“And Judas (Machabeus) said: Gird yourselves, and be valiant men, and be ready against the morning, that you may fight with these nations that are assembled against us to destroy us and our sanctuary.For it is better for us to die in battle, than to see the evils of our nation, and of the holies: Nevertheless as it shall be the will of God in heaven so be it done." (First Book of Machabees 3:58-60)

The First and Second books of Machabees recount how, in 167 B.C., the priest, Mattathias,refused to worship the Greek gods, sparking a rebellion of the Jews against Antiochus IV who had tried to supplant their religion with the veneration of his own pagan gods. Judas Machabeus and his brothers, sons of Mattathias, continued the war against the subjugation of their homeland and their religion.

In 17th Century Ireland the regiment of Owen Roe ONeill identified its struggle for freedom of faith and country with that of the Holy Machabees of Old Testament Judea. ONeill referred to his followers as his Irish Machabeans.

The same war between good and evil, one that has been waged from the beginning of time until now, still rages on. Inspired by the heroism of Machabeus, of Owen Roe ONeill and their followers, the Irish Machabean is dedicated to resisting all the outrages being perpetrated against the Catholic faith and against the Irish people in our days.

Thursday 25 February 2016

Moral Choices Faced by the Electorate

Tomorrow we will get to choose who will oversee the continued social, moral and cultural decline of Ireland during the next few years.
That the decline might be stopped is unlikely – at least if stopping it is dependent on anything that we are being promised.
What are on offer are some goodies in return for quietly acquiescing to the long dark night of decay. A tax concession here or there, shorter hospital queues, better infrastructure… none of it will stop the rot that is eating away at the moral and social fabric of this country.
Even if TDs could deliver on their lavish promises, they amount to no more than short term material benefits, and come at the high price of longer term cultural decline.

No candidate knows what the future holds economically. Those who claim they do are not being honest.
Who knows, for example, if introducing a new tax will raise the desired revenue? It could just as easily lead to social unrest, new tax avoidance schemes or other unforeseen consequences that would nullify any projected benefits.
In the end, not only abortion, definition of marriage and the like are moral issues. Pretty much everything in politics, as in other areas of life, involves a choice between what is morally right and what is morally wrong.
Even economic policies boil down to moral choices. We generally don’t know whether they will work or not. So the question is, or at least should be: are they morally right or wrong?
Of course there are certain policies that lead to foreseeable consequences – spending money we don’t have and that we can’t repay will only lead to bankruptcy.
And that is a moral choice too. To borrow what we know we can’t repay is stealing. Dumping the repayments onto future generations is stealing from those future generations – generations that might never be.
Property tax provides a good example of the moral choices involved in tax issues.
It was estimated that it would raise a certain amount of revenue for the exchequer. And maybe it did.
But it is impossible to isolate its impact in order to calculate the knock-on effect in various other areas of the economy, such as VAT revenue, property values and Stamp Duty. There are too many factors involved to make this calculation accurately.
What we do know is that it is an immoral tax. A home is the fruit of a person’s labour, paid for with after-tax income. So for starters property tax is double-taxation.
Property tax is effectively an income tax, and an unjust one at that. We can’t give 0.18% of our home to the Revenue Commissioners. Instead we have to give the monetary equivalent which, if we are fortunate, comes from our income. But the €315 tax that the average home owner pays is a much larger percentage of the wages of someone on low income than of the wages of high earners.
Furthermore, it is confiscatory. Imagine the outcry if the government decided to take 0.18% of all money in the bank – not just on interest, but on capital as well. It would clearly be seen as theft. Isn’t property tax the same?
So the choice is a moral one rather than an economic one.
Our almost obsequious compliance with the EU’s every directive is something that is decided by our political elite. And a morally baneful decision it is, too. Do we benefit from it? Financially: some do; some don’t. Morally and culturally the whole country suffers.
As it is for politicians, so it is for us, the electorate. Our decision in the polling booth is based on a moral choice.
We can vote for someone who pretends to know how to extricate Ireland from the looming world economic downturn, and who will continue the disastrous social policies of the current government. Or we can choose to vote for someone who sees politics from the perspective of morality.
Candidates with a moral conscience, in so far as they are available, are our best bet for the future.



No comments:

Post a Comment