Ploughshare and Pruning-Hook: Ten Lectures on Social SubjectsHousman, Laurence
Philosophy
Ploughshare and Pruning-Hook: Ten Lectures on Social Subjects
Housman, Laurence
Social ethics; Social sciences
If the community deliberately decides that one of these courses gives
the better social results, it is within its power to discourage the
other course, without descending to compulsion; and I am inclined to
think that this may, in the majority of cases, be done by treating the
desires and appetites of resistant minorities as taxable luxuries. If
the State finds, for instance, that alcoholism increases the work of
its magistrates and police, and diminishes the health and comfort of
home-conditions, it may quite reasonably tax beer, wine and spirits,
not merely to produce revenue but to abate a nuisance. But it would be
foolish, were it to go on to say that everybody who incurred such taxes
was guilty of moral obliquity.
In the same way, if the State wishes to discourage vegetarianism and
temperance, it will tax sugar, currants, raisins, tea, cocoa and
coffee, and will continue to tax them till it has diminished the
consumption; and incidentally it will let meat go free. But it will
not pass moral judgments--having the fear of human nature before its
eyes--on those who conscientiously bear the burden of those taxes
rather than give up what they think good for them.
I could imagine the State, in its wisdom, seeking to discourage luxury
and the accumulation of wealth into the possession of the few, by
imposing a graduated income tax of far more drastic severity than
that which is now depleting the pockets of our millionaires--but not
therefore saying that all who incurred income tax above a certain scale
were guilty of moral obliquity.
We have seen a State which required an increase of its population
setting a premium on children so as to encourage parents to produce
them; and I can imagine a State which required a diminution in the
increase of its population setting a tax on children, but not therefore
joining in the cry of the Neo-Malthusians that every married couple
who produced more than four children were guilty of a kind of moral
depravity. And further, I can imagine a State which wished to encourage
pure and unadulterated monogamy putting a graduated tax, practically
prohibitive in price, on any other course of conduct productive of
second or third establishments. But I do not see why the State, as
State, should concern itself further, or why Society should concern
itself more deeply about sexual than it does about commercial and trade
relations, wherein it allows far more grievous defections from the
ideal of human charity to exist.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account