If you ever find yourself with your back to locked barrack gates trying to stop immigrant buses getting in, or marching down North Dublin streets trying to act in solidarity with others doing the same thing, you can notice, at least at times, one abiding sensation. It can get cold, wet and maybe boring.
So the time honoured solution is to pass the time by debating politics with some similar, cold wet and bored flotsam of humanity, and there the great question is sure to arise. Where is everybody else? Why isn’t there more people coming out for these things, when will the Irish people wake up etc etc? And the answers will be many and various, fluoride in the water, RTE and the media brainwashing generally, even the education system nowadays, people afraid of blackmail retaliation by the state, with regard to jobs or even if its just applying for state benefits or housing, again, etc etc.
Who knows, some or all of that could be true but I would like to put forward a rarer explanation, and that is atheism. Obviously, under the influence of the endlessly hyped ‘scandals’, more and more Irish people have become atheist, or at least practical atheists in the sense that they never let religious ideas interfere in their everyday lives. They just don’t think in terms of the ten commandments and trying to get to heaven, its just not a ‘serious’ subject that way, and that could even be true of many practicing ‘Catholics’. But the effect of this on Irish society is not, I don’t think, properly understood by everybody.
One effect, is that it destroys the objectivity of people who have lost their faith in this manner. Yes, objectivity, I defy you to have heard that one about religious people, because the opposite is also true, people with great religious faith are often described as very objective in the way that they can look at the wider world. For example Bishop Richard Williamson, on the Saints and Scholars Podcast, was asked not long ago what was his abiding impression of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, widely considered a very saintly man, and that was his reply, the Archbishop’s great objectivity.
In trying to explain this maybe an analogy might help, we will begin by introducing Muggins exhibit A, who has great religious faith: He is reading the Irish Times, including the editorials and all the other ‘preachy’ articles of which therein there are so many. But for him the question of what is right and wrong, is tied up completely with his religion, he tries to live up to the 10 commandments and if he falls down on it, and we all do, he goes to confession, which is where he seeks forgiveness for committing sins according to this, unchanging, religious yardstick. So consequently nothing in what he reads in that Irish Times in any way tells him what should be right and wrong. Yes he can read where a person has committed a murder, for example, and that is bad obviously, but its not that he took from the paper the idea that was bad, that he took from his religious education, what used to be called an ‘informed conscience’.
Now consider Muggins exhibit B, reading his Irish Times. Probably in Ireland he might have started off, at least to a degree, a Christian, but now that is all burned out of him. He has ‘grown up’ and doesn’t believe in that ‘airy fairy’ nonsense known as Catholicism. The crucial thing to understand here is that you don’t stand still in that state. As a human being, a yardstick of right and wrong in your head, is totally essential, you don’t get to function without it. So where does he now get this? Well now he is reading his paper in a more serious way, there is a lot there about what he should and shouldn’t do and he is now thinking more seriously about it, he doesn’t take or leave it like Muggins A does. So hence he is not nearly as objective when he considers the various issues. His mind is now searching – he might be unconscious of it himself – for the ‘authoritative’ angle, for somebody to tell him what is right and wrong on a particular issue, not that he decides for himself like ‘A’ can.
This might seem confusing but it is in fact a huge issue in the human psyche, I believe, and one that explains a lot. Mostly people who have lost their religion will now attach a deep sense of right and wrong to the law, and to the establishment consensus generally, because they need that outside yardstick of right and wrong that the theist doesn’t. The simple point then is that if you run the state, which obviously makes the laws, and the ‘establishment voice’ generally, like for example in science, then you have captured the minds of these people. Hence the absolutely brainwashing level of Church bashing that generations of Irish people are living through, the deep state knows exactly what it is doing here, atheism is the elixir that holds the thing together for them.
If you look for it you will find a lot of evidence for this attitude everywhere. For example not long ago I was talking briefly to the editor of a local newspaper about their Covid and vaccine coverage. He explained that they just highlighted the official word from the Department of Health, and that was the end of the short debate, to be a mouth piece for the state was what was ‘right’ in his mind.
It also explains why you can have so many circular arguments with people. In relation to the vaccine for example, mostly people took it because officialdom told them it was ‘right’ so to do. Even very intelligent, very educated people spent absolutely none of their time finding out about death rates for Covid or how much testing was done for the vaccine, they were pulling out of the debate only the instruction in their ongoing quest to do what is ‘right’. They never actually considered the supposed ‘science’ in the first place, so it was pointless arguing with them about that.
That, I think anyway, is one of the unheralded reasons why Irish people are so slow to ‘wake up’ as it were. The scary thing though is not this effect now, the real question is what happens if their yardstick of the law or the establishment generally, collapses, as obviously happened in the French and Russian Revolutions for example. Will they go mad with an orgy of violence like obviously many of the elites in those countries did then?