennholdt-Thomsen, Mies, Werlhof 1983/1992).

Little by little all nature, including those who work on it, becomes about hers "Mortification", that is, submission and “killing”, transformed into “capital” without too great a cost. This means that it is transformed into the supposedly “better” matter, labor, resource and finally the “great work” in the form of the recomposition of dead matter into goods, machinery and “command”, as Marx called it, that is, the disposition from above become. In the end, capital formation leads to money. Today's money is as "money hacking" (Marx), that is, self-multiplying, thus the alchemical gold and a "Philosopher's Stone" of capitalism. Nothing can be used in general and can be changed quickly like money. And only modern, interest-bearing money awakens the “real” illusion that there can be any and unlimited growth, even “fertility” outside of nature and that it can “replace” it alchemically.

Modern agriculture in particular is another example of this, as chemistry and industrial methods are used to enforce an apparent fertility that is increasingly distancing itself from the real soil conditions and destroying them in the process. At the end there is inevitably hunger (Shiva 2004 and 2009).

The "accumulation" of capital is based on the violent "original" accumulation, alchemistically speaking, the "mortification", that is, appropriation and expropriation, dissolution and transformation of living matter as "means of production" into "resources" for capital conversion -ung. This means that the use-value of nature and the living is included in the formation of capital and is lost to nature and the living, which are therefore already from the outset as "worthless", although without them there is no "value" (exchange value) could come about.

This process is not only “necessary” once, but is continued uninterrupted both in and outside of agriculture where it began. The "continued original accumulation", as we analyzed it with regard to the subjugation and exploitation of women (Werlhof 1978), as a violent one, is not only a historically unique but continuous source of total capital accumulation at all levels, both locally and regionally (most recently Scheiber 2015 ), as well as its spread and functioning on a world scale (Werlhof 2007). Only in this way does the alchemical process get its constantly required basic materials - its "materia prima" - for the "great work".

All in all, it can only be seen in this way that the capitalist economy can neither be understood without modern technology, the machine, nor - even in the literal sense - would have made it so far. Because both are inseparable from each other through the alchemical transformation project into one not only economic, but also one technological society formation coupled. Yes, modern economics thereby becomes more part of the technology of the alchemical process than the other way around. Otherwise it would have got stuck in mercantilism. So if this economy should pass, then its technology may still exist, insofar as it i. w.S. remains “alchemical”. Or: Alchemy was / is there even without capital, But not capital without alchemy. This is the connection that has not yet been named or even recognized anywhere: the patriarchal-alchemical project is the fundamental one. In principle, it can also exist beyond modernity, just as it existed before it.

This is probably an important aspect when it comes to "post-capitalist" movements that nonetheless cling to patriarchy and with it a corresponding form of alchemy without being directly aware of it or even wanting to be aware of it. Because, as we find out again and again, the thematization of patriarchy and its alchemy meet with rejection on the part of most of the protagonists. Because maybe they want to continue using such methods even after a system change.

From here, therefore, is also a comprehensive one Critique of Science possible as the basis of modern technology and also meanwhile almost all individual sciences, which tend to adapt more and more to modern natural science. Most natural scientists consider their own thinking to be generally valid and correct, i.e. reliable, objectively verifiable and ultimately irrefutable. It is only "alchemical" and capital or patriarchy-driven.

This means that almost all science follows the patriarchal "separation thinking" (Behmann 2009), which separates all phenomena from one another and transfers them into abstract categories - eg "matter" and "spirit" or "life" and "death" - to Above all, to be able to dispose of them “quantizing” (Wagner 1970). This prevents “dialectical” or even flowing thinking in relationships, contexts and processes of change, as they characterize all living things. The perception of the living and a dealing with it that does justice to it are blocked. The question of why “everything breaks down” today does not even arise. It is faded out.

Modern science emerged in Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries. Its founder is Francis Bacon, who seamlessly transferred the witch trials of his time to nature: just like women, nature should also be put under torture in order to wrest its secrets from it. Today it's just not called that anymore. As an alchemist, Bacon described the new and supposedly better nature as a complete and completely arbitrary reversal and transformation of the animal and plant world beyond the species limits, as we have just begun to get to know it today. He designed a utopian, strictly hierarchical-patriarchal civilization with new, finally obedient and thus “better” people (New Atlantis) and developed scientific procedures (induction, deduction) that are still valid today (Bacon 1990).

The mechanistic, decomposing, quantifying access to matter, which has also been defined as “dead” in modern times, which can be proven in its origins in ancient alchemy, has thus established itself. Today it can be found in some places where a new understanding of nature (relativity theory, quantum theory, electromagnetism, cosmology) has arisen, namely where it is still primarily about control of nature and power over nature (e.g. in the nuclear research center CERN , Geneva, and in the military in East and West).

Since then one has tried to use the alchemical process to gain general power - and not an independent general knowledge - over nature. “Knowledge” is thus defined as knowing how to gain power over nature. In the end, this justifies acting towards nature and living things, no matter how destructive it is. The knowledge that one needs to exercise power over nature, or the knowledge that produces power over nature, is only one in the end Destructive Knowledge. It is not "the knowledge". But such a thing would be needed if one wants or has to leave this civilization behind.

You now know how to “mortify” nature and then use it as “materia prima” for a “great work”. This then supposedly ensures the creation of a new one, even "Better" matter and nature.

As a result, in the long run and in general, however, the utopia of “creation” from the exercise of power and destruction is confronted more and more frequently and inevitably with the opposite, that is, destruction by alleged “creation”, which therefore turns out to be an illusion. In the end, the “better” mostly and especially in the long run turns out to be the worse (Werlhof 2012).

This also applies to the commodity, the great work of modern alchemy, in detail. It is increasingly qualitatively far inferior to subsistence and so-called natural products, e.g. in the food sector, and above all, after a short period of use it is usually nothing more than more or less toxic waste.

The power and the knowledge about nature that derives from it ultimately even lead to it in the end irreversible Destruction. Nuclear technology has proven this most clearly so far, even without direct nuclear war being waged. Due to the ongoing radioactive contamination, which, for example, will not end as a result of the Fukushima disaster (Caldicott 2014), the question already has to be asked: “Are we the last generations?” (Bertell 2013b).

From this result, the natural sciences and with it all other subsequent sciences would have to be confronted with the fact that their thinking and procedures were only temporarily applicable and “successful”, but failed in the long term. All that remains of him is the presumption of wanting to dominate nature and transform it into its opposite, because that brings in power and money. For nature it brings death (Merchant 1987). She is not only said verbally and conceptually dead, but also literally murdered in real life.

Only knowledge that does not arise from such interests can be justifiable knowledge, and there is no question that it must be neither patriarchal nor patriarchal-alchemistically motivated.

The science of nature, which knows nothing about it, nor wants to know what does not contribute to its control and transformation, but will also defy evidence of its harmfulness. For it is not rational in the sense of reasonable, but only rational in the sense of its subjective interests, which are only considered objective because they are the interests of the rulers. This is where the claimed general validity of this science ends.

A “correct” knowledge of nature can therefore only consist in knowing what and how it is itself and in dealing with it accordingly. Then she “shouts”, as a biodynamic farmer assured me. But this can never be the case on the basis of hatred of them and belief in their alleged baseness, wickedness and imperfection.

The anthropocentrism in the relationship to nature, which more and more women have now joined after initial hesitation, must also fall.

Knowledge that has freed itself from these prerequisites could be called “matriarchal”. It arises there and then (again) wherever patriarchal knowledge can no longer be represented “objectively” because of the destruction it causes.

The previous results of the patriarchal relationship to nature are the monopoly of property and power as well as the “block structure” (Ullrich 1977) of technology, economy and bureaucracy as one "Alchemical war system"that follows the paradigm of the machine and draws the entire civilization more and more under its destructive spell. The result is, among other things, a naturally cleaned one "Matter"without "mater" - which is the ideal of modern "materialism". However, its origins are much older, as the history of alchemy shows us (Schütt 2000). Logically, nature now disappears. Because in order to “replace” it, it has been transformed into its own opposite and cannot be transformed back into the nature it once was. The motherless and natural matter, conceived as the “great work” of alchemy, is instead mostly not even reusable and at some point reintegrates into the natural cycle as anti-nature.

In the long run, modern alchemy can be considered general Matricide and the attempt to get out of the normal cycles of life with the artificial male creation of the materially living, and to work beyond them, i.e. not be retained.

Nature's ability to regenerate has long been overtaxed, and today it would take two or three planets to keep pace with the consumption of nature. But since there is only one earth, the relationship with nature - and not just the consumption of nature - has to be completely redesigned.

Despite and because of its global success as “progress, modernization and development” like its premodern predecessor, modern alchemy is doomed to failure instead of producing the “philosopher's stone”, which with the creation of a new, artificially made paradise everywhere, the utopian dream of Patriarchy should become a reality for all eternity.

Instead, because of its scope as a war against nature, life and women, yes, as "military alchemy" against the planet itself, this alchemy has now reached such dimensions that even if the project is abandoned immediately, the damage that has already been caused will impair survival . A continuation as before, however, inevitably, soon and "necessarily" leads to the real "death of nature", of life on earth and perhaps of itself. This would even correspond to the biblical prophecy of the earth perishing in enormous natural disasters, but not the "alchemical one Dream ”of the supposedly possible arrival of a“ new earth ”(project group 2011).

Admitting the “necessity” of the failure of the relationship with nature is the great taboo of modern civilization. Because it would mean their end before the ongoing process of destruction itself leads to it.

The political relationship In modern patriarchy, the aim is to transform society into a “machine” or an “alchemical system”. The social space should be "empty", timeless and without its own creative power, which it as inherently original "Uterine" Has space. As a living and unpredictable space, it is intended to be “mortified”. In this way, the Space as "empty space", a concept that also accompanies modern science. Subsequently, however, the space is to be rebuilt and “raised” and filled with new alchemical creations, which is why all patriarchies invent special architectures and are aiming for conspicuous large-scale buildings and urban planning. Politics is one of the "Spatial planning".

Politics itself is an "alchemical process" or Politics machine organized, that is, as processes of “divide and rule” or “divide, transform and rule”. Politicians are those who use the procedure like alchemists to subjugate and thereby also mislead the inhabitants of this room.

Under the conditions of the centralization of power, technology and money that prevail today, the political relationship can of course not be or remain a really democratic one, as we are always told. The "Holy order of men" is, like all patriarchates, always associated with more or less dictatorial or totalitarian, today "plutocratic" forms of rule, which in antiquity after the patriarchal conquests of matriarchal territories with despotism and generally with the "Country" emerged as a central form of organization of the political. The war and the principle of “divide and rule” or the alchemical “divide, transform and rule” as violence of a “creation from destruction” can ultimately never be democratically legitimized. That is why supposedly democratic processes are never about the political content itself, but only about the money and the power to dispose of it. In real democracies, such as the egalitarian, domineering matriarchal civilizations, it could never even come to that.

This is generally the case Rulership principle Always present in the above as well as in the below. It is the prerequisite on all levels for the creation of the conditions for the alchemical project of creating a “better world”. The sacred and the secular head as the “ruling father” or “God-Father” and the “pater familias” as well as the individual man in relation to a woman have the same functions within the hierarchy, which reflects their consistently patriarchal character as the “system” of the ruling class Fathers - and ideally without them - still underlines.

The utopia “New Atlantis” written by Francis Bacon, the founder of modern science, in the 17th century represents this ideal of the patriarchal-alchemical “new creation” of social space (Bacon in Heinisch 2004). If it were finally feasible, from this perspective paternal rule would also be finally legitimized and forever unassailable. A lively political togetherness, such as Hannah Arendt describes it, would then never even be conceivable, let alone experienced (Arendt 1958/2002).

Today we are initially approaching increasingly chaotic forms of rule. Decay and Disempowerment of the modern nation state and its transition to the international system or the “failed” or “rogue state” are staged everywhere from above. Terror as Politics and the generation of regional and international wars and huge flows of refugees all over the world should equally pave the way for the takeover of literal world domination, for example through a totalitarian "New World Order" and / or lead to new, devastating world wars before or afterwards (Chossudovsky 2012) .

Correspondingly, this path is already paved in its emergence with the end of pseudo-democratic residual forms, the de-solidarization and division of the masses according to parties, classes, ethnicities and religions as well as mafia-like conditions, corruption and blackmail. They turn all politicians in the narrower and broader sense into mere lackeys, slaves and freely interchangeable cogs in the gears of the remote-controlled political machinery.

Even “women in power”, that is, at any point in the political hierarchy, cannot change anything, and once there, they do not even want to. On the contrary, women in politics are "mortified" into welcomed Accomplicesthat are supposed to give the whole thing the appearance that they too finally agree to the political relationship of the patriarchate and take responsibility for its crimes as well as participate directly in them. Because it is up to them to prove that women can do the same thing as men. One thing must be made clear: In the patriarchy, “power” in the political relationship is ultimately always that Power over life and death. Only those who really have power make this decision. It arises again and again solely from the fact that it is constantly about processes of "mortification", that is, the submission and integration or the exclusion and elimination of people and their connections in the political arena. In war, in various rituals, in medicine, in the domestic sphere, in sexuality and in crime, those who are formally not so powerful also appropriate power as a disposition over life and death. Apparently women want that too.

There is the ideal of a rule that runs automatically, i.e. as a machine no longer requires direct, even violent intervention from outside and by people. It would be the illusion that rule can be "renounced". A corresponding world state would - moreover, just like the emerging and appropriately organized "welfare state" - the "philosopher's stone" of the political relationship in the patriarchy, so to speak. He would suggest that neither domination nor violence is the case anymore because no one specifically exercises them anymore.

This ideal is also typical of the military, who dreams of waging war with machines alone without the “residual risk” of humans, as is increasingly happening (drones; automatic weapon systems; geoengineering, weather wars). The relationship with the political relationship in the form of rule over the state is not accidental.

Local attempts at democratization and egalitarian conditions, such as the Zapatistas in Mexico (Werlhof 1996) or living matriarchates (Göttner-Abendroth 2009) are the old and new starting points of the continuum in political relations.

However, their successful spread across the earth is generally not to be expected at the moment. Because there is an increasing lack of the economic basis for a correspondingly at least necessary self-sufficiency - for example due to "land grabbing". And in the meantime there is often a lack of a social structure based on the “connectedness of all that exists”, which is historically broken up in the north of the world system and replaced by the “better person” as in principle a single individual or the industrial mass society as a mortified, anonymous “melting pot” has been. Yet it is noteworthy that "the people" still insist on justice, democracy, equality, freedom and truthfulness in politics. Rule therefore still has to legitimize itself and cannot simply be taken for granted or even “natural”, as Aristotle argued at the beginning of the patriarchy (Aristotle 2012). So the memory of matriarchal conditions that recur in them has not yet completely disappeared. You can build on this anytime and anywhere.

The gender ratio in today's patriarchy, neither general nor individual can be understood without the macrostructure in the natural and political relationship of civilization. It is not just the gender relationship that is patriarchal-alchemistically organized, but the entire civilization as it is image it is regulated. It comes from the oldest times of patriarchy (e.g. Meier-Seethaler 1992) and most recently the early modern times with their "women as witches" persecutions (cf. Daly 1991). Purely psychological or behavioral approaches, as they usually prevail, cannot even remotely explain the patriarchal gender relationship if they do not understand it Context of the whole civilization of patriarchy. On the contrary, the question must be asked to what extent, under patriarchal conditions that have determined life in one form or another in one form or another for thousands of years, there can even be a quasi-independent "psychology" (My Han Derungs 2011 ). At best, matriarchal remnants in the gender relationship would still be traced, which as a species "Second culture" (Genth 1996) can occur again and again, at least temporarily, primarily due to relationships of love, family and friendship, and without which patriarchal civilization would probably not be able to sustain itself.

In any case, the gender relationship in patriarchy is more or less, today more than ever, characterized by the attempt to humiliate and devalue women as people, workers, mothers and sex beings, to subject them to various control systems and generally to disempower them, i.e. to "mortify" them. . The situation of patriarchal mothers is hopeless; options are only superficially available to them (Tazi-Preve 2004). The development is even going there, in the final analysis especially the mothers literally abolish. They are supposed to be the “better” women and part mothers who have been artificially fertilized, with implants and constant interventions, through machines and until then mixed and artistic beings, from the patriarchally transformed “good” mother to the “mother machine” (Corea 1986) Mothers are replaced “alchemically” (Schmölzer 2005).

In doing so, one tries first ideologically, then programmatically and finally in real terms to make the mother dispensable. As if that were possible, the “Worthlessness” of the mothers and their work confirmed in advance by their defamation as retrograde and by their character as essentially free work. Where the machine is gradually being introduced, there is no noteworthy remunerated work because it will or should replace the workers.

Even as “still” mothers, women are increasingly forced into the production of the alchemical system outside of the home, in which their work is assigned a value, albeit usually very little. Because the devaluating one "Housewifeization" (Bennholdt-Thomsen et al. 1983) also applies outside the house.

The women and mothers or workers "improved" through patriarchal measures of submission and integration into the alchemical machine are to be sought after their "mortification", i.e. their "alchemical" transformation, where they are combined or combined with machines to form cyborgs, i.e. human machines replaced by them: work, sex and delivery machines.

This process is more consistent in the “north” than in the “south”, where the premodern, but in principle alchemical, forms of subjugation of women apply partly or at the same time.

The patriarchal project therefore primarily provides for matricide in the form of the abolition of motherhood and its replacement by, in the main, machine processes, which would finally free the patriarchs from their dependence on mothers. This can also be proven historically on many levels, in mythology, psychology and in the legal system (Tazi-Preve 1992). To do this, however, the patriarchs would have to male self-creation, for example with artificial wombs, men with uterus or in the field of post- and transhumanism of robots and artificial intelligence, artificial life of the "life industries", and nano and genetic technology or cloning (e.g. Rifkin 1986, Schirrmacher 2001 ).

The tendencies to be observed at the moment show that it is no longer just about the artificial reproduction of the genus as such, but about its replacement by posthuman art beings. Not only the mother, "the human being" is now up for grabs. But it doesn't upset anyone, that's how much alchemical thinking has become normal (e.g. Fritsche 2013).

This has recently been the case, and in part also for dealing with homosexuality and transsexuality, which from a patriarchy and alchemy-critical perspective looks very different from the current “pro-con” debate. The corresponding “scene” has long since changed, and it is no longer a question of visibility and anti-discrimination, but of a quasi-alchemical appropriation of the entire gender debate. In the academic discourse, women’s studies are now being replaced not only by gender studies, but also by “sexuality studies”, where research is particularly carried out on homosexuality and transsexuality. Lesbians are barely visible at the Gay Parades. It is about the abolition and recreation of what a woman and a man should or can be (Tazi Preve 2014). In the meantime, it is publicly considered progressive to no longer be heterosexual. The new ideal of the “better man”, so to speak, is mainly represented by men who have been transformed alchemistically into “also women”, less by women than “also men”. So it is now about the attempt to make women replaceable not only as mothers, but also as sex beings for men.

In homosexual marriage, for example, the mother is no longer needed directly after adoption or, as in many countries, surrogate motherhood have become legally possible. In marriages of lesbian couples, on the other hand, the almost classic alchemical modern technique of artificial insemination can also be used. A technical criticism is therefore not welcome here either.

In addition to the workplace and politics, it is generally the same to this day modern patriarchal small family, in which the gender relationship is organized in that it serves its previous modern main function, the everyday reproduction of the wage laborer and that of the species in general. This type of family is, so to speak, the general place of the modern day alchemical human production. In principle, it is pretended that the mother-father-child triangular constellation is a natural given and the only possibility of generic reproduction, since it represents the political construct of a patriarchal authority (Tazi-Preve 2012). It is logical that, under patriarchal-alchemical conditions, men appear as “breadwinners” and “fathers”, that is, authorized to rule, and as if they themselves were the “creators” of the next generation. But exactly the opposite is the case - the nuclear family is the most dangerous place for women and children. Because originally the warlords and religious rulers, who later became so-called "fathers of the nation", are considered fathers and creators, for example of wealth through conquest. That refers to the fundamental Violence the social position of the husband and father in the family, which is related to his "creation" through destruction inside and outside the family.

It was the women's refuge movement that successfully scandalized violence against women as a matter of course, even if it was by no means able to abolish it.

The patriarchal perspective alone, that it is ultimately about the abolition of the female sex and especially women as mothers, leads to distortions and alienations in the relationship between men and women, which are not only dramatic, but also practically not at all among "conscious" people are to be avoided. Because this perspective is socially “presupposed” for the individual relationships and is already confirmed by the “worthlessness” of housewife and mother work.

It can be assumed that the Mimesis, that is, the emotional approach to patriarchy and its alchemical utopia has largely become generally accepted, so that feelings are also shaped accordingly (Genth 2002). Above all, these also suffer from shrinkage. Enthusiasm for the miracle of life is dwindling and giving way to the idea that everything can already be more or less manufactured anyway, that is, “goods” or “machines”, humans are a matter that is no longer “by nature”, but not with it something like “better” and “higher”, but actually is ultimately mindless and soulless. The miracle of the living is less and less understood and respected as a gift, but rather as feasible and therefore also capable of being killed. This is a recurring problem in reproductive medicine. Here, too, the “value” turns into its opposite. Now it is that of life itself.

The previously observable tradition of female-maternal care for people has also suffered in the meantime. There is more and more neglect of human relationships in the sense of a "lack of culture", ie the disappearance of the "care" (cultura) of the living. The so-called "shadow work" by I. Illich is increasingly spreading, which is only one that has lost the living, is ultimately forced and largely impoverished, invisible, mostly female support for the public male "creation" of the world of goods and consumption through destruction (Illich 1982). “Care” work is now also beginning to suffer from it. You could say that it is “infected” by it.

It is now a bigger one among women Distance and alienation from the living to observe (Frick 2012), including that which they themselves gave birth. Some have started to react to the patriarchal impositions by saying that they no longer want to be women and mothers - as a prophylactic, so to speak. Your program is called "Gender" (Bell, Klein 1996) and, conversely to the alchemist-hermaphrodite, flows into the woman as “also-man”. This is an anticipatory adjustment to the women and motherless, so no longer feminine-creative sexuality and society that patriarchy is aiming at anyway, and confirms it in it. This is why the debate about mothers is taboo on this side as “politically incorrect” because it is supposedly “retrograde”, even reactionary. Because under the alchemical progress perspective of the patriarchy, there will soon be no more mothers in the sense of the word, and the potential mothers forego their creative potential as such in advance. This leads to the removal of the uterus in order to increase the chances on the job market. What is to be abolished is to a certain extent obsolete beforehand as a topic: the mother.

The gender woman no longer wants to worry about the re-production of the living. This field is left to women in the colonies, surrogate mothers or the machine, i.e. all kinds of genetic and reproductive technologies, including the “giving birth” man and other perverse projects. That the machine is not only unsuitable as a “substitute” for life, nature, mothers and a life-friendly culture and gender, but rather for them destruction is eerily not noticed (anymore). Yes, any reference to this context is considered a "Essentialism" denounced. Modern patriarchal women have increasingly begun to abandon, even abandon, living things and nature, including their part as a body, and, with waving flags, so to speak, to switch to the side of patriarchal men. They leave behind what is an obstacle on this path. This gives rise to the claim propagated by so-called "emancipated" women, the female body is a purely cultural invention (Butler 1991). “Theorizing the post-human body” was the title of a session at the youngest American Women’s Studies Association.

Well, if it does, then it should first become one, as a machine!

The fallacy here is: If we are no longer counted as part of nature, we will escape its fate, or: without a body, no serfdom. And: We would rather be a perpetrator than a victim.

Since the sacrifice of women is common in alchemy (Eliade 1980), it is better not to belong to this genus. However, alchemy and its method are not recognized or even rejected, because its work is not noticed at all, or it is considered correct, and there is no term for it anyway. But the alchemical transformability of gender, for example through surgery, is welcomed.

It is all the answer to the question we asked ourselves in the early women's movement: What do women do in the long run with their experiences in patriarchy? How could it be that until recently most of them almost entirely ruled out open violence in response? But what does it mean that in the long run the "mimesis" of most women takes place in the patriarchy? Does that mean that violence as a way of reacting from outside and above could now penetrate more and more inside and below, and has now also reached women in general?

The logic of the “gender” movement, which - as the Facebook platform shows - in a patchwork of - counting 60 (!) - “sexualities” and the arbitrariness of gender, or the alchemical-machine resolution and arbitrary technological redefinition of the gender relationship should flow itself, and is also massively supported from above, is not the only possible one.

feminism meanwhile means everything and nothing. Wars are waged in the name of feminism (white men liberate oppressed women in Afghanistan and the Middle East). With the help of gender terminology, patriarchal rules are followed - the "feminist" Hillary Clinton has so far agreed to all US war missions.

Another response is to emphasize the "Difference" (Irigaray 1991) instead of “equality” of the sexes, which always means their interchangeability or “gender neutrality”.

The “difference”, however, has to get out of the logic of patriarchy as an alchemical whole, and not only serve neoconservative or neo-patriarchal pseudo “alternative” interests, its own Dissidence on patriarchy as a "civilization of alchemists" formulate and practice. Otherwise there would only be a stuck within the patriarchal conditions (as e.g. with Herrman 2006). In any case, these primarily provide for those two genders who, as separate, heterosexually "pure" materials (see justification of circumcision) by the alchemist - here the church in the form of the priest or the state in the form of the registrar - are part of the great work be united while the women are still needed. A gender relationship that is independent of such interests and manipulations can only arise beyond this basic alchemical model.

But where the patriarchy just as logically produces its own homosexuality, because a patriarchal man cannot really “love” a woman or at least take it seriously, the way out is just as little in sight.

A no longer patriarchal gender ratio is therefore only possible outside of an alchemical way of thinking and acting. It remains to be seen what it would look like. Living matriarchal societies can be an example of this.

The intergenerational relationship accordingly, patriarchy does not aim to cultivate the bonds between the generations as well as those between the sexes in the sense of a "bond between all that exists" and to accept and cultivate the love relationships and mutual respect and responsibility that arise from this. On the contrary, notions and mechanisms of separation prevail here too, which are intended to prevent the natural and cultural ties that have evolved between the generations and the sexes from occurring at all. Instead, it is about the disruption of this bond and its alchemical replacement by the Separation into abstract "generations" and their artificial re-composition if necessary. In Plato's utopian “state” it is characteristic, right from the beginning of the European patriarchy, that the newborns are taken away from the mothers and exchanged with others so that the bonds between mothers and children do not develop that are generally the strongest of all. Because women are the sex that loves their children, as it is called. This love should instead be stopped and flow to the state and its rulers and gods. Even the conception of the next generation should not be left to the partners and their affection themselves, but should be arranged from above according to breeding and class aspects. A love between the parents, like that for a common child, is therefore not intended from the outset. In this way, the state and its institutions come into action as a classic alchemist, who puts together the “materials” which it has subjected and prepared to rule to form the great work of creation (Plato 1973).

Such Utopias remind, among other things, of the futuristic experiments with the "Lebensborn" of the Nazi regime. The better and higher life should result from this. It is no coincidence that alchemical thinking and acting are reminiscent of the “machine” at an early stage. Before the invention of the machine as a material apparatus, it was a question of the social or society machine (Mumford 1977), i.e. from the beginning the machine as a social “relationship” or a theory and not just a practice (Genth 2002).

However, where such a utopian situation is not yet the case, the next generation will usually get through a "2nd, male birth", initiation (tests of courage, exams, communion, confirmation, beginning or end of school), presented as a “male creation”.

Only in matriarchal societies does the initiation of boys serve a different purpose. They should also prove themselves to “Mother Nature” as the larger cycle (Somé 2004), while the girls, if at all, are usually initiated in connection with menstruation (Voss 1988).

According to the patriarchal maxim, mothers and children should always be separated from one another as quickly as possible (Renggli 1992) or alienated from one another, especially today - even before, during and especially after the birth. This also applies as a principle for young and old in general. As “peer groups” of their peers, they should have nothing to do with each other and certainly not take responsibility for one another in an intergenerational context, exchange life experiences, pass on culture and live love for one another.

The latter is instead perverted and organized as pedophilia and sexual abuse, i.e. as systematic rape of children and adolescents by adults, mostly men.

Ultimately, the "Individual" independent and cut off from any origin, freed from “home”, without ties and belonging, as alone, needy and controllable as patriarchal civilization strives for. The nuclear family also functions according to this pattern, isolated from the social environment, the individual individuals subject to the hierarchical relationships within.

That is why the individual has been regarded as the “better person” since modern times, although he / she has been reduced to a mostly ridiculous and impotent figure, and he / she is encouraged to “alchemize” himself / herself into the appropriate form, for example with a special "Identity" to be provided (meaning of the fashion / s).

The “mortification” of familial, tribal, village, regional, cultural or home contexts was presented as bourgeois-rational-modern in contrast to feudal-irrational-retrograde. The "better" person as an "egological" individual is independent and "purified" from these "traditions" better suited to function as a cog in the gears and as a "particle" that can be used everywhere in the great work, as it did with Plato and later he can be read in the Utopians of the 17th century (Bacon, Campanella, More in Heinsch 2004). The allegedly “better person” is therefore a person without his own social power, yes in the end without his personal power. From the typically patriarchal anthropocentric perspective, however, he is considered to be that "Crown of Creation" and even as a “homo creator” or “transformer” (Wörer 2013).

But now this individual, which is no longer divisible, is confronted with post- or transhuman projects that finally dehumanize it and call it a “dividuum” (Mies 1992) or "Man-machine" (Bammé et al. 1983) for any use as part of the whole. In the course of such a development, there would then ideally no longer be any generations, and a "Generation neutrality " - parallel to "Gender neutrality" - a. In this way, to a certain extent, any remaining connection to nature and culture would have been erased. Time and its cyclical nature would thus be eliminated more and more in this relationship as well. This has always been a goal of alchemy as a creator of a u-topical, thus place, mother, nature, space and timeless order been.

For the time being, however, the attack applies to the unborn, directly or indirectly artificially created, as well as to the elderly. From the perspective of an expanding "alchemical system" it can be seen that they are delivered to the access of this system in various ways in order to be able to manipulate, manufacture or even "dispose of" them at will. The discussion about the legalization of the methods of “fertility medicine” and the suicide of old people should be seen in this context. It is to be feared that their legalization could be used to legitimize the killing of “unworthy” life (Singer 1994).

In the long run, the following applies: Whoever manufactures something, through "production", also owns it, is its owner. Therefore, he / she can dispose of it, and can legally dispose of it. In Roman antiquity, this was already the case in the case of birth, for example, which the pater familias could decide to keep alive with a gesture of the thumb, as he was considered to be the creator of new life.

The new Patent rights to life (TRIPS) give a foretaste of what this could mean today, as ownership of a living person largely abolishes the right to an intact or even self-determined existence (Mies, Shiva 1995). We already know such conditions in the form of slavery and serfdom. Even if they are animals or plants, they serve for foreign appropriation and profitable alchemical further utilization. In addition to the economic and technological relationship, this also affects the relationship between the respective “generations” and their history: it is separated or understood as separable.

A far-reaching abuse of the generations as separate from their structure is not excluded at any level.

The surname, which has become arbitrary, no longer suggests that generations belong together. So it is precisely the legislature who does the Dissolution of the intergenerational relationships operates at all levels.

Migrants inadvertently contribute to this process by being torn from their intergenerational context around the world. But they in particular pay far more attention than has been customary in the north since the introduction of the nuclear family to the formation of new intergenerational relationships.This is otherwise only to be found at the top of society or in the nobility, i.e. where there is something to be bequeathed.

Otherwise, matriarchal societies in particular pay particular attention to the undivided intergenerational context, i.e. a long-term time order, which results from the relationship with the mother and the resulting relationship to the common grand, great-grandmother or clan mother as well as to the ancestors. Because of her life experience and wisdom, the clan mother is, in complete contrast to patriarchy, the most important decision-maker in living together. This is the only way to do it Passing on knowledge and culture elements guaranteed, which are of decisive importance for the next generations, their strengthening and orientation. But that is precisely what is not at all desirable in a modern patriarchal society in which everything new appears to be better than everything old.

The transcendent relationship in patriarchy is shaped by Belief in the “pater arché” principle, that is, of the alleged creative superiority of men and the masculine character of creation. This includes the alchemical belief in miracles in the improvement or manufacturability of such a "creation" beyond women and nature where it has not yet been sufficiently recognized or realized, including the belief in its enforceability and its legitimacy. Basically, the patriarchal relationship of transcendence is the formulation of an ideological system that is derived from the Belief in violence as the first and last resort. Because only through them can the alleged task of "man" to realize the allegedly existing kingdom of heaven on earth as well, can be realized. It is therefore considered patriarchal religion usually with a similar one Legal system connected, which in particular punishes resistance to the violence inherent in the system and thus Good and evil Defined completely inversely to the previous matriarchal sense of justice and justice (cf. the Codex Hammurabi in the 2nd millennium BC). The relationship of transcendence in patriarchy is thus from the outset a very real and immanent field that is completely surrounded by sanctions.

The relationship of transcendence points directly back to the relationship of nature. In the patriarchy it is correspondingly religiously shaped by a Turning away from all older forms of worshiping female deities and cyclical processes of the becoming, existence and decay of the living as “connectedness of all beings” and its being embedded in invisible spiritual and spiritual contexts.

In patriarchy, however, one does not want to know anything about nature as a living connection between matter and spirit-soul, i.e. what it really is, because it generally eludes access, control and controllability as well as immediate transformability. In this way there will be one in all patriarchies from the beginning Separation of matter or body and spirit-soul claims, in order to then try to bring this about with alchemical methods, quasi as a "self-fulfilling prophecy". So is from "Pure spirit" started out, which is split off from matter and only then appears as "higher" than it. The spirit is torn from its female form as a spirit (ruah) and masculinized (Straube 2001), for example as “logos spermatikos” during generation or as “Archeus” (Paracelsus 1562). Since Aristotle the man has been considered endowed with spirit, the woman as a mere shell or container for it, as the still indispensable, but “passive” and in relation to the “active” male “dead matter” (Treusch-Dieter 1990).

The concept of the body, which still includes the connection with spirit and soul - love, life - gives way in modern times to that of the body of corpus, the corpse, or the body as "machine" (La Mettrie 1985, Descartes 1648). This tendency began with the Inquisition.

The modern alchemical "production" of goods means, seen in this way, the production of a matter that has been guaranteed to be separated from every spiritual and soul by being obtained from the killing and decomposition, dissolution and division (mortification) of nature. Anticipating this process, in the modern age all nature is defined entirely as dead matter that functions like a machine - into which, however, it must first be transformed in detail.

In this way, people today no longer notice what acts of violence must be committed continuously in order to get to the spirit, soul and body, but physical world (modern "materialism"). Behind the concept of nature as a dead mechanism, its ongoing murder disappears as a living one. On this basis, a spirituality is only possible in the form of the separation from "matter" and the thematization of spirit-soul relationships beyond it. That is exactly what it is in almost all ways patriarchal spirituality the case.

The attempt to think of matter and spirit-soul again or even together, yes, reappears in the patriarchal context, of all things, with the machine. This paradox can only be explained through alchemy. Because after everything was defined as “dead” and no concept of the living was accepted any more, the machine inventors, of all people, thought of the Machine as a potential living being. Because that was exactly their goal: to create the “higher” matter or a motherless “life”. The first machines were “body automatons”, so from the outset they had the purpose of appearing as human models and ultimately as surrogates. This also applies to early machines such as the "Iron Maiden", which was not used as a birthing machine but as a killing machine, e.g. in the dungeons of the Inquisition. Also, all later machines are actually essential Killing machines in the direct military as well as to a certain extent in the indirect military, the civilian area. Because they first of all ensure the possible mortification of matter and living things. This goes as far as the “machine of machines” (Genth 1989), the computer as a literal killing machine, which in turn comes from the military-industrial complex. The same applies to the further development of the computer in the form of the Internet and multiple other applications in the civil sector, especially and apparently paradoxically also that of the production of "artificial life" (AL) as one of the areas in which the respective military inventions are further used (Bertell 2013a). It is a general militarization - the so-called. "Weaponization" or "arming" - the civilian and not about a successful "conversion" of armaments into civilian goods or from killing machines into real life.

This makes the civil world less and less suitable - and no longer - for the creation of real alternatives. All of this is of interest for the transcendent relationship because it is the previous one Concepts of life and death completely overturned, and not only denies the connection between them, but actively tears them apart or dissolves them. Because in alchemy “death is brought” and life is “made”. Death as the "Great God of the Soul" (Hoffmannsthal 1893) or even as "Todin", a great goddess of the cyclical events between life and death, death and life, has to a certain extent been abolished here. At the same time, pre-modern alchemy held on to a form of “spirituality” and religiosity that was patriarchal, but still tried to think of the presence of the spirit and soul as something inherent in itself (Schütt 2000). She is still either credited with that or criticized as “superstition”. It was only modern rationality and the machine that erased these “relics” from the history of alchemy, but without discarding the latter as such.

That was our discovery (Werlhof Man.), Which is why we propose the application of the KPT's alchemy thesis to today's civilization, its five central relationships and its “crisis”.

Today - in addition to the machine as a killing apparatus - the entire "life industry", including as "synthetic biology", is in the process of "making life" in a typical alchemical way, whereby this Life always from death or killing is "made", and in the end what comes out of it is passed off as “life” (Venter 2010). It is the so-called "AL", Artificial Life. However, this life no longer has much in common with the rest of the living. It is the supposedly "living" machine and / or a "combination" of living and non-living, e.g. in the form of the genetically modified organism (Engdahl 2013).

If the goal of alchemy is to create better matter and better life, so how and to act as "God", then this is being striven for here so clearly and directly, materially, generally and massively, as never before in history. And if things don't work out with normal life and normal matter, or because you only want to create them as “new, better” anyway, then it is the machine that is supposed to replace the previous one as an artificial life. Suddenly you know what it is that you are producing: “life”, be it a bacterium, a nanomachine, a newly composed gene, a chimera (Bizzarri 2012) or a “cyborg” hybrid or a robot, yes a new subatomic particle that occurs through an atomic explosion (Calidcott 2002) or its imitation, for example in the atomic research center CERN (CERN 2012). Here is the perverse connection between alchemical “making life” and / as killing clearest. Then the question is justified, where is the superstition?

The "alchemical belief in miracles"To one's own" creations ", such as the commodity, the machine, the cross-species chimera, the hierarchy and money, i.e. capital, as the supposedly better substitute for that which is no longer named by the new creators, is on system-related irrationality can certainly no longer be surpassed.

One works on the ultimate triumph of the Alchemy as a method of overcoming death and life as well as their "new creation", e.g. also as a mixture to a non-life. The fact that hardly anyone seems to be seized by the horror who works or deals with it shows how natural alchemical thinking, feeling and acting is among us. The typically patriarchal separation of spirit and soul is generally regarded as normal and practiced accordingly, but afterwards "brought in" with one's own "creations", as if it were possible. "We are God"Craig Venter is said to have said after the invention of an artificial bacterium (Venter 2010). This characterizes the new relationship of transcendence of modern civilization or its goal.

Historically, the living “organic order” of the Middle Ages in Europe had to give way to the dead “mechanical order” of modern times (Merchant 1987). The earth-spiritual, spiritual and spiritual order of nature and the planet as a cosmic living being, the “cosmovision” of a matriarchal “old Europe” (Gimbutas 1996), was also “dragged”.

The new “magicians”, Neoplatonists, occultists, vitalists, “world soul” followers, secret allies and cosmologists - like Paracelsus - and “Latin” alchemists have contributed to this in their own way Renaissance at (Seligman, undated). They still tried to take the invisible seriously, but also in a patriarchal-alchemical way. Among other things, it was about getting hold of the invisible or spiritual and soul as a "philosopher's stone", so to speak, before dealing with the areas in question in natural science and mainstream philosophy was initially completely excluded. The existence of a spirit and soul itself is even doubted, except perhaps in humans (Descartes 2001) - at least seen as a man. Nature is only seen as a mere mechanism - as a machine, which at that time was not (again) presented as “excited” or enlivened. This is only the case when, according to the conception of nature as a machine, the machine is now also considered to be “nature” (Genth 2002).

It is all the more significant that the invisible, the living, the spiritual and the “divine” are brought back into the debate, when it appears that the alchemical program and project has actually been implemented. In this way, alchemy comes back to its "spirituality", but in a form that has nothing to do with the premodern. Alchemy thus no longer or again takes into account the earlier forms of spirituality, but instead invents its own after rejecting them. To a certain extent it is the “spirit that comes out of the machine”, a new “deus ex machina”.

It has never existed before, and only the alchemy thesis explains where it comes from, if it comes from. In any case, nothing can offend a machine enthusiast more than a well-founded doubt about the liveliness of his device. This one downright irrational “idealism” in the midst of soulless and mindless modern materialism is in the case of the machine, but also of the goods in general - no matter how inedible, lacking in quality, poisoned and short-lived - only because of the still unbroken Miraculous belief in the "superiority" of the alchemical "creation" explainable.

In the realms of the "Black Magic" and in the secret societies that have always existed in patriarchies, dealing with spiritual forces as a possibility for deliberately negative influence on people and situations has always taken place alongside the rationalistic denial of such areas (cf. Wolf 1998). In particular, the non-public alchemical practices, although these always have a somehow gloomy character, are part of this (e.g. the organ transplants that usually take place at night - Baureithel, Bergmann 1999 - and certain rituals that arise from the nocturnal torchlight marches in the stadiums of the Nazis or in the Ku Klux Klan belong to sacrificial rituals in today's secret societies).

In alchemy in particular, access to the immaterial was retained for a long time, such as - more meditative - in the "Spiritual" alchemy (especially in India and China, e.g. Porter 1993) or - rather gripping - in the so-called "woman sacrifice", which was brought about when, for example, the melting process of the metals did not succeed. In this case the woman or “soror mystica”, the mystical sister, of the blacksmith-alchemist was thrown into the furnace with the metals so that the work would succeed (Eliade 1980). Because by nature only the feminine is capable of creation, and where men did not succeed in this, they resorted to the last resort to force it after all.

This kind of thinking and acting is not just a thing of the past. It has only been supplemented since the "witches" persecution.

Esoteric, spiritual and religious currents are in patriarchy even today never positively oriented towards the earthly, towards "mother earth", towards the materially living and its connection with the "spiritual-soul". They do not believe in such a “connectedness of all beings”, yes, this is considered to be contaminated by “Satan”, the lowly, the “evil” etc.

That has not changed because the earth and life on it are now seriously damaged materially as well as spiritually and spiritually and are threatened in the extreme. Yes, this damage is celebrated by some as a quasi Gnostic way into an allegedly "better and higher" world closer to God and overcoming material life in the earthly "valley of tears" - as if there were an alternative to physical and physical life on earth, and as if the earth were necessarily a valley of tears. The esoteric emphasis on the immaterialThe so-called “spiritual” and “psychic” are based instead on the definitional separation of spirit and matter, instead of looking at them together - with the exception of the new way of thinking together spirit, soul and machine (Kidder 1982). The following applies, genuinely patriarchal: nothing like getting away from the earth, nothing like getting away from the earthly body.

This is also trained through asceticism and renunciations of all kinds. Perhaps the ideal of "Christ Lapis", Christ as "stone", the otherworldly, unpolluted by matter, created by God, no longer Mary "Pure body" of Jesus to be reached. Because this body is indeed body, but none of earthly matter - or this only in the sacrament of the again typical alchemical "transubstantiation" in the body and blood of Jesus.Classically alchemically, Jesus only acquired this body after his mortification on the cross and after the resurrection to a higher life, his “2. Birth ”in the hereafter.

Today's guru of a spiritual movement will pretend to be such a "philosopher's stone" for the "change and improvement of the world", already on its knees at the already ongoing changes and alleged improvements that the alchemical project expects of it goes. So instead of calling for the end of this project, patriarchal spirituality is busy glorifying the consequences of this project as a possibility for a "heaven on earth", as the realization of the supposedly existing hereafter in this world that all alchemy promises. Patriarchal esotericism is a direct part of the alchemical project.

The esoteric criticism of modern materialism is therefore not primarily directed against alchemy as a project to create a world of goods, machines and money that is in fact spiritless and soulless, but rather against the material earth, the ground beneath our feet, so to speak our earthly body, both of which begin to give way under the force of the alchemical grip. So instead of turning against the ongoing destruction of nature in all areas, patriarchal spirituality and esotericism, like religions, also turn against the earth and are pulling in the same direction of destruction.

So only from a matriarchal point of view is it guaranteed that the miracle of life, its soulfulness and its spirit emerge precisely in the materially living being, which is the exception within an invisible "spiritual-spiritual" event of universal proportions. The fact that this is defined the other way round, namely as the lowliness and imperfection of the materially living, can be traced back to those who cannot produce the materially living and who claim the immaterial - or their alchemical production - as the higher and more important (cf.Treusch- Dieter op. Cit. On Aristotle's theory of generation). In all patriarchal religions the Creator as higher and more perfect than his creation (Ernst 2014). But if we see matter and spiritual-soul in a ceaseless connection and earthly matter as the creation that emerges from it, without which the spiritual-soul would not come to immediate expression as living, then this divisive-dichotomizing, i.e. evaluating and character is lacking necrophilic hierarchization every logic and above all every sense.

Birth as one Rebirth and death as the entry into a phase before it has become unthinkable since modern times, because no rhythmic-cyclical connection is seen any longer as spheres between life and death. But alchemy has interpreted this problem differently, because it does not wait for life and death, but wants to create them itself. For alchemists, life and death are not absolute, but rather feasible in principle, that is, they can both be canceled and mixed with one another. Killing as mortification is therefore not a problem for alchemists, because they assume that what was killed will be resurrected in the Great Work as a higher creation. Yes, such a death must appear as a privilege (cf. the warrior in Valhalla, the suicide assassin in the afterlife).

Thus death is generally no longer viewed as a sphere or "other world", but only as a moment of extinction of life - or entry into the "great work" of alchemical "creation".

Instead, both life and death should come into mortifying, i.e. dissolving, technical-alchemical availability through their definitional separation and abstraction from the process of living or the “connectedness of all that is”. Making life and making death are the ideals and practices of patriarchy practiced again and again in new variants, especially in war and in medicine (cf. Bergmann 2004), which are used to finally overcome the natural order even in its inherently invisible order "Spiritual", spiritual and spiritual dimension should lead.

Accordingly, death comes before birth - in complete contrast to the natural process of the “mater arché”, the beginning as that of life at birth.

Fictional breakups prevail in patriarchy as those between body or body, soul and spirit, especially matter and spirit, life and death, this world and the hereafter, God and world, creator and created, before they pass into the alchemical disposition of decomposition and re-creation.

At the same time, the alchemical transgression of these artificially created limits sets in. The higher is supposed to arise through mortification and recomposition, and that supposedly has a spirit-soul again. Will it be given to him during the new creation?

The corresponding practical, technical "improvements" are introduced within the separation fiction, for example in the case of the classic alchemical method of organ transplantation, which believes that it does not have to take any account of the immaterial level that actually exists. What really happens with this kind of criminal alchemy in the spiritual and spiritual and related to it in the physical realm can no longer even be thought under these conditions. At the same time, however, this procedure is intended to create a “better” person who is now mentally and emotionally healthy again and who has escaped the impending death. How is that supposed to be possible? In reality, instead, it was found that organ recipients suffered from cannibalism fantasies and feelings of guilt towards the organ donors (Baureithel, Bergmann 1999)!

So it was not possible to replace the old spirit-soul with a new one, but the existing spirit-soul was sent through hell during this alchemical procedure and emerged from it badly damaged.

The separation of body / matter and spirit / soul is therefore always a fiction, be it generally accepted or temporarily “produced” in an alchemical process. An "improvement" of body and matter, even of spirit and soul, even their "replacement" by alchemical new creations is nothing but hubris. A “better” life than the one that exists cannot be created.

The alchemical project is doomed to failure again, especially today.

What, in the end, happens to the sensations, especially “love”, which plays such a large role in the relationship between transcendence?

Here, too, “divide, transform and rule” takes the form of the divisive Hierarchization and dichotomization at. These correspond to the other conditions and are their projection into the immaterial, as well as the realms of feelings. If the “spirit” is defined as the higher and better in comparison to the “matter” as the lower and worse, then there is also a hierarchy within the spiritual. The ideal of “pure mind” is mind without matter. The ideal of the alchemistically created spirit is the "animated", "thinking" machine. It should make the human thinking, which cursed the Lord again and again because it can in principle question everything, superfluous.

"Love" is therefore always programmatic here, as in the gender and generational relationship, with separation violence and the exercise of power, that is, systematic Separation of thinking, feeling and acting connected. It should no longer come from the “connectedness of all beings”, to which it belongs and whose expression it is, as is normally the case, but should be directed “upwards” beyond that, from where, first of all, dominion , Anger and command are to be expected, which in turn are to be regarded as proof of love. The perversion is justified and enforced as normality. Such a “love for the Lord” is only mentioned under patriarchal or alchemistically enforced conditions. Otherwise, mothers love their children and vice versa, and the fathers, if they act like normal people, are easily included. Jesus on the cross, the mortified, entered into the great work of God and made "stone" after his resurrection, "Better" person With the higher body, which no longer needs, indeed replaces, the feminine-maternal body, at the last stage of the alchemical process it is no longer mother-created, but God-created. He is the admonishing role model for the earthly “better person”, the hermaphroditic alchemist, and the “2. Birth".

The Christian-alchemical message is: Suffer is good. As a result of mortification, it serves a good cause, because it is the prerequisite for a better life, love and being body in the sense of the supposedly existing spiritual heavenly upper and beyond world of patriarchy.